SOLICITOR IN COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 31 January 1925, Page 2

SOLICITOR IN COURT

COMMITTED FOR- .SENTENCE. TIMAItU. January 29. At the Timaru Magistrate’s Court this morning Marlin Joseph O’Brien, solicitor, of Timaru. was charged with committing forgery on a hill i*f exchange drawn on the Union Bank of Australasia, Ltd., at Timaru, for the sum of £32 8s 9d, hv signing the name of W. K. Bourhill, knowing it to lie false and intending that it should he acted upon as genuine. Air J. Finslie appeared for the accused. t

Detective IT. J. Lc Sueur, in prosecuting,' state! that accused had been acting as advisor for Bourhill, and had re; cit ed a hill of exchange on January 12 for Bourhill. The latter was not award of the arrival of the hill and accused forged the owner’s name. William M’Govern, manager of the Bank of New South Wales, stated that on January 12 accused paid a hank draft into his bank. It was a draft from the Commercial Rank of Scotland. Edinburgh, drawn on the Union Bank at Timaru and addressed TV. E. Bourhill. care M. J. O’Brien, solicitor, Timaru. Tlie draft was later returned. Charles E. Tori esse, manage of the Union Bank of Australasia, Timaru, said he had seen the hank draft, which came to his hank in January; it was correct in every respect excepting the signature of payee, which signature he knew.

To Mr Elmslie: 'Hie money had not been paid out yet. It was still available for Mr Bourhill upon receipt of a draft properly endorsed. William Easton Bourhill. a labourer, qf Tiniaru. said lie knelv the accused well. Accused for some time past had boon doing all witness’s legal business. The bank draft produced was made payable to him, but the signature oil the ha< k was not his. He gave no one authority to sign his name to the draft.

To Mr Elmsie : He had no knowledge of how his account stood with the accused. He had asked accused several times for a statement, but had not got one. He could not say whether he owed accused money or whether accused owed him money.

Detective l.e Sueur stated that he interviewed the accused who made a statement to the effect that he had Bourhill’s authority to sign his name on any draft that arrived. W. McGovern, recalled, stated that accused did not get any of the money. Accused had nothing to say, pleaded guilty, and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. Accused was then charged with the theft of £l7O on November 19, 1924, the property of Allan S. Watson. Allan S. Watson, a farmer, of Pleasant Point, said he arranged to meet Mr Shaw, of Woodbury, in accused’s office on October 15, 1921. with reference to a mortgage for £l7O. Accused was to draw up a memorandum of mortgage. Witness paid in the monev (receipt produced and signed by M. J. O’Brien), but up to the present he had not been able to get any satisfaction. He had not received any papers or memorandum of mortgage. James Thomas Shaw, a painter, ol Woodbury, gave similar evidence; stating that he saw a cheque for £l7O handed to accused and a receipt was

given in his presence. Detective I«e Sueur stated that he interviewed Clio accused, wlio made a statement, admitting having received the money, which he paid into his trust account and used to meet his own liabilities.

Accused had nothing to sav, pleaded guilty and was committed to the Supreme Court at Timnru for sentence. Bail was allowed in accused’s own recognisance of £IOOO and one surety of £2OO.