DURESS PROVED.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1728, 19 April 1913, Page 7

DURESS PROVED.

ASTONISHING PROMISSORY NOTE CASE.

ROWE UNDER FIRE.

DECISION OF DR. M'ARTHUR, S.M

'Tho''extraordinary/Court j, case which arose but of a claim by George Rowe, commercial traveller, 1 Wellington, against' Arthur Fiiioh, blacksmith, Wellington, for £25, as'the amount of a promissory note, and Bs. 2d. 'as . interest on the amount,, 'was Concluded in ;the Magistrate's Court yesterday'*''Mr.'A.'Dunn appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. J. J. M'Grath for the defendant. :Ou January 22 a motor-car driven by ■Leslie-Finch (defendant's brother) and a "■»• driven by George Rowe (plaintiff).'col- !:.;<. -n the Hutt Road. On. January 2i tiie.r<; was an agreement drawn in the oi'iicf jf-Mr. A. Dunn, solicitor, and signt'(i by George Rowe, Leslie Charles Finch, and Arthur Finch, thereby Ar- ■ \vw Finch agreed-to pay Rowe .£5 on the v-:.?"ition'of the agreement and n further >■!!'. 0f. £25 by, January 25 (the follow- ;:'* day),' in .consideration for which JE3O I!two agreed to. forego all claims against Leslie' Finch for all damage resulting on ■ the collision.'- Arthur Finch agreed to give a promissory note for the ,£25 duo on/ January .25.(the day after, tho promissory note'was issued). Mr. M'Grath said that,on. January 23 (the day after tho collision)'.Rowe went to Arthur' Finch's shop and bullied Finch into taking steps to mado restitution for tho .damage alleged to have .been caused by his' brother. Arthur Finch carried, on a small blackimithing'business and was a.poor man. He was the sole support of his-aged parents, and-his younger brother, .who lived in a very humble home, rind .from .this dwelling Rowe said that ;he.;wotild" eject them to the street if the money: he wanted was not found. 1 Finally,- this extraordinary promissory ""note was drawn up. "I don't wish to say anything about the propriety, of the'action of the: solicitor who drew up that promissory note for a day," Mr; M'Grath remarked.; He added, that before the promissory- note' was obtained from Arthur Finch, Rowe took Leslie Fiiich to Petone and terrorised him with allegations that the police'and. the'.'detectives-were after him; .He expressed .-.himself ■ as:, certain that his- Worship would not allow the note to stand: He then sailed'evidence. In evidence Rowe (the plaintiff) denied having terrorised the Finches. He said, nlsO, that when the agreement was drawn up-at 'Mr.. Dunn's office the draft was read over to Arthur Finch who said that ho' xlcdrly':understood it, that. he. would pay' the amount when it fell- due, and that:hi .was quite- satisfied. ,i If ho had alluded- to .possible proceedings against: Lesljo ':■ Finch he had had in. mind "threats" made'by Bradley (tho owner of the car which L. Finch had driven). Both the -Finches seemed anxious to sign the agreement. .■. ">■'""'.■' Mr..M'Grath: Have you been telling the truthiin the.witness box? -'. 'Witness: TYes.". 7 . ■ If. that is so, both the Finches ' and your driver have • been telling' lios?r-"I am not aware of that. I am speaking tho .truth!"'•:.■■ '. ' ■•:■, ~--•. You say their are" untrue?— "Absolutely. I am only telling the truth, and don't want anything more said.". I' have my own opinion nboat thatl When;were you . married?—" About -fourteen -years ago.". Where—in New Zealand?—"No;, in Melbourne.".. . ' Where i at?-"Where! Why?" Come I ,;come! /You ought to know where you'were, married!—"l can soon tell you —in-the registry office." When ?—" When! That' 1 is her business (Mrs. Howe's)! - Let her answer"!;' Don't you' know?—" Yes; but that is her business."; ,- _ ,;. ~'~\ ..'■'.'■'-./ , Mr,.- to these' 'questions.' "These are," he said, "just on a parwith. my friend's othemq!Uesti<ms-,'/W si, Dr. .At' Arthur: a par.-I don't know which way yoii mean:. Mr,-.'Jd.'Grath: You .don't..know when you-were married■?,;,'-. •■'-■■*■ -■-•'-!•■' ;■.'•.■ ••-<.-. Witness': I-don't wanhto brzngniy pri-. ■ vate affairs,into an accident.'; .'... " ; . Mr. Dunn: This is most infamous. Mr. M'Grath: My friend (referring to Mr.' Dunn) looks as- if there i-was something Infamous. ■'. , ' • i :; . 'MrifM'Gratb. (to Rowe):: Turn round and'-let-'.us. sec now grieved' you look absufc'this..; ■"■ ' '' V' Proceeding with, his evidence, Eowe denied that' he had threatened to turn Finch's father "and mother from • their honio.to. the street. Mr.'M'Grath: Do you say that young Finch-has been telling a long story ot perjury? , A :,-: '■:;■ -.',.■ , Rowe: I say that-what ho says is not true. • -.-•...;..•■ . .'. Whose suggestion was it thai! you should take a promissory note for a da.y.?—lt was his, and mine, and the whole lot's. Dr; M'Arthur:" A sort of simultaneous concert of orchcstral*symphony. - Mr. M'Grath: Were they" not, anxious for fear you would take action against young i'iuch, and sell ihe oidpiopie up? Witness: Whatever their idea was, that wns. a-matter for• themselves/ ■ ;■ Yes, of course; but did y'oii tell them, that?—" Whatever their ideii was, let them take'it." ' ' ''■ Did you say that?—"lt is- absurd- to Bay that I could sell these people up." Dr."M'Arthur: It may be 'absurd.- But answer tho question. '/'■* -.'.•_ . Witness- (somewhat' flurried)': What is the- question? •'• '"'•" Dr.-M'Arthur: Answer 3lr:question!' •' - ; Witness: What is it? ' '-.'' ii. . ■/■■■-. ■ Mr,--M'Gi'ath:" Well,' never .inihd; .ppe r haps'this will be a convenient.place to leave this, witness. ■ . ■ s . \' ' ',-*" . At' the conclusion of the case.Dr. M'Arthur said; that was perfectly • satisfied about the contract respecting this promissory note—a most 'peculiar ; promissory note, for one day.'- 'What he had to consider was:'.What'was the .consideration on which' this promissory, note ..was made?He had not the slightest hesitation in saying that it'was obtained .from: the defend.ant .by, duress, 'that, was, .that Arthur Finch .wqnld never have signed.the note had.he known his legal position' at the time,'and had'Rowe not threatened to throw h'is (Finch's) invalided "parents on to ,the, street, and'.make Fiich himself bankrupt. ' In yiose ch-cumistances he had come,to the conclusionVthat there was .no'.'consideration whatever for the promissory note, and that judgment must be given for the defendant Finch. . His' Worship ordered that Rowe should .pay defendant's three witnesses,los. each. Security for appeal was fixed at 'if!7'7s.