ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1010, 15 October 1912, Page 3

ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

At the local Police Court yesterday, before Messrs Franklaud and Hornblow, justices, John Francis Smith was charged on the information of Robert A. Burnett with having obtain “ by means of false pretences. The case was adjourned Irom the morning sittinc in order to allow accused to ■ : ■ gage couusel. Constable W oods prosecuted on behalf of the informant, and Mr R. Moore appeared for the accused. After setting out the circumstances of the case, Constable Woods called R. A. Burnett, the informant, who said that Smith had come to his boardinghouse about two weeks ago. Next morning he asked Smith for as for his bed and breakfast, and Smith said he would stay on for the time being as he had obtained work locally from Mr Meyer, builder. Witness arrange.; to bu.a.i aim l ' ids pm week, payable weekly. A.I the end of tue hist week accused said he had not bad a draw yet and could uot pay. On the following Friday witness obtained an order from Smith on Mr Meyer for his wages. He presented the order to Meyer who promised payment the following week. On Saturday afternoon, at Smith’s request, witness handed the order back to him to go and get his wages Irom Meyer. Shoitly after he was told by his wife that Smith had got his portmanteau, and sneaked out of the house. Witness at once went to the railway station and saw Smith who was leaving by the train. Smith told him that he had only got from Meyer, and would be back next week. Witness then went and interviewed Meyer who gave him to understand that he had squared up with Smith, and told him Smith was coming back next week. He then laid an information against smith ior false pretences, and had him arrested at Palmerston N. on a warrant.

To Mr Moore; Had given Smith credit for his board. Admitted there was uo false pretence by Smith in obtaining board. He thought the man was going away altogether and would uot return. He considered the false pretence consisted iu Smith getting the order back from him, and then getting the money from his employer without paying him. Ad mitted Smith had not concealed the fact of his going away. Meyer told him he had squared up Smith. It he had known there was more money coming from Meyer, he would uot have taken these proceedings. Denied that he was making use of criminal proceedings in order to recover an ordinary debt. Considered the proceedings he had taken were justified after Smith had told him falsehoods about what he was going to do, and after what Meyer told him.

To the Beuch: He had given Smith board aud lodging after receiving the order from him. To Mr Moore : Smith had bad no board Irom him alter he gave the order back to him.

Mr Meyer, builder, stated that Burnett had sh.i.vu him Smith’s order, which had uot been filled in for any stated amount, and he told him he would pay next week. Next day Smith brought him the order and left it with him, and he paid Smith £1 ou account. He had to retain the balance ol Smith’s wages iu the meantime. There was about 35s still due to him. Constable Woods and Mr Burnett called on him afterwards, aud be told them he had paid Smith, and that Smith was coming back the following week.

To Mr Moore: He had told Burnett when he came to see him that he need uot be afraid as Smith was coming back, and he would get his money alright.

Constable Woods, iu evidence, stated that be had met Smith on Saturday, who told him he was going to Meyer to square up, and that he was leaving. After Burnett complained to him, witness interviewed Meyer, who told him he had squared up with Smith. To Mr Moore : Burnett had asked him to lay an information, but he told Burnett that it was a matter between him and Smith, and he did not consider that it was a case the police should take

up. This concluded the case for the prosecution, and Mr Moore for the defence argued that uo case had been made out against the accused. Counsel urged the Bench to remember that it was not only their duty to convict and punish wrongdoers, but also their privilege to protect those who were unjustly accused. The " > ase they had heard from the prosecution presented some subtle features, which it would be necessary to consider very carefully because it was a very serious matter to put a man on trial on a criminal charge unless there was clear proof that he had committed an offence. If the young mau were convicted he would have a blot on his character which would remain for the rest of his life, and it was very important that the matter should be weighed most carefully before so serious a step was takeu. Reviewing the evidence, counsel pointed cut that the prosecution admitted there was no false pretence in reference to obtaining board. Mr Burnett appeared to think that because he had, given the order back to Smith and Smith had gone and got his wages from his employer and not paid him he was guilty ot Jalse pretences. The effect of giving the order hack to the man who signed it was simply to nullify it altogether The man was quite entitled to receive his wages on his owu behalf aud Burnett’s claim against him was simply a claim for an account which he should have sued fur in the Magistrate’s Court. It looked very

much as if Burnett were employing the police court procedure for the purpose of enforcing payment of his account, and that was a thing which the Court should certainly not countenance, tl .r wise scores of people might have to answer unfounded criminal charges. Moreover, when Smith drew £i from his employer,

celt’s .0 T -ye bt also left the balance or lus wage, with Mr Meyer, which were jusi about sufficient to pay the amount he was owing to Burnett, so that instead of committing any false pretence, he actually left the money to pay him. The accused stated iu evidence that when he left Foxtoa his intention was to come back the following week and pay Burnett. When he saw Burnett on the railway station he told Burnett this. He had uot at anv time intended to ive him c ■ - : mt, and if he .aid ocmi pal.' in d-- would have settled with Burnett.

To the Bench ;—Alter he had spoken to Constable Woods, he arranged with Mr Meyer that he would continue work with him instead of getting work elsewhere as he intended previously. When he went away iu the train he had 110 idea whatever that Burnett intended to lake any proceedings against him or had any reason tor doing so. He had been arrested immediately on reaching Palmerston North and had been in custody ever since. To Mr Moore : If he had uot arranged with Mr Meyer to stay on and bad been paid iu lull by him, he would have settled with Mr Burnett before he went away oy the train.

Addressing the accused from the Bench, Mr Hoinblow said he hud no sympathy with him but on the contrary sympathised with his creditor because he had not acted as he should have done towards him and had misled him and had given him a, lot ut unnecessary trouble. It was fortunate for him that he had left sufficient money with Mr Meyer when he left and there was accoidingiy no false pretence and the case should be dismissed. Mr Frankland concurred with this view. He also had uo sympathy with accused and said Mr Burnett should lie paid for his board but it was not a' case where the man should be charged with having committed a false pretence. i'ne case was dismissed with one guinea costs agaiust informant. The Beuch look occasion to compliment counsel for accused in putting up such au able defence at so short uotice.