CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 9 March 1935, Page 5

CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD

SUPREME COURT ALLEGATIONS. ELLESMERE PROPERTY ,T)EAL. (By Telegraph—Press Asscciation.) CHRISTCHURCH, March S. False and fraudulent statements by a Christchurch solicitor, William Lancelot Aynsley, and two of his clients, conspiracy to defraud, fraudulent conversion ag,d a breach of trust were allegations made in an action partly heard in the Supreme Court today. The plaintiffs were * George Tracey Fisher, Ellesmere, farmer, and Elaine Mabel Fisher, married woman, and defendants were William Lancelot Aynsley, solicitor, Henry Martin Boyle, of the Trafalgar Hotel, Nelson, and Elsie May Boyle, Iris wife.

The conduct of the defendants, it was alleged, had caused the plaintiffs to lose £IOSO, and the return of this sum was sought. It was stated that the plaintiffs had agreed to buy from the Boyles a farm at Ellesmere on which there were arrears of interest, rates and land tax. To allow these to be cleared the plaintiffs, it was alleged, gave as a deposit a mortgage for £IOSO, on the understanding given 'by Aynsley, who was acting for the Boyles, that the proceeds would be used for this purpose, but Aynsley, it was stated, had paid the money raised, to tMrs Boyle, who had invested it in a hotel at Nelson and the contract between the plaintiffs and Boyle had not been completed. Defendants, while admitting that the contract for the purchase of the farm was made on August 14, 1934, denied that any such undertaking as alleged by plaintiffs was made by the defendants. They also denied that the mortgage of £IOSO was handed to them on any condition that it should be applied specifically in payment of interest owing on the first mortgage. The defendants denied misrepresentation or conspiracy, or conversion of the mortgage moneys. They admitted that some of the money from the mortgage was applied to the purchase of a hotel at Nelson and contended that the' arrangement made permitted this, and that the written contract placed no such restriction on the use of these moneys as that alleged by the plaintiffs.