A SERIOUS OFFENCE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9794, 18 October 1917, Page 7

A SERIOUS OFFENCE

ALLEGED FORGERY OF A WILL AX OLD MAX AXD HIS AIOXET. Mr S. E. McCarthy, S.M., was engaged yesterday afternoon bearing an unusual case, as far ns tie courts of tho Dominion are concerned. A man named George Harris, was charged that on or about December 4th, 1916. he did forge a. document- purporting to bo a will signed by one John Smith, and with uttering the same to the Public Trustee with intent that it be acted upon as genuine.

Air P. S. K. Alacasscy, of the Crown Law Office, appeared for the prosecution and Mr M. Myers for the defendant.

Mr Macassoy, m opening, said that an old man named John. Smith had been employed for some time by Jenkins and Mack as a drain-layer. Smith and a friend named Timothy O’Lnughlin on tho night of June 20th, 1916, went to Grodbor’s, They chatted as they went along, and Smith made some remarks to O'LaUghlin that ho bad been to see Dr Gilmer and that he had advised him not to smoke. This caused O’Laughlin to remark: “Have you fixed up your paper yet?” the term “paper 1 ' being understood between them to mean a will. Smith replied: “Xo. I must.” They walked on together to the Basin Reserve, when they parted company at 9.30 pan., and Smith, went to Mrs Lepper’s house (tho house iff his niece) at 28. Drummond street, where ho resided. Airs Lcpprr heard him outside and heard him fall down. .Etc expired shortly after XO o’clock that night. On tho following morning the accused Harris, went to soo O’Laughlin at the corporation yards and ha informed him that Smith was dead and asked him if ho thought there was a will. O’Laughlin then said “Xo, Only last night X spoke to him about it and in answer to my question about a will he said, ‘No; 1 must.’ ” About six months after Smith’s death O’Laughlin met Air and Mrs Harris in the street and they told him that tho will bad turned up and that Mrs Harris was tho person in whose favour tho will was made out. On. December 7th, 1916, the Public Trustee received a letter and the will signed by a man called Frederick Fraser, together with a will purporting to bo written and signed by John Smith, the deceased, and expressed to be attested bv Frederick Fraser, the writer of the letter and by another witness called Morrison. Mr Macassoy road tho will and the letter.

Continuing, Mr Macassey said the Public Trust Office, for the purpose of proving the will, made exhaustive inquiries as to the two attesting witnesses. They were, however, unablo to discover either of them, and having regard to the peculiar way In which the will came into the office, they placed the matter in the bands of the police at tho beginning of April, 1017. In the will the sum of £SO was bequeathed. to the accused’s daughter, I aged four years, and the balance, £7OO, I was bequeathed to the wife of tho ac- ! cused. Tho deceased left two daughters —Mrs Powell and Mrs Hams — and three sons—Henry G. Smith, of Wellington; W. H. Smith of Fremantle; and F. A. Smith, of Suhiaco. West Australia. There were also two children of tho deceased’s sonAll thee© people were excluded from the will. At the instigation of the police, on May 3rd, 1917, the accused was written to and asked for a written repudiation of an alleged loan ot £3OO that was stated byone of the deceased's sons to have been made to Harris. Tho accused called and said he was not good at writing, and would prefer to sign a printed form of declaration instead of writing the letter asked for. However, ho agreed to write the letter, and on May 4th repudiated the loan, and on July 30th the accused acknowledged that letter and two other letters to havo neon written by him. These were letters to tho Public Trustee, consenting to the administration of tho estate. When acknowledging these letters to be in his hand-writing, accused volunteered the information that bis hand-writing frequently varied. In the letter of December 7th, accompanying the will, there was a statement that the deceased had requested that his will should not he handed in until six months after his death. It would ho shown conclusively, Mr Macassey stated, by ex-Police Commissioner Dinnie, who was a noted expert on. hand-writing, that the writing of the will, the signature of John Smith, to the will, and tho latter of December 7th, signed by a man called Fraser, wore not in tho hand-writing of tho deceased, John Smith, but were written by Harris, as would bo shown by a comparison of tho letters admittedly by him with the will and the letter forwarded by Eraser to the Public Trustee. Furthermore, the police and the Public Trust Office had made exhaustive inquiries as to the whereabouts of the two witnesses to the will, hut without result. They were not even known to O’Laughlin, the deceased’s bosom Inend for many years, or to any members of the deceased’s family, or to Mr Mack, bis employer for many years. Apart from tho similarity of the handwriting, there were seven identical mistakes in spelling which occurred in bho letter accompanying the will and in the letter which was written by accused at the dictation of DetectavoSexgoant Rawlo, and one in tho '"’ill. Charles Zacharinh, district manager of tho Public Trust Office, gave evidence ns to receiving documents in connection with the will of the late John Smith. One of the documents was a letter sent by the defendant’s wife, who was a daughter of the deceased. . , George Parnell, m charge of too wills branch of the Public Trustee’s office, said he received the documents concerning the will early in January, IDI7. Defendant called at the office in response to a letter, respecting an alleged loan from the deceased to defendant of £3OO. Tho accused was asked for a written repudiation of the alleged loan. Defendant stated ho was not good at writing and asked if there was not a printed form ho could sign. Tho following day (May 4th) defendant wrote a letter disclaiming all knowledge of receiving a Joan of £3OO from the deceased. Caroline Lepper, 23, Drummond street, said tho late John Smith was her uncle and resided at her house tor about four years. About four weeks before Mr Smith died defendant and his wife came to see him. Defendant had stated on more than one occasion that he was surprised that Mr Smith had so much money. .Witness had

fold Harris she ’and found _ a bankbook with a credit of over £<oo in u. To '.Mr Myers: Deceased had never informed her ho had made a will. Mis Harris war. his ciaurjhtor. Ho appeared to be very fo;m of her and her children. Witness thought, it likelv tliat deceased would leave his money to his daughter I Ail's Hair).}-, and she showed him considerable atfection, and deceased had expressed a desire to help her nnc * ‘ lcr ‘ amlly get on. ‘ To Mr Macasac.v: Ho first heard ot the will in December last, vAcn Mrs Harris, shoved her a copy which she .St-.rod had been received from too Public Trustee. William It. Lepper. .manager ct Alacarthv’s Brewery, said durirg a conversation he had witn dcccasod, Mr Smith led him U> behove that ho. heel made a will or had fixed up his affairs. . . To Mr Macasscy (on being shown a letter)-. “To the best of my belief the writing in the letter is that of the late John Smith.” . “Do von consider the writing ra the will (produced) is that of Jonn Smith i”—“I do not, as the writing is not the same.” To Mr Mvers: Ho would not e.^pc^t the deceased to make such a confidant of Timothy O’LanghTm and of witness and his wife. Deceased was a reserved man. Did not believe from Ins own knowledge that Harris had on•bained a loan of £3OO from l!io Mr Smith. Timothy O-’Daughlin said he bad known the deceased for the past fiftyfive years, and was in his company five nights each week on an averageOn the night Smith died he was in his company. From what deceased had told witness that night, it dawned upon witness that his friend’s heart was affected. Ho asked Smith if bo had his pa,pers fixed up, and ho replied, “No, 1 must.” After having a cup of tea at Godber’s, as was thou .usual habit, witness and friend were walking homo, when Smith complained of not fooling well. Next morning Harris oame to the corporation yards, where witness was employed as a carpenter, and stated that his old friend had “passed out.” About six months afterwards Mrs Harris informed witness that a will had been found and it was in her favour. To Mr Myers: Harris had asked him if ho knew Fraser and Morrison, _who were the witnesses to the will. Witness made inquiries, but was unable to trace the men named- The deceased, about six months before he died, had stated that he liad purchased a will form.

To Mr Alaoarsoy; Ho made inquiries respecting -Che men Fraser and Alorrison, as ho was interested. It was foreign to Smith’s nature to pick up two strangers to witness his will. Henry Ernest Smith, cook, a son of tho deceased, said -ho saw his father sometimes on Sunday, and during the week on tho streets. He heard from Karris that Inis father had loft a will. He Irnd two brothers in Australia and two sisters in. New Zealand. To Air Alyers: When the will was shown Mm by Air AMvetum at' tho Public Trust Office bo was satisfied that tho signature to the will wns that oif his late father, and ho still believed that it was in his handwriting. At 5 o’clock further hearing was adjourned till Friday afternoon.