FORGERY OF AN ENDORSEMENT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 7292, 23 November 1910, Page 1

FORGERY OF AN ENDORSEMENT

A DISPUTED SIGNATURE PECULIAR CASE IN THE MAGISTRATE’S COURT, " The plaintiff company claims to re--cover tho sum of £io as the holder of * promissory note, dated August 9th, 1909,. made hy Thomas McCarthy, and payable four months’ after date to the plaintiff company or order, and endorsed by tb« defendant, which said note was dishonoured on presentment, notice of such dishonour being .given to ■ defendant,” said Dr. McArthur, S.M., in giving reserved j udgment .at'; the Magistrate’s Court yesterday in- the case in which the To Aro, Loan, Discount and. Investment Company, ' Ltd.; ' sued' John Fitchett, wheelwright, of Ohiro road, for JMO on a promissory note drawn by Thomae McCarthy in 1 favour of the plaintiffs, and endorsed by defendant. , A further A 3, by way of interest, was claimed by plaintiffs...... . , , ' “FORGERIES BY ONE MAN.’’ “The defendant denies liability,” continued his Worship, “ alleging that the endorsement on tne nolo is not his, but is a forgery. On comparing the endorse, ments on the note sued on and on two other notes', with three admitted signatures of the defendant on two receipts and, on a. note, of dishonour, X am of) the . opinion . tdat tho endorsements are not -those of the detendaut, but aro forgeries, by one man. Further, on comparing tho endorsements with a letter purporting to , bo w-ihiten by ‘ T. .McCarthy/ in which the defendant’s name occurs twice, 1 am of the opinion that: tho person who wrote Chat letter also wrote the endorsements.” ' ' DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE RELIABLE.

“My opinion is strengthened,’'’ said his \vorsuip, “ by a furtuer comparison of defendant's . name written in'a pro missory note signed by; Thomas, MoCarthy. On the evidence of the defendant, which I .absolutely , believe, and on my own opinion, based da the comparisons mentioned, I have no hesitation in saying that the endorsement on the , but sued on is a forgery.” , „■ ; ’’Defendant-certainly; received notices of dishonour of bills made by McCarthy, such notices including the .words, ‘endorsed by J. Fitchett,’ but he states that he attached no importance to those words, and simply passed, the notices on to McCarthy. I do not think that, such conduct , on" the defendant’s part precludes him * from .setting up his presentdefence/ . Defendant -was many times in the office of the plaintiff company, and "a" word between the parties . would have put matters right at, once." Judgment, was “.given, tor. the defendant. 1 • ■ ■ ■ ;■

Mr F., G, Bolton appeared for the plaintiff company, and Mr C. 11. Dix for the defendant.