ALLEGED THEFT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 16988, 26 April 1917, Page 9

ALLEGED THEFT.

IiLEWELLYN E. HALL BEFORE THE COURT. COMMITTED FOR TRIAL. At the City Police Court yesterday, before H - A -. You °S. S-M., Llewellyn Ernest Hall was charged with tho theft of a cheque lor £70 13s 6d, tho property of A J ilastie. Chief Detective Bishop prosecuted, and Mr.A. C. Ilanlon defended. Detectivo Hamrnodey stated that, as tho result ot a complaint regarding the theft of the cheque produced, he interviewed Mr Hasfeie, tho drawer of the chequo, on or about tho 19th inst. Ho stated that, on tho loth mst., ho wrote a number of letters, in ono of wlixh ho enclosed the chequo and -addressed samo to Messrs Wright, Stephenson, and Co. (Ltd.) This was posted at a pilJar box in front of Wain's Hotel. The chequo was post-dated "19th April. 1917" and drawn on the Bunk of New Zealand, Dunedin, and payable to No. 53 441 O r bearer for tho amount of £70 13s 6tL ' At the timo the cheque was drawn it had not the endorsement now on it of "R, L. Ray " Mr Hastie said he did not know anyone by that name, nor did he know the "accused Hall, who called on complainant sinco his (accused's) arrest. Georgo Goldio Notman, cashier for Messrs Wright, Stephenson, and Co., and who should receive all letters containing cheques, sa : d he did not receive tho cheque produced. It was duo from Mr A. J. Hastie, butcher for the amount stated, and an invoice had been sent for that amount.

Charles Cameron, electric lift attendant in tho Dominion Chambers, stated that he r? , ° accuSß d, who camo to the lift on the 17th uist. and showed v.-ifcness a cheque similar to that, produced, drawn for a similar amount Ho said ho had found it, and that it was an open cheque. Witness advised him not to have anything to do with 3t. Accused asked witness to get a certain employee in tho Dominion Chambers to see af ho could cash tho cheque. George- Wallace Duncan, 18 years of a°-o in tho employ of Messrs Laidlaw and Gray' stated that he met the accused on the 17th inst. He had seen him previously," but had not spoken to him. Accused asked witness if ho would cash a cheque. Accused said ho could not leavo his office, as ho had no one to lcav#> in charge. Witness took the cheque for tho purpose of cashing- it at tho Bank of A T ew Zoaland for accused. Ho guvo it to one of the tellers, who told him to tako it to tho ledger-keeper to seo if it waa all r;ght. Ho did so, and waited about 10 minutes before tho ledgor-keepor roburncd ami said: '.Who gavo you tho cheque?" lhey both wont to the bank manager's oHice, and on tho way to the offico witness saw accused insido tho front door of tho bank, and pointed him out to fcholedgerkoeper. Accused was called into tho bank, a ir ™ m lbreo wo,lt ■ into the manager's office. 1-ho manager (Mr Gibbs) asked accused where he got the cheque, and ho r&pbed that ho got it from a man while on his way to tho post offico that morning He .only knew tho man by sight. Mr Gibbs asked accused his natno, and he said bmith. After further questions by Mr Iribbs accused admitted that his namo was I'laH.

Richard Wain Gibbs corroborated the cv:dcnco of tho last witness regarding tho cheque. Witness said tho date on tho chequo had boon altered- from tho 19th to tho 17th Ho telephoned Mr Hastie. and also Messrs Wright, fstcphenson, and Co., and from the replies received thought it bettor to instruct tho ledger-keeper to bring in tho presenter of the chKiuo. Accused gavo his name as Jhomas Edward iSnuth, and said that Ihe cheque was given to him by a man in the street whom ho/know only casually and who asked him-to got it cashed in tons and to meet him that night at 10 o'clock at the Founta-n. Witness told accused that if this' man could not be found, ho (accused) would havo to tako the responsibility for tho cheque. Accused became agitated, and immediately gave his nnme as L. 15. Hall ihe police were communicated with. Detective Hammerlcy (recalled) produced" a statement signed by accused, which bore out the evidence of previous witnesses Accused was a returned soldier, and acted* as a messenger nt the Land and Survov Department. Witness said that accused had been snvon an opportunity of keep-'nc- his MpDO-ntmont with Ray. but the latter did not appear. Tho endorsement on tho eh<xiuo, "R. L. Ray," compared with tho writing of tho accused in his s'gn.n.turo to tno statement ho made to the police. The accused reserved his defence nnd was committed for tral at tho next sittin-r of tho Supreme Court, bn, : l being allowed— accused in his own rreognisanc* of £100 and one surety of £100 or two of £50 each