TENNIS PLAYER

Southland Times, Issue 22489, 25 January 1935, Page 8

TENNIS PLAYER

APPEARANCE IN COURT VALUELESS CHEQUES ALLEGEDLY ISSUED COMMITTAL FOR TRIAL (Per United Press Association.) Christchurch, January 24. Trevor Rhodes-Williams, aged 29, the well-known Canterbury lawn tennis representative and a former provincial singles champion, appeared in the Police Court on three charges of issuing valueless cheques. In evidence it was alleged that the accused obtained £56 15/- from the firm of Mason Struthers, Ltd., where he was employed as a tennis expert in the sports department. The first witness, Victor E. Hamilton, manager of Mason Struthers, Ltd., said that on January 17 witness ascertained it had been the practice of accused for some time to draw cheques on the Bank of New South Wales and cash them with the firm. Witness found that on January 14 two cheques had been cashed, both of which were dishonoured when paid into the firm’s bank. At this stage, counsel, Mr Russell, asked that accused be allowed to sit down in the dock, but the Magistrate, Mr E. D. Mosley, said he saw no reason to grant the request, as Rhodes-Wil-liams was not ill or aged. Witness added that he interviewed the accused in the presence of two bank officers, who said the accused had been told some time before that his account in the High street branch of the bank had been closed and that he had been refused a cheque book. Rhodes-Williams admitted he had secured cheque forms from a person whose name witness had forgotten. The accused agreed that there had been £l9 10/- in his account at the time of the drawing of the cheques. The amount obtained from the firm by means of valueless cheques was £56 15/-. Mr Russell then proceeded to examine witness on a telephone conversation between witness and counsel. The Chief Detective: What is the relevancy of this? The Magistrate: It apparently has something to do with the defence. Mr Russell: It is not part of the defence. The defence has not been disclosed. . . . The Magistrate: Well, then, if it is not part of the defence you have no right to ask the question. Mr Russell: It is part of my defence. The Magistrate: Be honest with the Court. Mr Russell: I object to the reflection on my conduct —a reflection that lam not honest. After further exchanges the Magistrate said: I want an apology, Mr Russell. I will give you ten minutes. The Court adjourned for 10 minutes. On resumption counsel said it was unfortunate the incident had arisen and expressed regret. Continuing, the witness Hamilton said he did not remember it being suggested that Rhodes-Williams was a young man and might be worthy of a chance. There was a minute in the books of the company that any servant found guilty of dishonesty should be reported to the police. The accused pleaded not guilty and was committed for trial, bail being allowed. An application for the suppression of accused’s name was refused.