VALUELESS CHEQUES

Southland Times, Issue 19276, 21 June 1924, Page 13 (Supplement)

VALUELESS CHEQUES

e LONG LIST OF CHARGES. ACCUSED COMMITED FOR SENTENCE. James David Stancombe, a farmer, residing at Five Rivers, appeared before Mr G. Cruickshank, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning cn six separate informations of having issued valueless cheques. In each case the cheques were presented in payment of accounts; the accused receiving various amounts as change. The total amount for which cheques were made out was £GB, and they were issued ‘to various local business people. On being presented at the bank the cheques were dishonoured. Sergeant Hewitt conducted the case fcr the prosecution and Mr S. Ritchie appeared for the accused. John Alenander Matheson, hotel-keeper, Winton, stated that on June 4 the accused came into his hotel and wanted to pay for his board. He inquired the amount owing and witness told him that it was £1 6/-. Stancombe said he did not have enough money, but asked him to cash a cheque for £lO. Witness did not have enough change and' Stancombe then asked him to cash a cheque for £5, at the same time asking whether his previous cheques had been honoured. Witness replied that they had and cashed the cheque, giving Stancombe the balance above the amount owing for board. Witness presented the cheque at the bank, but it was returned “no account.” Henry Thomas W. Denton, auctioneer and shareholder in the company of W. Todd stated that on June 2 the accused called at the office in the evening and inquired for witness. He told witness that : he had met W. Todd at the Bluff train ; and that he was to cash a cheque. WitI ness did so, cashing a cheque for £2O, I deducting £1 5/6 for goods which had previously been purchased by the accused.

William Bucham, manager of Scoullar and Chisholm’s, stated that on June 2 Stancombe came into the shop and told witness that he wished to pay an account that had been owing for four or five months. He produced a cheque book and commenced to fill in a cheque. The amount of his account was £5 7/9 and he asked witness to cash a cheque for £lO, mentioning that he was a bit short of cash. Witness cashed the cheque and gave Stancombe the change. The cheque was returned from the bank marked “referred to drawer.”

Winifred Meffin, cashier for the Southland News, stated that on June 4, the accused called at the office and said that he wished to pay a subscription. He said that his name was Stancombe and that he belonged to Five Rivers. She looked up the account and found that it had been paid up to the end of March. He then stated that he wished to pay up to the end of September, the amount being 19/6. He asked witness to fill in a cheque for him and also asked if she could give him any change. Witness said that she could give him a pound or two and asked if £5 would do, but Stancombe requested her to make it out for £lO. She made out the cheque for £ll and Stancombe signed it. Witness offered him a receipt but he refused to take it. When the cheque was sent to the bank it was dishonoured.

Samuel McCulloch McDonald, boot importer, stated that on May 30 the accused called into the shop and asked to see some boots, eventually selecting a pair. He asked that the goods be charged to his sister’s account, but witness declined to do that without his sister’s authority. The accused then asked that the goods be charged to his own account, but witness refused to do that, telling the accused that they should be paid for in cash. Stancombe then asked that the boots be set aside for him. On June 2 Stancombe called in for the boots and also selected a pair of ladies’ shoes. He wrote out a cheque for £5 and witness gave him £1 5/. i n change. The cheque had been returned from the bank marked “referred to drawer.”

Mabel Clark, a clerk employed by Kirk and Co., stated that the accused came into the office on June 2 to pay an account. He produced a cheque book and asked if he could have some cash for change. The account amounted to £8 11/2 and the accused asked her to write out the cheque for some amount over £2O. Witness declined to that but said that she would make it out for £lB. The accused signed the cheque but would not allow witness to fill in the butt of the cheque. The cheque had been dishonoured at the bank,

To Mr Ritchie: She would not say that the accused was drunk but he had had some liquor. Edward Cecil Sare, accountant at the Bank of New Zealand, stated that the accused’s account at the bank was wiped out in March. The accused went to the bank on June 2 and paid in £1 5/-, and said that he would be paying in a good sum after the holidays. Witness told accused that his account had been wiped out. When the accused paid in the £1 5/- he purchased a cheque book, but bad not paid any further amounts into his account. Since then cheques made out by the accused had been presented at the bank, the total amount of these being approximately £7O or £BO.

Sergeant Hewitt, stated that he arrested Stancombe at Five Rivers on June 6, H® charged him with the offence and after presenting him with the warrant, the accused said: “This is what booze does for a man.” He said that he did not intend to defend himself as he had not a leg to stand on. He also admitted that he know there were only a fw shillings to his account at the bank at the time he made out the cheques. Witness asked him what had become of th© money he had received and the accused said that he did not know. Witness also asked what had become of the cheque book and he said that he thought he had lost ik The accused pleaded gwiliy to each of the charges and was committed to the Supreme Court for sentence.. Bail was fixed at one surety of £l5O or two sureties of £75 each..