SOLICITOR IN TROUBLE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVI, Issue 8180, 23 July 1912, Page 1

SOLICITOR IN TROUBLE.

ALLEGED MISAPPROPRIATION

HEARING OF SOMERVILLE CASE CONCLUDED. DECISION RESERVED. Hearing of tho Wellington Law Society’s application to strike tho name of William George Somerville, of Dan■icvirke, late ot Wellington, off the roll of barristers and' solicitors was continued before the Court of Appeal yesterday. On tho bench were their Honors the Chief Justice (Sir ilobert Stout), Mr Joshua Williams, Mr Justice Denniston, Air Justice Cooper, and Air Justice Chapman. Air A. Gray appeared for the Law Society, and Air Somerville opposed the motion in. person. . The allegations of misconduct upon which the application was based were: (3) That Somerville received from Airs Catherine Butler, the sum of £3700 for investment' on mortgage over a property owned by Messrs T. A. H. and H. AI. Field, at Island Bay, and that ho fraudulently converted the sum to his own use; (2) that Somor villa misappropriated £132 Tos 4d, portion of a sum which he, on behalf of a syndicate, received from Percy Hud son.

One defence to tho first charge was that there was an agreement between Airs Bulter and Somerville not to com. plete the mortgage, but that Somerville'was to give personal, security for the money instead. Yesterday morning Edgar AI. Wylie, managing clerk to the firm of Morison and McLean, gave evidence to the effect that there was no such;agreement among the papers which his firm handled in connection with an action taken by Mrs Butler against Alessrs Field. Mr Somerville continued . bis defence, his argument : occupying the greater portion of thd day. In respect to the allegatiqns of misappropriation of' moneys entrusted to him by- a syndicate including J. H. Flockton, Mr Somerville claimed that, ho had ;,the right to appropriate this money, on account of money advanced for road, formation, as a share in the profits. of tho syndicate, and as solicitor’s costs.

. Mr Justice Cooper said that, .presuming •Mr ■ Somerville made' out a primu fdcie claim for costs, that portion of Ahe case would then_ be reduced to a question of‘the legality, of such a bill of .costs.

Mr -Somerville had not prepared a of costs. : ■ ' ■ . ;-, ; .';Aftier-their thetChief Justifce kiucT the court would postpone consideration of this portion of thc rule until Mr Somerville had made put a bill-of costs and had it taxed, if Mr Gray desired this. The court ■• would ,then go into the question of retainer.

Mr ~ Gray,. replying to Mr Somerville’s arguments' in regard to the Butler portion'of the rule, submitted that there was no corroboration of Somerville’s' ' statement' that Mrs ' Butler agreed to the mortgage remaining unpaid.. ‘Even had Mrs Butler consented Messrs Field had no knowledge of tho matter.

Decision was reserved, and the court adjourned till 10.30 a.m. to-day.