THE CASUAL CHEQUE.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14686, 20 November 1909, Page 15

THE CASUAL CHEQUE.

CONFIDING TRADESMEN.

Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M., presided at the City Police Court yesterday, when John William Chadwick was charged with, on August 27, forging tho name of Thomson and Co. to a cheque for £5 on tho Bank of New Zealand, and with uttering tho same to Margaret Quan.

Mr Irwin appeared for accused, who pleaded "Guilty." Chief Detective Herbert conducted the prosecution.

Margaret Quan said she. was saleswoman in C'ollio's boot shop. On• ■August 27 witnow supplied to accused a pair of boots which 'were to cost 15s 6d, In payment accused tendered a cheque for £5. Witness handed him £tfe 6d in change. In answer to witness's inquiries accused 6aid the chequo was one of Thomson and Co.'s, cordial manufacturers. The cheque was subsequently returned from the bank dishonoured.—To Mr Scurr: Accused appearol to bo sober, but ho struck witness" as bciin.g a man who had been drinking.

George Craig Thomson (member of tho firm of Thomson and Co., cordial manufacturers) sa«l the cheque produced was not issued by witness's firm, and was not on tho firm's bank. Tho signature was not that of any member of the firm authorised to sign choqucs. All tho firm's cheques were issued on epooially .printed slips. Witness did not know accusal'.

Daniol J. Jl'Lauchlan, ledgor-keopcr in the Bank of Now Zealand, eaid tho cheque (produced) was returned by witness marked "No account." There wvs.no account of Thomson and C. in tho Bank.

Detectivo Hunt mid that on the 15th inst. he saw accused at Dunodin Gaol, and at his request (showed him tha cheque (produced). Accused said the signature to the cheque was in his handwriting, ami that ho would plead guilty to the charge at tho proper time. Accused asked where he had cashed tho cheque, and witness told him. Accused. then dircotod witness to a- house where ho thought ho had left tho boots. Accused said his, memory was very hazy, as he had been on a drinking bout. 'To Mr Irwin; Accused ate eaid he was making arrangements to mako restitution to ail tlio people ho had defrauded. Witlis?, from his own inquiries, was satisfied that accused had been on, a drinking bout.

Accused was committed to tho Supreme Court lor ocntencc.

.Accusal then pleaded " Guilty" to a charge- of forging tho name of &. Wilson lo a cheque lor ±15 drawn on the Bank of New ifcauriid, and with uttering tho same to Alfred James Eyfc.

Alfred Ja-nies Jtyfo said ho was a traveller for Wilkio and Co. On August 27, about 4 p.m., witness saw accused, who camo to tliu shop and showed witness the label (produced), and asked for a quotation for printing a. quantity of thorn. Witness arranged that accused should col! again on tho following morning. Before leaving accused purchased a fountain pen for 9s, and tendered in payment a cheque for £5 drawn upon 11. Wilson. Witness took his word that the ckquo all right. Witness never saw accused again. Accused smelt of licjUCT, but was not incapable. The cheque was subsequently returned from tho bank.

Frederick Dinwiddio said ho was employed by Messrs Hart, drapers. On August 27 accused purchased soino goods and tendered the chequo (produced) in payment. Witness refused to accept tho cheque, and' accuse* 1 did hot tako tho goods. Aisusco eaid his name was Chad■wiclc' and that ho was a traveller for Hcoular and Co. Ho also said that the chequo was drawn by R. Wilson and Co.(lid.), Bond street. David Thomson, sccrotary for E. Wilson and Co., Bond street, said tho cheque (produced) was not ono of tho firm's, and was not signed by any member of the firm authorised to sign cheques. The firm used n K|«ciiillv printed cheque. t Daniel MXnuehlan, ledgorkecpor Bank of Kow .'Zetland, and Detective Hunt, gave formal evidence. ' '•.';

Accused was committed for trial,

was looking on she was faking no part in. tho struggle. Counsel contended that, in any case, tho words which the accused was

alleged to have used were not inciting Cuttle to resist, but were inciting tho crowd to obstruct the constable.—Ho submitted th it there was no case to answer.— His Worship held that the fact of tho crowd being persuaded to interfere was an incitement to Cuttle to resist.—Mr Irwin, announced that he had eight witnesses' for the defence, who would swear that accused did not call out—His Worship heard four of these, and then dismissed tho case, stating that he tiavo the accused tho bonefnVof the doubt.