40
This was not the first occasion for which i had received fines
for the Shroff at the Magistracy. As the fine receipt books will show on previous occasions I had acted exactly in the same
way as on this particular occasion, and all fines i received had
been paid to the Shroff as they were appeared in his accounts.
On the 5th. day of April last, between 10 and 11 a.m. after
having compared the previous day's cases with Mr. Melbourne the
late Chief Clerk, I took out from the drawer aforesaid the said
sum of $50, went to the said Shroff's office and threw same on
his desk. The Shroff was at that time busily engaged in col- -lecting fines. I said to him in a joking manner as we always
did to each other. "Here you are, you may take this for expense".
In addition to that I also said "It was for that case from Shaukiwan". The Shroff said nothing in reply.
On the 17th. day of May, 1905, when the Local Auditor questioned me about the $50 in question, I had
forgotten all about it as the occurrence had been out of my
memory and I could not instantly recollect what I had done with
the said sum of $50. On thinking it over I recollected that the
said sum of $50 was in the following morning paid to the Shroff.
If the Shroff on maxing out the first fine receipt on the 5th.
April, had looked, as he should have done, at the last counter-
-foil, there would be no trouble.
In answer to the 2nd, charge 1 deny wholly
the allegation therein. At the end of each day before the Shroff
leaves the office he makes up his cash account for the day.
After such day's account having been closed it is a usual
practice that all subsequent sums received on that day should
be entered in the following day's account. When I received the
sum of $50 in question the Shroff had gone. Although the actual
receipt of the said sum was on the 4th. April but it should be
entered in the account of the 5th. April. 1 accordingly put on
the