CHEQUE GOES ASTRAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18211, 3 October 1922, Page 5

CHEQUE GOES ASTRAY.

THEFT CHARGE FOLLOWS.

ACCUSED PLEAD NOT GUILTY

A sequel to the failure of a cheque to reach the person to whom it, was posted ■was heard in the Police Court yesterday, before Mr. J. W. Poyntori, S.M. John K. Hennessy (Mr. Denniston) was charged with having stolen a cheque for £7 lOf, the property of the Auckland Education Board,'and alternatively with having stolen the cheque from a postal packet. Alfred Arthur Pyman (Mr. Cahill) was charged with theft, and alternatively with having obtained £7 10s from Mrs. Evelyn M. Sutton by false pretences,' by representing that he was the rightful owner of the same cheque. Lengthv evidence showed that a ct.oque for £7 10s was drawn by the Auckland Education Board in favour of the 'Harle Giles Svsteirt of Hand-writing," ind was posted to Mr. T. Jlarlo Giles to a post office box. It was not received by the company. The cheque, which was marked "not negotiable," subsequently reached the bank and s?as paid. It had been cashed at Mrs. Sutton's shop. In reply to counsel, Mrs. Sutton said the amount of the cheque was at present placed to her credit at the bank. Subsequent to cashing the cheque, Pyman called stt the shop and asked that the cheque should be held and he would repay Mrs. Suttom When Pyman was interviewed by Detective Bober'tson, he admitted having cashed the cheque at Mrs. Sutton's shop. He said that Hennessy had asked him to redeem a watch, and had given him the cheque for that purpose. He cashed it and went to town for the watch, but found the shop closed, it being on Saturday afternoon. After spending some time in town, he found that the money was not in his pocket. It must have been stolen. He told Hennessy next day after having written a letter about the matter. Pyman pleaded not guilty, and was committed to the Supreme Court ior Iriai. In thfl caso against Hennessy, it was admitted by counsel that Hennessy's business post office box was immediately ■below that of Mr, Harle Giles, and also that the cheque had been received in accused's office. Detective Gourley staled that when interviewed accused 'first denied all knowledge ,of &» cheque, but subsequently admitted that he had given it to Pyman for the purpose of raising money on it to redeem a watch. Accused said it had been received by mail and presumably opened by a clerk who had since gone to Sydney. Accused made a statement, which was produced in the case against Pyman, as to how he got the cheque and what he did with it. Further evidence was given by Detective Robertson. Accused pleaded not guilty, and was ; committed U the Suj»«bjw Cotyrt f«s: trial