SIXTH DAY

Southland Times, Issue 21729, 15 June 1932, Page 8

SIXTH DAY

INSURANCE CLAIM JOHNSON CASE CONTINUED SIGNATURE ON RECEIPTS (Per United Press Association.) Wellington, June 14. The case in which Mrs Johnson is claiming from the insurance companies entered itg sixth day this morning. Under cross-examination her husband admitted that in the case of two of the receipts the men shown as attesting witnesses were not present when the receipts were signed by Mrs Johnson, nor had Mrs Johnson acknowledged her signature to them in their presence. Edwin Leonard Goodwin, called on behalf of the T. and G. Society, gave evidence of witnessing Mrs Johnson in hospital sign the document produced in Court. She did so on a table beside the bed. Mr Johnson took possession of it after it was signed. Asked what Mrs Johnson’s condition was, witness said, “You could hardly expect her to be fit considering she had a leg off,” but otherwise he thought she was all right. Witness denied he had many conversations with Mr Johnson since the case began. Witness was cross-examined whether he did not know Johnson’s financial position was precarious at that time. To a question whether Johnson about a fortnight before was not in arrears in payment of wages for some two or three weeks, witness said he did not know.

Counsel: But you are his bookkeeper. Witness said he could not remember. He was being asked to remember something which took place two years ago. Counsel: But you see you can remember everything so nicely when counsel for the T. and G. Company asks you, but when it comes to questions about your own wages, you can’t remember. Will you deny that in June, 1930, while Mrs Johnson was in hospital the wages of the men were in arrears for two or three weeks. Witness: No, I won’t deny it. Edwin Leonard Goodwin, in the employ of Johnson, admitted there was a conversation in a room at the Bowen Street Hospital at the time the document was signed. He could not recollect what the conversation was about, but he knew there was not enough money in the bank to pay the wages until £5OO was paid in.

Claud Hamilton Hudson, manager of the T. and G. Company, gave evidence as to the issue of cheques and obtaining receipts. The money was paid to the husband. In three letters written by the company there was nothing to suggest that they had informed Mrs Johnson that they were paying out to her husband. The letters were addressed to Johnson. For the Commercial Union Company, counsel called Herbert Phillip Mourant, public accountant and handwriting expert, who said his opinion was that the signature on the receipt for the money from the Commercial Union was in the handwriting of Mrs Johnson. His opinion was the same in respect of three or four other documents which he was asked to examine.

Counsel for Mrs Johnson cross-ex-amined witness at some length for the purpose of showing that differences between the admitted signatures of Mrs Johnson and those in question showed that the latter were forgeries. The hearing was adjourned until Thursday morning.