ALLEGED DUPLICITY

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8174, 16 July 1912, Page 1

ALLEGED DUPLICITY

SOLICITOR AND CLIENT RANGIAPOA AND HER MONEY. LAW SOCIETY TAKES ACTION. The Appeal Court yesterday heard an application made on a rule nisi by the Wellington District Law Society to strike John Gwynneth O’Conor'Stevens, of Otaki, off the roll of solicitors upon tho ground that ho had been guilty of professional misconduct. On the bench were their Honors the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout), Sir Joshua Williams, Mr Justice Edwards, Mr Justice Cooper, and Mr Justice Chapman. Mr A. Gray appeared for the Law Society, and Mr 0. N. Beere'for Mr Stevens. PARTICULARS OF ALLEGATIONS. The allegations as to misconduct were in regard to two matters: >(1) That on October 24th, 1910, while acting ostensibly as solicitor for a native woman named Rangiapoa Waikari, but really in the interests of one Sydney Robjohns East, Stevens applied to the Public Trustee for a loan to Rangiapoa Waikari of tho sum of . £IOOO upon tho security of certain land, and falsely represented to tho Public Trustee that tho money was required by the woman for the purpose of improving certain other lands which she, owned. By means of such false representation Stevens induced tho Public Trustee to grant tho loan and advance £IOOO, whereas in truth, as Stevens well knew, tho money was not required or intended to bo used for the purpose alleged but for the purpose of the purchase by Rangiapoa from East of a share in a' patent for indicating the position of sunken vessels, and called “ Tho Patent Automatic Wreck Recorder,” of which Stevens, East, and a third person, John Bentick Blaine, were the patentees. Tho substance of the second charge was that, prior to making the application for a loan and subsequently, Stevens persuaded, advised, and induced Rangiapoa to puxchaso a share in the patent from East and to mortgage her land for the purpose, ho knowing well at the time that Rangiapoa had no independent advice in the matter, and was not competent to act for herself. By reason of this persuasion and advice East obtained the sum of £BOO from Rangiapoa out of the proceeds of the loan. " MR GRAY SUMMARISES. Mr Gray, in placing the .evidence before the court, said that East, who was interested with Stevens and Blaine in the patent referred to, wished to obtain money to take a trip to England to push this and another patent. He approached Rangiapoa, and told her that the patent was a good one. She believed that there was a fortune in it, and it was with the object of 'discussing this matter that ’she arranged to meet East and Stevens, Whom she had not hitherto met, at (the Native Land Court Office in Wellington. Rangiapoa was accompanied ihy a relative, Richmond Davies, a halfcaste licensed interpreter. Rangiapoa said that tho object of this meeting was to discuss ways and means by which she could raise money to buy a share in tho patent; but Stevens declared that he knew nothing of the proposal to buy a share in the patent, and that ho was asked to be present at the interview, as Rangiapoa wished him to act for her in getting a partition of the lands which she and her father held in common. At the conclusion of this interview (according to Stevens) Davies said that Stevens might, as well complete an application for . a loan which was then in tho hands of the Public Trustee. It was not disputed, continued Mr Gray, that Stevens put in the application for a loan “for improvement of other lands.” Tho loan was granted by tho Public Trustee, the partition order was granted, and on November 14th, 1910, tho Public Trustee paid out a cheque for some £9OO. Rangiapoa allowed East to retain £BOO, and kept something _ like £9O for herself. Later Rangiapoa asked for a receipt, and an assignment was prepared by Mr A. A. Bennett. Stevens said that he inquired from Rangiapoa what amount she had invested in tho wreck-locator, hut she refused to tell him, and he judged from her manner that she had not given more than £2O. . Rangiapoa, on the other hand, said that she communicated with Stevens several times, but as she was unable to see him regarding the patent she consulted Messrs Bell, Gully, Bell, and Myers. JUDGE EDWARDS’ COMMENT. Alfred Augustus Bennett, solicitor, who drew up the deed assigning a share in tho patent, was called, at tho desire of the bench, to give evidence. Ho said that he received instructions from East in the street, and subsequently took the deed to the Arcadia Hotel, whero it was executed. Witness recounted subsequent incidents in connection with the assignment, but could not definitely connect Stevens with any of tho proceedings. Sir Justice Edwards: Whom did you consider your client? Mr Bennett: I considered that I was acting for the purchaser at the expense of the vendor. TTig Honor: Did you take duo steps to protect this native woman’s interest? Mr Bennett replied that he asked her if she were satisfied, and she said “ Yes.” Ho told her that it was her own risk; ho knew_ nothing of the patent, and was taking no responsibility. His Honor: Did yon consider that sufficient in acting for a native woman ? Witness: Yes. His Honor: Well, so far as lam concerned, I think it was wholly insufficient. WHERE THE MONET WENT. Mr Gray further dealt with' the whole of the evidence and affidavits submitted to the court, and concluded