RAKAIA THEFT CASE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 56, Issue 77, 13 January 1936, Page 6

RAKAIA THEFT CASE.

EMPLOYERS’ MONEY USED.

CONTENTION! FOR THE ACCUSED

(Special to the “ Guardian.”) / CHRISTCHURCH, This Day.

Six charges of committing theft between June 30, 1934, and October 30, 1935, were laid against Henry Alan Moray Smith (Sir R. A. Young), at the Magistrate’s Court on Saturday, before Mr F. F. Reid, S.M. Five of the charges involved theft from the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, Ltd., while the accused was in the employment of the company at Rakaia. The amounts said to have been stolen were as follow : April 2, 1935, £27 15s lOd; April 7, 1935, £32 19s 6d; June 14 to October 30, 1935, £3O; February 27 to October 10, 1935, £22 14s 6d and £4O. There was also a charge of stealing £4l, the property of William Wilson Carruthers between June 30, 1934, and October 30, 1935.

Chief-Detective Dunlop said that Smith had entered the employ of the company in 1924 and had become manager of the Rakaia branch in June, 1934, remaining in this position till he was dismissed in October of this year. He was a single man and in addition to his salary received entertainment expenses. One of the charges involved the conversion to his own use of a cheque paid to him for the company. On another occasion he put through a fictitious purchase of ryegrass and received a cheque in payment from the company. Anqther charge involved the retaining of wages tax on certain amounts which Smith had to disburse. In the alleged theft from Carruthers, Smith had withheld certain rents which he had collected. Smith had alleged that a junior member of the staff had been involved in one case and had stolen an amount of the money. He had been very frank, and had assisted the police in their investigations. Mr Young said that Smith was an old boy of a Christchurch college, and had a distinguished athletic record. He had a salary of £265 a year, which, after superannuation had been deducthed, left him £s' a week. With this ho had* to carry out his duties of entertaining clients and actually had received no payment from the company for expenses thus incurred. Mr Young said it had first been thought that the case would have been a civil one, and he contended that the action of the firm in its delay in handing the matter over to the police was most improper. One client of the firm had been so pleased with the way Smith had managed his affairs that he had offered to make good the full amount till Smith could repay it. Smith contended that the company knew he was borrowing from fhe petty cash, which he was obliged to do to meet his entertaining expenses. He had previously borne a good character. Chief-Detective Dunlop said the delay was caused because the Christchurch branch of the company had to consult with the head office before taking action. Accused would have been allowed 15s to 20s expenses. The Probation Officer (Mr W. H. Derby) said his attitude in the matter would depend on restitution, the fundamental principle of probation. Smith, who pleaded guilty to all charges, was remanded in custody till Tuesday, and the Chief Detective was asked to make inquiries concerning the payment of entertainment expenses.