MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 421, 18 October 1875, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Monday, October 18. (Before G. L. Hellish, Esq., R.M.)

Drunk and Disorderly.— Thomas Cook was fined 20s. Drunk and Assaulting- the Police.— William Perry, charged with being drunk in Colombo street the previous day, and assaulting constable Meade, who arrested him, was fined 20s,

Forgery and Uttering.— Joseph Cullen, who had been arrested in Otago, was brought up charged with forging the name o£ Richard Vincent to a cheque for £5, drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, and with uttering the same at the Wellington Hotel. Frederick Fuchs, called, stated he was the son of Mrs Elizabeth Fuchs, who keeps the Wellington Hotel. About the 7th October accused was at the hotel, and owed about 3s fid to his (witness’) mother. Accused tendered the cheque produced in payment. He (witness) cashed the cheque, and gave accused the balance. Accused put his name on the back of the cheque before giving it to him. The name he endorsed was “John Collins.” Wilhelm Fuchs, brother of last witness, stated that he got the cheque pro* duced from his mother and took it to tha Bank of New Zealand. It was returned to him “no account.” Richard Vincent, employed in the Telegraph department, stated that the signature to the cheque produced was not his. Knew the accused. Had never authorised him to sign cheques for him. Did not know any other Richard Vincent in the province but himself. Accused knew he had money, but did not know where he banked it. By Prisoner— The writing on the cheque was not like the ordinary handwriting of accused. By the Bench—The accusedhad received anumber of letters from him and knew his handwriting. The signature to the cheque was an imitation of his writing. James Macfarlane, ledgerkeeper at the Bank of New Zealand, stated that the cheque produced had been presented at the bank and returned “No account.” There was no account at the Bank of that name. Detective Bettington had presented the cheque produced all the Banks in Christchurch. The reply “Noaccount” had been received in each instance. After the evidence had been read! over to the accused he reserved his and was committed to take his trial at the next criminal session of the Supreme Court, A second charge of forging the same name to a cheque for £3, also drawn on the Bank of New Zealand, and with uttering the same on Jesse Hall, landlord of the Eastern Hotel, was then preferred against the accused. Tho evidence was similar to the first case. Accused had gone into the Eastern Hotel on the 7th inst, had some beer, and tendered the cheque produced in payment, at tho same time saying that it was signed.by Mr. Vincent in the telegraph office. When presented at the Bank the cheque was returned “No account,” nor was there an account of that name at any of the Banks in Christchurch. The evidence of Mr J. Baylee, landlord of the Criterion Hotel, went to show that on the 6th instant accused asked him for a blank cheque on the Bank of New Zealand. In reply to a question, he (accused) said his name was' Cullen. M Baylee gave him a blank cheque, first puttin his (accused’s) name on the block, the number of which corresponded with tho number on the cheque produced, signed by Richard Vincent. Mr Vincent called, said the name to the cheque was not his. Accused was also fully committed on this charge.