ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 1977, 15 May 1919, Page 2

ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

CASH AGAINST AIOTUITI MAORI. At the Palmerston North Supreme Court yesterday, Kimnni liairua, a .Molniti Maori, was arraigned on an indictment charging him with obtaining by means of false pretences goods and money to the value of £7!J lbs Hd from John Osborne, draper, of Palmerston N. Mr P. H. Cooke prosecuted on liehalf of the Crown, and Ihe prisoner, who pleaded not guilty, was defended by Mr JJ. Cooper. A native was retained to act as interpreter in the case.

The following Jury was empanelled: Messrs A. •). Palmer (foreman), Wm. Anderson, A..D. Campbell, G. \V. Healey, C. \V, Groan, G. A. Da wick, ,J. Bourke, E. L. Jones, If. M. Maunder, J, T. Baylis, W. T. Irvine, W. J. Prentice. . The first witness called was E. .1. B. Osborne, draper and storekeeper, of Palmerston North, who gave evidence at some length to the effect that in all lie had given the accused £-15 in hard cash, £29 in goods, ami an order for £5 on Collinson and Curiniiigliame, Ltd. Witness slated that he knew both (he accused and his brother. He had known (he latter 30 or 40 years. Three or four years ago he had had business, transactions with the brother Kauii, ami had always been paid for any goods supplied to him. Before this ease he had not seen Kauri for aiiout two years. AVitness recollect- 1 ed I2th December last, when accused came into his shop and said, “Don’t yon know me ?” Witness replied, “Kauri?” Accused said, “Yes.” AVitness replied “Kauri Hairaa,” and accused again replied in (he affirmative. Witness (hen concluded that accused was his brother Kauri, to whom accused Imre a. great resemblance. Accused said that Ids wife ami sons were dying Hi rough’ influenza. His wife had left him a lot of property, which he was selling to Mr Bell, a local man, and that he was to receive £2OO deposit in a few days. In all lie was selling 5,000 acres, and he wanted some credit. AVitness asked him who was doing the business, and accused re]died that Air Moffat!, the interpreter, was putting tho deal through. On that date witness supplied accused with goods to the value of £27 2s lid on credit, on the understanding that lie was Kauri Hairua. Witness did not think that he had ever seen accused before, and he did not know that Kauri Hairua had a brother. On 13th, witness- gave accused a cheque for £7 10s and cash £2, because lie said he wished to go to AVellington. The next day accused came into the* shop and said that he had not gone to AVellington, ami he asked lor more money. Witness accordingly gave him another £7 in cash, apd £0 17s in goods. Witness still thought he was dealing with Kauri. On 2(ilh December witness received a telegram from AVellington as follows: “Business fixed. Aloney at Palmerston. Alutor ear bolding me up. Bend me £3O urgent. Thistle Inn, Wellington.” The telegram was signed with some Alaori name which lie bad never heard of before, lie took it that it was from accused. The following day witness received a similarly worded telegram signed Kauri Patca. Witness did not send any money. On (he 3.151. December accused came into bis shop and brought a letter, which he said was drawn up by Air Bell, of Bell, Gully and Myers, slating’ that there was no need to worry about (lie account, as there was £I,OOO coming to him in about a week's time. Witness asked him about tin? telegrams, and accused replied that as he himself could not write, his; sou had written (he first one and signed his own name. As regards the second telegram, accused explained that it was signed by the name he went by in the deed. In view of the peculiarities of Alaori nomenclature, witness did not attach any significance to (he different names tlie accused went under. Accused also slated ilia 1 Air Bell was acting for Air “Ted” Barber, who was buying the whole 7,000 acres from him (accused).. On the strength of these representations, witness advanced another £25. Accused asked for £lO. Witness also gave accused an order on Collinson and Cunningliame, Ltd.,- for £5 2-. 7d, as he wanted certain goods which witness had not in slock. On -tlh January accused came into the shop again, and witness adduced him another £3, and went with him to the N.Z. Loan and Aiereantile Co,, at Palmerston. Accused asked that Company to wire their branch at Auckland about 40 head of cal tie which lie wished to place in their hands for sale. Witness still thought accused was Kauri Hairua. Not hearing anything further from accused, on 22nd January witness wrote to the accused as tho result of inquiries he had made. By this time he had began to doubt the identity of the accused. He was also “getting a bit mixed up,” and so included in the address of the letter referred to the whole of the names the accused had made use of from time to time. He addressed it to Alotuiti, and in the course-of the letter he remarked that he feared the accused had deceived him, and asking him to make settlement. He got no reply to the letter, and accordingly placed the matter in the hands of the police. To Mr Cooper; He thought that it was Sir Francis Bell, the AttorneyGeneral, who had drafted tile letter which the accused had shown him. The letter was written on a small sheet of paper, and witness thought at the time that it might have been written hurriedly by Sir

Francis, near the railway slat ion, possibly at the Thistle Inn. It was a fact Ilia! bis business relations with Kauri bad once been strained, be having, in 1917, taken civil proceedings again him at Eoxton for I lie recovery of £(>, This did not y’ -hake Ins confidence in Kauri, however. _

At this stage witness madg u statement, in the course of which he said that be would like to see the police withdraw the ease so long as lie got Ids money back. “1 would like,” be remarked, “to see the man go free and me walk out of the court with my £7!). I bear him no (iimily, and would be only too pleased to see him go free.”

Further cross-examined, witness said that he was positive that on the first occasion (bat accused came into bis shop he said that he was “Kauri Hairua,” not “Kauri’s brother.”

Re-examined, witness said that in

January, in consequence of a conversation and information be bad gathered from Maoris, he had come to the conclusion that Airs “Kauri” was not dead. He found that ‘'Kauri’s" brother's wife had died.

Kauri Hairua, brother of accused, gave evidence that he had known Osborne for 25 years. He had not seen him for two years. Witness' brother had some land at Waikato Heads. ■ Some other land belonging to the family had yet to go through the Land Court at Auckland. It could not be sold yet.

To Air Cooper: Accused’s wife died and left the land to the children, as also did Kimura’s mother. Accused would be trustee when it / went through the Land Court. The. ' Hairua family’s land was not yet partitioned.

Reginald T. Bell, llaxmiller. Palmerston North, said he knew ac-t-used, but had no land dealings witii him, ajlhougii lie had been in conversation with him about some land last December. In the conversation accused said that the land left by the death of his wife to either he or his children was for sale.

To Air Cooper: Witness also put in a week enquiring about the properly, but these inquiries proved unsatisfactory.

Edward D. Barber, butcher, of Wellington, deposed (hat be bad never had any laud transactions with (lie accused, although some laud bad been offered to him by accused. As far as he could see there

was no title. William Henry MolTatt, farmer and native interpreter, said that he had never acted in any land malteis for the accused.

Air Cooper called no evidence for the defence.

After a retirement of three-quar- I tors of an hour, the Jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy. ■

Air Cooper then pleaded that the prisoner be admitted to probation, His wife was dead, and (here were ten children to support. It was pointed out by Ids Honour that it could not be dune. Accused had already been convicted of a minor > charge of theft.

In passing the sentence, Ids Honour said; “1 am very sorry to have to sentence you to imprisonment, hut J. ibid 1 have to do so. You did not deceive Air Osborne once, but

many limes. You kept on giving your brother’s name time after lime, and also false statements. A r ou are liable to a sentence of a long term of imprisonment for lids, but as (he Jury have made a very strong recommendation to mercy 1 am very pleased to give effect to it. This enables me to pass a shorter sentence than otherwise. J must punish with some severity, to teach people they must not do these filings. You are sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labour.”