MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2140, 30 January 1880, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMAEU—THIS DAY. [Before E. Bectham Esq., E.M., and His Worship the Mayor.] OHUA'KKN’NKSS. Thomas Mc.Dougall charged on remand, with this oJfcncc was lined 10s. noimuGJi council A r . T. B. Joxns. This case Avas heard at the last sitting of the Court, and judgment reserved. His Worship now gave judgment for plaintiff, Avithout costs. Mr Jameson, for defendant, asked that a line for infringement of the Building Eegulations bo initiated, in order that he might appeal to the District Court. His Worship, Avith this object, lined the defendant £5 Is, a fine over £5 being necessary. AI.I.KOKI) FJiAU I>U I.KXT KKMOVAL 01'' non i is. Francis Arthur Sims, Avine merchant, Avas charged on the information of Jas. Stephens, bank manager, Avith feloniously stealing, taking, and carring aAvay one quarter cask of brandy, one quarter cask of Avhisky, tAventy half-chests of tea, and one case containing GOOD cigars, the goods and chattels of the National Bank, Timaru.

Mr Hamerslcy appeared on behalf of the accused, and Mr White appeared to prosecute on behalf of the National Bank.

Mr White opened the proceedings Avith a statement of the facts of the case, the particulars of Avhich Avere fully elicited in the following evidence : James Stephens, manager of the National Bank at Timaru : Kucav the accused. Saw him at the Bank about the Ist or 2nd of May last. Defendant came in and said ho had some liabilities to meet, and asked Avitness if he Avould give him some accommodation. He offered Avitness certain securities, auz., a bond av arrant and an agreement for a second mortgage oA r er his property in the Wai-iti road. He also gave Avitness an order on Neill Bros., of Dunedin, for =£ooo. This order Avas to be sent to Dunedin to be collected and the proceeds to be placed at his credit. He said the order Avas almost certain to be paid because Neill had promissed him assistance ,AvhoncA r cr . ho required it. The order Avas scut on to Dunedin but/ Avas not paid. Before the order Avas dishonored accused gaA r e Avitness the bond Avarrant produced and marked “ A.” A day or two after this accused brought Avitness an order on Wilson, of Dunedin, he bclhwed for £2OO, for collection on his credit. This order Avas also dishonored. Mr Sims being unable to pay his OA r erdraft as he as he had anticipated decided to go himself to Dunedin and make arrangements for assistance, if possible. They had some conversation about the bond Avarrant, and accused said in order that that document might never be questioned, it being a Avrittcn document and not recognised by the Customs, he Avould give Avitness a receipted invoice for the goods, shoAving the sale of the goods absolutely. Witness made inquiry of Mr Sims and elsewhere as to the validity of this document. Mr Sims said he belicA'ed it Avas valid, and that it would make the transaction perfectly safe ; and added that as lie had let the bank into this overdraft Avhieh he expected to pay in a day or lavo, he wished to arrange that the bank should actually have the security he had made over to them. On the IGth June accused hied his declaration of insolvency, and Avitness proved in the estate, describing fully the securities he held. The proof InaTncvor been objected to or questioned in any Avay. AVas aA\ are that the accused had made a composition with his creditors of 5s in the £, and in August, after accused ro-commcnced business, Avitness suav accused. He came to sec Avitness Avitii reference to his future business, and asked witness to let him have sufficient accommodation to enable him to pay the 5s dividend. After the matter had been arranged Avitness told accused that he hud been instructed to

remove the goods from the bond and sell them. He said it would assist him in his business if witness would allow him to purchase them back at the value witness had placed upon them in his proof of debt, which was 20 per cent, lower than his own valuation. After consulting with his chiefs, witness agreed to allow accused to take over his goods in bond as he requested, he paying for them at the rate suggested, and purchasing the same for cash at the value named in the proof. When the goods were all purchased he was to pay the hank 10 per cent, additional on account of the accommodation. He was to purchase the goods from time to time as he could pay for them. Sims considered that he would he able to take back all the goods in the course of a few months. On or about the I2th August witness gave the accused an order (copy produced) to enable him to clear certain goods from the Customs. They were a portion of the goods mentioned in the bond warrant and invoice, and were paid for by the accused. Witness also produced two documents in the handwriting of the accused, showing purchase by accused of other goods on October 4, and 31. The goods mentioned in these documents were also paid for by accused. On or about Jan. 23, witness saw accused in his office. Witness told him that he had ascertained that certain goods belonging to the bank had been cleared by him. He admitted that he had done so. Ho said that the hogshead of rum had not been cleared, and that the line of brandy had been cleared and not the whisky that witness had mentioned. He said four lines in all had been cloai’ed without witness’s knowledge or consent. His reason, he said, for clearing these goods was that he considered the bank had broken faith with him, in offering his house for sale under a second mortgage. He said he had only cleared so much as would be due to him at bond rate. The bank had no other goods in bond, besides those mentioned in the bond warrant or invoice. Witness replied that accused had no right to touch the goods, even if bondage was due to him, and added that he never applied to bank for bond rate. Witness said to accused, “We have hitherto always got on very well in our business affairs, as between man and man ; and our word to each other has always been sufficient.” He said, “ That is correct ; all my dealings with you have been satisfactory, up to the time of your offering your house for sale.” Witness replied that that was no breach of faith, and asked him to explain how it was a bi’each of faith. He replied ho considered it so. Witness said that he was sorry that lie should have acted in such a manner. The goods marked on documents A and B were delivered for the bank to the X.M. A A. Co. Their value would be about TtT>. The goods charged as being taken away were in the bonded store at this time. Accused never rendered witness any account of bond rent. The goods removed from bond wore removed without witness’s knowledge, and lie only became, aware of it during the present month. He went to the accused who admitted the removal on Jan. 23. By Mr Hamersley : Witness told accused that he would pay whatever rent was due if the whole of the goods were removed at once, provided that accused paid for the things removed. Accused refused ; lie said lie was going to file, and that witness must settle the matter witli the trustee. Accused told witness that lie had advice that the goods were not the hank’s. He said that Mr White laid asked him to give him the goods. Witness said if the question of ownership were brought up, the goods wore either tiie property of the bank or of Mr White, witness being under the impression that accused bad given Mr White security over all he possessed about the time bellied in June. Witness dated his ownership of the goods in May. Never gave the accused credit to the amount of T4ITJ. Still regarded the transaction represented in the document marked “ A ” as a security for debt.

By Mr White : All the other goods Avitness gave accused orders to clear from the customs, Avitii the exception of the goods missing. By Mr Hamerslcy; Accused might have sold the goods before he got the order from Avitness. Witness suggested that if accused Avould gWe him deliA'cry of all the goods and pay him for those lie had abstracted he Avould pay any proper bond rent that might be due to accused.

Air Stephens here asked loaA'C to amend a portion of his evidence, and have the words inserted, “ Accused may have removed some of the goods from bond before he got any order.” AndroAV Hart, Janding-Avaiter H.M. Customs, said : The paper produced Avas a list of goods cleared in Noaa and Dee. last by Mr Sims. Witness had seen this morning a quarter-cask of Avhiskey marked “ C ” over “ GBS, No. 9,” and identified the cask as one marked “ K 281, No. 2,” Timaru bond mark. Detective Kirby and Mr Pender Avore present. Bond Avarrants Avere not used in Timaru. It Avas a matter betAveen the bonded Avarehousc-kcepers and the oAvners of the goods. The quarter-cask Avitness saw this morning Avas cleared front thebond on Dee. 8 by the accused. Witness only kncAV this from reference to the Customs llegister. James H. Sutter, merchant, residing in Timaru, was elected one of the Trustees in accused’s estate. The National Bank proved in the estate.’ The proof stated that certain goods in the bonded store and free store Avere AA'orth £4OO. Witness attended and examined the stock in both stores. Accused Avas there and pointed out certain goods belonging to several parties and to the National Bank. He pointed out the latter, so that they would not be included in his estate.

By Mr Hamerslcy : Witness did not do anything in the estate, as it was assigned back to Mr Sims, therefore never Avcnt into the question as to the ownership of the goods in bond. By Mr White : The offer of 6s in the £. had not at the time been accepted, and Avitness Avas merely reporting for the meeting of creditors next day of the advisability of accepting this composition. EdAA-in FoAvler, accountant Timaru; had lately gone through the books of the accused. Keferring to accused’s bond book of Oct. 7 1878 witness found an entry of 10 quarter casks of brandy marked K 200, and numbered 1 to 10. A further entry shows that Nos. 1-7 had been cleared last number on Dec. 19 1879. IVenty half-chests of tea appeared to have been bonded on Dec. 4, 1877. The goods mentioned corresponded Avith those entered in the Bond Book. The tea appeared to luwe been cleared on NoA r . 15, 1879. All the entries Avere in the haudAvriting of

accused. There was also an entry showing that a case of 6000 cigars had been bonded on Dec. 9, 1878, 'and there was an entry showing that they were cleared on Nov. 24, 1879. Two quarter casks whiskey had been bonded on Doc. 13, 1878. One quarter cask brandy had also been bonded. Referring to another book kept by accused showing the disposal of Ids goods, witness found the names of 20 purchasers of half-chests of ton. On the Nov. 19, 1879, witness found spirits entered to J. Ackerman, on Dec. 8 following 3 boxes of cigars were entered to Ackerman. On Nov. 29, 1879, a quarter cask of whisky, was entered to J. Macbeth. There were queries after each item as—“ Query: If buy 20 half-chests of tea from Bank alreadv out.”

O. Picrceson, storekeeper, proved that the tea was cleared and sold to various parties.

John Ackerman, hotelkeeper, at Pleasant Point, proved the purchase of a quarter cask of brandy from the accused, and some cigars in boxes produed, from Mr Hutchison. Joseph Stanley, constable at Pleasant Point, stated that he received the brandy cask and cigar boxes from last witness. Detective Kirby proved having obtained a quarter-cask of whisky last evening from Mr Mcßeth’s hotelkeeper, Washdyko. It was branded G 685 9K. Council having addressed the Bench, His Worship reserved his decision until to-morrow morning. The Court then adjourned. WAIM ATE—Y ESTER DAY. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. An inebriate was discharged. CATTLE Tit ESPASS. John Henry, Alphcus Hayes, Fred. Hughes, James Boyce, James Buttler, and .Martin Thync were each lined 5s and 7s costs. civil, CASES. W. B. Hawkins v. J. Scott—Claim £25, for the wrongful detention of a horse belonging to the estate of Stewart Doig ; judgment for plaintiff with costs. Judgment for plaintiffs was given in the following cases:—Chisnall v. Philip, £5 5s Ud ; Thoid A r . Ennis, £3l 13s 6d ; Simon v. Scott, £7 13s ; Wills (Executrix of R. Wills) v. Wrigg, £2.