FRAUD CHARGES

Hokitika Guardian, 8 February 1926, Page 4

FRAUD CHARGES

CASES OF SMITH AND EAUME. ! EVIDENCE FOR PROSECUTION. WELLINGTON, Feb. 5. The trial of William Smith and Sydney Erne Baume on a charge of false pretences was continued in the Supremo Court to-day. A typewriter mechanic gave evidence that the peculiarities of a certain Remington machine were reproduced in the lettering on one of the cheques. There were in all six defective points reproduced on the cheques. Dr M’Laurin gave evidence that the ink used in ruling out words in a £4OO cheque resembled Steven’s ink used in Baume’s office. Detective Sinclair gave evidence that, in company with Detectives Jarrold and M’Lennan, ho arrested William Smith, at the Metropolitan Hotel. Smith had £675, which lie had handed over to Ryan, son of the proprietor, for safe keeping. Smith, said lie had given £,‘550 to Baume. A blank withdrawal slip was found on Smith, showing the name of S. E. Baume, Halsey, Wainui-o-Mata, and also the name of G. Watson, and the figures £750. Smith

Witness then read a statement from Smith, in which the latter stated that Baume had arranged all the transactions and had given his address to Smith as Halsey, Wainui-o-Mata. Smith had at first thought tb e proceedings strange, but because Baume told him lie was a solicitor lie thought it was all right. Baume, said Smith's statement, thought he could iind work for him, and Smith was grateful for the way in which Baume had already befriended him. Witness also described the arrest ol Baume, who led witness and other detectives into a room, where the produced typewriter lay. They explained about the fraud and told him that Smith had been arrested the previous night and had said he had given Baume £.'550 of the money. Asked to explain his own position, Baume denied know-

ing Smith or receiving any money from him. It was pointed out to him that the alterations to the cheques were made on a typewriter in that office. Baume then, said lie did remember a man he had befriended, hut that man’s name was Watson, who bad asked him for a feed and whom lie bad lixed up with a lied, and also that the man had received money from him. Baume asked for time to consider his reply. When that was impossible, Baume asked if he confessed his guilt would the whole matter he put off for ten days, and asked if tli e case could bo heard out of Wellington. Baume said he had posted £3OO of the money to. a fictitious address in Sydney. Baume later dictated a statement covering the receipt of the £350, and offering to repay £5!) he had spent. The typewriter produced was that in Baume’s office, and the samples of ink wore those taken from Baume’s office and the Post Oflico bv witness and Detective Jarrold. Detective Jarrold gave corroborative evidence of tbo arrest of Baume, who spent a quarter of an hour in thought before deciding on bis course of action. 'Hie statement eventually made by Baume was dictated by him. fn regard to the statement that he knew that £350 had been dishonestly obtained. Baume said that lie thought that should he toned down a hit. He was fold lie could alter it, but did not do so. To Afr Stevenson, witness said he had traced Smith’s history as far afield as lie could, hut had found no fault in his life except that it appeared he was addicted to drink. Ho had served front 1915 to 1919 with the expeditionary forces, and from the records it appeared that he had had his skull fractured. His Honour: The man seems to have had a good reputation. Afr Stevenson: Yes, Imt the other side may cast till sorts of aspersions. Afr O’Leary: I should not say the other side. We are fellows in distress Air Stevenson (to witness): You found no occasion where he was a clerk in an office using a typewriter? Witness: No. Donald Cameron, senior detective, •said that during an interview at which

Baume’s mother was present, she said : “You must have known the money was dishonestly obtained.” “Of course, I knew,” said accused. “I could not think otherwise." Professor Hunter. Peter Fraser. ALP., and Joseph Goldsmith, manufacturer. gave evidence as to Baunie’s character. . In his address Afr O’Leary asked what evidence was there against Baume. .Merely that he received £350 from Smith. It had been suggested that Smith was a dupe, but he got most of the plunder. William Smith, was placed in the box and gave evidence on the lines of liis statement to the police. To Air Afaeassoy; He had .suspicions that things wore not all right when •Baume had asked him to change his name, and when he had signed all the cheques and withdrawal slips. “God forbid that I should know that T was doing anything wrong,” he said dramatically. Baume was placed in the box and subjected to two hours’ cross examination by Air Alaeassoy, Crown Prosecutor, and Afr Stevenson, who appeared for Smith. Baume said he had befriended Smith, who wanted to get to Auckland. Oil the following day Smith returned to the office and handed Baume a package, which ho said he had obtained from, the Government Bank. After Smith left lie discovered the package contained £350. He suspected Smith, hut as he was sitting for an examination ho did not desire to hand the money to the police, ns there would he an inquiry. He went to the ferry and had a search for Smith. He saw the detectives, lost his | head and sent the £3(10 to Sydney Lo a fictitious address. The case was adjourned till tomorrow.

both convicted. WELLINGTON. Feh. 7. The case of irand on. the Post Office Savings Bank, whereby Baume, law clerk, and Smith, labourer, succeeded in securing £lllO from the hank concluded on Saturday evening. The mother of Baume stated that Detective Cameron’s statement in regard to Baume’s admission that ho knew it was wrong to accept the money, was absolutely untrue. Counsel addressed the Court. The jury, after a retirement of several hours, returned with a verdict of “guilty” against both prisoners. In sentencing Baume and,Smith, His , Honour said that they had been found guilty of a grave fraud, a very clever fraud, and lie was Itotmd fo say a very impudent fraud. He regretted to see a young man with, perhaps, a brilliant career before him, who, to

some extent inui made a w reels ot it. ; When T^anine met Smith first, find befriended him, lie believed the younger mail was actuated by generosity and kindly motives. H? believed that it was later that there entered into Baume’s mind the idea that here, was means to do this fraud, and that it j was designed to appease his vanity rather than his cupidity. Although ! Batinie had committed a grave crime, he had committed a graver one, in His J Honour’s opinion. The crime of fraud on Baume’s part was less than the ’ crime he committed in the witness : box, where he had fenced with counsel, ! sometimes with diabolical cleverness, j

and was most ungenerous to his confederate. It was well that Baume had been convicted, for, with his facile self-evasion, had lie not been checked at, the outset, lie might have come to a bad end. The case was the result of no sudden temptation. It showed a definite criminal tendency, which lie, and society must be protected from, and the fact that he was mixing in with the honourable men of his profession, all went to show that :

his crime was all the worse. On that account, he would not be sent to an ordinary prison,, where he might he debauched by men of the ordinary

' ; ' I rough and less intelligent type of cri- , 1 minal, and it was his duty to separate them from his fellows for a period. They were stranded, east on rocks, but could retrieve. Baume would be sentenced to three years in the Borstal Institute, and Smith, who was too old for that, would be sentenced to one year’s reformative treatment.