CHEQUE CASE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22504, 22 August 1936, Page 15

CHEQUE CASE

FAILUBE OF CHARGE HONOURED WHEN PRESENTED COMMENT BY MAGISTRATE MISTAKE IN ISSUING WARRANT [by telegraph—OWN correspondent] DARGAVILLE, Friday After severely criticising the action of the police in bringing a charge of issuing a valueless cheque against his client, William Ferndon Fast, motor mechanic, formerly of Dargaville, Mr. R. S. Burt, of Auckland, asked Mr. G. N. Morris, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday for costs against the police and also against the complainant. Fast was charged that at Dargaville 011 August 10, with intent to defraud, be obtained from Frederick l/./.ard goods to the value of los 4d and ]-Is 8d in money by means of valueless cheques. The magistrate dismissed the charge, but declined to make an order for costs. Sergeant F. Cnlloty, who prosecuted, said that accused had come to Dargaville from Auckland and had cashed five cheques. Evidence would be called to prove that accused was using a system. Mr. Burt: When the cheques were met —a great system! Privilege Claimed David Fe'rguson McKay, head ledgerkeeper at the Bank of New Zealand, Auckland, called by the police, claimed privilege on questions relating to confidential business. Mr. Burt said he had no objection to the police asking what had happened when the particular cheque which had resulted in the charge was presented, but to other questions he would object strongly. The Magistrate: I have never known of a case of this kind being brought before a cheque had been presented. Mr. Burt: It has been left to Dargaville to produce this novelty. In reply to Sergeant Culloty, witness said thut on August 10 accused had a credit of 3s August 13 £lO had been paid into accused's account. Cheque Not Dishonoured The Magistrate: Were any cheques dishonoured between August 10 and August 14? —Yes. That which is the subject of the charge ?—No. That has never been dishonoured. Frederick Izzard, draper, said that accused had called at his shop and purchased clothing valued at 15s 4d, for which he presented a cheque for £1 10s and received 14s 8d change. Witness bad noticed that three or four cheques were signed, and he thought something was wrong. After accused bad left he made inquiries and as the result of information received he had gone to the police. On the following morning herhad received certain information from the bank with the result that he had laid an information j and obtained a warrant for the arrest 1 of accused. He would not have cashed ; the cheque if he had known accused j did not have money in the bank with which to meet it. "Met When Presented" To Mr. Burt, witness said he knew there was no money in the bank to meet the cheque because of information he had received. The cheque had been met immediately it was presented. Another draper, Mate Peko, said that on August 10 accused had called at lxis shop and cashed a cheque for £3, which was not met. To Mr. Burt, witness said he had cashed cheques before and had no trouble. He had not been worried at any time about the cheque he had cashed.

Alexander Costcllo, another draper, said that 011 August 10 he had cashed a cheque which ho had paid into his account two or three days later, and it had been met. He would not have cashed the cheque if he had known there was 110 money in the accoijit with wbiclx to meet it. "No Case to Answer"

"The police are apparently trying to show that accused did not have any money in his account, and we do not deny it," said Mr. Burt. "This cheque was drawn on the Auckland bank, and it is impossible for it to go down from here in less than one day at least, and, as no money was in the bank at the time it was issued, this case has been brought," said the magistrate. "If money had been there neither Izzard nor the police would have brought this action. Izzard has sworn an information which he did not know was correct. I have never heard of a case of this nature before." Mr. Burt: Have we a case to answer?

The Magistrate: I cannot lind on this information that there is any case to answer.

Mr. Burt asked for a certificate of dismissal, and the magistrate complied with the request. Application lor Costs

"1 object to being dragged 11 p to Pargaville last week, only to be blandly told that the police were not prepared to go 011 with the case," said Sir. Burt, in asking for costs. "Tho whole thing has been an inglorious bungle from the beginning, and the police have been grossly negligent in the way they have handled the case. The conduct of the case calls for strict censure by the Court."

Sergeant. Culloty said that lie could not have, proceeded with the case last week, when it was nrst brought before the local Court following a remand from Auckland.

The magistrate said it should have been possible to avoid bringing counsel and witnesses up for a remand appearance.

"A mistake has been made in issuing the warrant, and there has boon lack of foresight in bringing you to Dargaville last week, but I am not prepared to allow costs against the police," said the magistrate. "We make no secret of the fact that we iutend to sue Izzard," said Mr. Burt.

The magistrate said that he thought it would be better to recover the costs by way of damages than by apportioning them at the present time.