TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXXVI, 4 November 1902, Page 3

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

The Court resumed this morning. The defendant continuing his evidence, giid he had made up the actual cash balance in the Al statement by bio-self Tlatia the correct statement. From England witness received .£BIOO, and fKrta local income £1139 163 4d, making a total of £9075 13s 4d, after deducting £164 3s twice debited to himself by error, The total payments as per sh- ets from Ito 6 were £9062 is Id. Had furnished supplementary payments not charg* d m theAl statement i36 19s sd, making a grand total of paymeuts of £9599 Os (id. When income as per sheets 10 to 6 had been deducted less £164 3s would show £9075 13s id, leaving a balance due to witness of £523 7s 2d. Supposing the item of £507 13a 4d ou the 19th august, 1902, were deducted there would sti'l be i aba'ance due to witness on the cibh < statement alone of £15 13s lOd. Beside" Ibis there were 17 days' wage3 due in September to Taylor, to and including the 19th, which at the ordina-y "*te3l6s 8d a day «vould amount to £14 3s 4d. This showed a total due to Taylor apart from the bill un Sheet 7 iu the Al statement of £29 17s 2d. Witness had credited the company with £1 139 16s 4d local income, without which the whole conce n would have collapsed. Mr Rogers had the Bainham saw mill, time, and wages' book by him, in which at first for most of the month Rogers entered the time alone against the men's names, with tbe total cwried out. Tbe Bheets actually ueed were the sheets produced, and which the witness called the originals. These sheets were made np by Rogers and witness. Never saw Rogers' book from which the Bheets were copied until September. The sheets were made up monthly as payment* weie made. Did not know from what reoprds tbe sheets were made up. The aoeets were certified to by witness from month to month after going through (hem with Mr Rogers. (Photographs tab en in the vicinity of the mine were then banded into Court ) Toia concluded Mr Fell's examination. Mr Maginnvty tben re narked to the. Magistrate tbat the case had dragged wearily on for erven days, and be would like some indication as to a com natal, and the case going to a jury Mr Magionity said bis cross examination would last all day. Tay or had admitted making the alterations and erasure-, and Mr Maginnity thought possibly the Magistrate might at the present time come to a decision. . Mr "grelteaid he was quite willing as to theMarißtrateooming to a decision as he had to be 'in Wellington on thnrsday to fulfil'*. bnsineßS appointment. Before tniß^Mirdtme, however, he would like to ' t*ke erideice fiom Mr 8t John, clerk in Mes rs Fell and Atkinson's offise. The Magistrate said that he nas in the awkward position of be.ng asked to determine bis verdiot b.fore he had heard all tbe evidence. He could not at this stage commit, as Mr Fell proposed to bring conclusive evidence. It would be too premature to arrive at a decision at the piesent moment. Taylor cross examined by Mr Maginnity, .aid the statement in AIO ruled oat regarding Lucas was struck out at the time the bill was made up. This was don some time in September. The erasares of Barry Lucas in A lO were made before th© statement was sent to Messrs Fell and Atkinson's. The £6 for Lucas was erroneously carried on on page -2 of the Al statement, bpt on page 6 it is al- ' - lowed to tbe company by Taylor, only ' charging the company £164 3s instead of £179 Bs, ne having allowed tbe tpmp my £15 4s Taylor was further cross-exa mined at length, particulars of 'which have already come oat in Tayloi's original examination; While the cross^xamioalion was proceeding Mr Maginnity made sereral remarka to the opposing counsel, Mr FelL ' Mr Pell retaliated, and appealed to the Magistrate to suppress such proceedings in Court. ' The Magistrate remarked that he could not allow Buch conduct. Mr Maginnity .- I will write tj Mr Fell irhen the -case is bv. r. Taylor, continuing, said to Mr Fell that a>l the wharf and bush right* belonged to bim and not to the company. Witness said that Mr Fell informed him that theser. items shonld not be placed on account. Taylor then made a heated atAtementto Mr Maginnity tbat if be tMr Ma&nnitF h » d steered thrqagh £10,OOU inthe fonrfold postition h« (Taylor) occunied it would be something lo boast of also if yon (Mr Maginnity) could come ?£ough it all with only £15 to the bad vS (Mr Maginnity) *onld be cle verei than yon (Mr Maginnity) are. ' Mr MagUmity, in an irate manner *■ continued 8 to examine Taylor with whal t appeared to Taylor aa perplexing quetions. .. . v-- ~~. VraylQr (to Mr Maginnity) : You an fcry&g to force me into ambi. uifcies. . ,Both witness and connsel f,.r the prose

J cution appeared to be very bet(:3d,and on failing to get a suitable ans\/tr, Mr M ■• ginnity was Leard fc> remark in quiveriujj tone?, "If I had a sack of potatoes. 1 woul i aim 3ome at you." Frederick SL John, accouutant foi Messrs Fell and AtkinßOu's, Bworn, stated that the draft Btatoiuont Bo was p.oeuicd frjm Taylor, and ftarwards made up. Did not audit t'.e whole of the accounts, as tbey were demanded. He (witness) barely had time to copy tho accounts. Witness then gave evidence as to the striking out and altering of certain iigureß in the prepared statement. Mr Maginnity also cross examined Mr St Th°e h Court rose at 1.15 p m. and resumT 'ouS' burning at three oVlock MrH VV Robinson, S.M., intimated that as the case stood, he was unable to commit Taylor for trial. Mr Magiioity then continued to cross examine Ta} lor. (Left Sitting)