MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1616, 22 July 1887, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

ASHBURTON— FRIDAY.

(Before His Worship thp Mayor, and Mi D. Williamson, J P.) OIVIL CASES. W. J. Hayes and 00. v. G. Kidd— Claim £1 18s Bd, balance alleged to be duo on a grocery account —Mr J W. White pppeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr IS. ». Crisp for the defend nnt.—H. W. Slovens, plaintiffs manager, gave evidence m support of the claim. He was erofsexamined at length by Mr Crisp, m the course of which Stevens denied that the signature to the receipt for £1 18 d 8d was m his handwriting ; it must have been a forgery. He also denied that defondant and his wife came into Hayes' Bhop together, and paid the account before the tenth of May.— G. Kldd, the defe&d«nt, deposed ih»t just before the teuton tea meeting on the 10 ih May he and his wife treat to plaintiffs ■h p to pay a bill of £1 18s 8d due to Hayes,— Witness 1 wife had a £5 note — Witness and hia wife both saw Stevens. The £5 notd was given to Stevens, who returned the change and wrote something on the account. Witness remembered the occHslon well because his wife aiked S evens for some lollies, and he remarked that "ho was sorry he had no blackballs". Cros -examined : Got the £5 note from Mr Ferrlman and gave it to his wife on the same day. Forrlmin's money was enfrjred on April 14th. Paid Stevens between 7 aod 8 p.m.— Grace Kidd, wita of the defendant, gave corroborative evidence, adding that Stevens took away the receipt from her home without hor conae* t or knowledge. She was certain iha* Stevens receipted the acooont for £1 28s 8d In her presence. -Orons examined : When I v/ent to the shop about the reoelpt Mr JHayes was oallei m. The receipt was shown to him and ho said to Steveas, «• That's your name." Stevens denied the genuineness of the signature remarking taut ha always signed with t«vo aitohea — Mr Arthur re* membered seeing Mr and Mr« Kidd to* gather about 7 pm. early m M*y. They wore just entering Hayes' chop. Mr Steveas was m the ahop standing behind the counter, — Cross-examined : I was not with Mrs and Mr Kidd and Me Stevens m the uhop together.— Mr McOwen, manager of the, Bank of New Zealand, ! I Ashburton, said that m his opinion the signature to the batoh of receipts pro* duced (Hay ot and Oo.'s) and the aigniture to the alleged forged receipt wore m the same hand writing. There was a difference oertainly. but a great siraularity m more than one particular. The ben<?| In the a.'tche were alike and so were the ees. Witness described at length m what respects tho similarity m the signatures existed.— Mr Shury, manager of the Union Dank of Australia, deposed ' that all the signatures were different, even on those receipts not disputed, but the great similarity m all led witness to believe that one person wrote the whole lot, including the one Stevens alleged to be forged —Mr H. Friodlander gave corroborative evidence.— The last two wit nesses and Mr T. Bullock gave evidence to the effect that thoy had known Mr Kidd for some yearß, and had always found him thoroughly honest m hia dealings, and a man who paid his way promptly .—This was the case for the defence, and the Court then adjourned for . half-an hour, when Mr White called the following rebutting evidence : — H. H. Stevens ;On the let Jane I sent m April and May accounts. Mrs Kidd hnd a conversation 7 with mo about tho middle of Juno, when she remarked that the April account had been paid. Early m July;, the sth, she brought down the alleged receipt, as promised.-. I denied afc' once the signature was mine, there being only one aitch and one Greek "c." Previous accounts had been settled by cash and contra. At first Mrs Kidd said the £1 ißsßd had been settled by contra and cash, bat afterwards she stated that the account had been paid, by cash, viz , a£6 note and change. Mrs Kidd said she remembered after baying a conversation with her husband about Retting the £5 note from Mr Ferriraan. Siw Mr Kidd about tho aff jr. Kidd said, " I saw you take the money from my missus, and give her the receipt." I denied this, and he oalled mo a liar, adding thatho would never come into the d — shop again, and he would apeak to Mr Hayes. I replied, " I am very sorry, but I can't father that signature." From the 2nd of May to the 7th I was not m tho bhop ■after 6 p m , it being my week off, and for the last two months I cart swear that I have never had my coat off after 6. Have been employed by Mr Hayes during the past three years, and have bad passed through my hands about £14,000, and have never had such a dispute as this before. —By tho Court : I took round the alleged receipt to Messrs Lancaster aDd McGregor to ask their opinion as to whether the signature was liko mine.— — Mercer, asHistont to Stevens, deposed that he was m the shop when Mrs Kidd spoke about the receipted account, Mrs Kidd said she was positive that she paid the account, as part was settled by contra, and the balanco m silver, for which she had teased Mr Kidd. Miss Kidd corroborated this, ifrora May 2. to June 7 I was on duty m the shop from oto 8, Mr Stevens was hot present on any night between these dates save on Saturday night.— Daly, employed In Hayes and Go's grocery shop deposed that he heard Mrs Kldd say m the shop that she had paid tho account partly by oontra and partly by c«sh,and that she remembered this well, the previous payments being by oontra and obeque. fcho paid partly la Bilver, for whloh she Aad " teasod Mf Kidd/'and heard Mr Stevens deny that the BlgnaturowashU.-Orofla-examin'd: Heard Mr Hayes eaj to Stevens, "If this [referring to the signature] is not yours, I don't know whoao It Is. It's your name aoyhor."— W. J.Hayes, the plaintiff, remembered being called to see the disputed bill. Remarked In Mrs Kidd's presence that the signature was not m his opinion, that of Stephens. Mib Kidd laid ahe paid the ncoount partly by oontra and partly by silver. Stephen has had the management of the grocery for three years, and there has never been the olightest Irregularity* m his accounts. Mrs Kldd regrotted that she had paid m silver Instead of by cheque, as It would have saved a lot of (rouble — Mr Webster, Bank Manager, deposed that he had had eleven years' experience. Tbe figntture on the reoelpt for £1 18s 8d and th» signatures on tho provlous receipts were unlike. CroBE-examined— At bis banker I would pats four of tho receipts as bearing; gennlne signatures, By the Court : —Tho writing on the receipt for £1 18s Sd.ln n<t In my opinion that of Mr Stephens.' Walter B. Mobs, accountant, oalled as an expert, Bald that m his opinion the receipts were not written by the aamo person and In support of this opinion he pointed oat the difference m various letters and figures. Willful Rerringe, an expert m writing, deposit that he was well acquainted with Mr Stevens' handwriting. Thea Ignature on the account for £1 18a 8d wfii oertainly not that of Mr Steven*, the letters and general style being quite dfaitmUar. He was confident that the the signature was not Me Steven*'— John Swwanon, ft drape* In the employment of Mr Hayes, itated that: from May 2 to May 7 Btavens wan not. on datj after 6 p.ra — J. A. Oayglll, Solicitor, 'deposed that Mr Kidd demanded the receipt from him and he declined to give it up. Stevuns wm preß«ut and Informed Kidd that Mrß Kldd had given him the; receipt »nd he had given her a oopy of It.— Mr Crisp addressed the Bench at sorao length for the defence, drawing attention particularly to tbe many d. iQ'ereot w*j«

Pteveng bad signed his signature, and quoting authorities to show that the export evidence was valueless — Mr White followed on the other sido, pointing out that it had been clearly proved that ' Stevens was not m tho ahop aftet 6 p.m. from May 2nd to 7th, benwotn whioh date it was alleged Mrs Kidd had pud Stevens. As a solution of tho matter, ho (Mr White; thought it likoly that Mrs KHd had beo.ome mixed up m regard to iho dates. Fer iman's £5 uoto was paid on the 14th April, and on that date an account waß settled with Hayea Ho regretted I that his learned frleud had cast asperjpionß on the character of Mr Stevenß, a ] young man who held a position of trußt, which, according to Mr Hayes, ha employer, ho filled with credit Mr White contrasted the evidence oE the different witnesses at considerable length.