IMPRISONMENT FOR A YEAR

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21243, 15 August 1934, Page 9

IMPRISONMENT FOR A YEAR

* ' THEFT BY SOLICITOR PUDGE'S SEVERE COMMENT IrKMS ASIOCUTXOX TEUtQBAtC.) WELLINGTON, August 14. Found guilty on a retrial of the the ft of £GSO from Samuel Wilson, on July 7, ID3O, William Perry Holltngs, a former solicitor, ■was to-day sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment with hard labour by Mr Justice Ostler. "Your conduct was criminal," said Mr Justice Ostler. "You took the savings of a poor woman and used her jM')O on your own speculations. You were .systematically using clients' money:; and systematically making false entries in your books. I believe you intended to repay all, but somethin;: like £2OOO is short in your trust account. Probation .seems to be out of the question. I shall make the sentence ;is light as I can, but I cannot possibly let the public think that such conduct in a solicitor can be passed ever." Referring to the amount of £650 in the charge, Mr Justice Ostler said that he agreed with the jury that Hollings had no intention of stealing it His intention was to have the use of it, but the result was that the £650 was lost Owing to the existence of the Indemnity Fund, Wilson might not be a loser. Hollings had deceived Wilson from the start and had kept him deceived for years. Counsel for the prisoner, Mr R. Hardie Boys, made three submissions, which he asked his Honour to reserve for determination by the Court of Appeal. The first point was that the case came within the proviso of section 244, as a debtor and creditor account between parties necessitating a directi on in writing as to appropriation. The second point was whether in three respects his Honour's direction to the jury had been proper—(a) as to the definition of what would be fraudulent •.inder the section; (b) as to the reference to a statement made in the depositions, and not in the actual evidence; <c) as to the suggestion that in the event of the jury returning a certain verdict leniency would be shown to the accused. His Honour said he would not reserve the questions. Counsel could, if he wished, apply to the Court of Appeal. "The view I take is that I ought not to reserve any one of those questions," said his Honour. "I feel confident as to all of them." As to the first question, the proviso referred to many dealings between the parties. Here there was only one dealing as to the definition ox what was fradulent towards a person whose money was stolen —there was only one attitude. His Honour was confident on that point. As to the statement read from the depositions, his Honour had referred to them merely to clear up ambiguity.. "[ made no suggestion to the jury that, if they found that the accused had no intention of permanently depriving Wilson of the money, Hollings would be given probation," said his Honour. "It was perfectly legitimate conduct for a judge. I am not prepared to reserve any of these questions." CIVIL CLAIM HEARD FURTHER CONSIDERATION BY PARTIES (I'illS9 ASSOCIATION TBLEOIUM.) WELLINGTON, August 14. Although the evidence seemed conclusive in proving the claim against Hollings, there had been nothing to show that his reputed former partner Eagar had entered at all into the transaction complained of, or was in any way blameable. said Mr Justice Ostler, in giving judgment in the Wellington Supreme Court to-day on a civil claim against William- Perry Hollings, a former solicitor, and Edward Fitzgerald Eagar, a school teacher. In the case against Eagar, the plaintiff waf non-suited, and judgment in respect of Hollings, who had entered no defence, was adjourned until further consideration by the parties concerned. The proceedings were brought by Mrs Agnes Elizabeth Powell, of Jonnsonville, who claimed from both defendants £4OO principal, plus interest. She alleged that without her knowledge or approval the £4OO had in 1929 been invested by Hollings _on properties owned at that time by himself and Eagar, and she had not recoverqd it. ' , . As there have been many involved legal points outstanding in the proceedings his Honour agreed to supply a written judgment to add to the oral decision.