ALLEGED FRAUD.

Auckland Star, Volume XX, Issue 194, 16 August 1889, Page 3

ALLEGED FRAUD.

CHARGE AGAINST A POSTO-FFICE SAVINGS BANK CLEBIi,

A serious charge was preferred this morning at the Police Court against William EctW'n Bannister, a young maa of respectable appearance. He waa charged that on tho 2nd of August, 1387, he did at Wellington unlawfully! issue a Post Office money order for tho sum of £10, with a fraudulent intention, for the purpose of defrauding Her Majesty's Post-master-General of New Zealand, contrary to seccion 61 of the Post Office Act 1881., '

Messrs S. Y. Collins and J. A. Connoll were on the Bench. •

Sergoant-Myjor Pratt said with reference to the present charge, the police received information from Wellington that a warrant had been issued at that place for the apprehension of .the accused, who was a clerk engaged in the Money Order and Savings Bank Department ao Auckland. He went himself to the Post Office yesterday afternoon and made the arrest. As the oii'eneo was alleged to have been-committed at Wellington about two years ago, he would ask that the accused might be remanded until Monday, when tho warrant would be to hand. Meanwhile he would put in the telegram upoa which the arrest had been made.

Mr Theo. Cooper appeared for tho accused, and said that he must ask the Bench to discharge pi-isoner. There was no information before the Court and no warrant, therefore the Bench had nothing to go upon: in fact, the accused was illegally in custody. He referred to a recent decision of the Chief Justice, in which it had been held that the police had rio authority to arrest upon a mere telegram, without either information or warrant. Hβ argued that until either an information was laid or the warrant arrived, there was nothing before the Court on which to detain the defendant.

Sergeant-Major Pratt said that the case referred to by Mr Cooper was a misdemeanour, whereas the present one was a felony, and a constable mights arrest under such circumstances upon suspicion alone, lie had gcod evidence that a warrant was in existence.

Mr Cooper contended that there was no power to detain the man. He suggested that Mr Biss might swear an information.

Sergt.-Majcr Pratt said the police were responsible ior what had been done if anything was wrong, bub he contended they were fully justified in making tho arrest. At this stage tha argument was adjourned to enable the Bench to consider tho matter.

When Mr Cooper again came into Court he said that while still holding that the point raised was a sound one, still ho had agreed with Sergeant-Major Pratt not to oppose a remand until Monday provided that the accused was allowed bail, himself in £100 and two sureties in £50 each.

The remand was granted upon this arrangement. Mr Cooper further said that he had only raised tho objection in tho interests of the public, because ho considered the practice of arresting on telegram a dangerous one.