AN INSURANCE FRAUD.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1510, 7 February 1901, Page 20

AN INSURANCE FRAUD.

A PECULIAR CASE

ACCUSED PLEADS GUILTY.

[Before Dr McArthur, S.M., at the Magistrate’s Court on Friday, the Ist, Walter Miles Phillips was charged with the theft of £405 Is, moneys of the Imperial Insurance Company; with having forged the name: of Walton James Wilkins to an insurance policy ; and also with having forged the same name to a receipt for £4OO. Inspector Pender conducted the prosecrition, Mr Cooper appeared for the accused, and Mr Gray watched the proceedings on behalf of the company. Alfred Arthur Locke, general manager for Australia of the Imperial Insurance Company, Limited, deposed that Walter Miles Phillips was the manager of the New Zealand branch cf the business. There were agencies in other towns of the colony, all of which were under Phillips’s control from January, 1897, until January 1901. Accused received a salary of £SOO per year, with a commission on profits. He had to report his transactions to the Melbourne office. Witness, in consequence of information he had received, came to Wellington to investigate accused’s transactions. Witness recollected a policy proposal being submitted to the Melbourne office by accused. The name of Walton James Wilkins was that of the insurer. The sum mentioned in the policy was £4OO. The insurance was to start from Ist January, 1899, and to be in force for twelve

months. The whole of the proposal was in the handwriting of the accused, and the initials '.“W.M.P.” were placed as those of the ostensible witness to the mark ,of the insurer, who. was repreisented as a settler at Wellington, and as being unable to write. A letter (produced) dated 7th July, 1899, and acldrejssed to the Melbourne office, _made a claim for £4OO on account of a fire at Christchurch on the premises of Walton James Wilkins. The policy under which the money was claimed was the one taken out in January, 1899. The fire was stated to have been caused in June l , 1899, by the accidental overturning of a kerosene lamp, and that the fire brigade arrived too latd to be of any service. The form also stated that accused had visited Christchurch and had adjusted the loss, aided by the principal agents there of the company. The claim and particulars were in the! handwriting of accused. The demand was met in due course, and £5 Is additional was allowed for incidental expenses. (A triplicate receipt for £4OO in the handwriting of accused was here put in. It Core the X mark purporting to be that of the insurer jxnd initialled by the accused). On the 2oth inst. witness called at the Wellington office and saw the accused. The witness then proceeded : —I asked him to produce the proposal which is the subject of the present case. I then told him I had heard that the proposal was a dummy one; that no such person as Walton James Wilkins existed : that no such dwelling as the one indicated in the proposal ever existed; that the Christchurch agents said they knew nothing of the proposal whatever; and that the superintended of the Christchurch Fire Brigade denied that any such fire took place. Accused remained silent. Witness again asked him about the facts, and accused replied: “It is bogus; but none of the! money went into my pocket/’ He then continued : “I have an explanation ; but it is for your own ear only.’ 1 Mr McTavish, our local director, asked accused what had become of the money. Hd Replied: “To. tell the truth, the amount is made up of outstanding agents’ balances which were in existence! when I took charge of the office.” His excuse for not reporting them when he first took chargd of the office was that he was afraid to let the company know —“You l

know- Mountain!” were his words. The company’s auditor. (Mr Morpeth), who. was then brought in, was told briefly the facts of the case, and asked to search the books to see if there was any truth in the accused’s assertions. At about five p.m. a cessation was mad© in the search, and the witness privately saw accused, who said, “Lccke! What doete it all mean? Tell me the worst!” I said: “Even if you can account for the money in the agents’ balances, as you say you can, your connection with the company will have to be seivered; but if you cannot do so you will have to take the full consequence.” In the evening Phillips admitted to me that theire were deficiencies in the accounts, for which he was responsible. He made anotheir appeal for lenielncy. I told him there was no hope, but I would consult the company’s solicitor (Mr Gray).

Cross-examined by Mr Cooper: Accused was in receipt of £350 per annum when he first cam® to Wellington. It was subsequently increased to A4SQ and £SOO. The amount of commission earned would not bo great. The business had increased under Phillips, but the profits had not. Could not say without reference to the books whether it would be necessary to make -up for past losses before/ Phillips could draw profit commission. For two years before Phillips came to Wellington there had been a loss on the company’s New Zealand business. A. J. McTavish, landed estate! agent, gave evidence that he was a local director of the! Imperial Insurance Company, and that he was present at the interview between Locke and accused. Witness confirmed the account thereof given by Locke.

Charlton Douglas Morpeth, an accountant* carrying cri business in Wellington, said he was present when accused told Mr Locke that he had applied the sum of £4OO towards settling deficiencies which had accrued prior to accused tab- *

ing charge. Witness made an examination of the books with the object cf testing the truth.of accused’s statement. The comparison of the various balances made by witness showed that there were practically no deficiencies existing at the time accused took over the business. Certain of the agencies showed small debt balances; certain others 'showed small credits—and the offset of one to the other left a variation, of only a few shillings. Eventually accused; admitted to witness that things were not as they should be, and that he had used the moneys of the office, without authority. Witness welnt on to state that the sum of £4OO had been debited in smaller sums to the various agencies of the company. Edward Smith, superintendent of the Christchurch Fire Brigade, testified that there was never such a fire as that indicated in the! demand made by accused on the company for £4OO insurance money. Sergeant Cmuckishanlif deposed that ho had been to Christchurch to make inquiries into the! alleged fire at the house of a man named Walton James Wilkins. There was no such man to be found, and. no such name appeared in any New Zealand directory.

Accused, when charged by the Clerk of the Court in the form by star tute provided, pleaded guilty to each, charge, and was remanadd to the Supreme Court for sentence!, bail being allowed in two sureties of £IOO and ■accused’s own bond in a like amount.