TAMAHERE FORGERY CASE.

Waikato Times, Volume 97, Issue 15270, 21 June 1923, Page 5

TAMAHERE FORGERY CASE.

RYAN BEFORE THE COURT. VERDICT OF GUILTY. In the charge of forging a pay voucher of the Tamahere Road Board, against a former quarry foreman employed by the Board, named Roderick Ryan, heard before Mr Justice Herdman, at Hamilton, to-day, Cecil Mark "Brown, late engineer to tho Board, gave similar evidence to that •which he gave in the charge against himself, and stated that it was only about three weeks after the introduction of the fictitious name of Miller to the time-sheet that he discovered that no man named Miller had been engaged at the quarry. He then Immediately dismissed Ryan, after Ryan had explained that he had inserted Miller's name in order to reimburse himself for the money lost.

Cross-examined by Mr Meldrum, witness said it was true that work automatically ceased in the quarry when Ryan was dismissed, as Hyatt was the only qualified man there. The quarry work was let to one Eshelby a few days later, and all the men, including Ryan, were taken on by the contractor.

Charles Woodhams, the workman to whom the £9 :1,2s was subsequently paid as wages, said Ryan asked him to sign the name W. Miller to the pay voucher, as Miller had been paid his (Woodliam's) wages, by mistake, anil this would put the matter right. Witness therefore signed.

Detective-Sergeant .1. Sweeney read out a written statement, signed by Ryan, in which he said the introduction of Miller's name to the pay-sheet was at the suggestion of Brown, who said he had " drawn short" at the bank, and he did not want tlie Board to think he was such a fool. He said lie would draw the additional sum on the following pay day, and thus square Woodhams up. In his address to the jury Mr Meldrum pointed out the utter absurdity of Ryan putting to a voucher tlie signature of a man who did not work at the quarry, when the forgery eould not but be discovered very soon by Brown, who was in the habit of paying the men, and whom Ryan must have known would probably pay the men on this very occasion. Counsel commented on the fact that Brown possessed all the wages slips handed to him by Ryan except tlie one relating to this particular pay out. Ho also pointed out that the only actual evidence against Ryan was that of Brown and Woodhams, who were both implicated in the offence, and their evidence was, therefore, to be regarded with Hie greatest suspicion. In his .summing up His Honor told the jury that even if prisoner did not actually sign the false name of Miller to the voucher, if bo procured another man to do it, he was still guilty of forgery—(bat was, of making a false document knowing it to be false, with the intention of causing il to be acted upon as if il were genuine. Ryan was found guilty, witli a recommendation to mercy on account of his health.