ALLEGED FORGERY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XII, Issue 3909, 10 September 1891, Page 2

ALLEGED FORGERY.

ICnrAoek IfoSenzio Before the Oowt. In the R.M. Court yesterday afternoon, Murdock McKenzie was charged on the information of Patrick M'lntyre with haying, on the 18th October, 1889, forged the name of R. H. Holstein to a receipt of the Masterton Road Board for the sum of £4 10s. Mr Beard, who appeared for the prosecution, opened the case with a lengthy review of tie circumstances of the case. Evidence similar to that given in the first case was adduced by the informant, and Messrs J. C. Soddington, Tabuteau and Spreat. R. H. Holstein deposed that he had not done the work for which the cheque for £4 10s was drawn, neither had he received the money. The bench after a short retirement, stated that it considered sufficient evidence had been given in this case to justify a committal. Mr Pownall then stated that he would put the accused on his oath to prove that be had no knowledge whatever of the affair. Murdock McKenzie, the accused, sworn, stated: I have seen the reoeipt purporting to be signed by R. H. Holstein. I did not sign the receipt, and do not know who did. I have not, to my knowledge, seen it before coming to Court. I have not seen the cheque drawn in favour of Holstein, neither have I had the proceeds or any part of them. I do not remember Holstein ever doing work for the Road Board. I never certified to his having done any work, and did not put his name upon the pay sheet. I am quite sure the signature on the receipt is not in my handwriting. By Mr Beard; I used to submit a pay sheet of my own to Mr Wilsone, who used to prepare the pay sheet for the Board. I yery seldom attended the Board's meetings. For some months prior to 1889 I had been overseer to the Board. Payments were made for work done by cheque or cash. Sometimes I made the payments, and sometimes the

t clerk. Yery often I cashed the cheques and paid the amount in cash. Ido > not remember having signed a receipt ' for any person. I will swear I did not 1 sign Dagg's receipt for £lO. I received | money from the Board by cheque and , paid it into my own account at the Bank. I paid Dagg in cash for this i but received no receipt from him, I i gave no receipt to the Board for the i £lO, and took no steps to procure a ' receipt. I told Dagg when I paid > him the money he could sign a receipt 1 any time he came in. Ido not think [ the signature on the receipt is Dagg's. I do not know whose signature it is. ; I did not take steps to see if receipts had been made out. I know of certain discrepancies with the B,oard, and ; certain monies, have been paid against , my wish. I have never seen the particulars of the deficiencies. Ido not admit that there were any deficiencies. Somebody offered to .pay the monies to the Board on my b'ehali, but I stated that I would sooner have, it tested. Acting qn advice I allowed the matter to be hushed up and the monies to be paid. When these monies were paid I did not recognise the deficiencies. I was asked by the Board for an explanation of certain to, regeipts, but could give no better explanation then than I can now.. I cannot recollect whether Mr Dagg did or did not do the work for the £3. I should think from the paysheet the work had been done. I cannot say if the receipts of Dagg and Holstin are in, the Bame, handwriting. The cheques were cashed by me at the Bank of New Zealand. I may have cashed cheques at Caselberg's. By Mr Pownall: When I cashed cheques at Caselberg's it was to enable the men to get their money on Saturday night. Mr Renall induced me to settle the matter with the Board, as he was connected with me with regard to my mother's estate. I have never been threatened, fey the Bjoard. Mr Renall said it would cost me more to fight the case than settle it, and this wa3 why 1 settled. As a rule the receipts were left in the office. In face of Mr Spreat's evidence I say I did not sign the receipt. The Bench stated it still considered the evidence was sufficient to commit upon, ac,cuse4 w§s tqen pom* mitted to take his trial at the nest sittings of the Supreme Court to be held on November 30th. Bail was allowed.