MOTHER ROBBED

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22832, 17 March 1936, Page 12

MOTHER ROBBED

COMMENT BY JUDGE FORGED CERTIFICATES “ Is it better to rob your mother or a moneylender?” This question was asked by Mr Justice Swift at Liverpool Assizes recently, when John Reginald Larking, aged 41, son of Lady Lark : ing and the late Sir John Larking, was sent to penal servitude for four years. Larking -was charged, along with William Porter, aged 53, and Estyn Apsimon, with frauds on a Liverpool moneylender, Mr Samuel Harris, by forged share certificates. Apsimon was sentenced to three years’ penal servitude, and Porter to seven days’ imprisonment, which meant his immediate release. Mr Maxwell Fyfe, for the prosceu- ■ tion, said Larking got various advances from Harris on the strength of the forged certificates. Apsiraon’s part in the fraud was to secure the printing of the seals and share certificates. In April, 1934, the solicitors for Lady Larking paid ' £3825 to settle all the amounts outstanding with Harris. Answering Mr Justice Swift, Mr Fyfe, said that Harris had not lost anything, . and had received all the agreed interest. Mr Justice Swift: I am interested to know whether it will be raised as an excuse that the moneylender has not lost anything, and that it is., only the mother who has been robbed. ADVANCE OF £2000./ Mr Fyfe, continuing, said that Mr A. J. Scholefield, a Liverpool commission agent, advanced Larking £2OOO as' a friendly transaction on the strength of a share certificate which later turned out to be forged. He also was repaid by Lady Larking. Dealing with certain offences which took place in 1935, Mr Fyfe said it was impossible then for Larking to have personal transactions with Harris, and accordingly he secured Porter to obtain the advances. The total amount ad--vanced to Porter was £4930. He handed the money to Larking and received only small amounts in return. Mr Justice Swift: Has the moneylender lost that or has somebody paid it again? Mr Fyfe: This time the moneylender has lost it. Mr J. C. Jackson, who appeared for Larking, said, in reply to Mr Justice Swift: “ I am not going to say that Larking robbed his mother. He certainly preyed upon her love and sympathy.” Mr Justice Swift: I call it robbing her w'hen he puts her in the position that to save him from going to gaol she has to part with her money like this." It is a disgraceful thing to commit a crime and then to urge in extenuation that your relatives have paid the money. Mr Jackson: I am not putting that forward in mitigation. Mr Jackson added that the trouble ; with Larking was that he was the son of very wealthy people. “ The mother love which has been with him all the time and has settled his debts,” added Mr Jackson, “is the •reason I am here representing him.”