RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 437, 16 December 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Gisborne, Thursday, Uecembeu 14, 1876. (Before W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M., and J.B. Poynter, Esq., J.P.) Horsestealing. W. W. Parsons was brought up on remand to receive sentence. Mr Rogan for the prisoner, said that there were some circumstances connected with this case that induced him to withdraw the plea of not guilty. He thought it would be better to deal summarily with the charge, as a heavy sentence would probably be the ruin of the prisoner, and he had already been in custody for about 6 weeks. The Magistrate gave sentence for six mouths’ imprisonment with hard labor. Forgery. Louis Pierre Dugleaux appeared on bail to answer the charge of forging and uttering a promissory note of the value of £Bl purporting to be drawn by Josiah Tutchen. Aft Rogan prosecuted. '* Messrs Wilson and Whitaker appeared for the defence.

The information having been read: — Mr Rogan opened his case at some length and called Josiah Tutchen sworn, stated:— I reside in Gisborne. On the 4th of this month while in the Bank of New Zealand, the manager (Mr Turner) said “ there is a bill 6f yours due to-day.” He showed me the document now produced, and I told him the signature was a good imitation, but it was not mine—it was a forgery. The “JosliHi” was like my signature but the “ Tutchen ” was unlike mine. Ido not know the lhandwriting in ■ the body of the bill. The signature on the Bill is decidedly not mine. I never authorised any person to put my name to the Bill. I have never given a promissory note to Dugleaux. I was absent from Gisborne on the Ist of August, the date of the Bill. I do not remember having signed a promissory note iu my life—neither have I ever authorised any person o sign any Bill on my account. I saw Dugleaux shortly after the conversation with Mr Turner, and he told me that he got the Bill from a married man in Gisborne with a large family, and did not wish to disclose his name. He seemed confused in manner, and did not reply for some time. When I met Dugleaux subsequently, he said if I would take the Bill up aud not expose the thing he would give me the money. I said I would see him by and bye. He came to my house at 1 o’clock the same day, and told me the bankers said I could take the Bill up, but he could not. I invited him to dinner, but he declined, saying “ I have made a great fool of myself.” After dinner, he said “I will give you the money, and when you take the Bill up I will tell you from whom I got it.” After this I heard him say he took the Bill from a man named Charpontier. He said he had got £l5 for cashing it. Cross-examined by Mr Wilson—l swear the signature to the Bill is not mine.

R. Turner sworn deposed: — I am manager of the Bank of new Zealand in Gisborne. I know Dugleaux, he keeps an account at my branch. I know Tutchen, he also keeps an account there. 1. remember the Bill produced being fought to inc from the Union Bank on the signature on i>

is a good imitation of Tutchen’s signature except the “ J.” The Bill was passed in the usual way of business. The writing in the body of the bill is like Dugleaux’s carefully written ; I believe the signature oh the back of the bill is Dugleaux’s. (Tne witnessed evidence was mainly in corroboration of Tutchen’s). Subsequently Dugleaux asked me to take payment for the bill, but I declined. He said I will tell you who gave me the Bill if you will take the money for it. I again declined, as I believed the document was a forgery. Dugleaux’s account at this time was a little overdrawn. I did not tell Dugleaux that Tutchen could take the Bill up, but that he (Dugleaux) could not.

O. D. Von Dadeizen sworn stated :— I am manager of the Union Bank of Australian! Gisborne. I know Dugleaux, his firm had an account at the bank. The Bill was endorsed by Mr Dugleaux and Air R. Thelwall, and discounted at our Bank and the proceeds were placed to the credit of Air Robert Tuelwall’s private account, not to the partnership account, on or about the 21th August. Ou the 4th of December the Bill became due and was sent with the usual exchanges to the Bank of New Zealand. In the afternoon of that day Dugleaux brought the money, to the Bank and told me iu answer to my question that he obtained the Bill from a man of the name of Charpontier who had left Gisborne. The 13.11 had been returned by the Bank of New Zealand, and I took the money from Dugleaux. I was under the impression that Mr Dugleaux took the Bill up for the purpose of handing it to Serge. Mills to make enquiry about Air Charpontier. I am fairly acquainted with Mr Tutchen’s signature. I think the signature of Josiah Tutchen to the Bill is a good one I should have had no hesitation in accepting it. The writing iu the body of the Bill is very like Dugleaux’s ; to the best of my belief it is his writing. I have seen two other bills for £75 each purporting to have been signed by Tutchen in favor of Dugleaux. They were discounted by me and placed to account of Messrs Graham and Co. The one due on the 4th of November was paid for by Air Dugleaux in cash 3 days before its due date. The other which would have been due ou the 4th of January next was similarly paid by Mr Dugleaux ou the first of this month. Sometimes Bills are retired before maturity, but it is not often done in Gisborne. At this stage Air Rogan applied for a remand, and the case stands adjourned until Monday next, at 11 o’clock.