MADE A SPLASH

Hokitika Guardian, 22 January 1932, Page 3

MADE A SPLASH

FARMER’S WEDDING

VALUELESS CHEQUES,

FALSE PRETENCES ADMITTED

YOUNG MAN FOR SENTENCE

AUCKLAND, January 20

Embarking on the sea of matrimony in' October last, Norman Finlayson MciMillan, aged 25, a farmer, discovered ‘the waters were, turbulent as the result of a “splash” he had made. Several matters relating to his wedding were brought up at the Police Court this morning, when McMillan appeared and pleaded guilty to three charges of false pretences.

Detective Sergeant Kelly said accused opened an account, with an Auckland bank by.* depositing £25 on October 28 last. Immediately afterwards, he began to issue valueless cheques. He called on a young man, an assistant in a large (wholesale firm, and asked him to cash a cheque for £25. The assistant referred accused to the cashier, who cashed the cheque on the assistant’s recommendation. The cheque was returned by the bank. The firm wrote to accused, who replied by enclosing an authority to collect the money from an /Auckland insurance company, but on making inquiries there the firm discovered that there was no person ol the name on the books. Mr Hunt : How did the assistant come to get the cheque cashed for accused ?

Detective Sergeant Kelly: I’m just coming to that, sir.

Mr Kelly added that the assistant once lived next door to McMillan s parents. McMillan got him to be best man at his wedding, and had represented to him that he was a man of means. As a result, the assistant told the cashier, at the time he cashed the £25 cheque, that he thought it would be all right-.

Continuing, Mr Kelly said that, on lOetober 30 McMillan went to a large dijapery firm, which had known his family for many years, and, representing to the credit manager that he "as a man of means, asked him to cash a cueque for £2O. He told the cieciit manager that he was getting married and that his fiancee was getting £IOO from her parents on her wedding day. That cheque also wa s returned, marked '*‘no funds.” CLOTHING AND RINGS. “At the time he got this money,” said Mr Kelly, “McMillan had already been married a day or so. He obtained clothing valued at £22 14s 6d from the same •firm, and failed 'to pay for it. He said the account would be paid when he got married.” On October 30 McMillan went into the shop of a jeweller and bought three rings valued at £4 14,s 6d with a cheque for £l4 14s 6d. 'He received £lO in change. This cheque also turned out to lje worthless. He also issued three further cheques, for £B, £2 and £l, but these were not the subject of charges to-day. He made good the cheque for £2. The £8 cheque he gave to a woman in business as a ladies outfitter. This woman arranged his wedding, ai\cl the cheque for £8 was in part payment for the expenses. As the woman knew his family well, she did not make any complaint against McMillan.

Tile total sum McMillan received as the .result of cashing the valueless cheques was £59 14s 6d, said the detec-tive-sergeant. McMillan was before the Court about six yoars ago, but since then jhe had not come under police notice until now. Counsel told the magistrate that McMillan had committed the same class of offence six years ago, but fie made full restitution. “He came to town to get married and started on ail orgy ol extravagance,” said Counsel. “He wan - ed to make a splash—” Mr Hunt: He has done that all right. Counsel added that at the time he issued the cheques, McMillan thought he had a just claim against an estate and that die would have money to meet the cheques. That did not materialise. ■•\ow that he has a wife—a woman who will be a controlling influence over h,irn I think he will be all right, counsel said. ”He will make restitution :UU | I would suggest'that he be imuad ori probation.” Mr Hunt: What did he do with all ihe money he got?—He spent it on the wedding. • . . , Mr Hunt: 1 will remand him U» sentence until next Saturday, and m the meantime 1 will get Ml <un P ' probation officer, to make inquiries and report to me.