EMBEZZLEMENT. ', ... ,'
Joseph Reed pleaded Guilty to having taken from
tho store of his employer, Robert Boardman, store
keeper, Steiglitz, a quantity of drapery, and con
veyed the same to the dwelling of his father,
Richard Reed , at New Year's Reef, Steiglitz ? : ;
Witnesses were examined to prove the previous
good character of the prisoner, and he was sentenced
to six months' imprisonment, without hard labor,
for the first offence, and three months for the
second.
RECEIVING STOLEN PROPERTY.
Richard Reed was then placed in the dock charged
with having received from . his son the property
stolen from Mr Boardman, with a guilty know
ledge.
Prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and was defended
I by Mr Aspinall.
Robert Boardman identified the property pro
i duced in court as his, discovered by himself and
constable Flahey in the house of the prisoner.
Constable Flahey deposed that, on searching the
Fix this text
box in which the goods were packed, the prisoner
: stated that he had purchased them in Ballaarat. ;
The witness underwent a long cross-examination
: by Mr Aspinall, with the object of proving that it
was only a portion of the goods produced, not identi
fied by Boardman as his, in the course of wbieh
'his own evidence was a good deal shaken, and Mr
Aspinall wound up by a powerful address to the
jury, who returned a verdict of not guilty.