FORGERY AND THEFT

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 30, 4 August 1925, Page 6

FORGERY AND THEFT

m THORPE FOUND GUILTY. The trial of George William Thorpe, former manager for 0. W. Price, Ltd., who answered twelve charges of forging receipts, dealing with them as though they were genuine, and theft 4 involving an amount of £23, was concluded in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon. Accused was represented by Mr. 0. A. L. Treadwell and Idr. W. E. Leicester. Evidence was given by the accused, who said he had been in business for 40 years. In May last he said he commenced buying furniture, paying for it out of his own money, and later reselling it to the company. His Honour: "Did you know that was dishonest?" Accused: **I didn't think so." Thorpe said that as he was doing further business with the company, everything would have been squared up later on. His Honour: "You would have told them all about it!" Accuseds "It would have come out later." ' Accused said he bought under the name of Watchman because people wonld not sell to a dealer as they considered they would not get a good price. Mr. Macassey: ''Why did you forge the name of Payne?"—"l did not exactly forge it. I used it to classify that stuff from another." His Honour: "Did it not occur to you it was forgery?"—" No." His Honour: "Are you in the habit of copying somebody else's style of writing? Don't you know it is wrong?" Accused: It would be wrong to do that." Hit Honour: "Did you have any moral right as manager to buy furniture and sell it to your firm at a profit?"—" That would have come out later on." "I don't see how," added his Honour. Evidence was called by Mr. Treadwell as to the accused's previous good character. After a retirement of 25 minutes the jury returned a verdict of guilty, with a very strong recommendation for mercy. Sentence was deferred till to-day. This morning Mr. W. E. Leicester submitted that after 40 years' commercial experience Thorpe had adonted a means of making money which he honestly believed not to be illegal. He was an old man, and not in robust health, and he urged his Honour to accept the jury's recommendation to mercy. "It is a painful thing to me to have to pass sentence on a man well known, and with a good record, yet who has fallen into very serious crimes," said Mr. Justice Ostler. "It was foolish of you, when the evidence was so very strong, to think you could throw dust in the eyes of the jury by setting up a defence in which you pleaded one crime against another. I cannot for a moment believe that you did not know that what you did was immoral, but I do not propose to make it harder for you because you defended yourself. I cannot grant probation, but seeing that you are an old man and not strong, I will make the sentence light, and let your disgrace be your chief punishment. You will be imprisoned with hard labour for three months on each charge, the sentences to be concurrent.