AN INFORMATION DISMISSED.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXX, Issue 14976, 23 April 1909, Page 5

AN INFORMATION DISMISSED.

[Per Bress Association.] AUCKLAND, April 21. George A. Elley was charged at the Police Court to-day that on or about April 19, being a partner in a firm trading as Elley and Coulson* lie stole £l2 10s 9d of tho money of the partnership. , , , . Job Coulson said that he spoke to accused respecting a, contract, .and they agreed to do' the work on half profits as partners. They carried out certain works on this arrangement, Elley adjusting the contracts. There was no talk of witness receiving wages; he was to share in the profits. Ihe defendant received all the money. On April 19 witness spoke to Elley about his share of tho profits, and accused ieplied “ Wait until to-morrow morning.”' Another interview occurred later in. the day in the presence of a constable, when accused denied that he had had a partner, and witness would ha\e to send in a bill for wages, which would be paid. Coulson declared that he would not trouble with a hill, and would summon Elley. Mr . Kettle, S.M.: Why didn't you summon him in tho ordinary way, instead of laying a criminal charge? Witness: I had no time, and 1 had reason to think he was going away by the boat to Sydney that night. Cross-examined, witness said that tho constable ho first spoke to told him that his remedy was a civil one. Then ho went to the detective office and laid a complaint, and afterwards swore, an information, a warrant being signed by a Justice of the Peace. , Mr Kettle: Did you take any advice before laying this criminal charge?— Oh, no. Why did you lay the charge?—l wauted to get mv share of the money. You did not think he had committed a, criminal offence?—No, but I thought he w 7 as going to Sydney. You wanted to get payment, and not to punish Elley for an alleged crimo which vou thought he had committed? —Yes, I did not want to injure the man, Mr Kettle: I think it is a monstrous proceeding on his own admission. . A man has no right to invoke the criminal law in such a. case. Proceeding, Mr Kettle said he did not tliink it necessary to take any more time with this case. The informant admitted his sole object in putting the criminal law in force was not that ho thought the accused had committed a criminal act, but because he wished to force Elley by criminal process to pay some money which he (the prosecutor) said was due to him. The information was dismissed.