DUNEDIN POLICE COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3018, 17 January 1912, Page 34

DUNEDIN POLICE COURT.

Wednesday, January 10. * (Before Mr 11. Y. Widdoweon, S.M.) Fraudulent Conversion. —Harold Jamieson »>as charged that, between July 1 and October 31, ho did receive from David Thomson Shand the sum of £7 5s on account of Cooke, Howlison, and Co. without accounting for the same. The ease was treated indictably.—Chief Detective Herbert conducted the prosecution, and Mr Irwin appeared for the accused.—Frederick Augustus Cooke, of the firm named, said that they had a garago in Hanover street, where accused was employed as clerk for about 13 months. His duties were to keep ! certain books and receive moneys. There was an entry in the ledger showing that Shand was debited with the amount of £7 5s 3d on October 17, tho payment being (made on September 23. Tho receipt produced was in the handwriting of accused. About December 22 witness spoke to accused about this sura and others that wore missing. He then practically admitted taking moneys, and made out a statemont amounting to about £2O. exclusive of the amount the subject of this charge. This he also admitted was not accounted for.— To Mr Irwin: Accused did not do all tho bookkeeping at Hariovor 6treet. Witness himself did some of it. All the cash received should go into the hands of Jamieeon, or of witness if he was there. Accused had a till to which witness and the foreman aLso had access. Monevs received in cash should go into this till. Moneys j received in payment of accounts should be j handed to witness, who would keep them i in his pocket till he could bank them. Jamieson would make out the receipts in such cases just the same. His salary was 30s a week. It was not the practice for people to pay accounts at the main office and then for the main office to ring up Jaimieson and tell him to enter them in the cash book, though it might bo done I sometimes. Witness would bo surprised to hear that such a thing happened once or twice every day. If witness were present when remittances arrived he would take possession of them and enter them at Hanover street Accused had made entries at witness's direction in regard to moneys received at the head office.—David Thomson Shand, a farmer at Wylie's Crossing, said that on October 31 he sent the payment in by anessenger, and received a receipt in return. —Detoctivo Lilly said that on December 22 he arrested accused and charged him with the present offence. Accused made a statement, and said that about six months ago ho was pressed for money which he owed, and instead of paying in some moneys which he received for tho firm from clients he ounverted it to his own use, and had frequently done the samo thing since. When searched ho had £33 5s 2d in his possession, and on being interrogated concerning it he declined to answer. He afterwards said that it had been given to him in trust for another person.—Chief Detective Herbert said that that was the case, and accused reserved his defence. He was committed to the Supreme Court for trial. The same accused was further charged with a similar offence in regard to a sum of £ls 13s received from William Burnett.—Frederick Augustus Cooke said that he noticed the amount entered in tho ledger in accused's handwriting. When asked for an explanation why it was not shown in the cash book, he explained that ho had confused Mr Burnett with Dr Burnett. Witness found a small sum credited to Dr Barnett in both looks, so lie eiased the entry as accused said tho amount had not been paid. —William Burnett (Mayor of Dunedin) said that on July 1 three motor cars wore hired, the hire being £ls 13s. He subsequently received a bill for the amount, and went to the Hanover street branch and paid it in cash to a young man. He was not able j to produce the receipt just then, but hoped he would be able to do so shortly. He did not recognise accused as the man to whom he paid the imoney.—Detective Lilly (-aid that the evidence he gave in the first case applied to this one also. He asked accused if the amount had been paid by Mr Bur- i nett, and accused replied that he could not remember all of the amounts he had taken, as he was drinking at the time.— Accused again reserved his defence, and was committed for trial. Accused was still further charged with not accounting . for £7 17s 4d received from Francis Robert I Shearer arid with appropriating £4 Is od.— Frederick Augustus Cooke said that on December 22 accused was examined, and admitted taking £2 Is Id. Witness saw j Shearer, and examined his receipts since August. There were three receipted bills and one not receipted. The receipts were ! in accused's handwriting and showed an aggregate of £7 16s 6d. The amount shown by tho books as not having lx>en accounted for was £4 Is 6d. Francis Robert Shearer, a motor agent at Dunedin. gave evidence as to paying the accounts to accused, and ' Detective! Lilly said his evidence in the previous cases also applied in this one.—Accused was committed for trial.—Mr Irwin applied for bail, which was granted—accused in his own recognisance of £IOO, with one surety of £IOO or two of £SO each, Mr Irwin remarked that one of the bondsmen was prepared to give accused employment.

Moxdav. Jantjart 15. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) Uttering Valueless Cheques.—Lin<!e,ay

Templeton Bell was charged with obtaining the sum of £8 from Anne Ainge by means of a valueless cheque.—Mr Hawkins appeared for the accused, who pleaded " Not guilty;."—Chief [Detective Herbert called Catherine Horan, (.bookkeeper to Mrs Aingo of the Grand Hotel). Witness said «he remembered the day in question, when she saw accused at the hotel. Accused asked her to cash a cheque for him, and she said she did not know him. He referred her to the proprietress of the Chalet Hospital, where he said he had been staying. He went away, and returned with tho_ cheque produced. Witness cashed it, giving the full amount (£8). Subsequently she found through the bank that it was of no value. Accused told her nothing about who he was or where he came from. —Christina Walker (the proprietress of the Occidental Private Hotel, at Dunedin) eaid she remembered the accused as a man who boarded with her in November for a couple of days. He said ho was Captain Bell. Accused called on her at the beginning of the present month and asked for a blank cheque. Witness gave him two, the cheque produced being one of them. He said he wanted to pay the nurse. Witness knew he had been in the hospital.—Henry Manton Bates (an accountant at the Union Bank of Australia. Dunedin) said there was no account in the name of Lindsay Templeton Bell at. the bank, nor was there any at the date in question. The cheque was received at the bank in the ordinary way of business, and returated Tnarked "No account."—Accused had nothing to sav, and reserved his defence. —He was coimintted to the Supreme Court- for trial.— The same accused was further charged with issuing a valueless cheque for £lO on January 3, drawn on the same bank.— Carra Janet Kerr (bookkeeper at the Grand Hotel) said she remembered accused calling at the office on January 3. He asked witness to cash a cheque for £lO. He gave his name as Bell, and gave his initials, but witness did not remember them. He said he had been staying at the Chalet Hospital, and wished to book a room at the hotel. The cheque produced was the one in question, and witness cashed it, giving the full amount. The cheque in tho previous case was returned dishonoured, and it was not considered necessary to present this one.—Christina Walker gave evidence as before, identifying tho cheque as the other one of the two blanks she had given accused. —Honr*- Manton Bates also gave evidence.—Accused reserved his defence, and was committed to the Supremo Court for trial.—Bail was fcxed—accused in his own recognisance of £l5O, with one surety of a like amount, or two of £75 each. , _ .

The Opium Act. —Alfred Thomas Price was charged with failing to enter in a book provided for the purpose particulars relating to the purchase and sa'e of opium. _Mr W. D. Stewart appeared for the defendant, who pleaded " Guilty."— Mr Sibbald (Collector of Customs) appeared for the prosecution, and explained that the cafe had an important bearing on the onium acts passed during the last five years. The necessity to keep a book had been brought under the notico of chemists, and* when a visit was made to the different chemists' shoos it was found that three of them had failed to do so. Another visit was paid, and still the books were not written up. —Mr Stewart said that the rejrulations were only brought, into force in July of last year. Mr Price had failed to pet the new "form of book rccpiire<L acd had continued to make the entries in the old one.—Mr Bartholomew intimated that he would hear the other oases before inflicting any penalty. Charle* William Hawkins was then charged with a. smilar offence, Mr Hawkins appearing for the defence, which rested mainly on the p'.oa of ignorance a.nd the argument that, no time was stipulated ?n the section when the entry should be made.— Worship, in entering a conviction, said there was no doubt that the entry must bo made at the time the opium was procured. Ignorance of the requirements of the statute had b?cn pleaded, but he did not see that the position of chemists in this respect was any different to that of hote'keepcrfi with regard to the licensing laws. The provisions of the Onium Act. were stringent, and he must view the offence in necordnree with these provision*. Alfred Oudaille was then charged, Mr Hawkins again defending.—Mr Sibbald said that this was the worst of the three ens**?. Defendant had purchased large quantities of opium, and in three months disposed of 6807, of solid extract and 1201 b of tincture.—Mr Hawkins explained this by the fact that defendant did a large business all over the colony. He made a sprcialty of horre mediicines. which contained a large quantity of laudanum, as was well kro-.»n.—Defendant was fined £lO. and costs (£1 ss). Price and Hnwkins being each fined £5, and costa (12s).