FORGERY CHARGE

Southland Times, Issue 19346, 11 September 1924, Page 4

FORGERY CHARGE

DEFENDANT COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE. A CASE FROM THE NORTH ISLAND. At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, before Mr J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M., Charles Lewis Lucas Nonnette Flint (Mr J. Robertson), was charged w’ith making a false document, to wit, a receipt for the payment of £4 10/-, purporting to be signed by one, Wilson Johnstone. For the police, it was stated that in 1919 the defendant was being treated, in the North Island, for a breakdown sustained while on active service. Defendant had forwarded an account for travelling expenses to the Department, which had been duly paid, but afterwards it had been found out that the handwriting in the signature and the enclosed receipts corresponded with that of defendant.

Thomas Morton Highet, clerk in charge of the Pay and Revenue office, Wellington, said that a cheque including the amount of £4 10/- was issued and posted to defendant upon receipt of the signed vouchers for payment of horse hire. The vouchers purported to be receipts from one William Johnstone, a carrier in Okau, but the signature was afterwards found to resemble defendant’s handwriting. Wilson Johnstone, carrier, of Okau, Taranaki, said he had never hired defendant any horses, and the signatures on the receipts were not his. Defendant said that he had to make several visits to the Medical and Pensions Board in Wanganui during 1919. He incurred considerable expenses in the hire of horses, etc., but had not received any receipts for payments made. He was told by officers of the Department, that if he produced receipts he would be refunded expenses, so he made out receipts and signed them in Johnstone’s name. Defendant, who pleaded guilty, was committed for sentence at the next sitting of the Supreme Court. Defendant was also further charged with attempting to obtain the sum of £l4 from the Department by false pretences. Evidence showed that a cheque for £l4, being an amount owed by the Pensions Department to defendant, had been forwarded to him, and a receipt signed by him, in 1919. In 1924 defendant had attempted to obtain a further cheque by informing the Department that he had not received the money. Defendant said he had no recollection of ever having received the money, and he had acted in good faith in taking steps to obtain it. His Worship dismissed the case, saying that in all probability defendant had neen somewhat careless over the matter.