SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XLV, Issue 127, 29 May 1914, Page 5

SUPREME COURT.

THE RIGHT TO A CHEQUE , CONTRACTING PF.R EM PLOY El- ! ' THE RETENTION <»F £510.

Hearing oi the charged • ■;' misanpro- | ■prKfjion and theft Predenek I Schlnich. formerly an employee of thi- 1 'indenting !i.-m of Hughe- anil < ne-sar. ' »a- roiitimir.l t:ii« morning before ilri j.luclin' <"nnpi>r. It »a- alleged against ; I.Srhiaii-h that he had misappropriated a .-hcqiie :,jr CISOO <>dd. paid t.> him by! t'.ie Post and Tclpjrraph Department, in I payment of a contract for a supply i>; I Hal-ammonia'- from the firm nf lljjjlipland Cii-Mnr. SchiaMi had breii in the habit .in the knowledge (.if !■;.■ iiriii) iof undertaking eoiuracis for thp iirrn in . I his nun ißDif. this bring fouml t.> be j ! runvenieiu. since lie was personally \n J ! ' j.known to thp heads of the various Miovernment departments with which tin- ; ; firm did bunine-*. After lu> left the linn in Dc.-emb-r la?t. he had received ' tiif cheque fi.r £111(1 from file I", and T. : jDejmriment. but retained it ;n>ii.t;ng. he. j explained, eoutingent lia-bilities in crm- ' |iie<-tiun with oilier contrail* ?!il! i ling: and. further, pending an .•uciioii lor j defamation of character, in which he ; proposed u> claim (lamij.jw ir"ii tliei i Mr .1. Jl. Reed. K.r.. c-onduited the ' I ea«c ia private proen-ution) for tin- ! jOown. and Mr .1. I!. Keed. K.C. fwilli ! lrim Mr U. M, Aljiei anpeaml for n-j L-1.-CUM-d. : Further evidence was given by I'ercy j jliaroM Hughe*-, ot the iinn of' Hughe* | and fo»rsar. lie wa.- cross-examined at i ■treat length V Mr Reed on puints in | I connection ttiUi the relations between ! and the firm, and iv connection ! J with the various contracts fuihT.eJ by j thp linn through Mr fcVhlaich. : I In the course of hi- pvid"n;e. uitiuv-i i said that when he engaged Sehlai-h a- ! I their Wellington raaua-i-r. Sehlaieh ha.l ; been in business on iiir* own aoeouii: f-ir ■ .about a month. He was to devote the 1 ! whole of hi.- time t> the interests of the ! ilinn. and to remit lo Auckland all ' : money received on behalf i.i the firm. ■ '■■ontra'-ti- wore supposed to have Iven I J taken in the name of !::■■ firm, bin niter] .'.Sphlairh oamn in witnifH ' found :hat he had been taking ..-outrafts i jin iiis own name. S-hlaicii. uhen j i spoken to nbout thi< matti-r. «aid that He had been doing this all the tim-. and , advised continuance of th- practice. l« m-<> he Mas perr-niialh s-j \\c\i known | i'o the Jr-ade <■■'. all the (loverr.ment de-j Ipartnirnts. Sclilaich had further stated \ !in support of the practice that any money he received could .Vie immediately j I paid over tn the firm. The firm had ;n I I «-rilp to Schlaieii in Wellington r.evera! ! times about his ) w■ne,vs in remitting I money, and t'ipy found later that he had j not foriva-lfd wit'mut delay money re- : reived in payment of Government' i-on- ; trains. I i No evidence was called for (he defenw. • j and counsel for the respective partie* j J addled the j,,r- Bl lenpth. Mr. Tolc -:::-:!'ted that it had ! not. been sho.vn thai tho accused w-ns I justified in retaining the money for eonliabilities on existing 'contracts ! |"V that he was entitled io retain the j I money in view of the. civil a<-tion Paid ' :id be pending. j j Mr. Reed urged that the evidence j should br> exnmine-d the more carefully as ■ j i since this \va-i a private prosecution I ! lit was of vital importance t<) <h<> firm (of Hughes and Cossar to stine the claim i j l iy the accused in the civil action that , pending. Accused, he pointed out, j had invariably paid the deposits on the i different contracts, and had invariably ! I'Jvepl iii hand the payment for one con- ■ trail. I His Honor to sum tip for the I I jury ai 2.30 p.m. I CASE FOR THE RBFOR.\£\IX>RY. <;.ivin IVrston, a yonthful-lookinp prisoner, pliwded guilty to stealing a! suKllo and bridle, and admitted a prelinns conviction -for the-ft. ( The. Crmm Prosecutor said -that the j prisoner had the reputation of being addicted todrii>k. and fond o<f loose company. His Honor o-lraracterised the theft Hβ an impudent one. and sentenced prisoner | to be deramed for reformative -, reat-l ment. for not. more than cix months, in- i ! ii-matinp thai he irouhi recommend | ireatmcut at tlie InverearjriH reforma- ] tory.