THEFT OF £720

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 174, 24 June 1926, Page 7

THEFT OF £720

ACCOUNTANT PLEADS GUILTY,

COMMITTED TO SUPREME COURT

, An accountant named Robert John Malcolm, 33 years of age, of Levin, appeared in the Police Court this morning before Messrs J.. A. Me* Leavey and J. Nairn, J.P’s., charged that, on or about May 1, 1925, at Levin, and on divers other dates between then and March 4, 1926, at Levin, he committed theft of various sums of money amounting to £720 10s Id, the property of Stanley Nelson Stilwell. Last week accused was charged with the theft of £l3 5s under the circumstances described and remanded until to-day, but in the interim the amount of the sums allegedly taken was enlfVged to £720 10a Id. Senior-Detective Quirke appeared for the police, accused not being represented by counsel. Stanley Nelson Stilwell, garage proprietor at Levin, said that, in April, 1925, he arranged with accused to do his cash books and other office business, such as receiving money, giving receipts, paying sums into the' bank and generally - performing bookkeeping business as a part time employee. Accused, by a verbal arrangement, was to be paid 30s per week. About July 22, 1925, accused was given a letter of authority to operate on witness’s current account at the Bank of Australasia, Levin. That was for business convenience, but about the end of January, 1926, because of something which he had heard, witness asked accused to prepare a balance-sheet for audit purposes, but accused failed to provide tho balance-sheet. On March 11, 1926, the books were handed over to another Levin auditor (Mr Hamilton) and, as the result of an audit, witness had a conversation with accused in the presence of Mr Hamilton. On that occasion accused admitted deficiencies and said that he would make them good within seven days. Accused had signed a statement agreeing to find £877 which would coyer shortages and tho cost of investigation of tho embezzlement, but tho actual amount stolen was that in tho charge. Subsequently, witness saw accused who said that he was going to Wellington to get the money but was not clearing out. That was on March 30 and it was not until June 21, at Palmerston North, that witness again saw accused, from whom ho had heard nothing in the interim. To Mr Quirke, witness said that accused needed only to spend a day and a half in the week on his books. Malcolm was doing like work for other business men.

George Dacre Hamilton, accountant, Levin, to whom the books of the last witness had been handed for audit, described the condition in which he found tho accounts. A comparison between the counterfoils of the deposits and moneys received by accused revealed that there was no trace of receipts from the bank for several cheques which had been received . at, Stilwell’s office, the inference being that the value of those cheques had been retained by accused. Sums totalling £2948 14s Id had been handed to accused but only £2631 0s 8d had been paid by accused to his employer’s credit, leaving £317 15s 5d unaccounted for. A further cheque for £6 14s 2d had not been accounted for, and accused had drawn several cheques totalling £lB 5s from his employer’s account before he was given authority, so to operate. After he received authority to operate on the account, it was found that accused had drawn various cheques aggregating £204 13s, some in his own name, others as “cash” and. “change,” accused converting the cash so obtained to his own tiso. Of benzine to the value of £346 4s 9d (cost price), which had been sold, that sold on credit was represented by a book entry of £132 16s, but no cash sales, which should have made up the balance, had been entered after June 22, 1925, there thus being a deficiency of £230 8s 9d. There were other defalcations in the sundry debtors’ account. When witness went into the figures with accused at first, Malcolm admitted nothing and endeavoured to explain matters, but later admitted defalcations and agreed to pay £877 to cover the amounts stolen —about £720 and recompense Stilwell for the cost of the audit and investigation. Detective T. E. Holmes stated in evidence that, when he went to arrest accused on the original charge of the theft of £l3 ss, he was not to be found, but eventually was arrested on June 12 last by a Wellington detective. On June .21 accused was interviewed at the Palmerston North detective office by Mr Hamilton, the Levin auditor, and after going through certain figures said that he would plead guilty to the theft of the amount named in the original charge —£l3 5s —which was embodied in the sum which accused was now charged with stealing. Accused had been perfectly frank and had placed no obstacles in the way of the police. Asked had he anything to say accused replied in the negative, pleaded guilty to the charge against him and was committed for sentence to the Supreme Court at Wellington.