Fraud by a Local Preacher in Melbourne.

Te Aroha News, Volume IV, Issue 196, 26 March 1887, Page 8

Fraud by a Local Preacher in Melbourne.

Our Melbourne cable news last week reported the conviction of a local preacher in Melbourne, of a series of gigantic frauds. The following particulars of the case, adduced in the Puiice Court, chow the character of thB frauds peipetrated by this humbug, Augustus Smyth, of South Brunswick, a local preacher, was charged by a new arrival in the colony named Retallick, of obtaining, by moana of false pretences, the sum of £3,500. Mr C. i\. Smyth, Crown Prosecutor, appeared on behalf of Retallick, and Mr Purves and Mr Hood for the accused. The case for the is briefly to the effect that the prosecutor arrived in this colony in the month of June, 1835, bringing with hitr."a cum of £5,040. Directly after landing in Mtlbourne he went to the Victoria Ci ffte Palace, in Collins-street, with one Sarah Hendry, and in the readingroom he fell in with the accused, up to that time a perfect stranger to him. It wan Suuduy evening, and Retallick being a religious man, was much Bhocked to see persons placing cards. He waa pleased, however, to notice that the accused rafused to join the game, and this gratifyiog circumstance was the first thing that drew Retaliick's attention to him. Being a strauger in the city, and without friends or acquaintances, Retallick opened up a conversation with Smyth, telling him he had just arrived, and asking for friendly advice. After some conversation Ketallick d scovered that he had met a 11 pious, God fearing, honest man," and made an appointment to meet him on the following day. When they met Retallick confided' in Smyth his pecuniary position, and by the latter's advice deposited £5,000 in the Englieh, Scottish and Australian Chartered Bank. A fast friendship then "sprang up between them,* and being taken to various prayer meetings by Smyth, Retaliick became to love him exceedingly, to use his own words. Eventually ho made him advances of money, which Smyth undertook to invest upon mortgages to a very profitable extent. After waiting a considerable time and not getting his deeds he conferred with Mr Criep, his solicitor, hence the present charges of fraud. The prosecutor in his evidence said :— The prisoner stated on several occasions that the party to whom he had lent the money was immensely rich, but he did not want anyone to know that he had anything to do with a mortgage. A few days subsequent to this he informed witness that be hart received a letter from his solicitor in Sydney, which was to the effect that their client considered the businaes transaction so strictly private that the acceptance of the third person muse be declined. About the same time accused referred to the making of some repairs to a gate at his Ascot Vale property, and witness accompanied him there. Pointing out the property to witness, he said he paid £1,000 for it, and was getting £50 rent per annum. In the early part of February he informed witness that he had something " sticking out ' for the witness's " broad shoulders." About the 4th or sth of February they wont to the woodyard at Brunswick, where accused was going to take a wood siding. Witness was to be the working foreman, and to receive £3 a week, He remarked " This is a business that will become a big thing after a bit," and added, k< the officials at the railway dtations do not take cheques for rents and freights without permission from the railway authorities, who require me to pay £600 as a guarantee in drawing cheques." Accordingly witness gave him a cheque for £500, and he said, "of course whatever overdraft you are charged, I'll make up." On the fifth of Ap:il accused visited witness, and paid the interest He said, "Lend me £500, and I'll make«everything square at the end of the year,' and witness did so. On the 7th of April witness told accused that he had an application from Mr Sims, house agent, at Brunswick for £600. Accused said, " Well,Thomas,if you lend £400 here, and £600 there, and other eums elsewhere, you will want a clerk to collect your interest. If 1 were you I'd take up a mortgage of £3,000 or £4,000 at once," and witness asked accused as a practical man if he thought such a mortgage could be obtaiued. Accused eaid he knew one of the best and oldest firms in the colo nies at Sydney. A few days later he said to witness that he had received a letter from his solicitor)?, which read thug : - "Dour Sir,— ln reply to your inquiry,; we hare Clients, one for £7,000, one for £5 000, and one for £3,700." Accused added that ho was going to tuke up the £5,000 one, and aaked witness what he thought about the one for £3,700. "It was at 7rP er cent » anc * he thought 8 per C6nt would bo obtained.' A few days sub sequent to this conversation he called the attention of witness to some property in Park-street west, rear Brunswick, which was for private sale. Thero was a fine house, sheet?, fee, on the land. One morning afterwards he eaid, "I'm asked if I will stand to my offer for it," adding " It's a bargain, but its under the power of truatrees,who ln-e in England, and a depo&it of £600 is required. 1 ' Accused did not haye enough money to pay the deposit, and witness let him have £350. At the same time witnoss was informed by him that the £3,700 mortgage was secured. Up to this si age witness had advanced him £3,350 Witne3 5 8 fixed depo c ifc was up on the 30th June, and on the 3rd or July ho gavo the accu3ed hi* bank bock and tho deposit npte to withdraw the account. On the following Monday accused returned him the bank book, When witness gave accused the bank book he a'sD gave him a blank cheque for the purpose of winding up the account, Tho bedy of the cheque was in accused's handwriting, except the word "self;" witness noticed by the bank book that there was a balance of £619 5a 3d. After doing gome figuring relative to interest in various auras, accused sain, " Now, Thomas, I have already got £3,350, and have secured that mortgage for you. If you let me have £350 more it will make the £3760. I will give you a receipt for the £3,700 until the deeds come. Witness then received a receipt from him, and also a cheque for £302 10a 3d, tho balance at bank still remain • iDg to witness. On the evening of the 7th accused said, ♦♦ Thomas, will you bring me that receipt I gave you, for I don't think it is right, and I will give you another." Witness complied, and received another, which was now produced in Court. Soon afterwards the* accused went to Sydney, and returned in two days, saying that he had arranged about the deeds, which would be forwarded in due course to a firm of solicitors in Melbourne. Witnesß was given to understand that aticueed had taken up the mortgage of £5,000. On the 9th September accused visited the office at the wood yard and said, " I have made you a power of attorney, Thomas, and I am going to Sydney for a fortnight. It's very likely that whilst I'm away your deeds and mine will be sent to Melbourne. You'll be likely to get a telegram from a firm of eolicttors there for the purpose of signing for those deeds." Holding the power of attorney in his hand, accused eaid, "Be sure you take this, for you'll also have to

sign for mine." Witness wrote to accused and received the following reply t—"Sydney, 15th September, 1886. My dear Thomas, —I have waited until to day, thinking I might be able now to say definitely when I shall be ready to return, but I cannot yet say. I received your Monday letter yesterday, and was glad to hear from you, and co far it seemß you were then getting along all right, except there is yoar usual miegivinga as to your own capacity, and underrating your own abilities and service. The scant supply of blocks, and above all the Bad calamity you narrate of Saturday evening, is aad news indeed. ..... But poor Hawkins's fate is most appalling. lam glad it was at a time when you were not at hand to realise so great a shock. We must for a time grin and bear the exactions of the Railway Depart ment. I hope the deputation on Tuesday made a favourable impression. I am glad to hear that you enjoyed your Sunday evening's outing. It is a blessing to have a relish for good things in the midat of life's woriies and toils ; for, after all, the endless life is more important by far than this mortal life, May we live in a growing preparation for the better and brighter world to come. I am afraid I ehall not get to Melbourne this week. . . &c Believe me, dear Thomas, yours faithfully, -C A.Smyth" About the 24th of September he returned, and eaid, " Well, Thomas, I went to the solicitor's quite expecting to bring back the deeds with me, but to my surpriee they had not com menced toprepare them. You know what solicitors are, especially those large firms ; but I've hurried them on, and they will be sent to Melbourne very soon. Your interest on the deeds commenced on the Ist of August." On the 6th of October he said, " Thomas, I am going to New Zealand tomorrow by a fast boat, which will take me there in six days. I'm going an business, and will return in 15 or 18 days. Witness did not see him again till the 22nd November. Meanwhile Retallick, at last becoming suspicious, went to the Federal Bank, and found that accused had do account there ; also that accused's statement about managing Parry and Harcourt's drapery business at South Melbourne at a salary of £6 for the first three months and £10 per week afterwards was a falsehood. Smyth, however, pereuaded Retallick's that he had wronged him, and saying that he wanted to stop any poafibility of an evil report that he had gone with Retalliada's money, percuadod him to Bignthefollowing:~"Brunaaick,Nov 23sd, 1886, To all whom it may concern.— ln consequence of Mr C. A. Smyths return to Melbourne, I hasten to make what amends I can for having aomovshat prematurely spoken of his absence as causing me some anxiety. It appears that a po&tal miscarriage of a letter : and other matterß led to the untoward cir cumstance referred to, and I am extremely sorry for any pain I may have caused him or hia tamily.— Thomas Retallick." To thia the accused added, "I hereby appoint Mr H. Jones custodian of this memo , and request him to submit the same to tho perusal of all interested persons." Witness signed the memo, because there was nothing in it likely to do him any harm, and it would satisfy the accueed. Subsequently prosecutor received the following letter :—" Gee long, 26th November, 1886. Dear Thomas, —I hastened by cab to see you before >ou had started for home, but arrived too late I was prepared to give you fair satisfaction, which is, of course, a relief, although acting upon ad vice I should just !at this period act otherwise. Oue thing is certain, my position has been made sj painful by your indiscretion that it has .- almost prostrated me, and I have reached ! thia place to night co very ill that I 1 thought I would drop you a line, as 1 am not going to crush my life by parading about Melbourne until by come reasonable ineana I am set; right with the public, and my health is such, with my heart affection, that I am only acting on medical advice, I was obliged to seek to day, by coming here for rest. If 1 feel equal to it, I shall ccc you to-morrow or Saturday. I owe you uo ill will, and hope you are feeling better. - Yours, &c , C. A. Smyth." Of course the confiding Kefcnliick never saw his money.