Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISHONEST SOLICITOR PUNISHED

BATCHELOR SENTENCED * / • JUDGE’S COMMENTS 1 Dominion Special Service. Christchurch, March 8. When John Black Batchelor appeared for sentence to-day before Mr. Justice Adams for theft of sums of £986 and £3OO from two of his clients, there was a large attendance of solicitors in Court, and the public benches were well filled. Mr. F. D. Sargent, for prisoner, said Batchelor’s downfall was not due to riotous living and gambling, but probably to the fact that he started in practice as a mere youth of 21, without any assistance from matured judgment, or knowledge of business affairs. It was doubtful whether any man of that age should be permitted to practice on his own account. From the beginning there was muddlement, and when after four or five years the truth of his position came out, he had not the moral courage to face the position,, but endeavoured to carry on, with the inevitable result that he stole from Peter to pay Paul, and borrowed at extortionate rates of interest to pay his debts. Instead of employing a well-known accountant, be employed a young man, who was remiss in his work, and was later suspended from practice. Counsel described Batchelor’s statement written on the boat while he was being brought back to the Dominion, as a pathetic human document. Batchelor, he said, had been forced into 'crime by circumstances. Counsel asked for leniency, remembering Batchelor's mental torture, and his wife and children. “There is no doubt,” said Mr. A. T. Donnelly, for the Crown, “that the original difficulty came about through ignorance, inexperience, and personal conceit. It is impossible to keep out any individual who is able to pass the standard examination, which is the sole qualification. The Law Society cannot help that. There is no doubt that Batchelor had no qualifications, but a capacity for getting business. His affairs became muddled, and he resorted to dishonesty from 1924, and then ran away and left the country. “I am bound to say that there is not a sign or gleam of conscience in the statement made by Batchelor. It was not a pitiable human document; it was a more or less impudent admission of a long course of dishonesty.” “Batchelor’s only capacity was to get business,” said Mr. Donnelly. He was without the capacity to perform it. His conduct is inexcusably dishonest and there are no mitigating circumstances. There are one or two of his clients who are not entitled to any sympathy; they handed their money on his promise to obtain high and usurious rates of interest. Such people cannot be protected from their own greed. It is so much humbug, to say that Batchelor was glad to give himself up. \ He ran away and he had no intention of coming back.” His Honour said he was not satisfied that there were any circumstances that would justify him in extending special leniency to prisoner. It was no excuse to say that because he did not understand bookkeeping and was a muddler that he was entitled to the leniency of the Court. The obligation was upon him to conduct’ his business honourably and not to use for his own purposes money which belonged to his clients. Batchelor's example would have a most serious effect on the reputations of those carrying on their businesses in a perfectly honourable way; it would bring on these trustworthy and honourable people undeserved suspicion and distrust. V “Persons least able to lose theirmoney are the most easy victims.” His Honour added. It was true that as a result of the discovery of the facts prisoner would be struck off the roll of a most honourable profession and one to which he ought never to have belonged. When the prisoner entered upon the practice of such an honourable and learned profession ; he ought to have known better than to be guilty of fraud. There was not shown any special pressure which made him do what he did. His Honour sentenced Batchelor to two years’ imprisonment, and then amended the sentence to one of reformative treatment for a period not exceeding two years.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19290309.2.94

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 140, 9 March 1929, Page 11

Word Count
687

DISHONEST SOLICITOR PUNISHED Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 140, 9 March 1929, Page 11

DISHONEST SOLICITOR PUNISHED Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 140, 9 March 1929, Page 11

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert