OATH AGAINST OATH.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 171, 22 July 1930, Page 8

OATH AGAINST OATH.

BENEFIT OP THE DOUBT.

CHARGE AGAINST SALESMAN,

A salesman named William James Norton was charged at the Police Court to-day with having received £2 and failed to account for it to .his employers. Mr. R. P. Smyth appeared for the accused. The prosecution produced two receipts for £1 each, stated to have been made out by the accused, but not on the regular receipt form of the firm. The money was received from a Point Chevalier resident as a time-payment instalment. It was alleged that the money was never paid into the office. When arrested, in Wellington, Norton said everything he had received had been paid in to the firm in the usual way, and that was the defence.-

After hearing a good deal of evidence Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., said t'here was no evidence of falsifying any of the books. Accused swore that he paid the amounts into the Office and the clerks concerned said that they had not received it. The matter was one of oath against oath, and in a case where there was a doubt the accused was entitled to the benefit. Therefore the case would be dismissed.

There was a further charge against the accused, the amount concerned being £0, and upon that he wished to be tried by jury. The case was adjourned until Thursday next.