BREACHES OF TRUST.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXII, Issue 19149, 15 October 1925, Page 15

BREACHES OF TRUST.

TWO YOUNG MEN SENTENCED. REFORMATIVE DETENTION, WAR BONDS FOR £IOOO STOLEN. Two young men who had pleaded guilty to thefts involving breach of trust were each sent enced by Mr. Justice Herd man in the Supreme Court yesterday to reformative detention for a term not exceeding two years. Walter Attridge Connell, aged 24 {Mr. Singer), was an officer of the. New Zealand Insurance Company, and stole ten £IOO war bonds, the property of the company. The securities were intrusted to him to be deposited in the Bank of New Zealand, and prisoner converted them to his own. use, stating, when asked for an explanation, that he had transferred to a junior clerk the duty of making the deposit. Mr. Singer urged that the Court should act upon the report of the probation officer, who had recommended that prisoner be admitted to probation. llis character had been excellent up to the present lapse, and the only explanation of his offence was that it was due to sudden temptation and to some pressure that had come upon him. Full restitution had been made. Oliver Nicholson, a director of the New Zealand Insurance Company, said that prisoner, while in the company's service, was held in the highest esteem by the board. Witness was chairman of directors when prisoner was appointed to the staff, two years ago, and was then well satisfied as to his character. Prisoner bad made to witness a confession which showed he had yielded to sudden temptation, in that he had been subjected to heavy blackmail, to avert which he had committed the theft. Unfortunately, when he realised the enormity of his acts he had burned £S(X) worth of the stolen bonds. Apart from that he had made restitution in money. The directors had authorised him to say they felt strongly for the prisoner, who had lost his position and would now have to find a new avenue in life. Suspicion Thrown on Another. Mr. Meredith, Crown prosecutor, said the facts hardly indicated sudden temptation. The bonds were handed to prisoner in Juno and none were cashed until August. He seemed to have got possession of them with the idea of subsequently disposing of them. It was also unfortunate that prisoner had thrown suspicion upon the honesty of a fellow employee. He had been trained in the Public Trust Office and was employed in another trust institution at the time of his crime. If such an offence were to be condoned if would create an undesirable precedent. His Honor said he had given anxious consideration to the case, but he had a public duty to perform, and he must deal with the offence in the light of the public interest. It would not be in that interest to grant probation in such a case. Time after time young men, when charged with dishonesty, pleaded sudden temptation. They came from the Post Office, from other Government, departments, from banks and from mercantile houses. The Court had no right to consider the future of the offender. It had to regard the general standard of honesty or dishonesty of the community. If the public thought lightly of theft that was no reason why the Court should do likewise. Its duty, unpleasant though it might be, was, by inflicting punishment, to deter others from dishonesty. Prisoner, from his training and position, must have been aware of his responsibility. As this was his first offence he would not be severely dealt ith. Company Manager's Theft. Charles John Downs Eves, aged 27 (Mr. Quartley) had admitted the theft of £lll 9s Bd, the property of the Law Book Company of New Zealand, Ltd., of which he was formerly manager, by using moneys which purported to have been banked. Mr. Quartley submitted that although prisoner had been guilty of a great crime against the community, it had to be remembered that he had the consciousness of having brought disgrace upon an honoured name and ruined his own career. The probation officer, in his report, had drawn attention to the fact that discrepancies dating from 1923 had been found in prisoner's books, but it was also true that this would never have been discovered but for prisoner having voluntarily given information to the auditor. The cause of his downfall had been association with extravagant companions. The money abstracted was largely used in trying to help out of difficulties another man, who, however, had taken his own life. Prisoner had not been able to make restitution, and it was felt it would not- be desirable that other persons should do so on his behalf. Probably if he were placed in such a position that the consequences of his crime came home to him daily—" if his nose were kept to the grindstone " —it would help to re-estab-lish his character. His Honor said there was very little to distinguish Eve's case from that of Connell. Prisoner had been in a position of trust as manager of a company. The police report showed he had stolen £lll, and that he had previously committed thefts of his employer's money in 192-3 and 1924.