The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-25 00:00:00

THE CHICHESTER BANK.

EXAMINATION AND COMMITTAL OF THE
CHIEF CASHIER AND CLERK.

CHICHESTER, Nov. 23.—1 t having beer. rumoured that
the chief cashier and chief clerk of this bank had em-
bezzled sums of money, great excitement was created,
the most exaggerated statements circulated, and the
stoppage of the bank attributed to them. The exact ac-
count appears in the following evidence :
William Stiles Goodeve, chief cashier, and William
Williams, head clerk, were brought before Dr. 111‘Ca-
' rogher, the Mayor, and Thomas Howe Clarke, Esq., the
sitting Magistrates, charged with embezzlement. Mr.
Sherwood, a solicitor, attended on their behalf.
Mr. William Newland deposed that he was a junior
partner in the firm of Ridge and Co., bankers. The pri-
soner Goodeve had been for several years in the esta-
blishment as cashier, and had the charge of the cash and
the notes issued by the firm. On Wednesday last witness
went to the bank, and asked the prisoner Goodeve if he
could tell the amount of notes in circulation. The prisoner
then went into the front office, and produced a paper, on
which was 8,685/. Witness asked him if that was the
correct amount of notes in circulation. The prisoner
said there was about 5,000/. more, which he said he was
certain was the correct amount. Witness asked him what
he had got to provide for it, when he replied about
4,0001. worth of hay and other things. When the pri-
soner pointed to the 8,685/., witness asked him if that was
the return furnished to Mr. Ridge. The prisoner said it
was 5,000/. more in the statement supplied to Mr. Ridge.
Mr. Charles Ridge deposed that he was a banker
at in consequence of discovering
errors Chichester.rotinth ltn
prisonerVicss'
Goodeve's accounts, sent for him
and asked him to account for the deficiency, amounting
to 5,0501. in notes, returned on the 13th instant. Wit-
ness reminded him that he had told Mr. Newland the
deficiency was 5,000/., but they had since found it was
5,050/. The prisoner accounted for it by saying he
omitted to put a check for the 50/. Witness asked him
if he took the 5,000/. at one time, but he declined answer-
ing the question. The witness produced a book, from
which he stated that there appeared to have been in the
prisoner
Goodeve's custody, 1,5491. 2s. 10d. in cash, and
35,0401. in notes. Itiitness also produced the memoran-
dum furnished by the prisoner to the firm on Friday last,
purporting to be an account of the notes and cash in the
bank cellars. The amount of cash is stated to be 4001.,
and the notes 16,000/. ; the notes were issuable by the
firm. Witness added the 16,000/. with other notes, and
the notes found in the prisoner Goodeve's parcel, and the
deficiency was found to be 3,2001. and 8,3001., which the
partners were cognisant of, and 5,0501., which they were
not cognisant of, and which was the deficiency alleged
against the prisoner Goodeve. Witness said the amount
added together made 35,0401., which was the amount of
notes the pi:isoner represented as being in his care.
Mr. John Dixon Newland deposed that he was pro-
fessionally engaged in assisting Messrs, Ridge in inves-
tigating their cashier's accounts. They were unable to
make out the prisoner Williams's accounts, and he was
called in and asked to explain the deficiency. The
prisoner then said he knew he had done wrong. Witness
cautioned him against saying anything to criminate him-
self, but he said it was no use attempting to conceal it.
Mr. Charles Ridge was then examined as to the defi-
ciency of Williams. 'Witness deposed that the prisoner
had been for many years in the employ of the firm, as
clerk and cashier. In consequence of discovering a
deficiency in hi: accounts, witness sent for him on
Friday last, and told him they could not make his notes
and cash correspond with the figures in the book.
Witness asked if he could inform him how the difference
arose. Ile replied, he could ; adding, he knew .he had
done wrong. Witness then asked him to produce a
paper, on which he enumerated the items of his cash
and notes. The prisoner 'Williams kept an account
independent of the prisoner Goodeve. The prisoner Wil-
liams then produced an account, and said he knew he
had done wrong, but if witness would allow him he
would explain. Witness here produced a book, in the
prisoner's handrwiting, from which there appeared in
cash 456/. 75., and notes 2,9201., which sums the prisoner
ought to have had in his possession. Witness examined
both the cash and notes, and found a, deficiency of
1,7491, 12s. 4d. Witness compared the account furnished
by the prisoner with the books, andhfebucnadshtlhoeo;m:ijoirnet
representing the notes and the amouarnpltapnreeaaptrirto.edns:eon,:b.ihneeginothohiee.
licelas7sisltiltihdeasi did
sn
asked
entered
ec
do r
trhe
!pi
prisoner
sdeo.
book,e 'rrfho erananondt cestx
said the account he furnished was altogether fictitious.
Witness informed him that tblens.oteBsd.i, ti his parcel had
been counted, and amounted to 1,255/., which was 1,6651.
less than was entered in the book. • Witness
payments
sntil made
cash in his possession amounted to 36SL 18s.; and three
receipts amounting to 5/. 6
on account of the Duke of Richmond, which sum
being deducted from 4561. 75., entered in his cash-book,
left a deficiency of 841. 12s. Witness asked the pri-
soner if he could explain that deficiency, but he said it
was inexplicable. Witness told him that the same
figures occurred six different times on six days. The
prisoner Williams acknowledged himself to he a defaulter
to the amount of 1,549/. 12s. 4d. ; he said that the 20(1.,
the difference between the 1,5491. 12s. 4d. and the appa-
rent deficiency, had been throttg,li two errors in his ac-
counts of 1001. each, which, rather than investigate he
had added to his own deficiency, but that he had not
taken more than 1,549 L 12s. 4d. The prisoner told wit-
ness that the reason he avoided investigation of the 2001.
was, that he was afraid the inquiry would lead to the
overhauling of his cash and notes, which were deficient.
Witness asked the prisoner if he took it all at one time ;
In replied no, and that he had not taken any thing for
three or four years; he said lie thought the first time was
twelve or thirteen years ago, and that it began when
some of his family were in distress.