Strange on Trial on Fraud Charges

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 733, 5 August 1929, Page 1

Strange on Trial on Fraud Charges

“CATHOLIC REVIEW" STORY OF PARTNERSHIP The business transactions of “Tabor and Company,” who established premises in the Dilworth Building recently as publishers of the “1930 Catholic Review,” which never saw the light of day, was investigated in the Supreme Court today. Arthur Strange, a young man, was on trial before Mr. Justice Ostler and a jury on a charge of fraud. He was charged with intent to obtain from Arthur Frederick Rowe on June 12, £l5O by falsely representing that he had a publishing company at 509 Dilworth Building, and that he was the sole agent for the 1930 “Catholic Review,” and that he had authority from the head of the Roman Catholic Church in New Zealand to have the same distributed in all Roman Catholic Churches. Mr. Hubble ■ prosecuted and Mr. A. H. Johnstone, with him Mr. M. M. Flynn, represented accused. Bishop H. Cleary, head of the Roman Catholic Church in New Zealand, was the first witness. He denied having given authority to Tabor and Company to publish the "Review.” All printed matter relating to religion and morals had first to be authorised by him, to be printed, the bishop said, but that sanction did not carry the authority of the Church, for distribution in the churches. Under the conditions, special permission had to be obtained from the diocese under his jurisdiction. The “Review” contained many extracts from his own publication, added the bishop, who said that he objected to the “Review” on the ground that he had not been consulted. Following a reply by Taber and Co., to an application, Arthur Frederick Rowe, a Mount Roskill carpenter, called at the office on June 10. According to his evidence, Tabor informed the visitor that he and Strange were sole agents for the “Catholic Review” and “Tabor’s Classified Telephone Directory.” It a well-established business, Tabor stating he and accused had been in partnership for two months, and each had invested £l5O. Witness was urged to invest £3OO for a half-share, Strange making similar comments as Tabor had done. Strange declared that the “Review” was registered in New Zealand, and that Tabor and Co. had sole rights from the head of the Roman Catholic Church in New Zealand to have the “Review” published and distributed through all Roman Catholic churches free of cost. A skeleton classified business ’phone directory was produced by Strange, who claimed to have authority to publish and distribute the books to telephone subscribers. Asked the reason for his desire to withdraw from the business. Strange said he had the wanderlust and could not put his heart into the business. Apart from that, Tabor was not satisfied with him, accused declared. Rowe said that he handed over £l5O on June 12, and it was arranged that the balance of his share was to be deducted at the rate of £2 weekly from his salary of £8 a weke. When Tabor announced his decision of leaving for America on July 2, and asked for permission to canvass the Hamilton district meantime, witness told both Tabor and Strange that he wanted to pull out. “Tabor promised to pay me on Tuesday, and although I wanted the money then,” said witness, “would not pay me. I have never seen Tabor since.” Under cross-examination, Rowe denied being told by Tabor that there was also a theatre publication in hand. He admitted that he had only retrieved £2 3s 7d out of the £l5O. A partnership account was opened by Tabor and Strange on April 9 at the Bank of New Zealand, according to Mark L. Drower, ledgerkeeper. On June 12 Rowe’s name was substituted for Strange. That day there was a credit balance of £7 17s lid, and the account was closed on June 19. Sydney Wallace Smith, clerk of the Commercial Bank, Wellesley Street, stated that Tabor opened an account on June 1. Twelve days later there was only Is 9d in the account, and on that day £149 was paid in, and I subsequently £75 was paid out in a cheque to Strange. (Proceeding.)