SUPREME COURT

Greymouth Evening Star, 5 March 1926, Page 2

SUPREME COURT

JURY ACQUIT LEE. Presided over by Mr Justice Adams, the sitting of the Supreme Court was continued yesterday afternoon, lifter the “Star” had gone to press, when the case against Samllel Arthur . Lee, for failing to account to his employer, R. Ronchi, butcher, of Waiuta and Blackwater, for nine sums of money, was concluded. Continuing his evidence, accused said he had taken no monies of Ronchi’s. Ronchi knew -.three weeks prior to his leaving his employ that he was going. Just after he left, Ronchi got him to help liiin on his round. Hs his motor delivery van was broken down. Ronchi never disputed ally of the accounts with him-. He (Ron Chi knfew he was going to Christchurch. 1 To Mr Kitchingham : It was only occasionally that Mrs Ronchi balanced the cash, when he got home from his round. He saw her using slips for balancing on. He never knew how much cash was fin the bag as he never counted it. The accounts were put into the bag, and he sorted them out as he went his round-, lie did hot Chase the amounts on the accounts shown as “Account rendered.” Mrs Ronchi told him to correct accounts when customers said they were wrong. This he did by drawing his pencil through the amount not owing. He never erased any amount. He did not remember delivering any accounts to Barnes at Totara Hat. It did happen at times that accounts were not delivered promptly at th£ beginnliiig of the month. He credited the £4 to Langley, because Ronchi told him to do so. He did not tell Ronchi that if he was squealing about the £5 he lent to Mclnroe (shown as loaned to Sartori) in his round book, he would pay it himself. He left Blackwater about 4 o’clock in the afternoon, and biked to Waimaunga the day he left. He wanted to see a man named Gough. From there he took the train to Stillwater, where his wife met him, and they went to'Christchurch next day. Addressing the jury on accused’s behalf, Mr Joyce said it was apparent that there was distinct laxity in the way Ronchi’s kept their books, and this threw needless responsibility on' accused. The system of book-keeping followed by Ronchi, prior to Mr Wylde insisting on a cash book being kept, was altogether improper evidence, on which to convict a man. The cash book, which unfortunately had been damaged in a recent fire in Ronchi’s

house, contained evidence which would have exonerated accused in at""least three of the charges against him. In summing up, his Honor said if the jury accepted the evidence of accused, it would mean, to put it bluntly, that all the witnesses for the prosecution had lied- Accused had admitted receiving-certain of the moneys. Receipted accounts bearing his signature had been produced, and he acknowr ledged his signatures. There were cases- where the customers’ accounts had had the words “To account rendered,” and the amount erased. The duplicate copies of these' accounts were, retained ,by Ronchi, and showed no'such erasure. Were the jury to believe the erasures were part of a diabolical scheme to bring about accused’s downfall, as he had suggested when giving his evidence in the witness box ? The question of Ronchi’s bookkeeping- did not enter into the case. People were allowed to keep their books in their own way. Custom varied regarding the showing of afnounts “To account rendered.” Spine firms showed it as the first item on the whilst others made it the last. The jury retired at 4.30 p.m. and returned at 7.30, with a verdict of “Not guilty” on all nine counts. Accused was accordingly discharged.

PRISONERS SENTENCED. j While the jury was considering its verdict in the case against L6e, yesterday afternoon, those awaiting sentence were brought before Mr Justice AdamsSydney James Birchley, who pleaded “Guilty” at the Reefton Police Court t'o a charge of forging and uttering a cheque, and opening a postal packet not addressed to. him, and for whom Mr I. Patterson appeared, was granted two years’ probation, and ordered tpay the costs of the action, £2 11/, refund the £1 10/ misappropriated, and to take out a prohibition order and keep it in force, against hiniself during litis probationary period. Stanley Lawrence .George Couch, convicted of breaking and entering and theft from the premises of Bahay Saraty, Greymouth, was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment from the date of his arrest (January 10). Rupert Dunford, for dual voting at the Parliamentary elections last No, vember, first at Ngahere and then again the same day at Kainaka, was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment, his Honor pointing out that the offence with which the prisoner was charged was very serious in the eyes of the Legislature. The defence was that on the second occasion on which accused voted, he was under the influence of drink, and did not know iVhat he was doing. His past record was good.

BANKRUPTCY. The application of Henry Hazelhurst Smith (Mr Joyce) for Ills discharge from bankruptcy, which was not opposed, was granted. The application of Oscar Henry Brailsford (Mr Hannan) was opposed by Messrs Ashby Bergh, Ltd. (Mr F. A. Kitchingham) and dismissed. TO-DAY’S SITTING. The sitting of the Supreme Court was continued this morning, His Honor, Mr Justice Adams, presiding. : The following common jury was empanelled :—Walter Sherratt, Henry Addison, David Douglas, Arthur Hopkinson, S. B. White, W. J. Stewart, William Prendergast, C. G. moss, Frank Jacobs, J. D. Wingham, H. Nankervis, L. Neubauer. S. B. White was chosen foreman. ■ Two men, Joseph Michael Clarke and David Rintoul Cousin, at present serving a sentence on a charge of vagrancy, were charged with breaking and entering the premises of Kettle Bros., merchants, Greymouth, on the night of January 25, or early in the morning of January 26 and stealing therefrom, cash to the amount of £4,

and a box of Three Castle cigarettes, valued at 30s. Accused, for whom Mr J. W. Hannan appeared, pleaded ‘ ‘not guilty. ’ ’ For the prosecution, evidence, as in the lower Court, was given by Patrick Guider, John Truscott, Emma E. Jackson, Thomas Johnston, Edmund McCarthy, and Constables Brown and Hay. Summing up, his Honof said there was no direct evidence on which ho could ask a jury to convict. The details of the cash missed from Kettle Bros.’ cash register could not lead to the identification of the cash found on both the accused at the time of their arrest. He could not, on the evidence p.- V ”i nsk a >iirv to cnnvirt. Wiihmit irluing. Hie jury lelmiml

a verdict of “Not Guilty,” and the accused were discharged. committed to borstal. Robert Henry Coom, who appeared for sentence, he having pleaded guilty in thd Lower Court, to a charge of indecent assault oil a girl aged nine years, was committed to a Borstal Institute for a period of two years, His Honor said he had carefully considered counsel’s (Mr Joyce) request for probation, but was unable, to entertain it in the present case. 'He thought prisoner should be taken care of by the Borstal authorities, and therefore Intended to have him detained for the minimum period, which was two years. ' . That concluded the business of the G rCynioUth .session.