MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume XX, Issue 1620, 30 April 1879, Page 2

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Wednesday April 30. | Before G. L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.]

Dbttne and Disobdebly.—Two drunkards wore fined 10s and 20s respectively. Obscene Language.—Daniel Pasche was fined 20s for using obßcene language in a public place.

Larceny teom a Dwelling. James Graham was charged with stealing a watch and other property, value £4 19a, belonging to John Brooker. On the application of Mr Inspector Hickson he was remanded until May 6th.

Stealing Money.—Kichard Harris, a little boy, was charged with Btealing from a shop the sum of 2s 6d, the property of Samuel Taylor. The boy admitted the theft. Mr Inspector Hickson gave him a very bad character as the misleador of other lads his own age. He was ordered to bo sent to the Burnham Reformatory for twelve months.

Embezzlement.—Charles \Ym. Greenwood was charged with embezzling money, the property of Mr C. F. Barker. There were three charges against him of embezzling £3 12s, £7 2s 9d, and £5 ss. Mr Gordon Holmes, instructed by Mr Garrick, appeared on behalf of the accused. 0. F. Barker being sworn, said—l am a land and estate agent at Christchurch. The accused was in my employ as clerk for about three years, up to within a day or two of the Easter holidays —the day previous to Good Friday. He was my head clork. His duties were general correspondence, keeping the cash accounts, and other duties pertaining to the position of a head clerk. The duly of the accused was to receive money and give receipts, also to send money to the Bank daily. I know Mr Morsehead. He called at my office on Friday, the Bth instant. The accused and Moreshead met together at my door, and I went with them into the office, and Mr Moreshead mido a complaint that lie had hud an account sent to him a second time, which be had previously paid. He was asked how ho knew he had paid it. He said ho had torn up the receipt, but he had paid it by cheque I called my accountant, Mr Edwards, into the office, and at my request he brought in the rough cash book kept by tho prisoner. Mr Moicsohoad

said ho hnd paid the account some time in August. The receipt fide is in tho prisoner's handwriting. I looked through the book to ascertain if Mr_ Morcshottd's cheque with which he said ho had paid tho account had boon paid into my aocount, ar,d could find no record of it. It should have been entered in the book within a reasonable time after its receipt. No such account was credited to me in the book. Mr Moresheed presented the bi'l produced for £5 ss, at the same time the prisoner being pressnfc. After some conversation, Mr Greenwood saying it was a mistake. I wont to the Colonial Bank and gilt a paying in slip of tho 2(3th August, which wrs tho nest date of money being paid into the bank after the alleged payment of the money. I got the slip produced in the handwriting of the prisoner for the sum of £25 12s, bearing the dato of 26th August. Comparing the paying in slip with the cash account, tho cash should have been on that date £lf> 19s 3d, the actual amount paid in amounted to £ll 14s 3d, making an exact sum of £5 os, the same amount as Mr Morshead's cheque. The cheques should have been £8 12s 9d, £2 2s, and £6 10s. The accused and Mr Morshead remained in my office until I returned from the bank. I checked the cash book in the presence of the accused. He said it must be a mistake, as he was in the habit of mixing up his own private cash with mine. I expressed my surprise at it, and sajd.it was against my rules, but would , give him the benefit pf the doubt of it being a mistake, provided nothing further was found wrong with his accounts. He offered to deposit £5 5s with me. I refused it and fixed the following Monday evening to commence checking the accounts. The accused attended at my office on the following Monday evening, when myself, my then accountant, 1 Mr Edwards, and the prisoner were present. We commenced going through the rendered accounts from the rendered accounts book. While going through them there were two called into question, but nothing further arose respecting that particular account then. We made another appointment for the following evening, but the accused did not keep it. John Thomas Pearce Moreshead, being sworn, said—l am a farmer, residing at Ashburton. I was indebted to Mr Barker in the sum of £5 ss. I settled it by a crossed cheque, paid to the prisoner in the office of the last witness, on the 24th of August last. I said to the prisoner I was going to England. I have Bince received the bill produced for the same amount, and I came to town on the 17th of April, when I saw the accused and the prosecutor in tho latter's office on the following day. I saw the accused, and asked why I had received another bill after settling the account, and he told me I had not settled it. I took him to the Bank, where I showed him my cheque. We afterwards came back to the office, and seeking through the book could find no entry of it. Subsequently the prisoner offered Mr Barker £5 ss, and said that a mistake must have occurred through the account getting mixed up with his own affairs. Mr Barker refused the money, and said he should look through the books and see if there was any other mistake, and if there was not he would give him. the benefit of the doubt. To Mr Holmes—l cannot say whether I crossed the cheque produced for £5 ss, or whether it was crossed by the accused. lam generally in the habit of getting receipts for money paid to me, but cannot say whether I got one in this instance. Beecham John Patrick, being sworn, said—l have been a clerk in Mr Barker's offioe for about two years and a half. On the 23rd August I received £ls 6s from Benjamin White, which I handed to tho accused. He gave me an acknowledgement for it by initialing the book produced. William Warren, teller in the Colonial Bank, being sworn, said—l received the moneys and cheques amounting to £25 12s, as speoified in tho voucher produced. When Mr Greenwood paid in money he was in the habit of bringing a book, in which the sum was specified. He brought the book on that occasion and initialed it. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr Holmes put Mr Barker into the witness-box, who stated the cheque was crossed in the handwriting of the accused. The Court reserved any decision in this case until the others had been heard. [Left sitting.]

LYTTELTON. Wednesday, April 30.

(Before H. Allwright and F. H. M. Walker, Esqs., J.P's.) Drunk and Disorderly.—Thomas Corkill, a seaman belonging to the Himalaya, wag presented on the charge and fined 5s or twenty-four hours. Illegally on Premises.—Peter Hies, for being in a house owned by J. Cameron, Christchurch, situate corner of Canterbury and London streets, after being cautioned by the police, was sentenced to forty-eight hours.

Lunacy.—David Gardener was discharged, having recovered.