Stanley James Edwards was charged for that he on November 25, 1907, then being em; layed aa" let or cer van to Meese. Hall & Holtz, La,, feloniously Shanghai, March 10.
The hearing of this case was resumed at 2.30 p.m. arrived in Shanghai in 1905 under an Mr. said that the accused agreement with Messrs. Hall & Holtz, Ta. and in August 1006 was appointed cashier. Counsel then outlined the of book-keeping following at Messrs. Hall & Holtz, during which he said that bill always showed the amounts owing from previous months. Accused went to hospital about and fraudulently did embezzle and steat|the end of January and from that a sam of $23.10 in money and within six calendar months thereafter, to wit on December 5 and December 31, 1907, and on January 10, 1908, the further sam of $226.68 in money, to wit money received or taken into possession by hi in the name or on the account of his said masters or employers, contrary to the Larceny Act 1861, Btat. 24 and 25 "Viet., 0. 96, neat. 68.
Mr. K. E. 8. Gregson (Mesars. appeared Doutta Mr. Morgan Phillips red for th? defence. gave evidence that on Wednesday, the 4th Gostant, he received " Supreme Court warrant for the arrest of the accused, fat on the advice of Dr. J jackson, secosed's medical attendant, did not acate it then. At 11.30 p.m.i0m Sund witness arrested accused at the Victo Narsing Home. Witness read the warrant over to him and cautioned him. He made no statement. Witness placed 'a man {n charge of accused and next morning brought him from the Nursing Home to Hongkew Police Statinn and afterwards to the Court.
Mr. Gregson said that he had hourd only a short time ago that the case was coming on and it had been impossible for him to have witnesses ready. He asked for a remand until 2 pan next day.
The acoused asked for bail, ant to the allowed an opportunity of obtaining same, He had been in hospital five week and only came out that, morning. He had not had riy chance to get advice or to obtain sureties.
His Worship raid he would arrange that accused should have an opportunity to obtain bail. In the meantime mould be remanded in the custody of she British gaol.
Accused asked if he could go back to the Nursing Home.
Detective-Sergeant MacCabe was recalled and in reply to His Worship, said that he arrested the accused the} previnas night because Dr. Jackson told him that he was to leave the Narsing Home the next morning.
Accused said that he understood from Dr. Jackson that he would not be able to leave the Narsiog Home until Wedneeday or Thursday. His eyes were not well yet and if they were exposed to the light and cold, he might lose his Worship said that he would com-manicate with Dr. Jackson. In the meantime scoused would be remanded the custody of the British gaol. time customers to come in and show that they had been billed for accounts already paid. Alt there was an amount of $2,700 "unaccounted for William John Vine deposed that he was deputy Managing Director of, Messrs. Hall and Holtz, Ld. Mr. Tuck was manager of the London office and. engaged the assistants. The document produced was the agreement signed by accused for three years' service. Accused arrived about March 31, 1905, and was at first taken into the office as ledger clerk, but after wards acted as cashier downstairs, responsible position, because he rece ed money from customers and was responsible for it.
George Howard Rental deposed that he was an assistant engaged at the Public Works Department. He remetered receiving accounts from Messrs. Hall & Holtz for the months of August' and October. Witness identified the receipts produced, dated November 25, 1907. He paid those amounts personally to Edwards.
In reply to the Court witness said that he was quite sure that he paid those accounts to Edwards. He thought that it was some time in November.
Cross-examined witness said that he was under the impression that Enlwarda handed the money over to the shroff, because he received some change.
Re-examined witness raid that he thought accused banded the whole the money to the shroff and told the latter the amount of the bill and what change to give.
Arthar Stanley Hocking deposed that he was assistant in the Coast Inspector's office. He recollected receiving an account from Mesers. Hall and Holtz in the month of December. It was and witness brid it in cash to one of the boys in the department. The took the cash and brought the receipt (produced.) He received a bill in January for the month of December and paid $40 on account between January 5 and 10, to Edwards, hom witness knew. Edwards gave witness the receipt, produced. Witness reerived subsequently an account for January which showed s balance owing of $44.25 not including the January purchases. Witness showed that to Mr Palmer, secretary of Messrs Hall Holtz, some little time alter. That account included the December account.
Crosse-examined witness. said that) th boy be paid was on the ground floor and witness sam him take the money to the cashier' Witness could not say whether that money was handed over to the shroff. When witess paid the money to Edwards the latter handed over the receipt, but witness did not notice whether Edwards handed the money over to the shroff. The $40 was the only amount witness ever paid to defendant; sometimes witness paid Mr. Hill, an assistant in the iven's department, Henry Franklin Landers deposed that he was chief clerk in the printing department of the British Cigarette Company. He remerobered receiving accounts for purchases made at Hall & Holtz in September and October last. The September account was paid in November to Mr. Edwards who gave him the receipt produced. The October account was paid in January, also to Mr. Edwards. The account for July was paid to Mr. Edwards in October, and the August account in November.
('ross-examined—Witness had dealt with Hall & Holtz for about six years on credit account and always paid personally at the cashier's desk. When witness paid his accounts he always, as far ax he could recollect, received change from the shroff.
Mr. Gregson said that the other account mentioned in the complaint was that of Captain Gordon who was away. Counsel would, therefore, call the shroff of Messrs. Hall & Holtz.
Ching Jung-king stated that he was a shroff in the cash sales department of Hall & Holtz, He had been there for sixteen years. If a customer came in and paid cash for what he bought the money was given to witness. He signed his name on the slip and chopped it. Each day he sent npstaire the money received on the previous day. The cashier had nothing to do with cash sales; bat when a customer came in and id bill the money went to the cash who sometimes told witness to count it. Then the cashier took it back and locked. it up till the end of the day when he handed a lamp sum to witness. Accompanying each sum of money were duplicate slips; the cashier kept one and witness another. Witness gave the cashier a receipt for the lump sum.. The slips produced were those Kept by witness When the money went up stairs it was received by a shroff who entered it in the accounts.
Counsel for the defence made an application for bail and the Court speci fied the amount of two sums, $1,000 and $500.
The case was then adjourned until 2 p.m. next day.
Shanghai, March 11.
The hearing of this case was resumed at 2.30. p.m.
Mr. Gregson, Counsel for the prosecution, said that he wished to adda charge in connexion with an so count contracted by Mr. Newman.
The Court granted permission.
Arthur Stanley Hocking, recalled, said that the scoount for January was
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.