MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1435, 9 May 1912, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

(Before Mr. W. G. Eiddell, S.M.)

INGENIOUS LABOURER,

HIS CHEQUES ON HOTF.LKEEPERS

■Robert William Halliday (alias Smith, Dalzioll, AmlcrMii, and Milhr) plr.iiled guilty to four charges of having obtained money by means of valueless, cheques. On April 20, 1911. in Wellington, ho obtained .£•-' from 1-rcderick Cobnon; on April 22, 1011, at Rilnierston North, he obtained .CIO from John Hurley; on April 28, 1911, in Wellington, -CI from Itoso Darroch; and on May G. 1911, at Carterton. JJ3 from William Kcdino'id. Chief-Detective l'robcrg stated that, on April 22 last year, defendant had gone to the Railway Hotel at Palmei'stou North, had ro'presei.ted that he was a Mr. Dalziell, of Hunterville, and had cashed a .£lO cheque with the hotelkeeper (Mi. John Hurley). Some days later he had Rone to a Wellington hotel and the barmaid (Miss Rose Darroch) had cashed a Jsl cheque for him. Whan things had got tco bad for him in Wellington, lio had' gone to Cartertou and stayed at. Mr. Redmond's hotel, and while there had cashed a .€3 cheque. Since then defendant had been lost sight of until quite recently, when he had been arrested at Blenheim while he had l>eeii working at a hospital there as a gardener. He had gone under several , names, but his real liama was Halliday. In June, 1910, he had deserted his wife at Waimate (Canterbury), nnd he was now "wanted" on that account. By occupation he was a farm labourer. The Court sentenced Halliday t» three months' imprisonment. Detective Brolier?: "When arrested he had -S3 13s. -4.1. on him. I ask that .L' 3 is. be returned to Hie people whom he victimised. That would leave him 9s. !:!., and icliirn a dividend of is. in the .£. The Court agreed to the request. FORGEfiY ALLEGED. Joseph Wii-oii and' Albert Culbusli appeared on remand charged with having forged the name of L'. 11. Tfebinson to a cheque for .-£2O I Is. on thn National Bank at ilokilika, and uttered the same to Ernest Batchc'lor at Wellington on April 23. Chief Detective Broilers prosecuted, and Jlr. P. W. Jackson defended. Thomas Huiuy Mather, manager for George and Kersley, draper.", Weliiu'.'lon, deposed that on April 23 tho two defendants ha<l selected two overcoats at his firm's shop. As payment they had tendered a cheque for .£2O 11s. on the National Bank. Hokitika, signed "E. ir. liobinson." Witness had declined to cash the cheque, and the defendants had departed, saying they would have no difficulty in getlins it cashed elsewhere. Thomas Don-Ud Anderson, a shop assistant in Hill and Sons, hatters. Lambton t'liay, gave evidence that on April 23 tho defendants had gono into Hie shop and bought two overcoats, and Wilson had asked if payment by cheque would be. accepted. The accountant. (Ernest Batchebr) had cashed the cheque, which hail been endorsed ".T. Williams." The overcoats had cost. £7 I9s. for the two. Wilson had said thai "J. Williams" was his name. Defcetive-Sei-jeant M'lveney staled that at about G.S.'i a.m. on April 29 he had arrested the defendants in the house where they were living. Cutbush had then said that he knew nothing about the cheque, nnd had never been in Hill's shop. Wilfew, who had been out of the room at Ihnl time, had, later on, remarked: "Someone must have put us away. You would never have nicked us. ' I didn't think you would know so soon, because the cheque had to i?o over there." AVilsnu had also said: "You know, you told me you ?ot (be cheque from a straiiirer on Hie Hokitika racecourse." Cutbush had replied: "Yes, T had a good win dov/n there, and he asked me to cash it. ... I don't know his name." The-case was adjourned till 0.45 a.m. io-dsv. when the evidence of E. 11. DobinFon (whose name it i.s alleged was forced 1 is to he taken. This witness is expected to reach Wellington from Ilokitika this morning. OTHER CASES. Thomas Louis Gardiner pleaded guilty to a charge of insobriety. Senior-Ser-geant Darby stated th-at there w.is a long list'of convictions against the defend ail for insobriety and breaking prohibition order*. His AVorsliip remarked that Gardiner was a habihtal drunkard within (he meaning of !he Act. He fined defendant .£2, and issued a prohibition order against him. For insobriety. Margaret Malier was lined "><., and John Mars 10«.