ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11712, 23 July 1901, Page 3

ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES.

GORRIE BEFORE THE COURT. »

REMAND GRANTED TILL SATURDAY. At yesterday's sitting of the Police Court, Mr. H.W. Brabant, S.M., presiding, James Andrew Gorrie, well known in the city as an auctioneer, was charged that he did, on December 19,1 1900, at Auckland, with the intent to defraud, obtain the sum of £35 from one George Tuck, by representing that the said James A. Gorrie was the owner of a certain horse named Motor, and entitled to sell the game, and did so sell the same to the said George Tuck for the sum of £35, which representation he, the said James A. Gorrie, knew to be false. Gorrie was also charged that he did obtain, by means of a false pretence, £43 from John Olsen; thirdly, that with intent to defraud, he did obtain £35 from Henry McVeigh; fourthly, that he did by means of a false pretence obtain £30 from Josiah D. Webster. Chief-Detective Grace prosecuted, and Mr. J. R. Reed appeared for the accused. .On evidence being called, George Tuck, contractor, carrying on business in Auckland, deposed that he had been acquainted with the accused for some years. ;.. On December 19 of last year, accused said he wanted to borrow some money to purchase a hack. Accused told -witness that he had paid a deposit on the hack, and had promised to pay the balance on the following morning. '.■. Accused then said to witness that if he gave him (the accused) £35, he would be able to purchase the hack. Accused said he would give witness * his horse Motor, as a security for the money. Witness understood that the accused was the owner of the horse Motor. Witness asked the accused why the horse Motor competed in race meetings in Bell's name, and accused replied that the name was only a racing one. Witness lent the £35 to the accused, who promised to refund the money in January, 1901. Witness identified the sale note produced in Court, and signed by Gorrie.*' Accused told , witness that nobody had any claim on the horse Motor but himself. Witness saw the accused in the month of February or March last, concerning the money, and he asked witness to wait a little longer for the money. Subsequently witness heard that the horse Motor was to be put up for sale at Buckland's Yards, and went there on the day of the sale, and claimed the horse by the sale note signed by Gorrie. Cross-examined by Mr. Reed: Witness was to get no interest for the money lent to the accused. Witness understood that the horse Motor had been in, the accused's possession for a couple of years, and thought that Gorrie had the management of the horse. , = -■■■-.—• - ,-■■■. r-.;vW

Henry McVeigh, licensee of the Swan Hotel, deposed that on December 8 of last year accused came to witness' hotel "and stated to witness that he wished to soil the racehorse' Motor. Witness said he did not feel disposed to buy the animal. Accused said that witness iwas losing a good thing,if he let the offer go. Witness then consulted his wife, and ultimately decided to buy the horse. Accused promised if witness bought the horse to relieve him of its training, etc. -Witness asked accused if he owned the horse, and he replied "yes." Witness then asked the accused why the horse ran in races under Bell's name, and he replied that' that was only his racing name,. Witness gave £35 for the horse, and the accused promised 'that he would be responsible for the horse's training and nomination fees, etc. Shortly after the witness had purchased the horse, he noticed in the papers that the horse Motor was going to be put up for auction. Cross-examined by Mr. Reed: Witness said the purchase of the horse was not one of loan, but of sale. Two days before the sale took place accused came to witness and told him that he had an offer of £150 for the horse. Witness then said that he would give another £65 for the horse, besides; the £35 the witness had already given accused. \ Witness did not know that the words Coll. security" on the sale note meant " collateral security." ■ * Josiah D. Webster, fruiterer, of Queenstreet, said he knew the accused perfectly well. Accused came to witness in December of last year, and borrowed £30 from the witness, giving him the horses Motor "arid Josephine as security, for the money. At the -time of the loan the horse Motor was engaged at a race meeting at the Thames,. and accused considered that the horse had an excellent chance. Cross-examined by Mr. Reed: Witness had not been repaid any of the money accused borrowed. Thomas B. Bell, owner of the racehorses Motor and Josephine, said that the accused had charge of : the horses during the last three years. Accused aoted as his agent.. Accused agreed to maintain the horses; and pay for fees, etc., on condition that if , the horses ' had a win accused was to have some of the money. Witness did not know " that anybody had security over the horses. Messrs. Buckland last month lent the accused , £150 at the request of witness, and gave the horses as security. ' '/ ,', * ' This was the - case. > ■■•■■■ • The accused reserved his defence. On the application of Mr. Reed the accused was remanded till Saturday next. The accused was again" brought before the Court in the afternoon, to answer a charge that he did obtain the sum of £43 from one John Olsen, by means of a fraudulent promissory note and receipt purporting .to be signed by T. 18.• Bell. ' John Olsen, pawnbroker, Auckland, deposed that he lent the accused.£43 on November 26 of last year, on the security of .a promissory note and receipt signed by T. B. Bell. ' , ' , . „--!.'•" 1 Thomas B. Bell was placed m the box again, and said that the signatures to the receipt and promissory note produced were not signed by him, and he had given- the accused no such permission to sign his name. Mr. Reed intimated that the accused re«. served his defence, and was, as in the case of the other charges, remanded till -past ten on Saturday next.