A Monster of Ingratitude,

South Canterbury Times, Issue 7064, 9 February 1893, Page 2

A Monster of Ingratitude,

An important action arising out of what are know in the North of England as the great cotton frauds was settled at Liverpool on December 10th. These frauds were a singularly audacious and for a long period successful scries of crimes. The firm conoerned, though absolutely ruined, had not, till the moment the crash of discovery came, the remotest suspicion of anything being wrong. Reynolds and Gibson were a highly respected and prosperous firm of cotton brokers. They did a large buiines*, and cheques for ten, twelve, and twenty thousand pounds were daily drawn and received. The senior partner, Reynolds, had retired from business, without however, withdrawing his capital, and the junior Reynolds and Mr Gibson devoted their attention entirely to the brokering. The financial department and bookkeeping had for many years been in the hands of two confidential clerks, Isaac Lunt and William Harrison. For the latter the Reynolds bad done everything. He was an orphan educated at the senior partner’s expense, and on leaving school presented with a situation (embracing future prospects) in their office. If ties of gratitude can ever bind one man to another, Harrison was bound to the Reynolds. Unfortunately this clerk was a weak man, and Isaac Lunt was a strong one. One day Lunt asked Harrison a favor. It would save him from ruin, and was only a slight irregularity. In a fortnight the money should be repaid with interest, just as though be were a customer of the firm. Harrison shook Lis head, listened, hesitated, and was lost. For fourteen days be endured the tortures of the damned. Then Lunt actually did repay the money with interest as he had promised. This was the beginning. In a few months Harrison was not merely Lunt’s tool, but his partner. Huge suras were in time withdrawn, the depredations of the pair altogether amounting to £150,000. Their method was to alter signed cheques (which Harrison as cashier regularly filled in) from £2OOO to £12,000 or £20,000. It was very neatly done. Last woek in Court, two hundred cheques of the firm were displayed, and, till they had been enormously enlarged by photography, it was impossible for even experts to detect which were the regular and which were the altered onee. When the frauds were at length, quite by accident, discovered, Reynolds and Gibson were universally blamed. Everybody but themselves i(of course) had seen things were wrong. ,f When Lunt took to giving huge dinner parties, and Harrison to keeping hunters, a child could have told what was up,” said Jones to Brown. As a matter of fact, all either Jones or Brown suspected till the crash came was that Lunt and Harrison speculated. Partly by way of vindicating themselves, and partly in hope of really winning the case, Reynolds and when the two culprits had retired into penal servitude, sued the bank.on the ground of negligence, for the losses incurred through the altered cheques. Very big counsel were employed on both sides, and it was hoped that the question whether a bank which cashes an altered cheque can be held responsible would be finally settled. On the first day it was apparent that Reynolds and Gibson had not a leg to stand cn. Lust had always done the firm’s business, and again and again cashed large cheques over the counter for legitimate necessities. Throughout the entire transactions nothing irregular had occurred in the faintest degree to rouse the bank’s suspicions. On Saturday the cotton brokers were glad enough to settle the case and accept £SOOO (without costs) iu lieu of their claim of over £IOO.OOO. Why the bank conceded this much is not apparent. Perhaps pity for their old customers had a good deal to with tho directors’ action. Everyone feels specially sorry for the elder Reynolds, ruined in his old age by the orphan lad whom he educated and started in life, and to whom in many other ways he '.had been a second father. This wretched youth was the principal witness

last week’s trial, and profoundly shamed and miserable he looked. Harrison, of course, wore convict costume, once more proving to all who knew him what an all important adjunct is dress. Prior to conviction he was a distinctly handsome lad, whereas, standing in the dock, bo teemed to belong to a low elan o! navvy.- {Star correspondent.)