REMARKABLE EVIDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 5 June 1917, Page 2

REMARKABLE EVIDENCE.

"SHOCKING STATE OF AFFAIRS." Gisborne, Juno 1. Some remarkable evidence was given in .a case against a native woman, Tepaea Tait, who was eliarged witli forging orders purporting to be drawn on Mangatu.No. 1 account (trustee, H. C. Jackson),' totalling £2500. Accused's husband, who is the manager of the property, deposed that he had authority to sign orders in connection with work on the property, which in turn had to lie presented to the trustee. The orders produced were forged. Accused had no authority to sign on his behalf. Detective McLeod produced a statement signed by accused, in which she admitted forging her husband's signature to orders which sho handed over to various tradespeople in return for goods purchased. In her statement, accused admitted making the orders payable to men engaged on the station at bushfalling, and she had endorsed them accordingly. She alleged that she did not want the goods she purchased, but that tradespeople pushed them on to her. The magistrate (Mr. Barton): "I can only say that if these tilings are true these people have been offering a premium for dishonesty. It is a shocking state of affairs." •Arthur Gordon Gunn, in evidence, said that accused presented orders for over £9OO to pay an account of just over £700.' Cross-examined, he said that hf< did not think it! extraordinary accused being in possession of the orders. One order was wrongly endorsee;, and was returned by the bank. Air. Lusk (of Napier, who appeared for accused): "I put it to you that accused in your shop re-endorsed It as required," Witness: "I believe that is so." The magistrate: "And you say you did not know it was a wrong thing to do2" Witness: "JIo." The magistrate: "Well, I would not believe it. I will say no more about it, lint someone else probably will." Thomas Robert Gordon, jeweller, deposed ' that he sold accused a diamond ring for £l2O. Mr. Lusk: "We had it valued at £37. What did you pay for it?" . Witness: "I believe £90." Mr. Lusk i "Was the ring worth £50?" Witness:' "It is hard to say. Diamonds went up 20 per cent, last year." Herbert James Grieve, jeweller, in evidence, said that accused made purchases amounting to several hundred pounds, and payment waß partly by casn and for the balance by some of the orders in question. He wag under the impression that accused and her husband were wealthy people. Cross-examined, he said that before he save her extensive credit he had an interview with accused's husband. The magistrate: "Did you tell him how much she owed you?" "Witness: "No, He assured me she had any amount of her own. and that he would pay if she failed to do so." To Mr. Lusk, witness said that on that sho could have had the whole shop. Later, in cross-examination, witness said: "Your questions suggest that we were lambing her down." Mr. Lusk: "The case looks as if that wan so." Witness denied selling a watch to accused for £l7O. He would swear that the price was only £7O. He never suspected that anything was wrong with the orders. After further evidence had been given by other tradespeople, accused reserved her defence and was committed for trial.