THE ALLEGED CASE OF EMBEZZLEMENT AGAINST W. R. WATERS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 780, 11 February 1887, Page 10

THE ALLEGED CASE OF EMBEZZLEMENT AGAINST W. R. WATERS.

W. R. Waters, on remand, was charged at the Resident Magistrate’s Court before Mr Wardell last Friday afternoon to answer the information charging him with the embezzlement of £I9OO from the funds of the Northern Land, Loan and Building Company. Mr Jellieoe sa*d, before the case was pro ceeded with further, he would point out to his Worship that his learned friend had promised to indicate the particular items on which he proposed to deal. As no such information had been received, he would ask for au adjournment for the purpose of allowing time to examine the items previous to cross-examination.

Mr Middleton opposed the adjournment, saying that he proposed now to proceed with the examination of the items mentioned in the memorandum or statement which was produced in Court by Mr Harcourt, and also as to the two amounts stated by the Messrs Blundells. These particulars, Mr Middleton said, had been before the Court since the case was first called on, and he therefore considered that an adjournment was not necessary. Mr Jellieoe said that on both the former occasions they had floundered about in an indefinite way. His only reason in asking for the adjournment was so that he might examine the accounts prior to cross-examina-tion. He (Mr Jellieoe) oould not see why his learned friend should object, as a considerable amount of indulgence had been granted him all through the oase. His Worship decided to proceed with the case in the meantime, but if it was found necessary to adjourn, would do so. Mr Jellieoe complained that he was not in a position to cross-examine. His Worship : Let that difficulty appear first. Mr Middleton said he had been placed at considerable disadvantage in the case, as he had had to work out every item himself, while Mr Jellieoe had had every detail in connection with the matter placed before' him. The following evidence was then given : H. P. Rawson, dentist, produced a deposit receipt on the Northern Land and Loan Company for £SO. The money had been paid* by cheque. No receipt waa given to witness by the accused personally. Previously had conversation with accused, in which arrangements were made about the deposit. George Mee, ledger-keeper in the Union Bank of Australia, produced paid slips showing that on July 20th, 1886, a cheque for £l5O had been drawn by H. P. Rawson on the Bank of New Zealand and paid to the credit of Waters’ account. On the 27th October cheques amounting to £193 2s 7d were also passed to the credit of accused. Mr Jellieoe said he had no question to ask the witness.

Matthias Seagrif produce a deposit receipt for £IOO on the Northern Land, Loan, and Building Company. Witness paid the money to W. B. Waters in bank-notes. D. T. Stuart, recalled, stated the sum of £l5O referred to by the witness Rawson was omitted in the books of the Northern Land, Loan, and Building Company. There was no such entry in the books until witness entered it. Bernard de Vere, tailor, produced a deposit for the same amount in the Northern Land, Loan, • and Building Company. The money, which consisted of £SO, was paid by witness to accused’s clerk. Mr Jellieoe reserved his cross-examination. Andrew McEwen, a farmer, produced a deposit receipt for £645 on the same Company. The money was paid by witness to accused. At this stage the farther hearing of the case was adjourned until next Friday, for the purpose of securing the evidence of Mr Vivian, who was a clerk in the employment of the accused. Bail was granted in the same amount as previously —namely, one surety of £IOO.