A CHARGE OF FRAUD

Southland Times, Issue 19396, 10 November 1924, Page 8

A CHARGE OF FRAUD

ALLEGED TELEPHONE HOAX. JUGGLING WITH A NAME. SIR JOSEPH WARD AS WITNESS. A telephonic conversation in which the name of Sir Joseph Ward was freely used and an assurance given that a sum of money could be safely advanced in a certain direction was described in the Magistrate’s Court at Wellington on Wednesday, when a young traveller, Albert Joseph Fogarty, appeared before Mr E. Page, S.M., on a charge of obtaining £75 by false pretences. LOAN OF £75. Evidence was given by Jeremiah O'Meara that while resident at the Grand Central Hotel in July he was approached by accused for a loan. Fogarty explained that some relatives were visiting the city and he required £75 for furniture. “I told him I would see him later,” said witness. “He told me a good tale that Sir Joseph Ward would like to have a talk with me. Sir Joseph was supposed to be a friend of his, and so, he said, would back his bill for this amount. I said: ‘lf Sir Joseph Ward is such a particular friend why don’t you get the money from him?’ He said ‘Sir Joseph won’t lend money, but he will back my bill.’ The money was to be lent for not more than three weeks. It was just an obligement.” “A NICE, SOFT VOICE.” Continuing, witness said he left the hotel, but was later overtaken by accused in a wood and coal yard. Fogarty there rang up the Royal Oak Hotel and asked for Sir Joseph Ward. Holding the receiver to his ear he remarked that Sir Joseph had gone to Heretaunga, and next made the reply, “He has not gone; he is here now.” Handing the receiver to witness, accused said: “You can speak to him now.” Chief Detective Kemp: And what did you do? Witness: I took the receiver and said: “Is that you, Sir Joseph?.” The reply came: “Yes.” I said: “You don’t know me, but of course I have known you for years. This man Fogarty you sent along wants a loan of £75.” He said: “You give it to him; it’s all right.” Chief Detective Kemp: Did it appear to be an educated voice at the other end? Witness: Yes, a nice, soft voice like Sir Joseph’s. Witness added that on the assurance from the other end of the wire he had decided to give accused a cheque for £75. As witness was suffering from a sore finger. Fogarty filled in the cheque and witness appended his signature. Accused handed over an 1.0. U. for the amount, to be paid before October 6, but the contract had never been fulfilled. Chief Detective Kemp: Have you received your money back?—l have not. Have you had any promised?—l have had promises every day for a week. NO LOANS AND NO BILLS. Sir Joseph Ward told the Court that he knew accused, but not very well. Accused had had a discussion in a general way with witness about the business with which he was connected, but no reference was made to money. No telephone message of the variety outlined had ever been received by witness, and never in any way had he guaranteed Fogarty. During July accused approached witness for a loan, but the request was declined. Nothing was ever said about backing a bill. “He saw me after his arrest,” added witness, “and I told him I had not backed a bill for anybody for over 30 years. I had refused on principle to back anybody’s bill.” At this stage the hearing was adjournedfor a week.