CHARGE OF FORGERY AGAINST W.W. CHARTERS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LVI, Issue 6474, 26 November 1881, Page 3

CHARGE OF FORGERY AGAINST W.W. CHARTERS.

At thA Resident Magistrate’* Court yestorday tnorninjr, Mon; O. h. Hellish, K*q„ R.M.. William Wombwell Charters was charged with forging a bill of exchange for £14712* with intent to defraud.

Mr Duncan appeared to conduct the case for the prosecution, Mr Joyce defended the prisoner, and at his request all witnesses were ordered out of Court. Mr Duncan called the following witnesses Margaret Chapman: I am the wife of John Chapman, of the Heathoote Valley. The accused acted ns my agent from April, 1880 till when he left the Colony. I have freebold property of my own, which he had charge o?. I never gave him authority to draw upon me, end I never accepted a bill of exchange. 1 never saw the bill produced till 1 saw it in Mr Tippings' bands shortly before Charters loft. I never authorised anyone to sign this for me. Accused never informed me about the bill of exchange. 1 cannot write. I had eigned my name, inking it over pencil written by accused, for a Post office order I received when he was employed at W. Wilson's. Cross-examined: I had known the accused for a long time before April, 1880. I received £lO from the accused in January last, and £lO in July, 1880. There might have been some other sums which I don’t remember, but I paid them all back to accused. Charters paid £9l for mo on a house that he was building for me, and I owed him this sum in April, 1880. Accused said it did not matter about my paying that back, seeing he was receiving my rents. My accounts would show my transactions with accused. I have never signed any acknowledgment to Mr Wilson for moneys I received from him. When I drew £BO from the Post-office Savings Bank, I touched the pen while accused wrote my name or made a mark for mo. Out of this I paid accused £6l which woe all I owed him, so far os lam aware. This was shortly after Mr Draper's death. The only time that I authorised any one to sign my name woe when accused wrote it in pencil and I inked it over on a receipt for a P. 0.0. which I signed in the old Poet-office.

John Chapman: I am a farmer in the Heathoote Volley, and husband of last witness. The bill of exchange produced 'I had not signed for my wife, nor authorised anyone to do so. I knew of its existence shortly before Charters loft.

Cross-examined: 1 have seen my wife ink over her name which bad been written in penoil by a person at my wife’s suggestion. Edmond Tippings: I entered into partnership with accused in March last. Wo dissolved partnership on April 1 last. This bill of exchange was debited to Tippings, Charters and Co., and when Charters and I dissolved partnership it was agreed that I should have this acceptance of Mrs Chapman’s. It was also arranged that Charters should go down with mo to Mrs Chapman’s, to tell her that I hod the acceptance. Accused gave me tho bill of exchange, and told me that the amount of it was still due. I drew the bill from the Bank. I asked Charters how it was he had let the bill be so long overdue without asking for the money, and he said he would go down and see about it. Accused did notago with me to Mrs Chapman’s, and when I went myself she denied owing the money, and said she never wrote the signature. It was the second week in April, and I think after Charters left. Cross-examined: The bill was overdue some three or four months. I took up the bill before Charters left. I believe the Bank would have cashed the bill because it was debited to Tippings, Charters and Co., and the firm’s credit was reckoned good. W. T. Twinning: lam taller at the Bank of New Zealand. The accused's firm had an account at the Bank. This is the accused's writing on the body of the bill of exchange produced. The formation of some of the letters in the signature “M. Chapman ” appears similar through a glass to that In the body of the bill. The “ 0-h- a-p” on tho receipt produced, which was given by the accused to Margaret Chapman, was put the same as the “ O-h-a-p ” on the bill of exchange. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Joyce intimated that the accused would reserve his defence.

The prisoner was then committed to take his trial for forgery at the next criminal session.

Mr Joyce said be was instructed to apply for boil, although he believed that Mr Duncan would oppose the application. He_ was informed that several substantial sureties could be obtained for the accused.

Mr Duncan strenuously opposed bail being granted. His Worship said that considering the circumstances of the accused having previously left the Colony, and been brought back in custody, he was not disposed to accede to the application for bail, but at Mr Joyce’s request he would let the matter stand over to Monday for his further consideration.