SUPREME COURT.—CIRCUIT SITTINGS.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5549, 10 January 1879, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.—CIRCUIT SITTINGS.

(Before his Honor the Chief Justice and juries of twelve). Thursday, January 9. SENTENCE.

James Allan Mackie was brought up for sentence for forgery and larceny. j,jr. Porwood reminded his Honor of the recommendation of the jury, and expressed a hope that in passing sentence he would take this into account. , , . Mr Buckley said he had known Mackie for more than two years. He had always hitherto borne a very good character. _ _ Mr. Arthur Baker gave similar evidence, and, in reply to hia Honor, said he believed that Mackie had, immediately before entering the service of the bank, been on a sheep station in Canterbury. Before this he had been at sea, and was previously in the army, according to hia own statement. In passing sentence, his Honor said —l need not tell you, prisoner at the bar, that the position of one who is manager, or acting as manager, of a bank, is one necessarily of great monetary trust, and it is one in which, by the falsification of accounts or by the forgery of

documents, detection may for a time—perhaps' 1 - for a long time—be avoided. I bclievo tbaW-,

the practice of the courts iu such cases is one which will on consideration _be found to be a proper one. It is this—that the greater the trust, the greater the offence, in the estimation of Courts of Justice. Where the offence of embezzlement or stealing a master's money is accompanied by a falsification of accounts or forgery of document', the offence is a very grave one. Frequently cases of embezzlement are before the Courts of Justice in which the Court finds itself able, iu the interests of society, to pass a light sentence. For instance, the unfortunate man may have given way to habits of intemperance, or he may he suffering under temporary irritation of mind, or he may be exposed to sudden temptation, and applies some portion of his master's money to his own use —generally when it is in bis own pocket; but sometimes he forges a cheque for a small amount—to pay some pressing creditor. Such offences, though necessarily grave, and punished with some degree of severity, are very different from an offence committed by a bank agent or clerk, especially when accompanied by forgery or falsification of accounts. The jury recommend you to mercy on account of youth. They are manifestly mistaken in this, for a person of thirty-one years of age is long past that time when youth may be taken into account when considering any offence ho may have committed. The jury have also felt themselves'justified in saying there was a want of care in the inspection of the books by the bank authorities. Mr. Lawrie, who bad only been in the bank at Wellington for about, four months, certainly said nothing which showed a want of inspection. The ordinary inspection appears to have been half-yearly, and he said nothing to show that this did not take place. Tbe jury also seem to consider that tbe inadequate salary paid to you was a reason for recommending you to mercy. I do not know whether this has any effect on my mind ; I think not; it should not, and I hope it has not. There are cases in which such a matter might be taken into consideration. Some man with a large family—a storeman or shopman somehow or other gets into temporary difficulties, possibly through disease or illness in his family, and gives way to temptation, uses a few pounds of his master’s money, and is discovered and apprehended shortly afterwards—then that circumstance might properly be taken into account, and have an effect upon the sentence passed upon him. That manifestly is not yonr case. According to your own statement, you went into the bank in monetary difficulties; almost immediately afterwards you began to help yourself from the bank's funds for the purpose of paying those debts, and you appear to have been helping yourself by driblets ever since. You must somehow or other have been guilty of falsification of accounts or forgery before this instance under notice, or you could not have escaped detection so long. This being the case, I feel bound, notwithstanding the recommendation of the jury, to pass a severe sentence. Ido not know that this is an occasion on which I ought to say anything to the bank, for I know from experience that persons unacquainted with banking mattere are not competent to offer advice or suggestions, but I certainly am inclined to think that some check should have been put upon the bank accounts. If two officers bad had to certify that the cash balances were all right, the danger of fraud would have been greatly lessened. In apportioning your sentence I have taken ints account that there is nothing against you except the crime with which you are charged, and also tbe fact that the punishment to you must be more severe than to a person who has been in gaol previously. I can only express a hope, that those who are now anxious to assist you, will endeavor not only to fortify you in bearing your punishment, but that they will, at tho expiration of your sentence, aid you iu obtaining some creditable employment in which you may regain your lost character. Though I must not consider the inadequacy of your salary as an excuse, I may remark that there is a tendency at tho present day, not only iu banks but iu other business, to pay those in a position of trust too lightly. It is supposed that a person may be safely entrusted with money, though he has not been in the habit of handling it. I apprehend that this is a false idea, for it is just as necessary to have a man experienced in the resistance of temptation as a man experienced in plastering walls. The sentence of the Court is that you be imprisoned for four years on this charge of forgery, and four years on the charge of larceny, the sentences to run concurrently. ASSAULT WITH INTENT TO INFLICT GRIEVOUS BODILY HARM. Arthur Falloon, a respectable looking man, was placed in the dock, charged with having assaulted Philip James Murtagh, with intent to do him grievous badily harm. Prisoner was defended by Mr. Travers, with him Mr. A. N. Bunny ; while Mr. Gordon Allan assisted the Crown Prosecutor, The charge arose out of some dealings in property at Masterten. There was an agreement by one Tait to transfer a house and land, &c., to Murtagh, but quarrels arose between the parties, and on Tait, accompanied by prisoner, attempting to enter a room which had been his bedroom in the house, a scuffle took place between Murtagh and prisoner. Cross informations were laid, and both men were committed for trial. Tho matter was very much involved, and’the trial of Falloon occupied some hours. Finally, as the case appeared to reveal principally civil disputes, the Crown Prosecutor dropped the prosecution, and the prisoner was found not guilty. In Murtagh’s case, when he was called on to plead, he pleaded not guilty. A jury was empannelled, but no evidence was offered, and the prisoner was acquitted. PASSING A VALUELESS CHEQUE. Arthur Swete was again put on his trial in this case, convicted, and ordered to be imprisoned for six months. This concluded the criminal business of the Court.