CHRISTCHURCH.

Press, Issue XLI, 25 February 1885, Page 5

CHRISTCHURCH.

Tuesday, Febbtjabt 24. [Before B. Beetham, 8.M., and H. J. Hall, J.P.,Esqs.l Dbtjnkbnnbss.—For a first offence a man who did not answer to his bail was fined 10s, and Geo. Lake Waterman, who had appeared on the previous day in Court drunk, was fined 10s, both to be imprisoned for forty-eight hours in default of payment. Pbotsotion Obdeb.—An order was made protecting the earnings of Emma Waterman against her husband, George Lake Waterman, on the grounds of his ill-treat-ment and habitual drunkenness. Mr Weston appeared for the plaintiff. Stealing a Post Lbttbb.—Donald McDonald was charged with having stolen a letter, the property of the PostmasterGeneral, containing a cheque for J541 6s Id. Inspector Pender conducted the prosecution ; Mr Bussell for the defendant. John Cunningham, a farmer, residing at Brookside, in the Leeston district, deposed that the cheque (produced) for £41 6a Id belonged to him. He got it on February 6th, and caused it to be forwarded with a paid in slip on the same day to the Union Bank of Australia, to be paid in to the credit of his account. He did not receive any acknowledgment of its receipt from the Bank. Cross-examined—The cheque was dated January 30th, drawn by W. J. G. Bluett; on the Union Bank of Australia. He crossed the cheque and left it for his sen John to enclose and forward to the post. John Cunningham, son of the previous witness, deposed that on February 6th he addressed a letter to the Union Bank of Australia, Christchurch. His mother placed a cheque and a printed form in it, he closed the letter and gave it to a boy named Jnrisse to post. Witness did not see the face of the cheque. Cross-examined —He was quite sure that the envelope was addressed to the Manager of the Union Bank of Australia, Hereford street, Christchurch. Harry Jurisse, employed by Mr Hunt, the elder, deposed to receiving a | letter from John Cunningham, as described 1 by him. He took it to Mr Granger's blacksmith's shop, which is the Poet Office at Brookaide, and gave it to Mro Granger.' She put a stamp on it and dropped it into the post box, which is in the outside wall of the store. Cross-examined—Wit-ness could not write, but could read the words " Union Bank " on the back of the letter. [The witness was tested by samples of Cunningham junior's writing. He answered correctly.] Martha Granger deposed that she saw the letter brought by Jurisse j it was put into the mail-bag by her. It was addressed "Manager, Union Bank Australia, Christchurch." The mail-bag was tied, sealed, and delivered to the mail carrier in the usual manner. Cross-examined—The boy paid her for a postage stamp, which she affixed herself; the letter did not appear to have been tampered with. George Lnmmiß swore to having taken the mail bag from Granger's on February 6th to the guard of the evening train from Brookaide to Christchurch. J. B. Ferguson, cadet at Christchurch General Post Office, stated that on the evening of Feb- | mary 6th he received the mail bag from Brookside, it was tied and sealed. The way-bill of its contents was with it and was correct. The letters were placed on a table to be stamped. Witnes did not notice any particular letter. Letters addressed to' the owners of private boxes were always placed, after sorting, in those boxes. Litters were sometimes put by mistake into wrong boxes. The Union Bank'and the Bank of Australasia have private boxes. Francis Latter, clerk in the Union Bank of Australia, said

that, on February 7th, it was part of Mb duty to convey the letters from the Bank's private box, of which he had the key, at the Post Office, to the Bank. He did so on that morning. He carried them in a leather bag, which was secured by a patent lock. He emptied the box and conveyed aU the letters safely. At the Bank he caw the letters. There was not one from Mr Cunningham. In the course of his work witness would have known if there had been. The cheque produced came through the Bank of Australasia on Febrnary 9th. Joseph Oram Sheppard, manager for E. Hadfield, of the City Hotel, Christchurch —He received the letter (produced) by post on February 7th, Saturday afternoon. It contained the cheque (produced). [The letter waa dated Lyttelton, February 7th, signed G. Barnard, who asked Mr Sheppard to cash the cheque, and forward the proceeds, less £5, to the writer. The £5 was to be retained by Mr Sheppard for his trouble, the balance Mr Sheppard was to hold. The cheque is the one which was in Mr Cunningham's letter.] Witness paid the cheque on Monday, February 9th, into the Bank of Australasia, to the credit of Mrs Hadfield. On the next day he received a telegram from " G. Bernard" at Lyttelton, asking for the proceeds of the cheque, or its return. Witness then wrote a note to George Bernard, Post Office, Lyttelton, enclosing a cheque for £31. He informed " Bernard" that he could probably get the cheque cashed by Mr Haxell, at Lyttelton. Witness posted the letter, and at the same time telegraphed "Bernard," informing him that he had done co. About two hours afterwards he received a notice from the Telegraph Office that the telegram could not be delivered to George Bernard—he was not to be found. At about eight o'clock the same evening a man gave him a letter at the hotel. It was signed " George Brenard." It inquired about the cheque. Witness wrote a note in reply, detailing his previoui action. On the next day, at about noon, the prisoner came in to the hotel. He presented the cheque, which witness had posted to "Bernard." Prisoner said he had given money for it to some gentleman that morning, and that he had been to Port, but could not get it cashed. He asked witness to give him cash for it, or to get it cashed. Witness asked him ho«r much he had given the gentleman for the cheque. He said £10. Witness then asked him to go to the Bank of Australasia and find out if there was a dishonored cheque on Leeston for £4163 Id. The prisoner returned a few minutes afterwards, and said there had not been such a dishonored cheque. Witness then took the cheque from the prisoner, wrote on its back " Please stop payment of this cheque," and returned it to him. On the evening of the next day witness went with Detective Neil to the prisoner's house. There was no I suspicion attached to him then. He said when questioned that he got it from a man in Cathedral square at seven o'clock on the Wednesday morning. He did not know the man, but he paid him £10 for the cheque. On Thursday he received a letter signed George Bernard, acknowledging the receipt of the cheque sent by witness to 1 Lyttelton. |_All the papers mentioned were produced in their order.] Cross-ex-amined—Witness did not know "Bernard," but knowing Mr Bluett's signature, did not hesitate to change it. He did not expect to receive any consideration for changing it. He understood the instructions in the letter to mean that he was to send £31, and retain the balance for Bernard. He was asked to send the £31 in notes. He sent a cheque signed E. Hadfield, because it would not be safe to send notes. When the prisoner told him that he had bought witness' cheque for £10, witness told him that if Mr Bluett's turned out all right he would pay him the £10. Mr Russell Boon afterwards informed witness that he was instructed to sue for payment of his own cheque. Witness said he had not paid it because it was not endorsed. Witness then informed the police of the transaction. Albert J. Muller, cadet in the Post and Telegraph office, Lyttelton, said he knew the prisoner as G. Bernard. He first saw him at the Telegraph office on February 10th at 4.30 p.m. He asked if there was a letter for him, and saidhis name wasG. Bernard. There was no letter at that time.' Witness, however, had, a "collect" telegram for him, which was shown to him. 'The prisoner did not seem to have the money—-Ib—to pay for it. 'He went away, but returning the following morning, and there was then a letter for him from Christchnrob, whioh was delivered to him, and he went away, tWitness next saw the prisoner on the 20th of February, and pioked him out from eight others. Frank Haxell, son of the licensee of the Empire Hotel, Lyttelton, swore that on Wednesday, February 11th, at about 8.30 a.m, the prisoner came to the hotel; he presented a cheque for £31 drawn in favor of G. Bernard, signed by E. Hadfield, and asked for it to be cashed. He also produced a paper signed by Mr Sheppard, whioh stated that Mr Haxell, sen., would most likely cash the cheque. The cheque was not cashed. Wm. Robinson, bill clerk at the Bank of Australasia, Christchurch, deposed that the prisoner had been messenger at the Bank for nearly a year. He slept on the premises each night. He brought the Bank's letters from the Postoffice. Witness was at the Bank on Friday, February 6th, till about 10.30 p.m. The prisoner came in about 10 pan. He was supposed togo to the Post-officeeach night at that hour. He stopped witness and asked questions, the drift of which were would a cheque drawn in favor of one man be paid by the Bank to another if he presented it r Witness had known mistakes at the Post Office in the placing of letters lin private boxes. Thos. Neil, a detective [officer, deposed that he went to I the prisoner's eating house. Cathedral square,on February 12th. Inspector Pender Mr Sheppard and the prisoner, and his wife were there.When asked how he (got the £31 cheque he said he met a tall man in Cathedral square." The man said to him that he had bad breakfast' at Mrs McDonald's, and had presented the cheque to her in payment. He asked Mrs McDonald to advance him some money on it but she could not do it. The tall man further showed him a telegraph form on which waa written that Mr Haxell at Port would cash it. The prisoner added that he had £10 in his pocket which he advanced to the tall man on the cheque. The tall man gave him £1 "for his trouble," and said he would call for the balance. Witness arrested the prisoner on the present charge on February 16th. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution, and the prisoner reserving his defence, was committed for trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court to be held at Christchurch. Bail was named on the prisoner's application, himself in £800, and two sureties in £300 each.