CHRISTCHURCH.

Press, Volume XXIII, Issue 3035, 14 May 1875, Page 8 (Supplement)

CHRISTCHURCH.

Wednesday, May 12.

[Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] Dritnkenness.—John Wilson, who was also charged with indecency and using obscene language, was fined 20s ; Francis Smith, who was also charged with assaulting the police in the execution of their duty, was fined 60s. Threatening to li_-tjse a Wife.—Thos Wild was charged with having, on the 10th May, threatened to ill-use his wife, Martha Wild. Mrs Wild said that her husband was continually coming home drunk, and threatening to take her life. She had to clear out, for she was afraid oi her life. She had three little children, whom, she had to support. The defendant said that it was all through the drink; he was in constant employment, and would allow his wife to receive his wages and would never touch beer any more. His Worship said that if the defendant would do that, he might yet do well. He would adjourn the case in order to allow the defendant to join the Good Templars. The defendant promised to do this, and was allowed to go. Transfer of Pawnbroker's License.— Mr H. A. Davis applied to have his license transferred from the premises now occupied by him in Cashel street to Strange's new buildings. Mr Mellish said that he did not see any provision in the Act allowing the transfer of a license from one premises to another. The license allowed the business to be carried on in certain premises, but not elsewhere. Mr Davis said that tranfers were generally granted in other provinces. It was a matter in the discretion of the Bench. Mr Mellish said that the Bench had no discretion in the matter. He had no objection to give the transfer, but the Act did. not allow him to do so. Mr Davis— There is nothing in the Act that says it shall not be done. It will come very hard on mc if I have to take out a fresh license. Mr Mellish—There is no provision in the Act to enable mc to give a transfer. lam afraid you will have to take out a fresh license. Mr Davis—Perhaps your Worship will adjourn the case in order to give time to look further into the matter. Mr Mellish—Certainly I will; I will adjourn it for any time you like. Thursday, May 13. (Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.) Threatening Language.—A case against Thomas Pugh for threatening his wife, was withdrawn. Drunkenness.—Thomas Freeman, was fined 5s ; John Campbell, fined 5s ; H. L. Worsley, who had been previously convicted, was fined 20s. Illegally on Premises.—George Brown was charged with being illegally in the stable of Mr Fuhrmann, in Oxford street, last night, and was fined 10s. Horses and Cattle at Large.—The following cases were dealt with:—Henry Garland, fined 5s ; John Tetley, 5s ; Frederick Palmer, 5s j John Gear, ss; G. Simpson, 5s ; Thomas Tuersley, 5s ; James Harrison, 5s ; Win Ormandy, ss; J. Way, ss; D. Beaton, 5s j G. Baron, ss; W. Viney, ss; F. Palmer, 5s ;T. Hill, 10s; Thos Langdown, ss; W. Goodland, 10s; J. O'Neil, ss; R. Kent, 5s ;J. Fraser, 5s jE. Reese, 5s ; James Rosser, ss. Neglecting to Keep a Light Burning. —Wm. Prudhoe and H. Cooper were charged on three informations with neglecting to keep a light burning against a quantity of stone placed by them in Lichfield street. Defendants said that they had received no notice to put up a light, on doing so they immediately put one up. Mr Mellish said he was not aware that notice was required; he would dismiss two of the informations, and would fine each of defendants 10s on the other. Cab Cases.—Edward Dunn alias Sharpe, a cabman, waa charged with obstructing Colombo street with his cab on 16th April, and was fined 10s. Defendant did not appear. Andrew McTaggart (three cases), fined 10s in each case; James Reid, fined lOa in. oaoh case (three informations) ; John Miller (two eases), fined 10s in each case; Alexander Beatty (two cases), fined 10s in each; F. Chambers, fined 10s ; Daniel Howard, fined 10s; L. Zouch, fined 10s. None of the defendants appeared. Dr Foster said it appeared to be an impression amongst the cabmen that after taking out a license they might wait opposite the Theatre as long as they pleased. Now the bye-law (No 1, clause 30) would not bear that construction, but allowed them to remain for a reasonable time before the assembly broke up. He was happy to say that most of the cabmen did not dispute the bye-law.

Unregistered Dogs.—The following persons were dealt with:—John Johnson fined 20s; J. Andrew, case dismissed; Samuel Lindsay, 20s; Robert Kerr, 20s; Jloratio Henwood, 20s.

Breaches of Public House Ordinance. —John Fox, landlord of the Prince of Wales, was charged with keeping open his licensed house on Sunday, 25th April, and supplying drink to persons not being lodgers. Mr Thomas, who appeared for defendant, submitted that it had not been proved that the house was open according to the Ordinance, no doubt drink was supplied, but as he was instructed it was given by Mr Fox, who positively refused to sell drink on the Sunday. Mr Mellish said that he would dismiss the information for keeping the house open, and fine defendant £5 for supplying drink. J. Oram Sheppard was charged with having, on 25th April, obstructed Sergeant Wilson in the execution of his duty, by refusing to admit him to his licensed house. Mr Thomas said that as he was instructed, the sergeant came to a glass door, which was fastened, but instead of opening it then Mr Sheppard foolishly went into the bar, and then came back and opened the door. The Bench fined defendant £5. William Simmonds was charged with keeping the Warwick Hotel open, and supplying liquors on Sunday, 25th April. It appeared that defendant had refused to sell the beer, but that he had given a bottle of beer to a person who had formerly done him a kindness, jjmd for that purpose had opened his house. The Bench fined defendant £5 for supplying drink, with cost of one witness Ss 4d, and dismissed the other information. Protecting a Wife's Earnings.—Mrs Barker, wife of Peter Barker, and for whom Mr Slater appeared, obtained an order for protecting her earnings, as her husband did not maintain her. {[Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, 8.M., and B. Westenra, Esq., J.P. ] Embezzlement. —Frederick Pavitt, who had been out on bail, appeared on remand, charged with having, in his capacity of servant, embezzled certain moneys, to wit £-797 Is 6d, the property of his employers, the Church Property Trustees. Mr G-- Harper appeared to conduct the prosecution, and Mr Joynt lor ike defence. Tke following evidence was adduced : Bey Canon willoek produced the church property trust bank book. Since investigating the accounts, witness noticed a remarkable entry of £475 12s 7d. Witness produced the last audit account, dated 3rd of March, 1875. In the audit account there is a sum of £475 12s 7d, as having been paid into the bank prior to March 3rd, in the bank pass book the entry stands of £475 12s 7d, as having been made on sth March, 1875. As this entry was first made, there are two figures in the state, viz., 22nd February, the figures 22 have been struck out, 5 written over them, and the letters M. C. H. attached. The figures £475 12s 7d in the bank book are apparently in the prisoner's handwriting. By the Bench—Prisoner had no authority to make that entry of figures in the pass book ; it is the duty of the officer of the bank to make all entries in the pass book. By Mr Joynt — I believe the entry on 12th March, 1875, of £1000 to have been made by the bank officials. John Ollivier. the provincial auditor, examined by Mr Harper, deposed—l have been in the habit for several years past of auditing the Church Property Trustees Accounts. The last audit I made was on the 3rd of March last I see the bank pass book before the balance is struck. I saw it on that I swear. that the book now produced was then shown tome. The last entry of payment iota the Tb»t

payment appears now in the pass book under date March sth, but when I audited the accounts on the 3rd March it appeared to mc to be on the 22nd February. There were other payments alleged to have been made to other accounts on the same date. The figures 22 in the bank pass book have been erased, the figure 5 written above them, and the letters *• Mch" attached. I should say that the figures £475 12s 7d are not in the same handwriting, as the rest of the figures in the bank pass book. Thomas P. Baldwin deposed—l am one of the ledger-keepers at the Union Bank. It is one of my duties to make up the bank pass book produced. The entries from January 21st to February 19th, are in my handwriting ; the date March sth is in my handwriting, but not the figures —475 12s 7d. I see the figures 22. I cannot say positively that they are not in my handwriting, they are so obliterated. In running down the ledger I found that the figures in the pass book and the ledger did not agree, so I altered the date. The proper date is March sth. Tdo not think that the figures £475 12s 7d are in the handwriting of any of the bank clerks. Mr G. Harper— That closes this case. Mr Mellish—lt appears to mc questionable whether, out of this case, a charge of forgery does not arise, which should be inquired into. Mr Inspector Buckley—l will inquire into it, your Worship. The prisoner was further charged with having embezzled the sum of £713 3s 9d, the property of the Church Property Trustees. Bey Canon Willock deposed—l am treasurer of the Church Property Trustees; some property called the Bishopric Estate is vested in the trustees; the accounts of that estate are kept in separate books; it was prisoner's duty to keep those accounts; he was paid a salary for so doing by the trustees; I produce the books in which those accounts were keptj this is the cash book; the entries are in the handwriting of the prisoner; the debtor side represents receipts, and the payments into the bank are in an adjoining column; those accounts were last audited on 3rd March by Mr Ollivier: prisoner charges himself with having received £713 3s 9d since the audit); he idoes not take credit j for any disbursement. I produce the bank Dass book for that account; I find there an entry April sth, then two dots (indicating the name of prisoner), and the sum of £420 9s 7d, as paid in since the audit. I see that item as the last payment in the cash book previous to audit on March 3rd. Prisoner does not take credit in the cash book as having paid in that sum since March 3rd. I make out the deficiency since audit as shown by the books as £713 3s 9d. Prisoner is not authorised to make any payments in cash. The account at the bank is operated on by my cheques, countersigned by the Dean. The prisoner gave up the keys of the safe and the cashboz, in which he alleged there were sums of money. 1, in company with the Bishop and Canon Cotterill, examined the cashbox and found £52 Is 9d. I refer to the entry of £420 in the bank pass book produced under date of April sth, and I believe that entry to be in the handwriting of the prisoner. John Ollivier deposed—l audited the Bishopric Fund books on the 3rd March last. The last entry of payment into the bank prior to audit is .£420 9s Id. I saw the bank pass book at the time of audit. The entry of £420 9s Id was then in that book. lam confident that the date of April sth was not then attached to it. The payment was without date, and appeared to mc to have been made on 22nd February. Ido not recognise the handwriting of the entry in the pass book, but I should say it is not in the same hand* writing as those that precede it. T. P. Baldwin deposed that the entry of £420 9s Id in the pass book was not in witness's handwriting, the other entries are in witness's handwriting. Mr G. Harper—That is the second charge. The prisoner was further charged with embezzling the sum of £136 8s from the Dean and Chapter Fund, the property of the Church Property Trustees. Bey Canon Willock produced the books of the fund kept by the prisoner. This is the cash book of that estate, with payments on side side and disbursements on the other. That account was last audited on March 3rd, 1875. At the laßt audit there was a debtor balance of £338 10s 4d. £316 13s have been received since. That last entry is in prisoner's handwriting. Prisoner takes credit for JBIBO 5s paid into bank. The amount of deficiency Bhown on that account is £136 8s; I produce the bank book of that estate; in that since the aud it the only sum entered is £180 ss. I have never authorised prisoner to make any payments from that account. The account at the bank is operated on by my cheques, countersigned by the Dean. It is prisoner's duty to pay all moneys into the bank. I have found no moneys belonging to this account in the cash box that I know of. There is an entry in the pass book of £47 10s in the same handwriting -as in the other pass books. I believe that entry to be in the handwriting of the prisoner. T. B. Baldwin deposed that the entry under date February 22nd of £47 10s was not in witness's handwriting. The date ought to have been February 25th, the date when the money was actually paid. The prisoner was further charged with having e&bezzled the sum of £389 19s, the property of the Diocesan Board of Trustees. The Bey Canon Willock deposed that he was a member of that Board, and was the treasurer up to present date. Prisoner was steward to the Board at a salary of £48 per annnm. Bos duty was to collect the rents, and to manage the estates. The "Jackson Trust Estate" is vested in that Board. The cash book produced is in prisoner's handwriting. The last balance was struck at the end of the year. Prisoner charges himself with having received from Ist January to April 19th £389 19s. All those entries are in his handwriting. There are no disbursements taken credit for by prisoner. The deficiency is £389 19s, being money received by prisoner, and not accounted for by him. Mr G. Harper—l shall put in the Synod book to prove the appointment of the Board, and that will conclude this charge. The prisoner was further charged with embezzling the sum of £2086 3s 8d from the Diocesan Fund. The Bey Canon Cotterill deposed—l am diocesan treasurer and secretary. My duties are to administer generally the funds under the control of the standing committee—viz, the Diocesan Fund. This was made np of the Clergy Stipend Fnnd, Church Work Extension Fund, Clergy Pension Fund, and several other funds. Prisoner was the servant of the standing committee, with respect to these funds, being appointed by minute on 27th March, 1866. His duties were to receive all moneys, to enter them in the cash book, and from that to distribute them under the various heads in the ledger, and to pay into the Union Bank all moneys received. The account at the bank could only be operated on by cheques signed by myself, and countersigned by the Dean. The prisoner had no authority to make £=y cash payments out of this fnnd. I produce the cash book keot by prisoner. The aceonnts fere last aaOitca on m\i October, Wi, up to Sid. October, by Messrs O. Olaxk and H. 35. Alport, The receipts and disbursements are in prisoner's handwriting. The balance to the credit of the fund on 3rd October last was £1100 18s Bd. I find in.the cash book that between January 2nd and April 28th, 1879, there had been received £438112s 6d, Turning to the bank pass book I find paid in the Bum £2229 10s 5d of money received during that period, making a deficiency altogether of £2082 2s Id. as ahown by this book. There is an amount belonging to the Melanesia^ Mission of J64 Is 7d not entered in the cash book, but in the rough cash book under date 29th April, 1875, in prisoner's hand writing, thus making the total deficiency, £2086 3s Bd. I first found out the deficiency a few days previous to the 28th April. I saw the bank book made up to February 15th. 1875, and I found a debit balance of £715 2s 6d. I was much astonished because I knew that there ought to haveTieen a credit balance of more than £1000. I spoke to the prisoner very shortly afterwada. He Baid he had been very much pressed with Easiness, that there waa a large accumulation of money in the safe, and that it wouid be all right On 28th April prisoner was Requested to. ahtaija the bank book.' He promised to have it ready by the but as be did not do so, inanity was made at the Bank as to the rtaiatatt o! th« account, and tht eiib book

was then examined. On the 4th M.„ t S Mr Worthy went to prisoner's ho„« y I^ d I speaking to him with respect to ***** I affairs, prisoner voluntarily made a sta_L "* I He expressed his great I row for what had happened. He T?l 8 the first thing that had caused him I his hands into the church futd 9 "J*** I pressure on account of flax-prison^ B I said, 'No human being knewwST h I done"-_r Fowler wasen ? a R ed to£?>* ? the accounts -.-Edwin Fowler, wiSSSf * ant gave evidence of examination of ?£_- l " book and bank book of the DiocWanW and stated teat the deficiency • f 8d E. A. Worthy corroborated theS, 3B I of Canon Cotterill with reference I visit to prisoner's house on the 4th May 5j § the statements then made by hi- pi*. aad fr said that his flax business had WoS I ito ruin, that when eighty men hS\, 1 wrong, and had never been able to «_ rte?! I since, that they were ready to tear him • 1 pieces for money, and as hT*S 1 not know where to turn he * 5 1 paid them out of one of the fand.fi I had in charge ; prisoner addressed «,.*♦ P Mr Cotterill Prisoner said thalfftfiS I Heaven he had resisted the temntati™ iL B destroy himself, as for two years he had* 1 in misery Mr Cotterill «aid, « How *_B I you do this horrible thing, why did ,££ 1 l*t us know or apply te I Prisoner said, "No human being mmS* W my secret-not my brothers, not even B_* I who had access to the books." This-!? ft eluded the charge. Mr Joynt said he ££ I posed the same amount of bail would k!_ ¥ ceived. MrMellish-Thecaseha,!i2s such a very serious aspect that I h_rf£ I think it would be right to accept b&ilwl f Joynt said that it was of the utmost uW I tance to the prisoner that he should £» 1 free access to him (Mr Joynt) for tie „„? £ poses of the defence. Mr Mellish sail _5 1 prisoner could he admitted to baiL h„_» § in £1200 and two sureties of £600 eachfc ft the meantime prisoner would be remark _ for a week. fc