MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume III, Issue 281, 6 May 1875, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH, Thursday, 6th May. [Before G. L. Mellish, Esq, R.M., and R. Westenra, Esq., J.P.,] Lunacy from Drink. —Matthew McCready, who had been remanded for lunacy from drink, was now brought up recovered and discharged with a caution. William Johnston, on a similar charge, was discharged with a caution, Drunk and Disorderly. —Charles Smith was fined ss; George Dowling fined 10s. Assaulting a Wife. —John Pugh charged with assaulting his wife, but which case had been remanded for an amicable settlement, appeared, and the case was further adjourned for a week. A case of assault preferred|by Ellen Wilson against her husband George Wilson was called on, but as defendant did 1 not appear, a warrant was ordered for his apprehension. Horses and Cattle at Large.— The following cases were dealt with ; —Frederick Palmer, fined ss; Joseph Hadfield, ss; John Garland, ss; Frank Stan dish, ss; Alex Agnew, ss; George Osborne, ss; George Clarke, ss; John Merson, ss; David Gerdner, 10s; James Merritt, 10s; James Bowman, 10s; Francis Haskins, ss. Throwing Stones. Henry Woodsj Thomas Woods, John Belgrave, Fredk. Tubbs> and O. Wagner Tubbs, were charged with throwing stones in the public streets on the 18th instant, to the damage of passers by. Mr Thomas appeared for Belgrave. The two Tubbs were discharged by the Court, they being of such tender years. Mrs Broad, a witness, deposed that she had seen the two Woods throw stones in Madras street on 18th April, but not Belgrave. Did not see Belgrave throw stones on the 18th. Mr Broad corroborated the evidence of his wife, and said that Belgrave threw stones at some acorns on Sunday week, and broke a window, for which he offered to pay. The two Wood were insolent, and were a terror to the neighbourhood. His Worship said he was glad to find that Belgrave was not insolent. He would be discharged. The two Woods were also discharged, with a severe caution. Quarrelling in the Streets. —James Cane and George Whitton were fined 10s each for quarrelling in High street. Obstructing a Thoroughfare, —A case against James Boot for obstructing the public thoroughfare by tethering a horse which had been adjourned, was now called on, and the case dismissed. Mr Boot was then charged with using abusive language to a constable by calling him a liar. The case was dismissed. Mr Joynt appeared for the defendant in both cases. Unregistered Dog. —The following person was fined: —J ames Boyd, 20s. Insulting Language. — Alexander Beatty was charged with using insulting language, calculated to provoke a breach of the peace. The defendant was a cabman, and seeing the complainant and her daughter-in-law, had called to them, wanting to drive them home, and offering them half a crown to be allowed to go home with them. Defendant called a policeman, who stated that he saw Mrs Millett take up a stone. Mrs Millet said that the cabman had insulted her. His Worship said that he quite believed complainant’s statement, and he should fine defendant 10s. Slaughtering Licenses. —The following applications for slaughtering licenses were granted:—William Bashford, R. A, Colee, Garforth and Lee, James Gregg, and Joseph Haydon. Embezzlement. —Frederick Pavitt was charged on the information of the Rev Canon Willock with having on divers times and manners embezzled certain sums of money amounting in all to £797 18s 6d, the property of his employers, the Church Property Trustees. Mr Hanmer appeared for the prosecution, and Mr Joynt for the defence. Rev Canon Willock deposed—l am treasurer of of the Church Property Trustees. They are a corporation, and I produce the Ordinance constituting them such a body. The Ordinance is dated 9th March, 1894, also an amended Ordinance dated 19th July, 1867. I also produce the Provincial Corporations Act, 1867. The Church Property Trustees engaged Mr F. Pavitt as steward. His duties were to receive moneys and to render an account to me as treasurer. Mr Pavitt was appointed at a meeting of the managing committee on sth Feb, 1866, as it appears by the minute book produced. On February Bth, 1866, it was agreed “thatprisoner should receive all rents, arrears, and dues whatsoever belonging to the Church Trust Estates, and all applications respecting the same must lie addressed to him at the College Library, Christchurch.” Prisoner enteredonhis duties and served from the date of his appointment up to within a few days. From the date of his appointment up to September, 1874, he received a salary after the rate of £250 a year. It was then increased, but I cannot say positively what is the exact sum. I have access to prisoner’s books. I had inspected other accounts, for which I, as well as Mr Pavitt, am responsible connected with the college. It was about a fortnight ago; I then tound the balance against the College to be, according to the bank pass book, £1550, whereas according to the daily balance, it was only £460. I produce the bank pass book of the church property trustees, also tke cash book in which the receipts are in the prisoner's handwriting. There is a discrepancy between the receipts and payments. Prisoners books on Ist February, 1875, give a credit balance of £2038 12s Bd. He further charges himself with a series of sums amount-

ing with the balance above included up to 27th April, £4692 11s 3d—the sum received exclusive of the balance is £2653 19s 7d. The prisoner credits himself with having paid into the bank as against the £4692 11s 3d, sums amountingto £1856 Os Id. No other payments appear in the books. The deficit shown on the books is £797 18s 6d. I have spoken about this deficiency amongst others to the prisoner. Ido not think I mentioned the actual amount of this deficiency, but yesterday in answer to a question from prisoner I told him the total amount of his deficiencies. Prisoner made no comment, but he expressed great sorrow that the church funds should suffer through his sin. I asked him what he had done with the money, and he said it had all gone in flax; he stated that he wished the Church Property Trustees to have everything he possessed, and he yesterday brought me a paper giving a valuation of his furniture, and sundry small amounts due to him from different persons. I read from the accountant’s statement the lump sum of the deficiencies. Prisoner had received his salary up to the end of last quarter from all sources. Mr Joynt said he would not ask Mr Willock any questions, but he should like to have access to the books. Witness—You can have access at any time at the College Library. Mr Joynt —Thank you, that will do. Witness, in reply to the Bench—The minutes of the meeting relative to prisoner’s appointment were confirmed at a meeting held on 23rd February, 1866, Edwin Fowler, examined by Mr Hanmer—l am an accountant; I have been employed by the church property trustees to look through certain accounts; I have examined the accounts kept by Mr Pavitt, viz., the cash book, the bank book, and the block cheque book belonging to the church property trust estate. The person who kept them charged himself with £4692 11s 3d, including a balance. On April 28th, 1875, the credit balance should have been £578 16s 2d. On referring to the bank book I find a debit balance of £2lO 2s sd. There are also some outstanding cheques amounting to £8 19s lOd. Had they been paid the debit balance would have been £219 2s 3d The actual deficiency on that account is £797 18s fid. Mr Hanmer said that closed the present case. There had been two further informations sworn that morning, and he must ask therefore for a remand until May 13th. Mr Joynt said he hoped the question of bail would be favorably considered, as Mr Pavitt was in delicate health. Mr Pavitt, had he felt disposed, had had ample opportunity to withdraw himself instead of staying to meet this investigation. The Bench remanded the prisoner until the 13th, and stated that bail would be accepted for his appearance, himself in £6OO, and two sureties in £3CO each.