ALLEGED FORGERY AND FALSE PRETENCES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 9335, 19 October 1893, Page 6

ALLEGED FORGERY AND FALSE PRETENCES.

THE ACCUSED COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. At the Police Court yesterday morning before Dr. Giles, R.M., a respectable look* ing young man named James Ferguson Morrison was charged that on the 15th of September he did unlawfully and knowingly by false pretence obtain from Mary Ross one gold diamond ring, of the value of £20, the property of Edward Smith, by pretending that he, the said James Fer§uson Morrison, had authority from Edward Smith to obtain possession of the ring. Mary Ross, residing in Monmouth-street, Archhill, deposed that she saw the accused first on the afternoon of the 19th September, at half-past two. He came to her house. He said his name was Morrison, and he had > come from Mrs. Smith, at Waipu. He told her he bad bought land there, and was up in town on business.- Mrs. Smith was a particular friend of witness', so she asked the accused to come in. In course of conversation accused said Mrs. Smith had asked him to bring down the. ring. She asked him why Mrs. Smith had not written herself. He replied that her hand was bad, and she could not write. Witness gave him the ring. He said Mrs. Smith was short of money, and he was going to get a box of goods from Mr. Nathan, and perhaps get him to buy the ring. Accused left her place at five p.m. She believed the value of the ring to be about £25. She again saw the accused at nine p.m. the same evening. He told her that ho had left the ring with Mr. Nathan. He said that Mr. Nathan was to give him £12 for it, but that. he. (accused). did not think it enough. He said he could not return to Waipu until Friday, the 22nd. Accused remained at her house until the Friday. He went away after breakfast on that day, and did not return. Thab evening witness wrote to Mrs. Smith, and on a receipt of a telegram, from her, she communicated with the police. She had never seen the accused prior to the time he came to the house on the Tuesday. In answer to Dr. Giles as to how the prisoner became aware that she had the ring, witness said she did not know.

Sarah Duff deposed that she lived with her sister, the previous witness, at Archhill. She was present on the occasion that accused called. Witness gave corroborative evidence with regard to what took place in the house.

Ann Maria Smith deposed that the accused entered her husband's employment in May last. He was employed by him for fourteen weoks. Accused left their place on the Bth September. On one occasion she told the accused that she had a diamond ring valued at £25, and that a friend in Auckland was trying to dispose of it. She did not recollect ever having told him that •Mrs. Ross had the ring. On the morning that he left, accused asked witness to lend him £2. She gave the accused no authority to get the ring. Bernard Gold water deposed that the accused called at his shop on the 19th September, and pawned a diamond ring for £4. He pawned the ring ,in the name of Smith.

Detective Chrystal deposed to arresting the accused on another charge on the 9th October, at eight p.m. Witness told him that he would be charged with obtaining a gold ring from Mrs. Ross by false pretences. The accused did not reply to the charge. The accused reserved his defence, and was duly committed tor trial at the next criminal sittings of the Supreme Court.

A SECOND CHARGE. Accused was further charged with having on the 16th September feloniously and fraudulently forged a certain cheque drawn on the Bank of New Zealand at Dargaville, for the payment of £3 Is. Matthew James McMahon, hotelkeeper, deposed that the accused called on him on or about the 17th September, and asked him to cash .the cheque. Ho said he had come from the country, and had stayed at witness' brother's place at Pahi the night before. He gave witness to understand that he meant to stay for three or four days. Witness gave him £1 lis, and the balance (30s) was to be left towards payment of his board. The accused then went out and did not come back again. The cheque was signed in the name of Mitchelson and Co. Audus Raynes, licensee of the Grand Hotel, Princes -street, deposed to giving accused a blank cheque. The cheque produced corresponded with the number on his block.

Richard Mitchelson, of the firm of Mitchelson and Co., Edmund Hallewel!, accountant at the Bank of New Zealand at Dargaville, also gave evidence. The accused reserved his defence, and was duly committed to take his trial at the next criminal sitting of the Supreme Court. THIRD CHARGE. The accused was further charged with having, on the 7th of October, at Auckland, by certain false pretences, to wit, by means of a valueless cheque, on the Bank of New Zealand, Auckland, for the payment of £3 39 9d, did unlawfully and knowingly obtain from Richard Fowler, the sum of £3 Is, with intent thereby to cheat and defraud.

Richard Fowler, pork butcher, Karangahape Road, deposed that the accused called at his shop on the 6th October with another gentleman. He called again next day between twelve and one o'clock, when he bought some brawn, valued at 2s 9d. He asked the goods to be sent to a house in Symonds-street. Witness sent the goods there, bub his man brought them back, as he could not find the place. After having purchased the brawn he took a blank cheque out of his pocket and asked witness if he could cash a cheque. Tho accused filled the cheque up for £3 3s 9d, and witness gave him £3 Is in cash. The cheque was returned marked " Name unknown." Evidence was also given by Francis Henry Templar, agent of the Bank of New Zealand at Newton and Detective Chrystal. The accused was committed for trial. FOURTH CHARGE. The accused was also charged with having on the 7th of October feloniously and fraudulently forged a certain cheque on the National Bank of New Zealand (Whangarei) for the payment of £15 Is. Herbert Mayne Smeeton, grocer, Karangahape Road, deposed that between one and two o'clock on the 7th, the accused came into his shop. He said he wished to leave an order to go to Whangarei on the following Tuesday. He gave witness an order for between £11 and £12 worth of goods, stating that they were for Dr. Marsack, with whom he was living. He tendered in payment a cheque for £15, which he filled up in the presence of witness. The blank cheque was supplied by witness. Ho gave him to understand that he was authorised by Dr. Marsack to sign the cheque, and he gave a reference' to the agent of the National Bank of New Zealand, Newton. Witness took the cheque, and noticing that he had not struck out the word " Newton," witness drew his attention to it. The accused struck out " Newton," and inserted Whangarei. Dr. Marsack, William Payne, and Detective Chrystal also gave evidence. The accused was committed to take his trial at the next criminal sittings of the Supremo Court. OTHER CHARGES. ~ There were also two other charges preferred against the accused of obtaining money by means of a valueless cheque, the amounts being £3 Is and £2 Is. The accused was committed for trial on both charges. Bail was allowed prisoner in his own recognisances of £20 and two other sureties of £10 each.