THEFT OF DEBT MONEY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 19879, 24 February 1928, Page 13

THEFT OF DEBT MONEY

COLLECTOR'S OPERATIONS.

TWO YEARS* PROBATION.

The operations of the Security Collecting Agency, Professional Chambers, High Street, -were investigated before Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday, when the proprietor, Henry. Cunningham Hay, aged 41 (Mr. Merchant), denied nine charges of stealing sums totalling £ll 18s 9d, the property of Preston and Son, tailors, and sums amounting to £4 10s, the property of Neil and Mackay, chemists. A further charge of obtaining £5 by falsely representing to a pawnbroker that a typewriter was his own property, was admitted by accused. Edgar Norman Preston said he instructed accused to collect a number of overdue accounts, for which he was to receive a commission of 10 per cent, on each debt collected. Witness said he only received one account of £4, less commission. He waited for some time for further payments, and then called at accused's office. He found a scantilyfurnished room occupied by two young women, who informed him that Hay had disappeared, and that they were waiting for their wages. Detective McWhirter said he interviewed accused, who stated he employed three young women, two of whom nad paid him £5, and had been admitted as partners in the business. Counsel admitted that moneys were still owing by accused, but stated he was still in business, and that the non-pay-ment should have formed the grounds for a civil action and not a criminal charge. Accused said he had every intention of paying the accounts, and would make full restitution if given a chance. The Magistrate: This is one of those common cases which have been before the Courts for 40 years, as far as I can remember. This man has failed to account for the money. What is his real occupation ? Accused: lam a book-keeper. (Loud laughter.) , , "Accused has been in New Zealand For onlv a few vears, and ho is a perfect muddler," sai'd the chief detective. "His engagement of these girls was quite wrong." The magistrate admitted accused to probation for two years on one charge of theft and ordered restitution amounting to £l9 6s 9d to bo made. A condition of his probation would be that accused would not bo permitted to undertake debt collecting as a business. On the remaining charges accused ' was convicted and discharged.