SALE OF TRUCK

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 151, 28 June 1935, Page 10

SALE OF TRUCK

LOWER HUTT AFFAIR

EX-COUNCILLOR CHARGED

AUDIT PROSECUTION

i Alleging that Barton Ginger,- a Cusi toms agent and an ex-member of the . Lower Hutt Borough Council, was inI terested in the sale of a second-hand . motor-truck to the Borough Council in October, 1933, and that a deliberate . attempt had been made to conceal the true nature of the transaction, the '■ Audit Department laid three informaJ tions against Ginger in the Magistrate's , Court today. The" charges' were that the defendant, having' on October 4, ; 1933, become incapacitated from being " a councillor of the Lower Hutt Bor- , ough, did attend meetings of the Lower i Hutt Borough Council as a member . on October 9, 1933, April 9, 1934, and . September ip, 1934. [ He pleadecl not guilty to all the > charges, which were heard by Mr. H. i P. Lawry, S.M. [ The Assistant Crown Prosecutor (Mr. • C. Evans-Scott) appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. E. P. Hay for the ; defence. \ Mr. Evans-Scott said that the defendant was in 1933 a member of the Lower , Hutt Borough Council and was then, ■ and still was, the principal shareholder . and the managing director of Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd. The information , against him was based on the ground i that on October 4, 1933, he became , incapacitated as a councillor by reason of the fact that he was concerned ' or interested in a contract made by [ the council amounting to £110. The ', incapacity, it was submitted, took place on October 4, 1933. Subsequent to that date he attended a large number of meetings of the council and he was'charged in respect of' three of them. CASE OUTLINED. The facts were, continued Mr. EvansScott, that Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd., was a private company and in 1933 it had three members—the defendant, his brother, Horace Ginger, and another. In that year Mr. E. K. Kirkcaldie, a solicitor, became possessed of two motor-trucks which had previously belonged \o a man named Olsen, who had an account guaranteed by Mr. Kirkcaldie and had failed. Mr. Kirkcaldie then took over the trucks. Mr. Kirkcaldie asked a Mr. F. Corkill if he could find a purchaser for the two vehicles and the latter, approached a number of prospective buyers, including Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd. This was approximately seven days prior to September 28, 1933, on which date Mr. Corkill sold the trucks to Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd. Mr. Corkill at first saw Mr. Horace Ginger, who said he would have to refer him' to, his brother, the defendant. Some days later the company communicated with Mr. Corkill and asked to see the trucks, and Corkill took Mr. Horace Ginger and a Mr. F. Tait, an employee of the company,- to see them. There was a subsequent inspection at which Mr. Corkill was asked for the keys of the trucks for a day, September 27, 1933, and he handed them over. "A. REALLY GOOD BUY." On the morning of September 27, the defendant informed Mr. C. J. Ashton, the chairman of the works committee of the Lower Hutt Borough Council, together with the Mayor of Lower Hutt, that a second-hand truck, was available for purchase at a very reasonable price and that if the council wished to purchase it they would have to come to a decision within 24 hours, those 24 hours being the hours during which the company had possession of the key. Mr. Ashton and the borough engineer, Mr. Mainland, went with the defendant and inspected one of the trucks the same morning, there being also present Mr. Horace Ginger and Mr. Tait. The price for one truck was. £100, plus £10 for an overhaul which was to be carried out by Mr. Tait Messrs. Ashton and Mainland were led to understand that the truck was being sold by Mr. Kirkcaldie who was liquidating the estate of Mr. Olsen, whose name was on the truck. They were not told that the truck was being sold to them by Mr. Horace Ginger. Mr. Ashton called the defendant aside, knowing that he had a considerable knowledge of trucks, asked him if U was all right, and was assured that it was a really good buy. After inspecting the truck and discussing it, Messrs. Ashton and Mainland returned to Lower Hutt and informed the Mayor that in their opinion .the truck was a good bargain. By arrangement other councillors were telephoned and they approved of the purchase of the truck for" £110. On September 28 Mr. Corkill was offered by Barton Ginger and Co.; Ltd;, £50 for the two trucks, and payment of £50 was made the same day by a cheque drawn by Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd,, in favour of Mr. Kirkcaldie and handed to Mr. Corkill. Later, the preliminary decision of the i councillors was approved of by the works committee and on October 9 the whole council approved of the action of the works committee. Delivery of the truck was made to the council on October 4, the defendant driving one of the council drivers from Lower Hutt to Wellington and handing, over the truck to him. Mr. Hay interrupted to say that the defendant lived at Lower Hutt and came in to the city in his car every morning. No doubt it was convenient both for the borough and for the driver for him to get a lift with the defendant. DRAWING OF THE CHEQUE. On the date delivery was given, continued Mr. Evans-Scott, the Town Clerk of Lower Hutt telephoned to the defendant and asked him to whom the voucher- for payment should be made out. As far as the Borough Council knew the truck was being sold by Mr. Kirkcaldie for Mr. Olsen's estate. Mr. Lawry: Did not the council pass a resolution that the truck should be acquired from some specific person? Mr. Evans-Scott: Not at that stage. Counsel read the works committee's minute, in which no reference was made to the person from whom the truck was to be bought. Continuing, Mr. Evans-Scott said that the Town Clerk asked for the name of the person to be placed on the voucher and the defendant said F. Tait, and told the clerk to send it to him and he would have it, completed and returned. The cheque for £110 was drawn by the council on October 4, payable to F. Tait and forwarded care of the defendant. F. Tait was an employee of the company. Mr. Hay: That is not the case. Mr. Evans-Scott: The cheque was endorsed by Tait,and paid into the bank account of Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd. Mr. Lawry: There's nothing in that, is there? A ll it means is that the company negotiated the cheque. At the end of last year, said Mr. Evans-Scott, the Audit Department investigated this transaction and an audit inspector, Mr. Todd, in December questioned the defendant, who said that Mr. Tait was agent for Mr. Horace Ginger and that the sale and purchase . of the truck had been effected by Mr. j^ Horace Ginger to whose account the' ( cheques had been debited and credhVj ed in the books of the company, Eeh ) •

(said he previously did hot know Mr. Corkill, but the latter would swear that it was the defendant who handed him the cheque for £50. The defendant produced to the inspector the ledger account of, Mr, Horace Ginger in the books of the company. It was a loose-leaf ledger. The submission for the informant was that the facts would establish beyond all reasonable doubt that the trucks were bought and sold either by the defendant personally or by Barton Ginger and Co., Ltd., and' that the suggestion that Mr. Tait or'j Mr. Horace Ginger was the buyer and seller was merely an attempt to use another person as a dummy to conceal the real transaction. Mr. Lawry: He can't be a dummy if he receives the profit, can he? Mr. Evans-Scott: The suggestion is that the profit was made to appear to go to Mr. Horace Ginger. CASE MUST BE PROVED. "Your obligation in bringing a criminal prosecution," said Mr. Lawry at a later stage to Mr. Evans-Scott, "is to prove it up to the hilt. You can\t expect me to be affected by inference." Mr. Evans-Scott s,aid the prosecution suggested that the ledger sheet referred to was a false one. Mr. Lawry: Well, you have to prove it. I'm. not going to accept suggestions. Mr. Kay: It's impossible for them to prove it. Mr. Evans-Scott: I suggest not. Mr. Evans-Scott further alleged that a deliberate attempt had been made to conceal the true nature of the transaction. The cash book was said to be lost and the counterfoils and cheques had not been kept. Mr. Lawry: You will have to prove it by placing the true facts before the Court and letting them speak for themselves. ' ; Evidence for the prosecution on the lines of counsel's statement was l given by Reginald Louis Machu, a clerk in the Commercial Bank, Frederick Corkill, a mechanic, John William Andrews, Mayor of Lower-Hutt, William R. Stuckey, offtcer-in-charge of motor registrations, and Charles James Ashton, who in 1933 was chairman of the works committee of the Lower Hutt Borough Council. To Mr. Hay, Corkill said he knew the trucks had been lying idle for two years before the sale, and had been hawked all around the town without being sold. The Mayor said in'cross-examination by Mr. Hay that ■ the truck was •an excellent investment for the borough. "We're very happy about it," he said. At first he had refused to sign the cheque payable to Tait, said Ashton, as he thought the council had bought the truck from Kirkcaldie. He signed after hearing an explanation of the matter from the' Town Clerk. (Proceeding.)