ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume I, Issue 92, 2 March 1881, Page 2

ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT.

Ernest Calvert Wilkinson was brought up on remand, on Tuesday, before Capt. Wilson and F. McGuire, Esq., J.P's., charged with receiving and taking into, his possession, between 23rd and 26th January, certain money —to wit, £24 9s lid and £15 Is 9d.

Mr. Barleyman appeared on behalf of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, and Mr. Ward for the accused.

Mr. Barleyman said the prosecution was instituted by direction of the Comptroller and Auditor-General, under section 69 ol the Larceny Act, 1867. He had had the assistance, in getting up the case, of an experienced officer from the Treasury, and he hoped to be able to lay the case as shortly as possible before the Court, and to show that the "money alleged to have been embezzled had never found its way into its proper destination — namely, the Public Account. As Mr. Davidson wished to go away by coach, he (Mr. Barleyman) preferred departing from the usual course, and taking his evidence, instead of giving a history of the case.

James Davidson, storekeeper, Hawera, examined — Remembered paying some money, about the middle of January — between the 14th and the 20th. The money was to have been paid to the Receiver of Land Revenue, as a second instalment on behalf of John Twigg. Paid £15 Is 9d to accused. Witness saw the receipt [Voucher No. 3] signed by the accused. Witness signed the block in the usual way for John Twigg. Witness had been at the office repeatedly to pay the money, but sometimes the Receiver was absent, and at other times made excuses that he was too busy.

Cross-examined by Mr. Ward — I wish to correct that portion of my evidence, with reference to the money having been paid between the 14th and 20th January. The money was paid on the day set forth in the receipt. I could not say on what day, as I had called several times.

Wm. Godfrey Holdsworth, examined — Am first clerk in Receiver-General's Office, which is a branch of the Treasury Department. The Receiver- General (Mr. J. C. Gavin) is also Secretary to the Treasury, and Paymaster. Examined the block receipts, and the receipts, so far as they could be obtained, given by the accused for money that he had received, as Receiver of Laud Revenue, for land sold ou immediate and deferred payment. Had a knowledge of the instmctions issued to Receivers of Land Revenue.

Mr. Barleyman (to Mr. Ward)— Will you produce the instructions sent to accused ?

Mr. Ward — You have got all the documents.

Mr. Barleyman — The original instructions cannot be found.

Examination continued — The instractious produced are a copy of those forwarded by Mr. Gavin to accused. Witness knew they were forwarded, and also the books mentioned in the list produced, as well as some memorandums.

Mr. Barleyman read from the instructions, which set forth, amongst ' other things, that all moneys received should be duly paid into the Bank every day, and entries made in the different books.

Examination resumed — The letter produced, dated Brd November, 18S0, was received at the Treasury from accused, asking for instructions, and the reply produced, dated 11th November, had been forwarded by the Receiver- General. Witness had investigated the accounts of the Receiver of Laud Revenue, found in the office at Hawera. Examined the ordinary revenue cash-book, and found no entries there. The book was mentioned in the letter of instructions forwarded to accused. Examined the deferred payment cash-book. Did not fiud any eutries iv it. Examined the deposit cashbook. There wore no entries in it. Witness discovered that accused had received some moneys ou deposit. The only way that the monej's seem to be accounted for was iv the bank receipts, slips of paper, and iv the documents forwarded to the Receiver of Land Revenue at Patea.

Mr. W rd objected to this evidence, as not being relevant to the charge.

Mi*. Barleymau contended that they were not bouud to the four corners of the information. He stated that he would conduct his case iv his own way, and then read from Judge Johnston's " Justice of the Pence" in support of his contention. Mr. Ward objeoted that the evidence had no connection with the information, and therefore it should not be admitted.

The Bench were of opiuion that they were merely a Court of Investigation, and wore not there for the purpose of tryiug the accused. Mr. Ward could make his objection in a higher Court.

Mr. Ward stated that he bad beard a Judge of the Supreme Court strongly auiniadvertiug upou a lot of extraneous

evidence being taken, and be desired to enter his protest against it being done id

tbe present ease. •• '[ The Bench ugreed that it was advisable to keep out all extraneous evidence, as far as possible. Mr. Burleyman urged that the case wag a very complicated one, and unless he was allowed to give the result of Mr. Holdsworth's investigations, he might fail in establishing a "prhita facie case. Examination resumed — The statement produced (marked A. 0) witness made up from the blocks of receipts of land sold on. immediate payment. (Blocks produced.) The bank pass-book produced appeared to be the oue used by accused as Keceiver of Land Revenue. The statement produced,was the same as the one which should have been kept in the cash-book. The total amount received for land on immediate payment wa3 J?26,751 16s. lOd., and there was paid into bank lla. lOd. The moneys shown in the blocks and receipts had not been accounted for. The apparent deficiency is j£39 ss, statement produced (marked A. 9), was one made up from the blocks of receipts showing sums of money received as second instalments for band sold on. deferred payment in the West Coast Land District, amounting to 9s. sd. The document produced (marked A. 10) was a statement of the accounts for second payments on deferred payment selections in the Taranaki Land District, amounting to £63 195., made up from the blocks, and in one instance from an original receipt (that of Thomas Robson). The books produced were the ones sent to the accus d. (There were no entries whatevpr in them.)

Cross-examined — Witness knew the accused before he came to Hawera. - The accused came to Hawera as Clerk of the Resident Magistrate's Court. Did not know what salaries the clerks received, as witness had nothing to do with tbe disbursements. The amount was not stated in the letter of instructions. There was nothing in them as to what accused was to be paid as remuneration for manipulating all these public moneys. Thought it would be possible for accused to comply with these instructions, in addition to his ordinary duties as Clerk of the R. M. Court. Was unaware as to what the capabilities of the accused were. Mr. Ward — Would you be surprised to hear that the accused received the princely sum of £135 for performing all these duties?

Witness — I would not, because Government servants are not now over-paid, •

Mr. Ward — And yet, according to what you Btate, the accused, who only received £135 per annum, received over .£26,000 within a short time?

Witness — Yes.

Re-examined — The total deficiency ia £482 13s. 5d., £379 9s. 5(1. of which is on account of moneys rec 'ived for deferred payment lands in the West Coast Land District.

Arthur Fitzroy Horneman, residing at Mangawhero, stated that he was licensee of deferred payment sections 16, 17, and 18, Block XHL, Ngaire. Paid the instalments due ha January into the Bank. Saw the accused on the 24th January. He ask -. d for some information, but witness was unable >to give it. The accused started to fill in the receipt, but he wished it left over till he (witness) could furnish the information, and witness left the receipt with him. The following witnesses gave evidence as to payment of moneys for deferred payment sections held by them, and also as* to having the receipts (which were produced), signed by the accused in their presence : — William Cleaver, settler, Normanby, £17 13s. 3d., on 31st December ; William Lilly England, storekeeper, Normanby, 17s. 10d., on 3rd January ; Michael Martin Hogan, settler, Ngaire, £12 55., on 4th January ; Charles Quin, settler, Normanby, £M 33. 9d., on 4th January ; James McCutchan, commission agent, Hawera, £1 6s. 7d. and Bs. 6d., on sth January ; William Broderick, builder, Hawera, £16 35., on 6th January; Michael Kelly, laborer, Normanby, i-15 4s. 9d., on 6th January ; George Casterton Turner, settler, Mangawhero, £10 165., on 6th January ; and William Stuart, settler, Normanby, £48 19s. Id., on 17th January. (Mr. Quin stated that he had offered a cheque to accused, but as it was not marked " good," the latter refused to take it at the time; but Mr. Quiu afterwards handed it to him near the bank, after it had been marked, and got his receipts in return.) Mr. Barleyman having stated that he had no further evidence to offer that day,

The Court was adjourned to 11 a.m. this day (Wednesday).