RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1146, 1 March 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Geraldine—Thursday, Feb. 28, 1884. [Before H. C. Brddely, Esq., R.M., Dr Fish, Rev, G. Barclay and Captain Temple, J. P.’s.] ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT. Joseph Mackay, of Mafaura, who had been in the employ of Mr D. M. Luckie, Chief Commissioner of the Government Insurance Department, Wellington, was charged, on remand from Dunedin, with having, in his capacity as servant of the said Commissioner, received certain moneys, to wit, on 14th January last, £6 9s fid from Mrs Wadlow, of Woodbury ; on the same date, £1 fis fid and £1 16s 4d from John FifHd, at Woodbury ; on 16th January, £1 Is fid from P. Geergeson, at Geraldme ; on 17th January, £2 2s 4d from George Wood, at Woodbury ; and on 18th January, £1 12s from Geoige Bethune, at Geraldine, and the said money then feloniously and fraudulently did embezzle. Mr White, Crown Solicitor, appeared for the prosecution, and Mr C. Perry, instructed by Dr Foster, for the accused. Mr White asked, in order to save the time of the Court, that the charges be taken in two sets of three each, and as the first, second and third charges were of the same import, that they be taken together. The request having been granted by the Bench, Mr C. Perry asked for a remand on all the charges, on the ground that the defence was not ready, and if they were gone on with at once it would prove pre judicial to the accused. Mr Stout was the accused’s solicitor, and would have been there to defend him that day only that he was engaged in a large case at Dunedin, so that it was impossible for him to be in Geraldine to defend his client. Dr Foster knew nothing of the facts of the case till yesterday, and he (Mr Parry) only a short time previous. He found that the case greatly depended on certain telegrams that had passed between the accused and the prosecution. The}' had not got copies of these telegrams or the originals, for them, to be produced in Court, and thus far they were unable to go into the defence. His learned friend who appeared on behalf of the prosecution might say that there had been ample time in regard to one

case, that of £1 is 6d, which had appeared before another Conn on the 20th January. He understood that so far as that casa was concerned, the accused was arrested on the 19th of that month at Geraldine, taken to the lock-up there, and sent to Timaru the following day; that he had been brought up before Mr Beswick, the Resident Magistrate there, and remanded to Dunedin. Two or three hours after ha was again arrested, taken before Captain Sutter, J.P., and remanded to Geraldine. He obtained bail to appear at Geraldine, and was then present. After that he (the accused) went to Dunedin, and whilst there he was again arrested on last Tuesday and remanded to Geraldine. Thereioie, so far as that case went, there was no time to get up the defence. Ha (Mr Perry) understood that there were six informations out against the accused, and the accused had had no intimation of that fact ; he only- knew that there was one charge against him, and did not know of a second till Tuesday last. Accused had to travel from Dunedin to Geraldine. In regard to the other case the accused was advised by Mr Stout that he had no need to appear at Geraldine, as such remand was illegal in the face of bis having been remanded to Dunedin where he should have been brought np and then remanded to Geraldine. Acting under advice from Mr Stout, accused had sent a letter to Inspector Weldon, to the effect that as the remand was illegal he should not appear at Geraldine but was prepared at any time to appear in Dunedin to answer the charges that were brought against him. (Letter read.) Accused, therefore, under these circumstances did not think it necessary to instruct anyone in Geraldine for his defence. The power of the Magistrate to remand him to Geraldine was ultra vires Those were the facts, and under the circumstances as narrated by him Le asked for a remand. He (Mr Perry) was quite aware that there were several witnesses present on behalf of the prosecution, and that it would cause inconvenience to have the accused remanded, but that should not be considered when the liberty of a subject was at stake. It was through no neglect on the accused’s part that a remand was asked for, and he (Mr Perry) considered it would be an infringement of their grand old law if the cases were permitted to be heard then and there.

The Resident Magistrate : For how long would you wish for a remand 1 Mr Perry : For one week.

Mr Perry in continuing his request, remarked that not only was the accused placed at a verj' great disadvantage, but the other side had all the advantage, knowing the oases previously and having had one remand at their request. Mr White said that before stating his reasons why the remand should not be granted, he must he say could not but feel amused at the manner in which his learned friend had spoken with regard to the officials of the department. He was generally averse to oppose any applications for remands, but under the peculiar circumstances, and in Hie interests of the Government, he should press that the remand be not granted. If the accused’s counsel were uot ready to go into the three cases he (Mr White) was ready to go info the one relatinp to £1 Is 6d, for which ample time had elapsed for the defence thereto to be got ready. Mr Perry ; I said that Mr Stout was not ready, not that I was not ready,

Mr White continued that the business of the Government Insurance Department should not be allowed to stand still, neither should the Resident Agent be treated in such a manner until Mr Stout was able to come up to Geraldine. In regard to the other side not being prepared with their defence on account of their not being in possession of the original telegrams or their copies, he was fully prepared to meet them and admit secondary evidence as !u their contents. Thdt was only an offer to meet the other side. He would submit that they had a week to get up the defence, and because accused thought fit to go to Dunedin from Timaru in order to obtain the services of Mr Stout instead of remaining in Timaru and getting a local man to conduct his defence was no reason why the Donartment should stand still. It had been stated by Mr Perry that accused whilst in Dunedin was re-arrested. Why was this the case ? Why. because accused had the temerity to write to Inspector Weldon at Dunedin to the effect that he should not appear at Geraldine, and he was roarrested in order to force him to do so. Did accused tell Mr Stoat that he signed a bail bond, when he was before Captain Sutter, to appear in Geraldine? By so contenting and signing he had consented to do away with the previous remand by Mr Beswick and to forgo his right to go to Dunedin. Acting on that the Commissioner, Superintendent and Agent at Dunedin and seven or eight witnesses were all present in Court, Mr Stout had applied to Inspector Broham to consent to a remand for a week but it was replied that that could not be done. Mr Stout had not replied, and now they heard the accused’s counsel asking for a remand. In the on? case the accused was remanded on the 20th for the 28th. He went to Dunedin and misled Mr Stout, though perhaos not intentionally— Mr Perry; I object to such a remark by Mr White. Mr Stout had not been misled. It was only a surmise on the part of Mr White. Mr White : The accused must then have put this representation to Mr Stout —that he had been taken before the Magistrate at Timaru and entered into bail to appear at Dunedia, the bail bond being afterwards altered. Mi Perry again objected to Mr White’s remarks. There was nothing in the report cf the case as inserted in the Dunedin papers to warrant such an assertion. Mr White said ho put that as an impression. If the accused had not been present in Court to-day his bail would have been estreated. Mr Perry read the report from the Dunedin Evening Star. The Resident Magistrate remarked that all the Beach had to deal with was the recognisances before them. If the accused had not been present he should have had to notify it in the proper nay. Mr White then continued : It had been stated by Mr Perry that the accused had only been brought before the Court on one charge and only knew yesterday that there were five other other charges against against him. As a matter of fact, Inspector Broham stated in open Court on the 20th last., ia the presence of

accused, that there were five other charges. The telegrams from the Department and accused’s own to the Department were inextricably mixed up with others, and as there were five other charges be was arrested on the one charge instead of all . together. The informations and warrants on all the charges were issued in Wellington previous to his arrest. In regard to his re-arrest, the apparent haisn step was only taken to compel him to appear in Court to-day, as he had written to the effect that be would not do so. His re-arrest was therefore caused entirely by his own act. It all was very well to speak in regard to the liberty of the subject, etc., but he would submit that there were two sides to the affair. In the one case accused had had eight days to prepare lus defence, but he had frittered bis time away going to Dunedin, and he now asked the Colony to bear the expense of a remand after the heads of the department were all present. If the accused were not ready now, then he never would be. Mr Perry said that it was a very unusual thing when any one accuser 1 was brought before a Court and asked for a remand, to refuse it, unless under very exceptional circumstances. m Mr White still contended that the Accused was well able to go on with his defence on all the six charges. Mr Perry was surprised at the attitude taken by the Crown in this case. Had it been a private prosecution it might not be wondered at if malice were shown. It seemed strange that there was such a strong objection to a remand coming , from bis learned friend. Their Worships knew that when a counsel stated he was unable to proceed with his client’s case, unless strong reasons were adduced to the contrary, a remand was always granted. Why should the interests of a department be considered when the liberty of an accused person was at stake ? The accused was laboring under a great disadvantage, for, as he had himself shown, his counsel was unable to go into cross-examination of witnesses. Where there was a feeling abroad that persecution existed, he submitted it would be a graceful act on the part of the prosecution to give waj. His client had just informed him that a short remand would answer all the purpose, say till Saturday or Monday morning, when they would be prepared to go into the case. His learned friend had said nothing in reply to his (Mr Perry’s) remarks in regard to the illegality of the remand to Geraldine. He only said that the accused had subfnitted to it and agreed to come to Geraldine. If a man presented a pistol at you and demanded your money, in order to save your life you would naturally give it him. His client was in a similar position. He had been forced to sign a bail bond to appear at Geraldine in order to ensure his liberty. He was forced into it, either to go to gaol or go to Geraldine, The Resident Magiatrate to Mr White : Do you object to a remand till Saturday ? Mr White : It is not on the ground of inconvenience, but on the ground of expense that I object to the remand. Mr Perry : The point is, is not the bond a bit of waste paper ? The accused was forced to appear here. Mr White : There would be very little time for the accused’s counsel to get the required documents from a distance. His Worship : The £1 Is 6d case we should go on with, and the Bench does not feel inclined to grant a remand for the other cases longer than Saturday. Mr White : We agree to ajourn the case till to-morrow. His Worship : To-morrow is ray Court day at Ashburton. Mr White ; Then we will agree to have the case remanded till Saturday morning if the Court could sit early. His Worship : We will begin at ten sharp, for all the cases, on Saturday morning next. We do not feel inclined for n longer remand than that. The question as to bail then arose. Mr White informed the Bench that since the sis charges had been preferred against the accused there were three otheis that might be proceeded with. The amounts were not large, but they all were a series of defalcations, and he asked that the whole matter might not be treated as a trivial one. Mr Perry remarked that the remand would only be for a short time and urged that the bail should not be too heavy. The Bench granted bail for accused’s appearance in Court on Saturday next himself in £SO and one surety of £SO. The bail was immediately forthcoming, and the accused was then allowed to leave the Court. The cases will be taken on Saturday (to-day) at tena.in. The Court then rosg.