RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3630, 10 October 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Saturday, October 10. (Before K. Ramsay and A. Mercer, Esqs.. J.P.’s)

Drunkenness. —Alexaudrina Ferrier was fin j d 20s, or three days’ imprisonment; and William Forrest (who, when arrested, had L 37 odd in his possession). s*. Obscene Language —Henry Pearson, for this offence, was fined 40s, or fourteen days’ imprisonment.

(Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M., and K, Ramsay and A. Mereer, Esqs., J.P.’s)

Alleged Embezzlement. Alexander Grant was charged with embezzling, on or about October 6, 1873, a cheque for Ll6 I Os, the property of Messrs Webb and Fulton, his then employers, vir Smith appeared foi the prosecutors, aud Mr Stout *'or the accused The facts of the case having been stated by Mr Smith, the following evidence was given; - J. S. Webb : The accused was in our etn ploy as clerk, and left in July last. Up to the end of June, 1873, he bad been insurance clerk, his duties being to obtain applications tor insuranc s, to keep the registers of policies, collect premiums, aud prepare the terms for the head office in Melbourne. I produce the policy-book, the general register, the cash-book containing a record of all moneys received for premiums and payments made into the Bank of Australasia, press oopy letter-books of returns sent to Melbourne, all of which were or ought to have been kept by Grant during the time he was insurance clerk. Besides the books mentioned, there is a premium book, the butts ‘of which for October, 1873, I produce. Mr Frederick hulton took the insurance clerkship and charge of the books after Grant was transferred. It was not Grant's duty to receive payment of premiums unless he was sent ouc for them, or he was the only person in the office when a person called to pay premiums. It was an old-established practice in the office that moneys paid in the latter case should be paid to the insurance clerk ou his return. I do not recollect sending Grant to Boss and Glendiaing for insurance premium after he held the position of insurance c erk. Be once—in July or August after be left my employ—informed me be had received insurance moneys after he was insurance clerk; but he never told me he so received money from Ross and Gleudining. Cheques paid for insurance money were paid into a separate account in the name of the Northern Insurance Company at the Bank of Australasia, and such was the invariable practice, so far as I know, during the time Grant was clerk. No clerk in my office had general authority from me to cash a cheque paid in by a .person for premium; he may have been instructed to cash a cheque.—His Worship : Before you sit down will evidence be given that the policy was in existence at the date of the alleged embezzlement ?—Mr Smith : l am not prepared to say at present. 1 don t think it would be a necessary element in the case.— His Worship : If there was no policy m existence, how do you make out embe«le*neat ?•—Mr Smith; Grant received j

on belnlf of his employers a aura of money, which he ought to have accounted for to them, but which he is charged with, appro pnating to his own use. —His Worship : If there was no policy in existence it might turn out to be another offence under the Act, and i call the attention of counsel to it Mr Smith replied that he ‘quite understood py Mr iJtout: I swear it was the rule to pay m cheques for insurance moneys. Insurance money was paid for transfer fees and other items or for the current accounts of the firm [ can dea, with any instances of such, if nanii d. There wore not ahucdri d instances of such caees. Cash was not taken from the insurance box and paid for petty cash for the office. I believe it mi ht have been done, and L have had to piohibit it; but it certainly was nevt r done with my authority. I did not attend much to the office business at this time, I then had a managing clerk named Hassell, who is not now in the Colony. I do not know what petty cash books there were in the office. Fart of the premium of one Wallace had gone as a setoff against an account due by the firm ; but I paid the money to Grant. I gave him my cheque for the amount to put into his cashbox. Cash was not taken from the insurance box to pay land transfer fees, and made up from petty cash or by a cheque given iu afterwards. I do not believe it was done. Fhe course laid down was thkt land'transfer fees were paid by special cheque or taken from the petty cash of the office So far as I know the practice was to ascertain the amount of land transfer fees and give a cheque for them. I have paid land trausfer fees by cheque, after they had been paid into the officej but made no inquiries when the money they had been paid with came from I am aware that on several occasions the police found our offices open in the middle of the night; but am not aware that the safe or cash-box was found open. Grant had no key of the office.—By Mr Smith; While Grant was insurance clerk, the insurance moaey was kept separate from the office cash. The premium on the policy produced for insurance for L 3,000 on stock in Boss and (Jlendining’s premises was due on the 6th October of each year. It was effected with nae as agent for the Northern Company. It s the policy in respect of which premium was due in October, 1873. Application was nade to me by Ross and Gleudining to in-crease-the amount of their policy, but I refused to entertain it, believing that the •oiiginal_policy was then extant. By the B nch : - ccordiug to our books the policy sas lapsed; but Boss and Gleudining claim that it has not. —By Mr Smith ; It was created in our books as a lapsed policy, because it does not appear in the renewed policy book as entered up by Grant. It disappeared from there in 1872, because in that year. We have not accounted to the head office for any premiums received on this policy since 1871 ~ Mr mith wanted to ask the witness if in the . event of a fire having occurred in Boss and Glendining’s, and then producing a receipt for the premium paid iu October, 1873, he would have considered the Northern office bound to pay, bub his Worship held that it was not com.patent for the witness to answer, as his directors might have repudiated, any action be took in that direction, and have treated :be ( olicy as lapsed.—By Mr Stout: I did cot peisonally, or by writing, intimate to Giant that he was superseded as insurance clct k. I don’t know whether or not 1 tnld him to hand over his book; we had a managing clerk, and I dare say he did se,— Frederick Fulton,''insurance clerk to Webb md Fulton : When I fir-t entered the office Grant was insurance clerk, and did the land transfer work. I finally got the books handed over to me, with the cash, by Grant on Augus-t 27, 1873, from which time I took entire charge of the insurance business, and Grant had no duty connected with it. I have asked Grant to collect premiums, but can’t recollect the instances. They .were in the cases where the persons lived on his way home, in the township of Nevada, and when he was going mto the country. He received premiums from these persona which L generally received ; when he returned I entered them in the cash book. I never asked him to collect premiums- from Ross and Glendining. The renewal book, in Grant’s hand-writing, pur ports to show the policies renewable in Ucto her, 1873. In it there is no mention of a policy renewable by Boss and Glendining. As a clei k accustomed to insurance business and not finding any number in the book of any policy renewable by Ross and Glendming I would conclude there was no policy in their name then exsistiug, and if there ever had been a policy that it bad lapsed. Grant never told me he had received a premium from Ross and Gleudining, After receiving the cash-box from Grant, I kept the Jorthern cash, aud the petty cash separate. I never authorised Grant to take cash out of the box but I know that in my absence he took small sums out of it, on about half-a-dozen occasions. It was always replaced. The receipt produced, bearing date October 6, 1873 (receipt for Ross and Glendining’s premium on policy in Northern Company for bS.UOO, from sth October, 1873, to 6th October, 1874, Ll6 10a; signed for Northern Insurance Company, per Webb and Fulton, agents—A. Grant) is in Grant’s handwriting. It is not in the form of thefcreceipts used in ihe office about that time. It was not taken from the recept-book. It corresponds with a t() rm used before I came into the office. I? Rom the time I took charge of the insurance business, I never knew of a cheque paid for premium being cashed at the bank on which the cheque was drawn.— °y Mr Stout: I should have to refer to the book to say whether since August, 1873, I alone have kept it. I will swear the entry of L 6 opposite Wise’s name in the book is in my handwriting. Hassell kept a cash-book, but not the insurance book. Grant, if short of moaey for Land Transfer fees, got it from me from the petty cash, which would be made up by cheque from Mr Webb after- , wards. We would not use for that purpose an uncrossed cheque given for insurance or building society. It was never done. When Ross and Glendining gave notice of their application to other companies to extend their insurancs, I looked up the original regist- r, but there was nothing endorsed on it to show thit the policy had lapsed. Grant, after being relieved of the insurance business would not collect premiums, unless specially aware of when they fell due, which would be unusual for him to know. He negotiated with a Mr Smith for a renewal of his policy in the Northern. I have left my cash box open, and I know Grant has often left his room and box open. I have examined the receipt book, and can find no butt for the receipt given by Grant to Hess and Glendining, It is different from those in the block! —D. Herons, bookkeeper for Ross and Gleudining, had known Grant for the last four years. Ross and Glendin ng had a policy in the Northern Insurance Company. Witness recognised the receipt produced. He first saw it on October 6, 1873 ; but was not quite sure whether he gob it directly from Grant or another person in Mr Webb’s office, He signed a cheque fer the amount, but could not say who he gave it to. The cheque produced for Ll6 10s was the one he gave on the insurance policy.- Samuel xNasmych, clerk to ihe Bank of New South Wales, produced a cheque drawn on October 6, 1873, for the amount of Ll6 10s. The money was paid into the Bank of New South Wales on that day. It was paid in cash.—Sub-Inspector 'Mallard arrested accused by virtu© of the

warrant produced on October 7 at, the .offices.; 'of Messrs Webb and Fulton. Ho,read thd warrant to spoused and told him 'that he mm-t consider himself in custody. Aooiued, replied that be had received the‘money, but ' did not know what he bad dob©, with ifc The warrant charge shim with having, on or about Octobei 6, 1873, received a cheque for Ll6 ■' 10s, the property of his employers, and with* embezzling the same.—By Mr Stout: Ho was in the next room to that in which focused and Mr Pulton had b«*<a conferring, and was called iu to arrest accused. Francis 0. Fulton said that he laid the information in the present ease. Mr Hassell, who bad been in his office as Bead clerk, had gone to Western Australia. He had not power to sign cheques oa behalf of witness’s fi rH i —By Mr Stout: The warrant was in ihe hands of the police at the time he sent for Mr Grant and before he was arrested. The warrant was accompanied by a letter saying that if Mr Grant would give a satisfactory account of what he had done with the money the warrant should be returned to him.— In answer to Mr Stout, the SubInspecter said lie did not produce the letter, aud it being a departmental letter he considered it confidential. Were the Commissioner of Police applied to, the letter might be produced.—His Worship pointed out that the information required amending. Accused should have been charged under the 68ch section ol the Act with larceny as a servant. information was accordingly amended. Mr Stout, in addressing* *the Court, commented severely on the extraordinary character of the action of one of the prosecutors, characterising it as unparallelled.—At the conclusion of Mr ad* dress, the Bench retired, and on returning into Court, Mr Bathgate said they had come to the conclusion that the evidence was not sufficient to cause accused to be put bn his trial A number of persons in court applauded the decision, and one Francis Falkner was arrested for so doing and ordered to be detained till the rising of the Court. A second charge was proceeding when we went to press.