THE ALLEGED LAND REVENUE FRAUDS.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3105, 9 June 1892, Page 2

THE ALLEGED LAND REVENUE FRAUDS.

(uv telegraph.— press association). Wellington, Tuesday. At tho Police Court this morning G. N. Bagsott, late Receiver of Land Revenue, and the Hon. J. B. Whyta, M.L.C., were charged on summons with conspiring to defraud the Government, the particulars of the charge having already been detailed. In opening the case Mr Skerrett said it would be shown that the defendant Whyte was the purchaser of what was familiarly known as scrip of two kinds, namelv, that issued under the New Zealand State Forest Reserves Act of 1871, and amendments, and that under the Naval and Military Se .tiers' Act of ISB3. It was to Whyte's interest to dispose of this scrip to the best advantage. Had he disposer. _of it to outside persons, there would be nothing against it, but there wen disadvantages against such a course. He proposed to adduce evidence showing that Whyte had made an arrangement with Bai'goU, the nature of which would boa matter of inference, but it would be proved that what was generally done was that Whyte deposited from time to time with the Bank of New Zealand at Wellington a large quantity of scrip with instructions to the Bink to hand it over from time to time to Baggott in exchange for cash for its full value, less a small deduction, which it would be shown was in one instance at least received by Baggott as commission. What Baggott did was this : Wheu he had had moneys paid to him in respect, of the purchase of Grown land, and which ought to have gone into the Government account, and when Whyte had scrip lying at the bank Baggott transferred the moneys he had received on behalf of the Crown, and substituted in lieu of it Whyte's scrip. The inference was that these two persons had agreed to do exactly what he had described. As against the defendant Buggott, he proposed to show that he had admitted that in four instances money.? received by him for Crown lands were by arrangement with Whyte transferred to his (Whyte's) private account, and scrip was substituted. The evidence against the defendant, Whyte, was equally strong, as it would be shown that there had been a

systematic transfer of Government, moneys to his account. He had sold scrip at its full value to Batgott, and the latter had in one instance received a commission. He proceeded to give instances of the alleged fraud, and said that in one case £1)61 which had been paid by Baegott into Whytas account had been anticipated by Wbyte's purchase of a bank draft for a similar amount. These facts he proposod to rely upon for a prima facie case against the defendants. The case was, by arrangement then adjourned until to-morrow. Last Night. There was again a considerable crowd of spectators at the adjourned hearing of the laud scrip conspiracy case, which it is expected will occupy two days. So far as the evidence has gone it relates to the purchase of Crown lands by settlers who paid by cash and cheque to Baggott. Nothing was elicited regarding the misappropriation of funds. The purchasers swore that they had no land scrip and no intention of milking payment in scrip. An important link in the Ci\se, it is reported, will be a written admission by Baggott made in a report to the Audit Department, and referred to by Mr Skerrctt yesterday in opening the case. A further link will be a verbal statement which Baggott made in the prnsp.ncu of the Contrnlh'V General and Mr O'Hu-a Smith. This evidence will be specially valuable if neither of the accused volunteers evidence on their own behalf. Seven witnesses had I been examined up to the adjournment.