THE CASE OF W. W. CHARTERS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2377, 15 November 1881, Page 3

THE CASE OF W. W. CHARTERS.

Wm. Wombwell Charters, on remand from November sth and 12fch was, yesterday, placed in the dook oharged with having embezzled six sums of money, amounting in all to £920. the property of the Christohurch, Sydenham, and Suburban Building Society (Permanent). Three of the sums—viz., £200,£60 and £l4O, were stated in the plaint to have been appropriated between November 23 nd and 27th, 1880. The dates of the other defalcations were December 6th, £250; January 10th, 1881, £150; and Janmry 10th, 1881, for £l2O. Accused had absoonded to England, had been arrested there, and brought here on extradition warrant.

Mr Joynt appeared for the prosecution. Mr Joyce stated that he watched the proceedings for the accused. The following evidence was given after our ■ going to press yesterday : Thomas Hamilton, builder, cross-examined by Mr Joyce—ln Jan., 1881, witness cleared off the mortgage by payment of the amount due to the society. The payment was made to McConnel and Douglaß, who executed a reconveyance of the property to witness, whioh deed is now held by Messrs Harper and Scott. Be-examined —He had no transaction with the society other than the £250 loan. W. T. Twinning, teller of the Bank of NewZealand, Btated that the three cheques had been paid in and placed to the credit of Draper, Charters and Co., and the society debited with their amounts. E. 8. Harley deposed, as before, that he had made an examination of the accounts of the society. He produoed blocks of the three cheques, all filled in by the accused—3BT, dated November 22ad, 1880, for £2OO, was drawn in favor of " Advance" and an abbreviated name, " H—1 —t—n," which witness took to mean Hamilton ; 388 of November 24th, for £6O, and 369, of November 27th, for £l4O, were similarly marked. There had been no account opened in the books in the name of Hamilton while accused was manager. Witness had himself entered the transactions shown by the cheque blocks as s debit, but there was nothing in the possession of the society to set against it. The total amount of defalcations by the aocused was £2600 ; that was to say, that amount had been drawn from the funds of the society while he was manager, und was not accounted for in the books or represented by securities in its keeping. In cross-examination witness said the transactions with Hamilton could not alter tb.B balance of the defalcations, ej there was no traoe of repayment made by him or on his account. After hearing the above evidence read over, the prisoner said with respect to the first three charges he pleaded guilty to taking the money, though he had had no pa?t of it personally. When brought before ths higher Court, he would make a full confession, disclosing the namea of those who in his opinion—and he hoped when all waß known, that of the public B leo—were more blaaablo than himself, having received the benefit from the fraud. As far as the other three charges were concerned, he denied them in tote* Hamilton had had his loan, and there was one of £4OO to Restell as well. If he were at liberty be could produce tho receipts. The prisoner was then committed to take his trial at the next sessions of the Supreme Court to be held at Ohrist=hurch. Bail waft not mentioned. . On a charge of forgery and uttering a bid of exohange for £147 1S», the prisoner was remanded till Monday, November 21« t, at two o'clock p.m.