SUPREME COURT

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10588, 20 March 1912, Page 5

SUPREME COURT

MASTERTON--TUESDAY.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Edwards.) THE GRAND JURY. The following Grand Jury was empanelled:—Messrs D. J. Cameron (foreman), James Colway, W. S. Jago, G. H. Perry, R. W. Roydhouse, F. C. Lewis, A. A. Cameron, W. H. Booth, J. H. Pauling, A. Henderson, W. McGregor, T. B. Michell, J. Payton, P. W. Temple, A. Caselberg, J. lorns, F. P. Welch, J. Caselberg, J. Scott, John Cross, E. J. Wright, James McKonzie, and J. G. Dagg.

His Honor, in addressing the Grand Jury, said he had to congratulate them upon the unimportant duties they had to perform. Only two cases would be placed beforo them. In one case, that in which one Carter was charged with theft, no serious issues were involved. In point of fact, the case was more a legal ono than otherwise./ The jury would only be required-to find, on the evidence for the Crown, if there was a case- to go to the common jury. The same thing applied in the case in which one Boyd was charged with forgery. This was a more simple case than the other, and the jury would have no difficulty in arriving at a conclusion. The Grand Jury, after a retirement of twenty minutes, returned true bills against each prisoner, and were tfchank. Ed by His Honor and discharged for the remainder of ifche session.

\ ALLEGED FORGERY. i . A young ,man named Arthur Reginald Boyd was charged with that he did, on or about December 29th, 1911, forge the name of Welch -and Hope, builders, to a cheque for £lO, and utter tho same upon William J. Harvey. Tho accused pleaded guilty. Mr Bunny appeared for (the Crown, and Mr P. L. Ballings for fthe prisoner. Mr Hollings said the accused was just twenty years of age. Although he could not ask for probation, as the accused had been convicted of theft when thirteen years of age, he would ask His Honor ito convict him, and order him to come up for sentence when called upon. His Honor: I can't do that without' having evidence. I must hear what the probation officers have to say. .

f -Mr "Hollings stated that he intended calling evidence. William James (Hope, the- late employer of the accused, stated.that Boyd had been in his "employ for six or eight itioiifchis." ;He was.a worker, and-.had:earned a shilling an ■hoiir when workmg. He.had not" known.l %im to be dishonest prior vto the pres-; ent lapse: He did not know that he woukl he prepared to employ him again, but did not consider the present charge should militate against his finding employment. Mr Rollings stated that the accused had refunded the amount of the cheque which had been forged. His Honour said the prisoner would bo required to pay the cost of the prosecution, £9 6s. After considerable hesitation ho had decided not to send the accused to gaol on this occasion. If ho came More the Court again, however, he would be sent to gaol for a considerable.term. ■ A fine of £lO would be imposed, to be paid in instalmenits of £2 per month, in default twelve months' imprisonment. The a '- cused would be discharged from cub•tody in tho meantime.

ALLEGED THEFT. Horace Carter was charged with having, on August 14th, received goods of the value of £llß lis lOd from John Lincoln"Murray, draper, of Masterton, and having unlawfully converted the proceeds of the sale of a portion, of these goods to his own. use. _ He was also charged with appropriating the proceeds of other goods to his own use. Mr Hollings appeared for the accused, and Mr Bunny for the Crown. The following jury was empanelled: Messrs W. M. Cole (foreman), J. Allen, D. J.' Wvllio, F. J. Pink, John Connell, H. E. Gosnell, A. H. Oallisjer, J. M. McPhee, J. Wyber, W. T. Masson, J. V. Gordon, and S. Allen. Mr Rollings said he desired to raise an objection against tlie indictment. He would ask that the indictment be quashed, under section 407 of the Crimes Act, on the ground that the charges in the information did not agree with the facts disclosed in the depositions. There was no evidence on the depositions of any fradulent conversion of the funds to the prisoni er's own use.

His Honor said that the indictment was regular, and ordered that the case proceed. The accused pleaded not guilty. Mr Bunny cited the facts of the case at some length. He stated that the accused had been engaged by Mr Mur_ ray as a traveller at £2 10s per week and commission. After the accused had been travelling for a time, he was asked for a statement of accounts. This was given, but showed a deficiency. The accused explained that a portion of the goods must have been stolen. He agreed, however, that the value of the missing goods be treated as a civil debt and deducted to™ nis wages. The accused was given another supply of goods, and was asked to report his transactions daily. The report was not forthcoming, and Mr Murray became suspicious. The accused was traced to various hotels in the district, and when requested to return to Masterton he had procured a motor car and avoided the town. He was eventually arrested in a secondclass carriage at the Carterton railway statiou. The accused told the arresting constable that he was going" to the Hutt to see his sister, and intended returning to Masterton next day. He stated that he-would be only a, few pounds short. Tho railway ticket m his possession was taken out for Wellington. Mr Murray had traced portions of the goods in various places. John Lincoln Murray, draper, deposed that in August last ths accused came to him as a, stranger. Ho said hehad recently arrived from England, and asked for employment, "- referred witness to the Mayor of Welling ton. Witness engaged accused as a traveller on tho terms embodied in an agreement (produced). The agreemen fc was for employment for twelve months front August 14th at £2 10s per week. and 5 per cent commission on all orders secured. The accused had to pay all his out-of-pocket expenses, and keep an account in a book of his transactions. Stock was made up and er'tered with tho price in tho stock-hook. The accused saw that tho goods entered in. the stock-book corresponded with what ho took. The goods ho first toolc were valued at £lO6 0s 7d, but goods s-e.nt later at- the request of accused" brought tho value up to £llß lis lOd. Witness found the hoi-: and vehicle.

and accused loft on tho afternoon of JAugust 11 t!i. Tho accused returned to 1) Mastoid on on September 15th, and tho g goods were checked off with tho list in 1 ilio stock-book. A statement was made 5 up, which was .shown to the accused, v This showed a deficiency, after deduct- n in" wages and commission, of £lO lis ■{ M. Witness di-cussed the matter witii i. accused, who abated that tho goods must havo been stolen. Witness hear! \ the accused had been drinking, and t charged him witli it. At (in=t accused , denied ilio charge, but stated that it I was tht first time he had bear round ] the district, and ho wished to get in f with the bovs. The total deficiency in j the geods was £2l 5s (3d. Accused , s,aid the default would not occur again, , ; and wifite-'.s decided to allow him to go ] out again. Accused left a .second time < on September '23 rd, agreeing to make j a detailed statement every day and for- i ward it regularly. Tho goods given to ■ tho accused on tho second occasion . , were entered in the stock bonk, and j amounted to £.187 10s. The accused was present when the goods wore soiec- ■ ted and entered, and packed them him- < self. For the first week witness got ( communications from tho accused, hut j ■no money. On. October sth lie got a . letter stating that accused would oe at the Taueru Hotel, and wanted more j o-oods. Witness went out to the Tau- , eru on the morning of the Gth, and saw | tho accused. Ho expressed surprise as j seeing accused at an hotel, and Imd him that this was against his liistruc- , lions. Accused handed over a sum of | £l7 7s lid. AVitncss instructed him < to proceed at once to tho Blairlogie - Hotel. It was not necessary lor the ; i accused to havo called at a hotel. Ac-. I euscd v.-as -provided with a set of .books. ] | in which to keep a record of his transactions. Witness 'heard that accused , had gone to Kahumingi on October 6, instead of to Blairlogie. On October 7th tho accused was at the Blairlogie . Hotel. Witness rang him up and asked him what ho was doing there. He said ho was going to tho station ui the morning. On oth October witness had a communication from the accused, and received further letters from time ■to time. On October 17th witness received a letter from accused at WliaUI ataki, and again ait the end of the month at AVhakataki. Witness got into communication with Jum at the I Whakataki Hotel at the end of Octoher, and told him that ho must return to Master ton. The accused said lie would return the next day, but- fallen to do so. Witness communicated again with him by telepliono at the Blairlofio Hotel on November 4th. Witness received a letter dated No'.cmop:4th, stating that aceusd would be at Carswcll's. He found that he \\m | there in. bed, and got into communication with him oh November Sbh, telling i him that unless ilio cnino to Masterton at onco witness would have him brought in. The accused did not return, and'witness communicated with tho police Witness went to Carterton, and saw the accused tinuer arrWt. Witness was present when, accused was searched by tho poire at the Masterton railway station. Witness identified some of the goods found on tho accused as belonging to him. liiey wero portion of tho goods given to tho .accused when ho went out on the first occasion. Witness went to the police station on tho following day, and. saw a parcel of goods which had been obtained from Eooderkirk's boardinghouse. Witness identified two towels, a tooth brush, etc., as his property. He also identified goods found in a bag. ■ Witness went to tho Taueru on November Bth, and found a parcel of tho. goods which ho had entrusted to accused in a room. Witness took possession of them and brought them to Masterton with tho vehicle. The goods wero checked off by witness and his assistant in tho stock-book. Tho goods recovered at the Taueru 'amounted to £lO6 14s Id. Witness recovered the books with the goods. He took the books to tho accused at tho police sta-

lion, and the accused marked which wero cash and which wero credit sales. He found a deficiency in cash of £45 Us t-d, and in goods of £l4 7s 7d, together with goods -sold on credit £ll-) . Ids 7d. The cash received was £22 6s .' sd, and the amount collected for previous sales £ls 0s Id. The- total amount of the deficiency on the second trip was j £sl) 17s 3d, making a deficiency on i the two trips of £'7o 0s Gd. | Cross examined by Mr Mollings, the witness stated that he agreed to treat the. first deficiency as a debt, and it was charged accordingly on the stockbook. Witness asked the accused if he had sufficient ca-sh when he went out the second time, and accused said he had sufficient. The accused would make money as he went along. The accused did'not ask witness to advaneo him money, if the accused had return cd and made out :•, statement, deducting his wage." ai;d cnmniission, witness would not have objected, so long as tho accounts balanced. Tho accused was entitled to commission on tho whole of the orders received and executed. Witiies:; had not made,up a statement showing what was owing to the accused on the second trip in wages and commission. The goods returned had been mixed up with tho general stock after the accused had been arrested, j Witness had never asked tho accused ' for a statement of what had become of the missing goods and money. AVitncss learned by letter than accused had been ill with a sere throat. Arthur William Pctheriok, livery .stable keeper, deposed that on November Sth last he got a telephone message from the accused, who was at tho Taueru. The accused asked witness to bring out his ear to bring him to town. ) Witncs; said he could not let him have his car, at it was undergoing repairs, but. would send out another. Witness sent out Eastwood's car, with Tester as a driver. . . George Alfred Tester, a chatfeur in the employ of Mr Eastwood, said that on November Bth lie went to the Taueru under instruction* from Mr Peth-c-riek, and saw the accused. The accused said he wanted to go to Gladstone, and asked witness to wait a little while he got a parcel. The accused aaid he did net want to go through Masterton, as he did not want, to see Mr Miirrnv. He proceeded to Gladstone via Brancepeth and the Mungarakis On the journey, the accused *-iid iio was going to tho Butt to see jus sister. He got a'letter at Gladstone, and was evidently disappointed that there was no money in it. Tho accused asked what it would cost for the car to Wellington. Witness said, the cost would be £(> 10s from Carter-. ' ton, and accused said this was too dear. . ! Witness took the accused to Mr lied- ' moud's hotel, at Carterton. •William Kooderkirk deposed that in 5 November last, ho was keeping a board--1 ing houso in Masterton. Ho knew the : 1 -H'-cused. who went'to his house on Aug- , " usf 3rd.' He left on August 14th, stat--1 ) inp- that ho was going to travel for Mr - Murrav. He returned again on Sep- ' Itcmbcr 15th, and remained until the ■ 21st, leaving without saying that lie ■ c was going. Witness asked him to. scts tie ui>, but he stated that he was not 1 leaving.for-a week. Tho accused told *' witness there were some towels in his 3 room which he could tako and make, fc use of. AVitncss said his wife did not ? want them. The towels produced were r among the .goods lefjb in. accused's ' room." AVitncss put tho < goods, which - we re about tho,'room, into a blindly, i and handed them to the police. Mr • • Murrav had called at witness's house : - and been shown the contents of the bundle. - ' °- By Mr Rollings: Accused nid not ■ state tint he had procured tlje towels 1_ fio'm his sister at the Butt. 0 At this stage the Court'adjourned s until 10 o'clock this morning there be- ;" ing three witnesses yet to call.