Mr BEAMISH’S CASE.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1004, 2 March 1883, Page 2

Mr BEAMISH’S CASE.

; George Beamish was charged at the R.jM; Court this morning, with embezzling "sums of ss-and 15s, dog tax, belonging to the Patea County Council. Mr Barton appeared for the prosecution. Mr Beamish applied: for remand, as the subpoena had only .been served at 2 o’clock on Wednesday. Ho wished to make provision for his defence. . His: Worship said the amount , was :within the jurisdiction of the Court. ; Mr Barton said that there were other charges pending, and he wished the case toffie sent to a higher court. ' Mr Barton said Mr McAlister was here, and his evidence might be taken to allow him to get away. = Robert McAlister, provincial district auditor : I was in Patea in Sept, 1882, for the purpose of auditing the accounts of the Patea County Council. I enquired* what revenue from dog tax had been collected for the County. I found that revenues had not, been accounted for, or paid into the bank. I saw defendant and asked him if he was collector of dog, taxes, and, if ;so, > 'what :he had done with the money collected. He replied that s he had been employed to collect the tax, and that he had collected part of it, but that one of the books containing the entries had been lost and that he was therefore unable to state exactly the amount he had received. He gave me a: book ; that produced is the one. I addressed a memo to Mr Beamish on September 24, 1882. The letter was as follows :

Adverting to rnj* verbal communication with you a few days ago relative to your illegal retention of public moneys collected under The Dog Tax Act and due to the County fund account, I have now the honour to request a statement of the sums collected, prior to the entries made in the book, handed to me for examination. I have also to request immediate payment of the sum of £SO sterling, shewn, by the book handed to me, to be due by you to the County Council fund account, together with such sums as may, have been paid to you either as i ates or dog tax. Be good enough, also, to explain why 5s only is entered in your cash book as received from Mr 0. Hawes, Waverley, when the Post Office money order by which the money was transmitted, shews that 10s ’ I received a reply written across the letter as follows ;—■ -.i.ini;

Memo. —After the County Council settles with me I will not have half the amount demanded by you to pay. Re the missing numbers 1 hope to be able to give a satisfactory, account of them by referring to the settlers who registered. Re .Mr Hawes’ 5 shillings, must be an error on my part.— George BEAMrsrt. ; ; Subsequently I wrote the following letter dated September 26. 1882. . “ Referring to the outside statement which you made to, mo a few days ago, that dog tax to the amount of from £2O to

£3O had been banded ov.or by you fo Mr, Black, I lie Clerk' and Treasurer of the Patca County Council, I have-the honour, to inform you that Mrßlack denies having received any monies from you in re Dog Tax. Be good enough to further explain this matter.” . Tim reply, was written across the letter as fol'owa : > ~ - “ I have paid Mr Black several small amounts, and settlers have paid him monies for rne, which I told him to credit me with.— Geo. Beamish. On ..the occasion of- the previous conversation Mr Beamish showed me a book amJ said that he Had paid between £2O and- £3O of the amount shown to Mr Black. Mr Hamerton said defendant had asked him t0... watch the case for him. He did not intend to cross-examine the witness. The remand was granted for a week. Bail, defendant in £IOO and two sureties of £SO each.