15. One of the facts which the Defence has endeavoured to establish is that while the complainant was giving out to the public that he was working a number of schools as the Agent or Manager of the Theistic Society in the interests of religion and morality he was in reality working these schools as private proprietory schools of his own and misapplying if not misappropriating their funds. The facts proved are as follow.—In Ex. LXIII a letter written on 28-12-82 by the complainant to the President of the Educational Commission he describes the Theistic Society as “chiefly an educational body”. In Ex. LXVI a letter written by the complainant on 19-3-83 he makes mention of the “Theistic Society's Schools.” In Ex. IX a letter written by the complainant on the I4th March 1883 he refers to the resolutions of the Theistic Society and promises to send a copy of the same to the person he addresses. In Ex. VIII dated 3 I-Io-83 the complainant writes “I am finishing the accounts of the Society for the last two years.” In Ex. LXIV a letter written by the secretary of the Theistic Society under the complainant's directions to the Director of Public Instruction, the writer alleges that the re. cords of the Theistic Society have been filed in court in a certain case. These documents in themselves, independently of the oral evidence on the point clearly show that the complainant was giving out to the public that there was a regular organized society called the Theistic Society which recorded resolutions, kept accounts and started schools as an educational body and that he was the Manager of those schools on behalf of the Society. What, however, was really the fact is clear from the complainant's own admissions in cross examination. He there says “I called myself, my teachers and sympathisers the Theistic Society. " " The Society was to help me generally. * * * It had no control over any of the schools. * It had no school of its own. * * The Society did not hold meetings or pass proceedings as a society. It had no rules
