R.M. COURT, HAMILTON. Tuesday.—(Before Mr H. W. North croft R.M.) UTTERING A FORGED CHEQUE.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIV, Issue 1969, 19 February 1885, Page 2

R.M. COURT, HAMILTON. Tuesday.—( Before Mr H. W. North croft R.M.) UTTERING A FORGED CHEQUE .

Rich \ih> Hackktt was eh uged on remand with that he did, on the 2«th January, IWT>, feloniously, with intent to defraud, utter a certain cheque on the B.vnk of New Zealand at Auckland for the sum of 412, purpoiting to l>e signed by one Robert Douglas lie, the H.iid Richard H.ickett, then well knowing the same to be forged, contrary to the firm of tile statute, tic. Hergt. McUo\ em conducted the prosecu tion, ,md the pusonci w.is undefended. The Hist witness called was Kdmiind Co\, stableman at tho Rov.il Hotel, Hamilton, who deposed that he s i\v accused at the hotel on the 24th January He -I'-ked witness to write out ,i che jue for him, as he had something the m.itter with his hand and could not hold the pen. Witness ileirnured, hut afterwards complied, rcnmkiug that though he knew nothing about cheques, ho did not think tins one would be of any value. The cheque pro duced was the ono. Did not know the accused piior to this. William Murphy, groom at tho Waik.ito Hotel, deposed that he remembered accused coming to the hotel on the 28th January, on which day ho hired a horse, .uid (rave witness a cheque for £2 on payment. Tivik the cheque to Mr Gaudin, who said it was fotged, and asked witness to send accused to him. Saw accused in tho evening, who asked him to get tho cheque back, at the same time offering witness his watch. Accused aftenvaids came to the hotel, and on Mr (inudm telling him that tho cheque was a forgery, ho said ho know nothing about it, as ho could not road or write, and had obtained it ut Bach's Hotol. Witness occupied a room in the stable, and in this loom some days afterwards lie found the cheque book and bank book, produced, under his bed. Accused had shown witness these books m Bach's Hotel befoiu the 28th. Hud known accused for some time. Mi (i.uulin >Mve c meliorative evidence. Constable Murray deposed to .11 resting the prisoner, who denied having stolen tho bank book and cheque book, saying that sometime-. Mr Douglas earned them and sometimes he did. Mr Hobart, a cleik in the bmk at Auck land, deposed th it the cheque was a forgo y. It had been taken out of a cheque book issued to Mr R. W. Douglas. About the 14th Januaiy Mr Douglas reported to the bmk the loss of his bank book and chequo book, and suspected a young l.ul he had employed of having stolen them. Acc.u-.ed, who i ,'S(>i ved his defence, was foimally committed to tako his tiial at the ne\t ci imiual sessions of tho Supreme Court, Auckland. Tho accused was further charged with the Luceny of a pair of trousers, thepropoityof one Robert William-ion, of Tmiwharo, a saddle and bridle, the property of one J. W. Tlvnnson, of To Awumutu, and a siher watch, the propetty of one Thomas Davis, of Hamilton. Prisoner pleaded guilty, and in nnswer 6o the Bench said he had nothing to say. Mr No-thcroft senteuml him to ono month's haul lnboui m Mount Kden (iaol for the Hist offeuc ■, two months' for the Hecond, and tin ou month-;' foi the thud, the sentences to inn concurrently