THE SHARE SWINDLE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14301, 22 February 1910, Page 6

THE SHARE SWINDLE.

ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY.

COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE.

As the result of an arrest made on Thursday last by Detectives Hollis and Scott a respectable-looking young man, who gave the name of Sidney Stevenson, was brought before Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., at the Police Court yesterday morning to answer charges of swindling and forgery. It was alleged that on February 15 the accused obtained from one Charles Henry Yeo, of the firm of S. White and Co., sharebrokers, of Auckland, the sum of £112 9s by falsely representing himself to be John Burridge, of Napier, the owner of 500 shares in the May Queen Gold Mining Company, Ltd., and on the same date did forge the name of the said John Burridge to a share transfer. Further, he was charged with on February

16 last falsely and deceitfully impersonating Henry R. Duncan, of Nelson, the owner of 1000 shares in the Watchman Gold

Mining Company, Ltd., and forging the name of the said Henry Duncan to a share transfer, thereby causing the firm of Mowbray Bros, to act on the same as if genuine. Mr. Allan Moody appeared for the accused, who pleaded guilty. Chief-Detective Marsaclc conducted the prosecution.

Charles Yeo, employed by Sam. White and Co., in giving evidence, said the accused came to the office and led him to believe he was John Burridge, of Napier, who owned certain shares in the May Queen Gold Mining Company. He asked witness to see that the shares were sold for him, and on this being done the accused received £112 9s. Witness produced a transfer made by accused. He knew restitution had been made by accused. He would not swear that he asked accused for any proof of his ownership of the shares. George Decry, a clerk employed by Mowbray Bros., stated that the accused represented him that he was Mr. H. R. Duncan, of Nelson, and wished 1000 shares in the Watchman Gold Mining Company disposed of Witness looked up the register and found the shares actually did stand to Duncan's name. He told

him to call later in the day, and at four o'clock saw the accused outside the office. He saw accused next day at the Central Hotel, and handed him a cheque for £89 Cs 4d. Accused stated he wanted cash or small cheques, and returned the cheque offered. He then went to consult Mr. Mowbray. His Worship expressed surprise at the apparent business laxity on the part of the brokers. They had not attempted to identify the accused, and had taken his word for everything. It was not surprising that they were taken in. William M. B. Mowbray stated that the 1000 Watchman shares were sold by the firm. Ho first saw the accused at the Central Hotel, when he said his name was Duncan. Witness gave him nine small cheques, and got a receipt for them. His suspicions were somewhat aroused, and' he took the precaution of looking up the original transfer and comparing the signatures. He then communicated with the police, and stopped payment of the cheques. He met accused at the bank the following day and took him to his office. Accused then stated that his real name was Stevenson, but. that he was acting under instructions from Mr. Duncan. He did not ask accused for evi-

dence as to his ownership of the shares.

Detective Hollis stated that he interviewed the accused in company with Detective Scott. He told them that his

name was Stevenson, and said that Mr. Duncan, whom he had met casually, had instructed him to sell his shares. * Sub-

sequently they arrested him, and ; found him in possession of £65 15s 7d. When in' gaol the accused made statements* admitting: his guilt. In one of these he explained that about two years ago, while travelling in a train, he heard two men discussing the.ease with which such swindles might be carried out. As he was lyird up lie resolved to try it, and on looking in the register choose the names of shareholders who were strangers to Auckland. ; , ■. The accused was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence. Mr. Moody applied for bail, but this was refused.