THAT SPANISH FORTUNE!

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXXVI, Issue 13092, 13 February 1937, Page 9

THAT SPANISH FORTUNE!

AN OLD CONFIDENCE TRICK?

AUCKLANDER SUSPICIOUS OF DUNEDIN CASE.

A N Auckland resident whose lather some years ago received certain correspondence from Spain hearing all the characteristics of the notorious “Spanish prisoner” confidence trick, told an Auckland newspaperman that similarities in names and circumstances led him to form suspicions of a case reported from Dunedin. The Dunedin report stated that it was possiblo that stops woidd he taken by a tobacconist to share in an estate which, in 1021, was reported to bo worth over £30,000. This estate was concerned in a will said to have lion made in a. Spanish hospital in that year.

The report told of the late Enrique co Fonesca, Goughian—said to he an undo of the tobacconist, Mr J. Ooughlr«n—who was stated to have made his will from a. hospital bed, after being severely wounded in a. 1921. rebellion. The will provided that his daughter, Anna le. Fonesca. than a minor, should he his heiress, and that her guardian should bo “Don” *l. If. Goughian, to whom was made a conditional gift of one-fourth of all the tesla tor’s goods.

Duplicated Letters

When Mr J. W. M. Lindop, of Auckland, read the story, sudden recognition caused him to turn to a sheaf of papers that had belonged to his father, the lute Mr W. A. Lindop. Ho found a long letter, dated Madrid, September 11, 1921. and signed Enrique do.Fonesca ; a black-bordered note, in pathetic but uncertain English, from one Anna de Fonseca : her reputed photograph; a will and its translation; letters purporting to be from a priest, Jorge Pena ; and other communications. It was a cunningly devised set of documents, and yet it showed almost childish weakness in one respect. It was patent that several of the letters were cyclost.vled ; perhaps they had been run off by the thousand on some form of duplicating machine. Although there was some genuine handwriting, even the deathhod letter for f‘Enrique dc Fonseca - ' vats obviously not an original, and typed documents, supposed to he personal, were plainly from stock .supplies. with the name of Mr Lindop added where necessary in an entirely different ink.

“My Darling Daughter.”

The first to arrive was a letter fronp Enrique do Fonseca, referred to in other documents ns Enrique de Fonseca Lindop, claiming near relationship and telling of his part in a rebellion. He said that he had been empowered to go to London to buy war material, and that he took with him all his fortune. totalling £85,700. But the plot was discovered, and the rebellion committee arrested, “denouncing me as a defrauder of a large sum of money to the War Ministry.” He stayed in London until the death of his wife, and then decided to return to Spain, “to recover my darling daughter.” Tho latter continued: “Thinking it v as an imprudence to take with me my fortune, I decided to place it in a sure bank of London, hut saying that money of mine could he payed in any branch office of said hank in your country, which bank gavo me as a varrnntry of if, a. cheque payable to bearer transferred for to collect it; in your country where I was going to life. Hi is cheque bidden in a secret partition I make myself in one of my trunks impossible to bcl discovered for anybody.’ ’

Cheque in Luggage. Briefly, bo then returned to Spain (with luggage and “perfectly” disguised) ; ho was arrested, shot a policeman, and was gravely wounded (thinking at first he was dead) ; he Was tried, and all liis luggage—with tho cheque—-was seized by the court. Writing apparently fiom a, prison hospital, lie said be had confided in tho priest or chaplain, who had promised to help all ho could to recover the luggage—and the cheque. “I invito you if you wish it to come here to Spain, for you can yourself raise the seizure of my luggage, redeem my luggage and with it and in.y dear daughter return to your country, where you can recover my cheque.” He intended to make his will, appointing the chaplain his executor arid Mr Lindop Ins daughter’s guardian. If the New Zealander promisedv to he a groat protector for his daughter and aid to the priest in all he wanted for redeeming the luggage, the dying man would reward him with £21,422, the fourth ji'irt of all his fortune, plus interest.

A second letter camo from Enrique do Fonseca just before bo “died.” Death, in fact, came quite quickly. Tlio priest, Jorge Pena, wrote the day afterward, enclosing the alleged will and its translation, and the alleged court sentence and its translation, in which it was pointed out that if the fino and costs, totalling £l5O, were not paid within 150 days, the luggage (still with the precious cheque) would he sold “to benefit public treasure.” The £l5O was obviously to come from the New Zealander, and was asked for in a later letter. There were also a pathetic letter from Anna do Fonseca and her alleged photograph. Mr Lindop did nothing, and nothin] further had been heard.