ALLEGED FORGERY.

Waikato Times, Volume 97, Issue 15211, 12 April 1923, Page 4

ALLEGED FORGERY.

THREE MEN CHARGED.

TAMAHERE ROAD BOARD CASK,

At the Hamilton Magistrate's Court on Wednesday, in connection with, charges of forgery brought against C. M. Brown, R. Ryan, and C. Woodhams. continuing his evidence, Ryan said that after paying the other men ho found that in addition to his own wages of £ll ho only had £2 over, thus being some pounds short of Woodham's wages. When Ryan reported this to accused Brown suggested that Woodham should sign in the name of W. Miller. Ryan asserted that Brown and not he paid Woodhams. The witness denied telling Brown that everything was o.k. in connection with an amount, of £9 12s owing to Woodhams and not available. Brown did not discharge witness in connection with this irregularity. Witness left the board's employ of his own accord. He was never authorised to engage employment without consulting accrued. Charles Woodhams, lJ>ourer, said (feat for the fortnight ending April 2» 1921, he was employed by the board at its Tauwhare quarry. Pay day for that period was April 5, when all the men knocked off together. He expected to be paid before knocking off work, but was not paid. At the time witness lived close by the quarry, and the following morning he learned that the men had been paid on their way home, and further that his pay was short for some unknown reason, Within a few days witness was asked by Ryan to sign the wages sheet (produced), and did so, but he did not receive the £9 12s. Witness repeatedly asked Ryan for the wages, and eventually he was told he would have to wait until the following pay day. He did not see accused about the time. Later he was presented by Ryan with the further document (produced) to sign, and witness signed for his usual wages for the period ending April 15, 1921, for £9 12s. In consequence of something Ryan told him, witness signed in the name of "W. Miller" on the same exhibit, being informed that **W, Miller" had obtained witness' wages for the fortnight previously. Witness received £l9 4 S on that day. The first witness had heard of there being any trouble over the matter was when he read about it in the Times. Witness had not been asked by Brown to sign the name of "W. Miller," but Ryan had asked him to do so. William Lee Martin, a member of the ) board, said that he had questioned Brown concerning the voucher purported to have been signed by, W« Miller. Accused had stated at a subsequent meeting that the whole of the > trouble was due to Ryan. When he , gave the money to Mathieson, a carrier who was going out to Matangi, to . give to Ryan to pay the men, the whole' amount was there. Ryan had come to him (Brown) on the evening of the d-ay on which the pay had been short and complained of the deficiency in this respect. Brown had replied that it was Ryan's funeral, and that he was not going to have anything to do with . it. Ryan had stated that he did not have the money and was not going to lose anything over the matter. Ryan had intimated that he would square things up the following pay-day. Witness then asked accused at the meeting why he had certified to the timesheets being correct, but Brown replied that he had so much work to do that he had overlooked this mistake. Asked by witness why he had written the name of "W. Miller" on the timesheet, Brown had stated that he had written the names just as they were given him by Ryan. On the new board coming into office Brown was dismissed on the grounds of the irregularity. The further hearing was adjourned ' till Wednesday next.