Wife as Witness Against Husband

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1050, 14 August 1930, Page 10

Wife as Witness Against Husband

MAGISTRATE OBJECTS WAGES ORDERS FORGED The question whether a vvif. can give evidence against her hut. band was discussed at the Police Court today, when William Gerald Cain, a relief worker, aged 4o was charged with forging hit wife’s name to Public Works Department money orders.

The case presented unusual features and at the conclusion of evidence Cain pleaded guilty and was committed to the Supreme Court for triaL Cain, who was not represented bv counsel, was charged with forging two Public Works Department monev. orders for £8 8s and £7 9s Sd re. spectively and with forging ttto authorities for payments of monev. orders for £3 14s 4d and £4 19 S respectively, purporting to be signed by Jane Cain, with intent to haw them acted upon as genuine. The offences occurred between Xovemb. 9, 1929, and July 12, 1930. Lonsdale Elliott, a clerk in the employ of the Government Labour Bureau, Customs Street, said that on April 10. 1928 and May 29, 1930, Cain bad applied for and received empov. ment, signing a memorandum of agreement, authorising the Pnilic Works Department to pay half his wages to his wife. Accused had been employed on relief work in 1929 and 19*. Frances George Eagles, accountant at the Chief Post Office, Auckland said that on July 11, 1930, Cain called at his office and presented a Public Works money-order for £ 7 9s Sd. Witness would not cash it because it was payable to Jane Cain, who would have to authorise payment. Accused took it away and returned the following morning with the signature of Jane Cain, though the necessary authority at the back was not signed. Cain took it away again, returning a few minutes later with the order signed and witnessed.

WAS SUSPICIOUS “I was suspicious then and held the money-order,” said witness. Beresford Mclsaacs, postmaster a: Kingsland. said Cain had called at the office on November 9. 1929, with a money-order, saying his wife was not well and could not cash it. He was given an authority form and came back 20 minutes later with a signature of Jane Cain. The amount of the order £3 14s 4d, was paid over. Ada Emily Gaw and Jessie Mary Fowler, both employed at the King., land Post Office, gave evidence of paying out £S 8s and £4 19s 10d, re spectively, to Cain, acting upon the signatures as genuine. WIFE IN BOX Jane Cain, wife of the accused, was then put in the witness-box by Detec tive-Sergeant Kelly, who prosecuted. Mr. F. K. Hunt: If this is his wife she can’t give evidence. “They have been living apart for the past 11 years.” said Mr. Kelly who said that sections 17 and 19 of the “Married Woman's Property Act 1908,” gave him power to call Mrs. Cain as a witness. - “I don't like wives giving evidence against their husbands,” said Mr. Hunt. Mr. Kelly held a short conference with accused. Addressing the magistrate, he said "As accused Intends to plead guilty. I won’t call the wife," Detective Sneddon said he had interviewed accused on August 8, 1931 Cain had made an explanaton in which he said he had never malt tained his wife. He had two children, a married daughter and a son of 1?. but he bad put himself down on the books of the Labour Bureau as hat ing two dependants. “He got employment by saying tha: he was married and had a family to keep?” asked Mr. Hunt. Cain had admitted the charges to witness, stating that he had some times got friends to witness the forge signatures. He wanted his money ant it did not belong to his wife, whoc he was not maintaining. The wage* were actually his own. When asked by the magistrate if be wished to say anything. Cain said, “I would like to say what I drew the money for. I wanted to pay £1 a wee.. I for my son who is in a mental hospt | tal.” Accused entered a plea of not guilt and was committed to the Snprem i Court for trial.