SOLICITOR IN COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3714, 19 May 1925, Page 47

SOLICITOR IN COURT.

SIXTEEN CHARGES PREFERRED. MISUSE OF MONEYS ALLEGED. WANGANUI, May 16. Considerable interest was manifested in the Supreme Court proceedings of the past couple of days, when 16 different charges preferred against George M'Caul, solicitor, were heard. The charges were of two kinds—failing to account for money? paid to him in trust, and for the conversion to hit :wn use of money belonging to his clients. Mr W. J. Treadwell, fot the defence, made an effort to prove that the offences were not committed with any criminal

intent, but were the result purely of muddling. Documents had been found unstamped, and undated, and some 100 letters had been found in his office unopened, which showed, counsel maintained, that he had not attended to business. Mr Treadwell said the honour of the profession demanded that a defaulting solicitor should be punished not only for honour of the profession, but in the interests of the public. He (counsel) would be the last, if he thought M'Caul had wilfully defrauded, to try to defend him. Members of the legal profession some years ago were not allowed to qualify until they had served five years in the office of a reputable firm, and had obtained a knowledge cf procedure of law, conveyancing, book-kc-eping, etc., and no one was allowed to become a barrister unless he had qualified. Unfortunately, entrance into the ranks of the profession had been simplified, and all that was now required was to get a few law books, read them over, pass examinations and hang out a sign, whether the candidate knew anything about law or not. Professional knowledge was not necessary. All that was required was cramming, and if a candidate was lucky he got questions he had read over the previous night. Mr Treadwell claimed that entrance 'nto the legal profession should be just as exacting as in the case of medicine. M'Caul was one of the type of men he had referred to. He had been a schoolmaster, read books, and had qualified to put up his sign without any knowledge of ordinary conveyancing. He had little knowledge of book-keeping, and lie had conducted his office with the assistance of a young female clerk. That was the way in which a business requiring the greatest care and attention had been conducted. Mr Justice MacGregor summed up strongly against the accused. He pointed qui that the duty of a solicitor was clearly laid down by the provisions of the statute. If any solicitor failed in his obligations he was liable to prosecution. It was suggested by the Crown that the accused had broken Section 242, and he was accordingly with 16 different offences. The result in each charge was the same, because a client had lost bis money. The jury would have to be <atisfied that there was fraudulent intent. Tho meaning of intent was clearly laid down and his Honor quoted a ruling on the question. They had to look at what were the natural and probable consequences of what he did. The accused when he received’ money either did not apply them as directed,' or he converted them to his own use, with the result that his clients lost their money. It seemed to his Honor that the facts spoke for themselves If M'Caul had kept his accounts separate, the sum of £723 should have been in a trust account to meet the claims of the 16 clients. What had become of the money that did not belong to him? Ho had drawn it out of the trust account to meet his personal engagements. They had been told that M'Caul for nine months before his bankruptcy had muddled. "Is it to be wondered at that lie was muddled," asked his Honor? "He must have known that lie was liable to prosecution, and he went on and on, with the result that *hese people—one a widow—lost their money. His conscience evidently made a coward of him. He was confused, and was not in a fit state to conduct his business. The jury, after about four hours, returned, and tho announcement was made that they had failed to agree.