FALSE PRETENCES

Hokitika Guardian, 19 December 1930, Page 5

FALSE PRETENCES

TH..EE MEN CHARGED.

(By Telegraph—Press Association)

AUCKLAND, Dec. 19

The hearing begun 10-day of the charges aguiust three men in connection with the State Advances loans. Lr. an ly.inumgham, 23, a solicitor \,v.n changed in six instances with aiding and abetting persons to make declarations, which would amount to perjury if made on oath. The declarations were all alleged to have been made in support of the applications tor loans from the State Advances .Department. D'linningliain and William Cornelius Torckler, a. taxi driver, were jointly charged with obtaining from the Department £B6O by falsely representing the money was for the erection of ;i house lor the sole use of Do rip Fordyce Cliappel and Ernest Cedric Qiappel. Torckler was also charged with counselling Raymond George Hausman to make a declaration equivalent to perjury.

Samuel Thomas Baker, 36, a carpenter, was charged with making a declaration equivalent to perjury. Ernest Cedric Chappell, a painter of St. Leonard’s Road, Mt. Eden, was the first witness, He said lie nurebased a section at Point Chevalier in April, 1926, for £245, on £25 deposit, and monthly instalments of 48s, In March, 1927, he applied to the State Advances for a loan of £1165. The tender for the house was £9OO. After waiting eighteen months it did not seem likely the loan would bo granted and as he was then unable to keep up the 'payments lie tried, to recoup his loss by selling the section. Dunninghani called on him in December, 1928, and said he had a lady who required n section, but wanted a Government loan, with it. I asked him how I would stand with a Government loan, and Duniiingham told me I would get back what I had paid on lit, continued the witneds, and that he would arrange for a new loan application.

Witness next received a letter from the Valuation Officer and showed it to Dunningham. Tlie letter asked why the Government sale notice was placed on the property. Accused advised witness to see the Valuator and tell him the application would be renewed. Mr Meredith (for (Grown). —You. knew the application was not to he for you.

Witness. —Yes. Mr Meredith.—And Dunningham knew also. •, Witness.—Yete.

M r Meredith.—Before you went to the Valuation Denartment did you ask Dunningham if it was all right. Witness. —Yes. my wife asked him (f it was the right tiling; and Diintiingkiun told her it was. My wife B nid she did not want to do twelve months in Mount Fden. Witness Chappell continuing, smd later Dunningham wrote out a letter which witness copied, stating he had withdrawn the section from, sale, and would be carrying cn with the loan. Later still lie and his wife signed a declaration supporting the loan application. He did not S ee the body of the application before signing. He did not know the declaration said he and his wife would reside permanently on the property. He got £53 from Dunningham out of the loan which he had put into the section. Witness then made a statement that Dunningham on 19tli August last called on his at the house and stayed two hours. Detectives Doyle and O’Sullivan had arrived previously, and were in the next room.