A PECULIAR CASE.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17720, 23 March 1923, Page 6

A PECULIAR CASE.

NEWSVENDOR DECEIVED.

; A CLAIM FOB £6O. A peculiar caae was- heard before Mr H. Y. Widdowson,; S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when Frank Smith sued Henry Hogan Foote for £BO, alleged 'to haWbeen'lent by plaintiff to, defendant. ' i Mr-.C-.-49..' Thomas, who appeared for Smith,stated that Foote had induced the plaintiff tq give him £SO under the pretext that plaintiff would then be elegible to receive a full 6ld-age penDefendant stated that this was-not the'.case. Frank Smith, newsveri3or t Barnett'a corner, Cathedral square, said that defendant had approached him about an old-age pension. Witness said he had, too'much money. Defendant said: "If yon give me ■£sol' I will pet you the pension." Defendant said he would give hint £6O back later. To defendant: He did not get a receipt from defendant signed "H. Foote." He'did not thrust the money upon'defendant. Tho receipt he received was signed "Harris.'' Witness did not say that He did not care what happened provided he beatt the Government for the money. , .Henry Hoean . Foote : stated that he had known the plaintiff for some -time. He thought plaintiff knew his name. I'lnintiff told him that be -had too much in. the bank to get' a full pension. He. was getting 'a reduced pension. Witness first suggested that f he should spend the surplus money ho had on, things for himself. Plaintiff dfcew £SO out of the bank and asked witness to take it. Eventually witness took it and gave plaintiff a. reoeipt signed "H. Footp." To Mr Thomas: He was a hardware .traveller, employed by A. J. Stevens and Co. He had previously been convicted for failure to account for moneys. Ho was not awaro that he had made a. false document. Ho was a pal of the plaintiff. The plaintiff came up to him and offered him tho money. Inter, defendant offered to pay him the money back at the rate of 109 per week. To the Magistrate: He did not represent to the plaintiff that ho was a man of means. . Plaintiff, recalled, stated that defendant :had said that he had.three sec-' I tions in Fcndaltoh. , Defendant explained _ that he had been working on a section in partnership, with another man. The Magistrate said it appeared that the defendant, on his own showing, hod not only taken the plaintiff down, but had committed a fraud upon the Government. He deserved to go to gaol i for three months,' but the warrant would be suspended providing that paymeht was made at the rate of 10s per week. ■ - j