THE CHARGES AGAINST JOHN DOUGLAS.

Waikato Argus, Volume II, Issue 135, 18 May 1897, Page 2

THE CHARGES AGAINST JOHN DOUGLAS.

(liV TliLlifiUAl'H OWN' COUKKSi'OSUKNT). Ai'cki.asii, Last Night. Thk adjourned cases against John Douglas woie proceeded with at the Police Couit to-day, befofore Mr Brabant, S.M. The accused was charged " That lie did on or about 12th day ot July, 1595, steal the .sum CSOO by then having received from the said Jno. Peter Du .Moulin, the taiil sum of 1500, mi terms requiring him to pay the tame to one Samuel Tanlield, of Auckland, crockery merchant, fradnlently converting the tame to his own use,

Mr Cotter explained that the circumstances in this case were almost exactly similar to those involved in the charge re the money lent to Howes, In this particular casciiboutjuly 12th,1S95,Douglas represented to I)u Moulin that Tanlield, who did business in Que.cn-streit, desired a loan of £SOO. Du Moulin asked for particulars with regard to the sccuiity, and Douglas actually took him up to Lome-street, to the back entrance to Messrs IJoylan and Tanfield's premises, and there represented to D'.l Moulin that it was on security of those premises and the stock contained therein that the money was to be advance.l. Du Moulin agreed to advance the money. Since that date, July 12th, 1895, Douglas paid regularly to Du Moulin the interest upon the loan, It was only since the trouble came on within the last tew months or so that Du Moulin saw Tanfield, and learned that Tauficld had never had any occasion to apply to Douglas for a loan, and that Douglas hod never lent him a penny of the £SOO. Du Moulin would himself state that he had never received back any portion of the money supposed to have been lcrt to Tanfield. After the evidence had been heard, the prisoner reserved his defence and was committed for trial.

This afternoon accused was charged with that he did on or about the 2Sth day of October, 1595, knowing a certain document, to wit an agreement to repay to the said Jno. Peter Du Moulin the sum of £SOO and interest, to be forged, caused the said Jno. Ptter Du Moulin to act upon t! - e same as if it were genuine. Mr Cotter said the short facts were these. As His Worship had already heard, it was the case of the supposed lean to the Union Timber Company of .000. Mr Du Moulin received the fol lowing document from the accused : " Auckland, New Zealand, October 28th, 1895. J. I'. Du Moulin, Esq., Symondsstrcet, —In consideration of your lending the Union 'limber Company the sum of £SCO, the said company agree to pay you the said sum of £SOO on three months notice being given and will pay interest on the said sum at the rate of £7 per cent, per annum from the above date and will hold this agreement as first charge on the assets of the Company for the Union Timber Company. (Signed), J. A. Walker, Director, Jno. Douglas, Secretary. There was an impression of the seal of the company over the names of J. A. Walker and Jno Douglas. Suspicion was aroused as to the correctness of the document, and Du Moulin causing investigation to be made, found that Walker, the only director of the company whose name was on the document, did not sign it at all. It was also ascertained that the signature of Douglas Hill, appealing in the document as witness, was not that gentleman's signature either. Hill would tell the court that so far as his signature was concerned he believed it to have been put there by Douglas. Evidence having beou given in that case, accused was also committed for trial.