RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume III, Issue 810, 9 December 1865, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

THIS HAYi (Before tlie Hon. A. C. Strode, R.M.)

DRUNKENNESS. Thomas Watson, charged with this offence, was fined 20s, with the usual alternative. ASSAULT. Thomas Watson was also charged with assaulting- Constable Hanlon while in the execution. of his duty. The constable stated that while he was searching the defendant in the lock-up he endeavoured to strike him, but failed to do so. He then kicked him several times, injuring him severely. The defendant was fined 30s and costs, or four days’ imprisonment. FORGERY AND UTTERING. Henry Evans was charged with forging and uttering a cheque with intent to defraud. The prisoner was defended by Mr Harvey. Dennis Sampson, sworn, stated—l am a partner in the firm of Hanslowand Sampson, tailors, Dunedin. On the evening of the 9th of September last the prisoner came into my shop, and asked if my partner was in. I replied in the negative, and he left the shop, but shortly afterwards returned, and purchased from me a pair of trousers for 30s, and in payment tendered me a cheque for £3, purporting to be drawn on the Bank of Australasia by C. W. Lorenzen. 1 accepted it, aud gave him 30s, the balance due. I subsequently handed it to my cousin, Mr Donnet Sampson, with certain instructions as to its disposal. Donnet Sutherland, sworn, stated—l am a salesman in the employ of Messrs Hansiow and Sampson. I recollect the cheque now produced which I received from the previous witness on the 9th September last. On the Monday following I presented it at the Bank of Australasia but was refused payment. I then took it away and returned it to my cousin, and did not again see it until the 13th, when it was in Detective Weale’s hands. On that day, in company with Detective Weale, I went to the Bank and presented the cheque, and payment was again refused. The cheque was then taken charge of by Detective Weale. Chas. Wm. Lorenzen sworn, stated—l am a commission agent, and reside in Jetty-street, Dunedin. I know the prisoner, he was in my employ as clerk up to the 9th September last, when in consequence of being told certain particulars regarding a cheque I discharged him. The signature “C. H. Lorenzen” attached to cheque produced is not my handwriting. I never authorised the prisoner to sign any cheques on my account. During a conversation regarding this cheque, the prisoner said * ‘ You (witness) had nothing to do with it, X will make it right.” Cross-examined by Mr Harvey—The prisoner is well acquainted with my signature. I can scarcely believe that the signature to the cheque is in the prisoner’s handwriting. The name written is not mine, although meant for it.

Prideaux Selby, sworn, stated—l am accountant at the Bank of Australasia. On the 13th September Mr Donnet Sampson, accompanied by Detective Weale, presented to me the cheque produced. I endorsed it with the word “ forgei’y, ” and also initialed it, “P. S. ” Cross-examined by Mr Harvey—l endorsed it such because the signature was likely to deceive persons unacquainted with Mr Lorenzen’s writing. Francis Jno. Weale, sworn, stated—On the 13th September I received the cheque produced from Mr Dennis Sampson, and accompanied Mr Donnet Sampson to the Bank of Australasia, where it was presented to the last witness, who, after examining it, refused payment, and at my request, endorsed it “forgery.” Mr Harvey submitted there was no case against the prisoner, as the signature to the cheque was not Lorenzen’s, but of some other party.

His Worship considered there was a prhna facie case made out against the prisoner; and, further, his admission went a long way to establish such, and committed him for trial, bail being allowed in his own surety for £IOO, and tw r o sureties of £SO each.