THE CASE FOR THE CROWN

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12571, 14 August 1906, Page 8

THE CASE FOR THE CROWN

In o->oning the case for the prosecution, Mr Myers said the case was of a somewhat peculiar nature, owing to tho charge*;, and the chara/.te.r previously lwriie by accused. It was always a painful thing for a jury to be called upon to try j>eneons- who had held positions of honour and trust in the town where they resided. Ho mentioned those points to them because ho asked them to remember tliat if Mr Bruges had not held the position of trust and honour in the past, tho two accused would probably not bo in their present position. It was tho proud boast of tho British nation that there was ono law alike for rich and poor, and ho asked thorn to deal with tho facts irrespective of the position of the accused. In outlining tho nature of the charges, counsel went on to state tliat it was tho duty of every solicitor to keep separate trust accounts. A solicitor had no right whatever to mingle with his own bank account tho moneys which wero placed in his hands for investment or otherwise by clients who thus showed their confidence in him. Between 1898 and 1904 between £10,000 and £12,000 was paid into tho accused's office, the greater part, if not all, for purposes of liein-g lent or investment, and tho whole of that sum was unaccounted for, and for the whole of it there was not a single investment to bo shown. It was for the jury to say who was responsible for that kind of thing. As to tho moneys in the indictments there was no question that they were paid into Bruges's office, and that they had not been applied to tho purposes foT which they were intended, and had not been accounted for. The question for tho jury was whether both accused or only ono were responsible. The books had been kept in such a state that it was impossible to tell where the money had cone or who had benefitted; apparently, the money had boon, paid to meet previous debts and liabilities; in other words, from 1898 to 1901 there had been a process going on of robbing Peter to pay Paul; although Goodman had handled tho money, Bruges was responsible, as ho was the solicitor, and reaped tho benefit, and Goodman could not have acted without him, being only a salaried clerk. Even a cursory glance at the books during tho six years would havo been sufficient to show how things were going.