The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1873-08-30 00:00:00

ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT BY A

cLEiti:

Henry Bate, late clerk in the employ of Mr. J.
G. Eveson, coal merchant, was brought up on re-
mand, yesterday, charged with embezzling the
respective 801116 of Li 13s 11d, a 14s 3d, Li 10s
4d, and a Ss 101, the monies of his employer. It
will be recollected that the ease was adjourned to
give prisoner the opportunity of procuring legal
assistance, The Magistrates on the Bench yes-
terday were Major Fletcher (chairman), Captain
Cochrane, the lion. C. O. Lyttelton, and Mr. U.
0. Firiustone.

Mr. Pirry again prosecuted, and Mr. Stokes
defended the prisoner.

Before the 17aSe IVILB proceeded with, Mr. Perry
said that the list of eases given in last week were
all of them cases in which the money had been
collected by the prisoner away from the office, but
there was now an additional one, namely, that of
.t.l 3s, paid by William Bubb,on the loth of April
last, at the prosecutor's (ace.
The depositions were read over to Mr. Eveson,
by Mr. king, and the former having assented to
them as being correct, Mr. Stokes proceeded to
cross-examine Ur. Eveson, as follows:

Mr. kiveson (cross-examined by Mr. Stokes) I
did not make the engagement with prisoner in
writing. It was made on the let of February. It
was made in the collage of a general conversation.
He was directed what he was to do in the course
of a long conversation. I cannot recollect the
whole of the conversation; I can recollect every-
thing connected with the business.

Z.-Stokes here called the attention of the
Bench to what he designated as the loose style of
conducting his business, adopted by prosecutor,
and said that the latter had been censured at the
Sessions for it.

Mr. Evcson ; I can't allow that to pass. I have
not been censured by any one.
Mr. Stokes: We'll come to that presently.
Cross-exatuination of Mr. Eveson continued: I
have gone through the book to ascertain all these
items and receipts and checked them to see
whether there were any entries there that were
not on the counterfoils. Yr.soner kept the petty
cash book. I balance up film time to time the petty
cash book. Part of his iruties were to hand cash
book over every week. He did not settle up every
week.

_
Witness here wade a remark to the Bench to
the e9ect that he could not get prisoner to settle
up; they all knew what a drunken man was. Mr.
Stokes thereupon told him not to untke such re-
marks as those whilst in the witness box. Perhaps
his own character was not so very pure.
Cross-examination resumed: Prisoner gave me
all the cash he received every week. Prisoner was
not general manager. Ile (prisoner) was to pay
out when people came to the office; that is, when
I directed him to do so. For what was required
in the office he did not pay, as I paid it myself. I
have a ledger clerk and a ledger. I can produce
them if you like. (The book was here sent for).
Two months have elapsed without a settlement.
It was not my fault; I could not get him to make
a statement. (The book was here produed, and
witness here pointed out a balance). The balance
was £l6 16e ad. I received money from him from
time to time. I did not get his book on all these
occasions. I asked him to balance up and he slid
not. I received every check he gave use money
for. I gave him a receipt for all monies he paid
Inc as he once paid me £l5 and said it was £25
afterwards. I gave prisoner receipts when he did
not produce the books—Witness was further
cross-examined at considerable length to show that
he was privy to the fact that the prisoner was in-
duced to go to Mr. Walker's offices and make a
statement, on the supposition that an amicable
arrangement of the mutter might be arrived at.
Witness denied having any hand in this, but ad-
mitted that he was present on the occasion, and
saw a lint which was produced by prisoner, pur-
porting to contain the various amounts received
by him and not accounted for. Witness, however,
asserted that he did not recollect what the list
contained.

Charles Hambrey, Rose Mills, and Joseph White-
house, gave similar evidence to that Risen by them
last week.

_
Ann Budd said that on the 9th of April prisoner
called at their house, and asked if sho owed the
prosecutor for a load o; eoal. She told him she
did, and refused to pay him. Went down to Mr.
Eveson's offices next day. She paid the prisoner
Li 3s, for which she produced the receipt.
Joseph Henry Sheppard, clerk to Ma, Eveson,
reiterated the evidence he gave on a former occa-
sion.

Cross-examinad : I told Mr. Eveson on the 16th
that prisoner said there were accounts outstand-
ing which he had received and not.accounted for;
but that his father was going to sell a house, and
he would call and pay the following morning.
This being the case for the prosecution,
Major Fletcher intimated that if the prisoner
pleaded guilty, they could deal summarily with
the ca.se.
Mr. Stokes said he did not intend to adopt that
course; but purposed to address the Bench as to
a prima facie aloe. He then contended, in.an ear-
nest appeal, that a prism facie case had not been
established. In order to bring home a charge of
embezzlement against the prisoner, the prosecutor
must prove that the money was secretly concealed;
but this was not so. The prisoner, on his going
for orders, had sometimes received monies, and not
having his cheque-book with him, had forgotten
them; but he had told his employer that he had
mistakes, and would make it right. For argu-
ments sake he (Mr. Stokes) would admit that the
prisoner had received four sums of money. He
was charged with emberaliug, but that was not