MAGISTERIAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2144, 20 March 1908, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

THURSDAY, AIARCII .19 (Before Mr W. A. Barton, S.AI.) DISPUTED STOPEKEEPERS ACCOUNT.

William A. Friar (Mr Alsuui) proceeded against I’aul Stuart AlcColl (.Mr T. Alston Coleman) for CM 13sttd for supply of goods. Phintilf gave evidence as to tlio amount of the claim. In Juno.or duly 1900 witness received a letter lrt'in defendant regarding his account, the dehit- at the time being Coil. The letter had been destroyed at the recent lire at witness’ premises. In the letter defendant said he was behind in lvis account because he had recently bought a (section and erected a house. Defendant said that if the account were allowed to stand over for a time he would pay cash lor all goods received and endeavor to reduce the old account. De.tendant paid cash up to November, when he was allowed further credit. Never had any complaint from defendant or his wife regarding inaccuracy ol the monthly accounts rendered. —By Air Coleman : In some instances the firm’s monthly accounts were sent out in parcels of goods, and in other cases they were delivered by hand. The statement of claim set out all transactions between and defendant with tin' exception of the cash business. Cash transactions wore entered in the counter books, tmt were not entered in detail in the firm’s business books. One account of T 9 12s was paid in July 1905. The words “on old account’’ should not be on the receipt dated January 15 1900. It was not probable that goods for which cash had been paid would be debited. As to a counter book receipt dated January 17, 1906 which was marked ‘’paid,” be felt sure none of the shop hands had so marked it. The same applied to a receipt dated January 26, 1906. In cash transactions the person who made out the account marked it “paid.” The account was not so marked in the ofliec.

At this point the S.A(. asked that witness ho supplied with all the counter book receipts hold by Afr Coloman for the purpose of having them compared with the duplicate held by witness. Jn all eases witness gave it as liis opinion that the word “paid” appearing on all the slips was not written by any person in.his employ. Witness said he could not produce the counter-foil of cash accounts as they had been burnt. On an examination of the receipts he said that so far as he could say they were not signed by any employee of his. Air Coleman produced a batch of receipted accounts, which were not claimed for. Being shown one of tho receipts witness said that the word “paid” on it was written by Air Neil. A number of receipted accounts,some claimed for, and some were not, were put in by Air Coleman, who asked witness to sort out those which he thought were signed by his employees.—Witness picked out one which he thought had been signed after it left the Shop.—Air Coleman stated that the account was n(>t claimed for. Witness picked out a number of receipts which lie said he thought were signed by bis employees. Air Coleman asked witness to turn the duplicates of these receipts. He had said that in the disputed receipts the word “paid” had not been reproduced on the duplicate, and ho wished to know if in tlio ease of tho receipts held to hs genuine the word had been recorded.—Witness could not find the duplicate of one receipt, and lie was asked to produce tlio book after the lunch adjournment. In the afternoon Air Coleman continued liis detailed cross-examination, at the conclusion of .which, at 4.30 p.m. the case was adjourned until April Bth. DRUNKENNESS. Alichael Purcell, twice previously convicted within six months, was sentenced to 10 days’ imprisonment. A prohibition order was issued against him. JUDGEMENT SUMMONS. In the case James Wliiamy v. Olias. AY. Aloore an order for r.nu odiate payment of £2 10s 6d forthwith, ill default 3 clays’ imprisonment. JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT. Judgment by default was given in the case Official Assignee in the estate of Enoch Richards (Air F. AA’. Nolan) v. Sonny Rum, -claim £2 4slOd, costs £1 2s.