ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO DEFRAUD.

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 286, 2 December 1889, Page 2

ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO DEFRAUD.

FURTHER CHARGES AGAINST ORCHARD. Another series of serious charges were preferred against D. B. Orchard this morning at tlie Police Court, ifc will bo re lneinberod that tho accused is already awaiting trial on other charges. Messrs F. G. Clayton and J. F. Buddie were ou the Bench. The prisoner was charged with having on tlie I5tl» of February foloniously, and with intent to defraud, forged and uttered an.n. for payment of £20, tho same purporting to be signod by one Edward Pen-

Mr B. Cooper appeared on behalf of the accused.

Inspector Broham conducted fcho prosecution, and asked leave to withdraw the charge of forgery ami altev ib to " uttering, well knowing tho samo to bo forged."

This was granted. William Monaghan deposed that he was a farmer. On the 15th of February he received fcho p.n. (produced) from tho acoused. Ifc purported to be signed by Edward Penson, who was described as a man of means. That bill had not been met. Accused paid thfe interest in order to get tha bill renewed for three months longer. Another bill had been renewedsince October, 1806, interest being paid each time. Witness gave up this bill to tho accused and got the present bill in exchange for it. Witness gave £18 for the original bill. Mr Cooper here contended that they could not take evidence a3 to the original bill. Evidently the witness gave no money for the present bill. In answerto Mr Cooper, witness said that he received no money when he gave the present bill. Defendant did not attempt to get any money on that occasion. Kdward Penson deposed that he was a settler residing at Northcote. did not sign the p.n. produced in Court. Witness bad done business with cecused, but had never giver him a p.n., nor was he indebted to accused iv any way.

Detective Hughes deposed bo formally charging the prisoner, who made no statement.

Mr Cooper submitted that there was no evidence before the Court that defendant knew that the bill was forged,

Mr Broham said that might be gathered from the facts of the case. ■

Defendant reserved his defence, and was duly committed to take his trial. D. B. Orchard was also charged with having uttered a p.n. on tho 27th of June for £25, the same purporting to bo signed by one George Cox. William Monaghan gave evidence .similar to that in the previous case. Hβ received the p.n. in renewal of ono drawn for £15 in March, 1837. Witness said that the accused had £400 from him, and that he got £40 from him the day before defendant went away. Witness gave £22 10d for tha original bill.

Mr Cooper objected and a note was made of that fact.

George Cox denied having signed the bill. He had done busiuoes with accused. Had given him a p.n. within the last year for £100. The bill produced in Court was not signed by %vitness. By Mr Coopor : He might have signed a bill for £25, but nob latterly. If he had done so ho had paid it before this. The £100 bill was still running. Accused reserved his defence, and was conjmibted to take his trial on this charge.

D. B. Orchard was further charged with having on the 12th June uttered a p.n. for paymont of £25 purporting to bo signed by Mi' 3A. Gray. Inspector Broham obtained a remind until next Thursday, as a medical certificate had been received from Dr. Kenderdine that Mrs Gray was unfit to appear in Court.

D. B. Orchard was next charged with uttering a p.n. for £25 on the third of April, the same purporting to he signed by George John Wheeler. Evidence was given as before by W. Monaghan as to receiving the bill, and also by Constable McKnighb to prove that no person of the name of George John Wheeler resided in his district.

Accused reserved his defence and was committed to take his trial.

D. B. Orchard was further charged with uttering a p.n. on the 14th of November for £20, the same purporting to be signed by one Edward frones. William Mbnaghan deposed to having received the bill in renewal of one that had been running since 1886. Witness was told by defendant that Jones was a farmer at tbeMauku. Edward' Jones, farmer at South Mauku, deposed that he had had dealings with accused a few years ago. The bill produced in Court was nob signed by witness. Prisoner reserved his defence and was duly committed to take his trial on this charge at the next sitting of the Supreme Court.