THEFT OF MONEYS

Dominion, Volume 15, Issue 12, 8 October 1921, Page 12

THEFT OF MONEYS

FROM THE GOVERNMENT

TEMPORARY CLERKS CONVICTED

Before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., in the TTagistrate’s Court yesterday, John Norman M'Lean was charged that on July 11, and on divers dates between July 14 and July 28, he stole various sums! of money totalling Jl4 12s. Gd., the property of tho New Zealand Government; also that on August 1, and between August 1 and Septemlier 22, he stole Xl9 12s. 6d., the property of the Government. The accused pleaded guilty.

, Chief-Detective Ward said that the two charges involved forty-two small sums ranging from 2s. Gd. to Ills. The accused had been employed as a temporary clerk in ihe Inspection of Machinery Dejiartment. He was in the service from February, 1.916, until May, 1918, -when ho went into camp, and remained there until December, 191 S; he then rejoined the Department, and in the coruse of events "ne was retrenched. The chief-detective explained that every year the machinery in the district bad to be inspected, and a certificate furnished, for which there was a fee. It was the Custom of tho Department to send the certificates to the Post Office, and to notify the owners of the machinery to call there, pay the fees, and obtain the certificates. The Department could not make out what had become of the certificates this year, and notices were again sent out. It was then found that the accused had collected the fees, and appropriated the amounts. Mr. 11. F. O’Leary, on behalf of the accused, said that he accepted the statement of the chief-detective, hut wished to amplify the facts, as he was not without hope that he would induce His Worship to give the young fellow a chance. The accused was only a temporary clerk in -the Department, and the maximum wage he received was Jl4 15s. Prior to joining the Department, M'Lean was in remunerative employment, but owing to circumstances over ho had no control he lost that job, and had to accept what, he could. During the ladt few months M'Lean found himself in financial difficulties, and he got into the hands of a moneylender. In July the moneylender began pressing, and the prospect before M'Lean was that his home would be sold up, and he hit upon this method of obtaining money. He took the certificates and collected the fees for the purpose of paying the moneylender. M'Lean was a married man with one child. Immediately after he took the money he was retrenched from the service. Before he was notified by the Department that they were on his track, M'Lean told ihe whole story to a friend; he lx>rrowed the money, went to the Department, and made a clean breast of the whole thing, and repaid all the nioney he had taken. Counsel asked the C™ l ™ to give the accused a chance, for he had a big fight, before him. The passing of sentence was deferred until later in the day.

Thefts from Lands and Survey Office. Thomas Smith Dickson was charged that on fifteen different dates between May and September he stole various sums aggregating J 162 18s. Id. Chief-Detective Ward stated that for a year or so up to September, Dickson was emjiloyed in the Lands and Survey Of~ fice as a temporary clerk. The Department received a good deal of revenue by way of fees,' rentals, etc., and this camo in mostly by money-orders and postal notes. Dickson was in the nabit of going to the office early, getting hold of the mail, and sorting out the letters which ho thought contained moneyorders and postal notes. These letters lie opened; he-abstracted the money and destroyed the rest of the contents. In this way he had stolen in all J 162 18s. Id. On September 27 it was discovered that he had cashed a money-order that was made payable to the Receiver ot Land Revenue. When questioned, he stated that he had received it from Wanganui, but afterwards said they ought to know how ho got it. The accused, a single man, 39 years of age, htid been living with his mqther and supporting her. good deal of the stolen money had been spent in the company of a class of young fellows who generally sponged on men of accused’s type. The chief-detective added that in 1912 the accused was convicted on thirteen charges of theft, and placed on probation for twelve months. Mr W Perry, who appeared for accused', said that he knew the man had been previously convicted, but that was nine years ago. Recently his record had been good. He had been on active 'service, and counsel hoped the Court would take that into consideration. Ihe facts stated by the ehief-detective were correct. The accused was in the habit of getting to the office early, and although he handled the mail, uu | h ‘" g happened until he received notice of dismissal. This appeared to have had a peculiar effect on him, and these thefts were committed. He was not lutely in need of the money; was T 4 12s. 6d. per week, and he paid his mother Jl2 per week. He spent the stolen money on companions "horn he did not know, but he thereby self "a good fellow” with then . He was not a gambler, and had not been on a racecourse sinco before the war. Al he was suspended lie gave t he assistance in clearing up 111 ... Notithstanding Ins previous c ° ' ct ’° and notwithstanding the fact thatMhothefts extended over a period, then, weie the other circumstances that should btaken into consideration, and counse asked that the accused be treated with as much leniency as possible The chief-detective stated that none tho stolen money had been recovered.

The Magistrate’s Decisions. The Magistrate deferred passing senfence until the' afternoon. When the Court resumed, Mr. Hunt said that Dickson’s case was not one o leniency. By some means he employment in the Civil service utter being "convicted of theft, and when not e tied of his dismissal he appeared to ha deliberately set himself out to cheat the Department. Dickson was sentenced to six months' imprisonment, to be followed by reformative -treatment toi cigh ’ <. m-i-“- ,’‘“7trate said that his was a more ihfficulit case, but ho felt ho would be in giving him a chance to make fc ood. M’Lean was placed on probation for years.