SUPREME COURT

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 147, 7 June 1932, Page 7

SUPREME COURT

, THE NAPIER SESSIONS ALLEGED FALSE REPRESENTATION. CASE FOR PROSECUTION COMPLETED. The trial of William Ebenezer Hyslop, manager of the Tourist Motor Co., Ltd., Hastings, who pleaded not guilty to two charges of false representation, was continued to-day. When we went to press the case for the prosecution was completed and the defence had commenced. Evidence that on December 17, 1930, he insured the Studebaker-six car tor £2OO was given by Ronald Herbert Miles, Napier, inspector lor the United Insurance Company, Limited. In effecting the insurance the cash selling price of the vehicle was disclosed as £304, but. tho terms price was stated to be £359 14/6. After the car was destroyed by fire, the insurance company paid out £l9O, being the amount of the policy less £lO franchise. Before paying out, the company was advised that £lOO deposit had been paid when A. R. Wyllie purchased the car.

Under cross-examination, witness said that as far as he knew the company had not asked the accused Hyslop for any explanation as to why he had set out the deposit paid on the car as £lOO.

The last witness for the prosecution was Detective-Sergeant Fitzgibbon, but as he was unable to be present in Court, the deposition of his evidence given in the Lower Court was read to the jury by His Honour. The detectivesergeant’s evidence related to his interviewing the accused, when the latter made a statement with regard to the sale of the two ears concerned and the prices and deposits paid on them. This completed the case lor the prosecution. ADDRESS TO JURY. Counsel for the accused then proceeded to address tho jury, outlining the evidence that would be lead in defence of Hyslop. The Crown had not proved, he submitted, that when the statement was made by the accused with regard to the deposit paid on the car, the accused had made it knowingly falsely. Counsel would bring evidence to show that at all times he believed the transactions to be actually as he had stated them to the United Insurance Company. The whole point of the letters read in Court was what deposit was paid, and the reply was £lOO. Tho accused believed that sum to have been paid and if that was the case, then counsel submitted that it did not matter iu the present case whether the deposit had been paid or not. Evidence would be brought to show that tho transaction regarding the Studebaker car was a bona fide sale at a price of £303 and a deposit of £lOO, the latter actually received in the form of a traded-in car.

In regard to the Hudson car, the defence was, said counsel, that tho transaction was conducted as stated to the Insurance Company by tho accused. Evidence would lie brought to show that the accused knew nothing but that tho £5O deposit had been paid. When his books were seized by the police he immediately carried out investigations of his own, which resulted in his discovery that the deposit had not in fact been paid. He thereupon saw Hannay, who had fixed up tho deal, and the latter gave him his cheque for the deposit. The whole question was whether, counsel concluded, the evidence given relating to the two deals showed the accused to be fraudulent or not. Counsel would lead evidence to show that tho accused had not been dishonest. ACCUSED’S EVIDENCE. Giving evidence on his own behalf, the accused stated that he had been in the motor business in Napier and Hastings for 25 to 30 years. Until after the earthquake his business with the Wyllie brothers was very satisfactory. Accused proceeded to relate how Altex Wyllie purchased an X-Nairn car from the Tourist Motor Company, trading in a Hudson car. The latter was given some attention and then held for sale, being first entered in the stock book. The Hudson was taken in at £l2O and later sold back to Alex Wyllie for £l5O by hire-purchase. This transaction arose because Alex Wyllie discovered, after purchasing the X-Nairn car, that he required a spare vehicle for his service run. The re-sale of the Hudson was arranged by Mr Hannay. The cash price was £l5O, with a deposit of £5O, balance payable by 12 monthly instalments. Accused subsequently received the hire-purchase agreement and the P.N.’s. He denied that at anytime after the declaration of loss in respect of the car had been made he knew that the deposit of £5O had not been paid. He was not consulted when the car was transferred to Mr Dalrymple. Two of the P.N.’s were met by Alex Wyllie, but the payments were not kept up, so witness re-possessed the car, storing it in his Nelson street garage at Hastings, where, on October 23, it was destroyed by fire. Accused continued that Mr Hannay arranged the insurance with the United Insurance Company. After agreeing to adjust the insurance business after the fire with Mr Bisley, lie did not tell the latter that the car had not been re possessed. After November 11 Mr Bisley made no attempt to adjust the claim with him. Arbitrators were appointed, one by the insurance company and one by the Tourist Company. These did not meet in conference, however.

Accused’s books and papers were later seized by the police, although accused did not know the reason. 110 then made some investigations on his own account, to try and ascertain why his books should have been seized and this resulted in his ascertaining that the £5O deposit on the Hudson car had not been paid. He therefore went to Hannay, who gave him a cheque for the deposit. Mr Hannay arranged the deal wherein the car was traded in on the Hudson for £l2O, and which was subsequently handed back to A. R. Wylie for £l5O.

Counsel: Do you seriously tell us that A. R. Wylie traded in the car for £l2O and then bought it again for £150? Accused: Yes. I do. The two Wylie’s wanted it as a spare ear on their run.

Regarding the seizure of his books and papers by tile police, the accused said that the rcti.soa why he made en-

quiries on his own behalf as to whether the £5O deposit on the Studebaker had been paid wns because he was dumbfounded nt the police’s sudden action. In connection with the Hudson transaction, Hannay also carried out this deal, the price being £303. When the documents were completed they were forwarded to tho accused. By way ol deposit a Dodge car was traded

The reply to the enquiry by the Southern Union Insurance Company was drafted by an employee, Mr Pickering, and signed by the accused, who thought that what he had signed was a true statement.

The Dodge car was received from A. R. Wyllie, but was later handed back to F. V. Wyllie, who was owed money by the Tourist Motor Company for services rendered at the Gisborne Show after his bankruptcy. Under the cross-examination of the Crown Prosecutor, the accused said that the Tourist Motor Company con. sisted of two shareholders, himself and his brother Jack. All business trans actions of any importance tvent through the accused. however, who ual the biggest slian-huldor.