RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 89, 23 October 1869, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Sattjbdat, Octobeb 16th. (Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M., Horace Bastings, Esq., J.P., and Alex. Stewart, Esq., J.P.) Kum Ah Shim was brought up on remand, charged with having appropriated the sum of £5, being a cheque, the property of A. Robertson, found by a Chinaman near the Camp. Mr Mouat stated that he appeared for the principal witnesses, and they were of opinion, after duly considering the matter that there was do intent to defraud, and that the accused was always willing to resto? c the property. The Bench ruled that it was too late to make such a statement as it was in the hands of the police, but the Bench would, at a future stage, take iuto consideration extenuating circumstances. Constable Smith prosecuted, and E. ff. Ward appeared for the accused. A. Robertson, being sworn, deposed : I am in the employ of Herbert & Co. On Tuesday last I received a cheque from Mr M'Kinlayin my favour in payment of wages. The cheque was for myseif. The cheque produced is the one I got from M'Kinlay. The cheque is signed by M'Kinlay. I did not see him do it, but I saw him go into the office to do it. When I got the cheque I put it in my pocket. I missed it before three o'clock on Wednesday. I was on Tuapeka Flat in the forenoon of Wednesday. When 1 missed it I wetic to the store and. got the number from Mr Armstrong (it was at the bank door I missed it.) I got the number and went to the bank, and told Mr Jamison that I lost the cheque out of my pocket. I requested him to stop payment. I saw the cheque next on Friday morning in possession of Constable Black. I never authorised the prisoner nor any one else to cash or make use of the cheque. By Mr Ward — I will swear that is the cheque. I did not know the number when I got it. I have no particular mark on cheque. By Bench — I recognise the cheque by the number, amount, and signature. Mr Jamison, being sworn, deposed — I am a bank agent at Lawrence. I remember Wednesday last. The last witness came to tho bank, which was closed. He j handed me a memorandum of cheque that he wished to get payment of. The cheque now in my hands corresponds with the number he gave me. On the following day I saw prisoner at the bank along with another Chinaman. He pro- j duced a cheque for payment. The one now produced is the one, and he said " is that good," or " all right." I said " Yes," and cashed it. I gave him £5. At the close of the business for the day my assistant called my attention to the fact that the cheque was the one payment of which was stopped. I went down the street to find the prisoner, but could not see him. About twenty minutes afterwards I gave notice to the police. I saw the prisoner afterwards in custody. I «aye the cheque to police at the lock-up. I held the cheque out to the prisoner asking him where he got it. He answered " Chinaman gave it to him to get it changed." By Mr. Ward— l knew the prisoner. 1 1 don't know his position amongst the Chinese. He is well known here. By Bench — All the prisoner said in the bank was if the cheque was all right. It was at the close of the business that the cheque was presented. Constable Black, being sworn, deposed — From information I received I went to the Chinese Camp on Thursday last. Previously I saw Mr J amison, who asked me if I had seen two Chinamen. I said I had not. He told me a cheque was stopped but had been cashed by an oversight. 1 found the accused in bed. I asked him if he was at the bank on that day, and he answered " Yes." I asked him if he had got a cheque cashed, he said "Yes." I asked him. where begot the cheque, he said " I picked it up on the road between the Camp and Lawrence yesterday." I then arrested him and brought him to the Police Camp. On the way he poiuted out the place where he picked up the cheque, and said that there was another Chinaman with him when he picked it up. After I lodged him in gaol 1 went to Mr. Jamison to identify the prisoner as the one who presented the cheque. Mr. Jamison identified the man. Mr Jamison, in my presence, asked him. -where he got the cheque. Prisoner replied that he got it from another Chinaman. I searched the prisoner, and found on his person £5 and 2s. Mr. Ward here addressed the Bench, shewing that there was no felonious intent, and quoted largely from leading cases. Qua Vie, being sworn, deposed — I live about a mile or two from here. On Wednesday last I was near the Chinese Camp. I found a document and could not tell what it was. I gave it to a Europeaii to peruse. I would recognise the document again. The one now in my hands is the one. Aboiit eight o'clock that night I showsd it to Kum Ah Shim, who read it, and told me it was a bank cheque, value £5. I asked him if he could obtain the money, and he answered he could. I asked him then if he had any time. He said on Thursday he would have time. I then proposed that we should go to Lawrence on Thursday at two o'clock, which we did. I had the cheque in my possession all the time. I asked the accused to get the money. I was to receive the money. I asked the accused for the money, he gave no answer. Afterwards the witness said that he got the £5. By Constable Smith — I told accused that I found it on the road. My mate saw me pick it up. The accused was not present. The place was half a mile from the Chinese Camp. By Bench — 1 found the cheque at William's. I got the money from accused about one o'clock on Thursday. (On being pressed about the time he, said he was only guessing at the time.) On Tie, being sworn, deposed — I know the accused. I saAV accused and another man on the road. I was walking after them. I saw Qua Vie give some paper to accused. I did not know what was said. Afterwards I saw accused go into the bank. I went with him. He gave a paper U> tlie banker. Accused got some

money. I then returned to the Chinese Camp. By Bench — I do not know what the paper was. The banker gave him some notes. All I saw was the document handed over to the banker. I could not identify it as I never had it in my hands. He said that a person of the name of Qna Vie had given him a document to change. I don't know Qua Vie. I know him by sight. It was about 3 o'clock when we went to the bank. This concluded the evidence. The Bench retired, and after twenty minutes consultation gave verdict Accused was discharged. The Bench remarked that they put no faith in the evidence of the first witness for defence, and as the accused could not speak English well, there was a doubfc on their mind that this accused did not understand the question put to him by the constable, and they would give the prisoner the benefit of the doubt ; and they instructed the Interpreter to inform the Chinese that any article found by them was not to be considered their property, and that they did wrong in converting it to their own use. Monday 18th Octobeb. (Before the same Magistrates.) ADJOURNED CA.9E. Police v. John Airey. — For keeping an unregistered dog. Fined 40s and *co3ts of Court. Police v. Patrick Docherty. — Docherty was charged with having violently assaulted a Chinaman at Waitahuna, by kicking him in the abdomen. Medical certificate was produced showing that tho Chinaman was unable to attend. Case remanded tc Waitahuna.