Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

12 articles on this Page

BANK CASE ENDS.,

Detailed Lists, Results and Guides
Cite
Share

BANK CASE ENDS., Before Lord Coleridge and a special jury at Giamorgan Assizes on Thursday, 17th inst., tthe hiring was resumed of an action in which the Metropolitan Bank o{ England and, Wales sought to recover .€1,350 from Mrs. Rhoda. Thomas, as 1-egal representative of her husband, the late Mr John Thomas, of LLandilo upon a guarantee a1- !<<ged to have been made to the Bank by the de- ceased as security for the account of Mr. L. H. Price, stockbroker of Swansea, who had since dis- appeared from the neighbourhood. Mr. B. Francis Wiilti.amts, K.C., <t(nd Mr. Meaner (matrueted by Mr. J .C. W<M)ds) were for thepia.intifrs. and Mr. Abel Thomas. K.C., M.P., and Mr Marlay SaimsOtn (instructefi by Mr. J. R. Williams) for the defence Mr. Abel Thomas, in addreasing the jury for the defence, described the case as an astonishing one. Here was a Ll.,tndil6 boatmia,k-er who- was alleged for no considera-tion to have gone to the bank and guaranteed the sum tA 47CI.I1,50 on behalf of a man he did not even know! The passing <i<f t2ie transfers in blank was a wickad and abomin- able fraud on Homfra.y Davies on the part of Price. Price might be an exceedingly clever rogue, but 'however clever he nughft be he did not seem to ha.ve put lfr. Young's mind quite at re&t in the matter. Counsel suggested that the bank knew Price had committed a wicked fraud in dopo.siting trust, securities against his overdraft, and that was why substituted security was aked toa'. It was obvious that Jno Thomas was grossly deceived, grossly wronged, and it o)igh.t to have been obvious to Mr. Young that Price was de- ceiving him and putting before him documents to 'which he h-,id no right. Counsel urged that Thomas was heartJessly and abominab!y defrauded In this sense, thait representations were made to him which were untrue by the agent or agents of the bank, and that he signed the guarantee in t-oinsequ.ence o.f these misrepresenta.tions. Addressting the jury for the piaintin', Mr. Fraji- t'ls Winiams nrst severely cmticised the admia- t4ton& made on the previous day in the witness box by Ho'mfray D:)\'ies. The defen<e a,sked the jury to say that. Mr. Bishop Davies, who was not re- Kxmsible for the ban koverdra'ft, and who was nott now connected with the bank. h:t,d comnntted fernery, .was guilty of conspiracy. a.nd had come to court to commit deliberate perjury. And the jm'y were asked by the defence to do this on the evidence ??f a man who, with brazen forehead. aL though somewh?at paUid features, told the story Hmt Ho'mi'r.ty Davies had toM in the box. It re- quired a certain amount of boldness on the part of Biny counsel, on the testimony of a creature of that kind. to ask the jmy to find on these prave issues against the gentlemen sought to be impli- cated. The Judge said it w.as one of the difficulties of the case, if not the main dinicutty, that the man John Thomas who signed the paraut" was dead. It was signed by Thomas for tl,30-0, and upon I the document it appeared that it was in favour of the plaintiffs in considera/tion of their continuing an overdraft in the matter of the account of Price and Co. The defence mainly was th.a.t when John Thomas signed the guarantee h.e did not know what he was sinning—that something was I said or 'that he would not have signed it if certain I c.ircumstwces had been brought to his know- ledgewhieh were within the knowledge of the plain.tin's and v ere not within Ms knowledge, iiil which plaintiffs, a("ting in good faith, ought to have communicated to him. His Lordship said Hom.fray Davies was a, ma<n upon whose uncor H(j M, f I. roborated testimony, few people would liks 10 rely and in judging whether or not they could rely upon his evidence he thought probably the jury would hnd it wise to consider the probabilities apart from the evidence. On the one hand it was said th.tt no person of Homfray Davies's charac- ter could he believed whatever be said. On the ether it was said the most hardened v]la{n would never convict himself of fraud openly and .con fesscdiy for ihe mere fuji <f it: and in such open confession of even the most fraudulent person one migh.t see the same reason for supposing if to be true His Lordship submitt-ed certain questions to tlie Jury. who after about 40 minutes' retire- ment gave answers to them as follow s:—— ].—Was the fact that Price had deposited the trust securities./wLi(;h were a portion c.f the es- tate of Thos. Thomas, with the hank as .security for his private overdraft, a. fact material to he known to John Thomas. wIw ¡;igned ihe guarantee —Yes. 2.— W a.s that tact known tc John Thoraas?— No. Was cha.t fact known to pJaintiffsP—Yes. 4.—Was that fact concealed from John Thomas hy ptaintin's?—Yes. .).—W as such conre'l.imeut fraudulent?—Yes. 6.—Did John Thomas acquiesce in snc!) concea!- men'; on discovering that it ha<! he(n made?— No. 7.— Was Homf ray Dn vies a.se.nt for the phuntin' in securin.s: the signature of John Thomas to the Knarantee ?—Yes. 8.—Did Homfray Davie.s s<'<'ur? such st.2'naturt; by fraud ?—Yes. The C ''lei-k: Th.it is the verd't-t of you aH? ?. The- Foreman—Yes. .Judgm.<?nt was then entered for defendant with costs, exf'epft asto the first day, when an adj'tUrn- ment took pIae, to enable defendant to amend the pjea,dins;s. On t!ie plaintiffs, stay of exer'n- t tioll was Krfmted. j

- ._- '- - - - AGRICULTURE.-I

Advertising

- - - - -MARKETS.

[No title]

THE QUESTION OF I-IEALL!-ti-

Advertising

CARMARTHEN COUNTY PETTY SESSIONS.

:PEMBROKE GUARDIANS APPOINT…

WELSH SCHOOLS VINDICATED.…

Advertising

[No title]