FORGERY CHARGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXIII, Issue 250, 21 October 1932, Page 7

FORGERY CHARGE.

WANGANUI COUNCILLOR.

VOUCHERS QUESTIONED.

TECHNICAL COIJjEGE AJTD FIRE BOARD. EVIDENCE OF A MANAGER. (By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WANGANUI, this day. Jabez William Mace Luxford, a member of the City Council and other local bodies, and a prominent business man, was charged in the Police Court to-day that about August 19, 1931, at Wanganui he made a false document, by forging the name of Boss and Glendining to a Wanganui Technical College Board voucher, knowing the same to be false, with the intention that it should be acted upon as genuine. He was also charged that on July 20, 1929, he forged the name of Bromley and Son, Ltd., Wanganui, to a Fire Board voucher, and that on August 24, 1926, he committed forgery in that he procured Gladys Robinson to ma.ko a false document, viz., to receipt a Wanganui Fire Board voucher in the name of Ross and Glendining and Company, knowing it to be false, with the intention that it should be acted upon *s genuine. Frederick Charles Atkinson, manager of the Wanganui branch of Ross and Glendining, produced a Technical Col" le"-e Board voucher, accompanied by & cheque for £52 13/1. This was supported bv two invoices on Ross and Glendimn„ s stationery for £40 1/ and £13 W 1 - Tk 6 cheque was drawn on the Bank of .New Zealand in favour of Ross and Glendining and signed by a member of the Technical College Board. To the best of witness' knowledge his firm did not soip~ ply the goods to the board. liis firm had no dealings with the board at all. The voucher was receipted in the name of his firm "per W.L." .This voucher was not accepted by witness or any member of his staff. His firm did not receive the. cheque. Witness never at any time had given stationery to accused. Evidence as to Signatures. Gladys Jones, clerk for Ross and Glendining, said the signatures to the vouchers were not hers or those of any member of the staff. The firm used a rubber stamp on receipts, and this did not appear on these vouchers. William Jolin Kane, audit inspector, said during the last audit of the Technical College accbunts four vouchers came under his notice. He found that four cheques bad been credited at the Bank of New Zealand aacount of accused's firm. These amounts were refunded to the college board account and the penalty in each instance paid to the public account. Isaac Edward Newton, director of the Technical College, said accused was chairman of the board from August, 1925, to August, 1931. There were two college hostels. When supplies were required the board, or mainly the chairman, was informed by witness. The goods on receipt would be checked and the invoice initialled. He could not say if the goods were delivered by Ross and Glendining. They were received by the board. Witness did not know who ordered them.

Payable to Bearer. Mist M. Cummings, accountant at the Technical College, said the accounts came to her to. be checked and initialled. After the accounts had been checked the cheques were handed to her to be distributed. Accused asked her to post certain cheques to him and make them payable to bearer. The witness Atkinson, recalled, said the Fire Board voucher for the payment of £29 5/ to Boss and Glendining was not received by liis firm. A payment of fl 3/3 was made to' the clerk of his firm. Witness had received instructions from accused that certain payments would be made from the Fire Board to Boss and Glendining and to credit these payments to his account. Witness detailed other payments of amounts up to £28 made in a similar way. The firm had not supplied goods to the board or issued invoices. The aggregate of these was approximately £IGO. None of the vouchers was prepared In the same manner as his firm and none of the' goods was supplied by his firm. (Proceeding.)