SUPREME COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20867, 6 November 1929, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

CRIMINAL SITTINGS. Tuesday, November 5. (Before his Houor, Mr Justice Kennedy.)

The trial of Kmn Yoon Lee, also known as William Chan, jun„ and Tong Sing Lee, was continued yesterday. The accused was called on to answer 13 charges in all of- obtaining money by valueless cheques and by false pretences and fraud and of breaches of the Bankruptcy Act. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr F. B. Adams) conducted the case, and Mr R. H. Simpson appeared for the accused. Wuyk Chan, father-of the accused, said fie had had a market garden in Invercargill for three years. The business name of witness was Rum Yoon Lee and his family name was Chan. Tong Sing Lee was a company name under which the garden was worked. The property which -Mr O’Beirne sent a bailiff to claim belonged to witness, not to his son. He told bis son that if he were a good boy he would give him the gardens. His son hud been educated in Dunedin, Auckland, and Sydney. Witness had spent a lot of money on his education. He did not like his son marrying a white worn in Dir Adams had considerable difficulty in getting clear statements from the witness, who spoke volubly in broken English. Witness added that his son’s w:Ui and children were now living at his place in Invercargill, James Mooney, secretary of Messrs Butfcrworth Bros.. Ltd., said that the accused had run up an account of £l5O 4s 9d with his firm, and Leslie M'Donald, accountant for Messrs W. D. and H. O. Wills, said the accused owed his firm £44 15s,

William F. Hanies. secretary in the official assignee’s office, stated that he had accompanied Mr Mooney to a housft in Maclaggan street where the accused had been staying and had there found two boxes with a large quantity of new and used silks, furs, etc., in them Mr Mooney had identified certain of the articles as having been supplied by his firm, and these had been removed and were at present in the possession of the official assignee. ’ Witness said that from the way the goods were packed in the boxes he was of- opinion that the accused had attempted to hide the unused goods amongst the used. Some of the goods could not be identified as belonging to Messrs Butterworth, but they corresponded with those obtained by the accused from Messrs Butterworth. There were 31 pairs of sox, 34 silk lengths; and 23 pairs of babies’ bootees in the boxes amongst the other goods. Andrew Duff, warehouseman, Messrs Butterworth Bros., said that the value of the goods in the two boxes was i 49 _7s 2jid, and the goods identified as having been obtained from Messrs Butterworth were valued at £22 Os 2d.

Mary Stanley said that she had known the accused as William Chan. He had stayed at her house in street with a woman and a child for about three weeks. The accused had left the two boxes behind, and had said he would send for them. Maureen Cowie, daughter of the licensee of the Gridiron Hotel, said that the accused had stayed with his wife and child at the hotel for a day or two and hal left owing £B. William D. Cowie, licensee of the Gridiron Hotel, said that the accused had not told him he had just been adjudged a bankrupt. The accused had a car, and used to park it near the hotel. Both tho accused and ’his wife were well dressed. Accused and his wife left without saying they were going. James Milne Adam, official assignee, Dunedin, said that'the accused had been adjudged a bankrupt on March 27. 1929. The accused had unsecured creditors amounting to £412 7s 6d, and his assets were £l2. Since the meeting of creditors other creditors had proved claims, bringing the total amount owing to unsecured creditors to about £686. At the meeting of creditors the accused had said all the silk had been sold up country. He had said the same thing when be had been examined before witness, as assignee. To Mr Simpson: Accused had stated that he did not think the claim from Butterworth Bros, was as large as had been put in. 1 Ho had been surprised at the amount, and had stated that -two other people had got some of the goods. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Simpson said he had no evidence to call.

Mr Adams, in addressing the Jury, said that it had been clearly proved in the evidence that the chattels mortgaged toMr O’Bcirne by accused were not his, but his father’s, and as a result of the transaction had proved a complete loss to Mr O’Beirne. In connection'with the cheques issued to Mr Paape. they had seen the accused’s bank account, and it showed that he had no right whatever to pass the cheques. The accused had. said that his bank account at this time was £42, clearly a false statement. The accused had sent a telegram to Mr Paape from Oatnaru, reserving accompiodatipu. Ho appeared in the hotel quite frequently in evening dress, he flourished cheques, and referred to his father’s name and his position. He had spoken to Mr Paape of opening three shops in Dunedin, and it was true he had opened two, but he had not the capital to justify such a venture. He had mentioned that he was an Oxford graduate, which he never tvas. Counsel referred to other statements made by the accused, and mentioned that he had said he had to pay ransom money to brigands to release bis father. Well, it seemed that the old man had been captured in China some 40 years ago, before the accused had been born, and that neither the accused nor anybody else had to pay anything for ransom. Counsel went on to analyse the other statements made by the accused, and said that not one penny of the cost of the silk obtained from Butter--1 worth Bros, had been paid. The jury would have no hesitation, counsel submitted. in knowing how to deal with the accused. The story told by him regarding his trips through the goldfields selling silk was a tissue of lies. The accused had come to Dunedin with nothing but debts, and they should ask themselves could the accused have reasonably expected to pay them. When the accused had first come to Dunedin he owed £147. In a fortnight it had grown by £9O. Early in January the accused’ was owing £237 15s Bd. on January 31 £312, on February 16 £490. and on March 1 £577, aud then lie went to Butterworth Bros, and secured goods of the value of £54 16s. Dealing with the charge of a breach of the Bankruptcy Act. counsel said that the accused had concealed certain goods which he knew quite well should have been delivered to the official assignee. When the accused went to the Gridiron Hotel he was a bankrupt, but was careful to show the appearance of a man of means. He had arrived at the hotel with his motor car and his gloves, and had left when the staff was not about. What that the action of an honest man?

Mr Simpson paid that the jury must be satisfied that the accused had intent to defraud. The father had told them that the son would certainly have his chattels at Invercargill when he was gone, and they had to consider seriously, in view of the relations between Chinese families, whether the accused had not conceived that his father wag behind him in the transaction. The father had alwav s been most generous to his son, and they must be quite certain that the accused, when he passed the cheques, did not think it was quite possible that his father would meet the payments. The accused had started two shops in Dunedin and they must assure themselves that the improbability of ins being able to pay his debts iiad been fully borne in on him,—as lie would no doubt endeavour to keep going as long as he possibly could. There was a doubt about what was in the accused’s mind m regard to the transactions with Butterworth Bros., aud counsel submitted that the jury should not convict him on this charge. In regard to the charge of failure to account for the possession of certain goods, they must remember that the goods were found in a house at which the accused boarded, and that they were m *- c /.'i 6 ? J ame ’ , Tlle i ur J’ must be satisfied that the goods were actually reownership of the accused, and that he intended to conceal them In connection with the charge that the accused had tried to pass himself off as being in a much higher position than he was to Mr Paape, and when he appeared in a dress suit they must be satisfied that he told lies, if they were lies with the actual intent to induce the person to whom they were made to give him some business advantage and also to extend to mm credit. Counsel went on to sav that the accused’s statements were mostly exaggerations,—reckless boasts,—and could scarcely have been for the purpose of actually defrauding the people to whom he was speaking. Counsel submitted that

in every one of the counts there was a reasonable doubt as to the accused’s guilt. His Honor, in summing up, said the accused by hie statements and his letters showed himself to be a man of considerable intelligence, and if he had not received an Oxford education, he .had at any rate received a very considerable education. Mr O’Bcirnc bad made an advance of £SO to the accused on the security, of certain chattels, and the letters written by accused certainly indicated that the chattels were his own property. Was the accused . the owner, or was the statement that h c was the owner a false statement? The father said they were his chattels, and the father was a man of high reputation for honesty. Dealing with the charge of obtaining money from Frederick Griffiths Paane by means of valueless cheques, his Honor said that the accused had a small balance in the bank, and there was no evidence to suggest that he had any overdraft arrangement with the bank. The accused had given a cheque for £27 to Mr Pa ape when he already knew that-his previous cheques had been dishonoured. The accused had presented himself at both the Oban and Gridiron Hotels, and had left without making an effectual attempt to pay his debts. The jury must he satisfied that in each of these particular charges the accused had obtained credit by means of fraud. On the evidence the jury would have no difficulty in realising that he had actually obtained credit. His Honor detailed the evidence relating to the accused's arrival at the Oban and Gridiron Hotels, and said the jury would have to judge whether ho had obtained credit by means of fraud or whether these two actions were both innocent of fraud. Referring to other counts, his Honor said that if they accepted the evidence of Mr M‘Kay and Mr Mercer it would be clear that representations wore made, to them that woo'd affect business men in extending credit. If they accepted, further, the. statements of the father,, together with the admissions made by the accused, they might conclude that these statements were untrue, and that the accused knew that they were untrue. Dealing with the charges of broaches of the Bankruptcy Act, his Honor said that when the accused incurred his debt to Butterwortlis. did he have any reasonable or probable expectation of paying his debt ia this firm, as well as liis other debts? His Honor said that in connection with the charge that the accused, being a person adjudged a bankrupt, be made a material omission in the statement relating to his affairs, tne evidence went to show that he had understated his debts to Messrs Butterworth by £9O, and to Messrs W. D. and H. 0. Wills by £34. His Honor also mentioned sums which had been omitted from the accused’s statement of affairs, and said that there was little evidence from which the jury could draw the inference that the accused had no intention to .defraud. The evidence in regard to the charge that the accused had concealed certain property of the value of over £lO went to show that property had been found in two boxes under _ circumstances which were, at least suspicious. The accused, moreover, had stated first that he had disposed of the silk, and then that he had pressed it upon his wife. Had they any doubt under the circumstances that the accused was concealing the silk and the other articles, so that tney would not come under the control of the official assignee? His Honor’s summing up, which lasted one hour and 20 minutes, concluded at 5 o’clock.

The jury returned at 10 minutes to 6 with a verdict of guilty on all counts. The foreman of the jury added that the jury was strongly of the opinion that the firms mentioned in the statements were very lax in their business methods as regarded the transactions concerned. The prisoner was remanded for sentence until to-morrow.