TIME AND PAY SHEETS

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 34, 9 August 1921, Page 8

TIME AND PAY SHEETS

CHARGES OF FRAUD

[WORK ON THE WATERFRONT.

"The hearing of evidence regarding the charges of conspiracy to defraud laid against George Churchill and Alexander Joseph Chisholm, time-keeper and assistant-time-keeper in the employ of the Union Company, was continued by his Honour Mr. Justice Reed and a jury of twelve at the Supreme Court yesterday ■ afternoon and to-day. It is alleged that Churchill and Chisholm defrauded the company of £165 by falsifying the records showing the time worked by waterside labourers by adding the names of two men; "T; A. Wells" and'"(3; N. Walker," together with the hours alleged to have been Worked by them. -. . {

Mr. IV-Sf.-iK; Macassey j appeared for the Crown, Mr! H. F. O'Leary for Churchill, and Mr. A. B. Sievwright for Chisholm. Mr. Walker Gardiner was foreman of the jury.

Edward Cyril Smythe, accountant in the employ of the Waterside Labour Employment Association,. continued his evidence,: referring chiefly to details of particular entries. '' ■ ..

.Edward Norman Walker and Thomas Anton© Wells. Harbour Board employees, stated, in evidence that^ they had not been employed as implied by the Union' Company's pay-sheets. The signatures on .the receipts produced were not, theirs. Walker, in cross-examina-tion, said that prior to sth May, .1920, he had worked for the Union Company's coal gang. Wells said he was, working for the coal gang up to 4th May, 1920.

■Patrick O'Donoghue' stated that he \vfs gang-foreman for the Union Company on the Dilpussund coal hulk on 220 d February, 1921, an occasion when Wells and Walker were alleged by the pny-sheets' to have worked. His list of men working did not show the namcs_ of either Wells or Walker. Had he" missed ■ the names of men working his attention would have been drawn to it.

■In answer)• to' Sir.- Sievwright, the witness said it was. possible for the accused men to write iup the time-sheets: from the engagement book and without reference-to. witness's book. Witness admitted.to. Mr, iO'Leaiy.that Ke had ojhitted,, by,- mistake, from his list men ftually employed. There -were cases, ■>, in-which men would go on to the y-slips without the foremen knowtng apythTng about: them. Apart from the February book, ■ he-was ■ relying on his memorvo.as- tci-whether--or not he had a "T. A. ..Wells','., or -an, "E. N. Walker" ■working under him since May W 1920.

James- George Bruce, secretary of the Wellington Waterside Workers' Union, sftid that 'Edward ■, Norman Walker and Thomas'-A. Wells were members ot tha rjiion. There was only one E. N. Warier and,one T...A. Wells on the union's books. „..;,. ... ' ■■ . ,

'In, answer •■ to cross-examination witness saM that in 1919-20- there were two "W ells's on the books, and. three, in 3920-21 In 1919-20 there were 17 Walkers on the books, and in 1920-21 there Were 11. '•..-'. ' :' S -

v Peter , Nelson),,coal-gang foreman for the Union Steam' Ship Company;, gave instances where the names "of Wells and Walker did nobr ; appeai; in his book as having been engaged on specific, libatsj although tho names {.appeared. ;on 'the time booksi ... ... .....■■■'..

LtEvidetfcfer: on-1 similar' linesi; was*-'given' l>y l ...E^HprrfaH., i ajnd,^aurenoe ©Isen",*"coal foremen. '";' ' "'

(Proceeding.)