ALLEGED THEFT.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 3443, 26 May 1898, Page 2

ALLEGED THEFT.

THE CHARGES AGAINST JOHN CKAIG. MAGISTERIAL INQUIRY. Mr H. Eyre Kenny, S.AL, continued his investigations yesterday into the c against John Craig of having various sums amounting t • .£.''lo, th • p-°-perty of James Smith and 1 »•- -^ f ° House. MriOllivierappc tied loc in*- C.-own and Mr Young for the de.oncr, S r K ’*«•* t Stout watching the proceedings on of Air Smith. Air S. C. Leary, the accountant eng d by the creditors to audit the b"Oks ot iho firm, was further eross*ext mined by A. r Young as to the legations between C uior (the London partner) and Craig. When witness drew up a list of excess drawings of salary ho was not aware that accused w a s entitled to a large amount from Smith and Carter, nor did he know it now. If Carter paid Customs duty out of his own pocket, thou there was nothing in the books to show it. William Sirmu. indenting clerk at Te Aro House, where he had been employed for 15 years, explained, in answer to Air Ollivier, that he had been on terms of personal friendship with Craig to the date of the latter's arrest. Recollected being present at a meeting between the accused and Mr Leary, the investigating accountant, at the former's residence on April 28th. Witness generally corroborated the previous evidence given as to the conversation on that occasion with reference to the condition of the books, the incorrectness of the balance-sheets and other matters. Mr Young: We have nothing to do with the balance-sheets, and any evidence on the point is entirely irrelevant. Ale Kenny: I think it may be admitted at the present stage for this reason : —lf Mr b'mith and accused have been in the habit of concocting false balance-sheets, it could only have been done with the object of deceiving somebody. If that is shown, and also that Smith has been in collusion with Craig, whereby the latter has been permitted to draw : cheques and pocket the money, it will be a question of how much the former is to be believed, and whether under those circumstances the case is one for a

jury. Mr Young still pressed his objection against questions with regard to the balance-sheet, bub was over-ruled by the

Magistrate, who, quoting from Johnston’s Justice of the Peace (pages 11 and 13a), held that testimony on the point was admissible. The present investigation was a purely ministerial one, his office in such cases not being of a judicial character. Further questions of a similar nature to those replied to by Mr Leary were put to the witness as to what passed at a second interview, his answers being substantially the same. Craig was greatly agitated on both occasions, completely breaking down at one point. To Mr Yeung: Had a distinct recollection of Craig inquiring " Are the cheques (those overdrawn) charged to salaries ? ” when questioned by the accountant. Accused had had a great deal of work ou his shoulders, and was looking wretchedly ill at the time. Believed the figures of an entry in the cash book “ D,” folio 20, relating to Customs were Craig’s, bat was prepared to swear that the entry on folio 36, “ salaries .£100,” was. Had suspected that the balance-sheets were unreliable from the date of Craig’s dismissal. The only advantage the latter would gain by having a false return prepared would be to retain his position. Had assisted Craig to gat hail in every possible way, and when Mr Young cross-questioned him on this point in order to show that he had not done so counsel was confusing him with his father. Had an idea why the latter told one of the bondsmen that he would not go bail for sixpence. Believed that Craig’s private cheques were used to assist customers of To Aro House to meet bills falling due. Mr Kenny: You say that Craig was general manager. Who acted as accountant ?—Accused.

In that capacity had he charge of and access to the cash-book D ?—Yes. Was he in the habit of making entries in it?—Yes.

The next witness, Wilson Skeen, chief clerk in the office at Te Aro House, said salaries were paid once a month—half of the house on alternate fortnights. Cheques for the amount duo were filled up by the accused, who occasionally signed them, and sometimes Mr Smith did so. The money was then procured from the bank and handed to Mr Craig, who paid each employee, though at times Mr Smith did so. Each person’s share, was wrapped up in an envelope, but the witness could not say who put it there. Had never seen one or the other doing this work of apportionment. In the 54 cheques (for salaries) produced the body was filled in by Craig, but some were signed by Smith. Other cheques for £IOO, £llO and £4O were in accused’s handwriting and were signed by him. Craig made up the salaries sheet.

To Mr Young: Did not know the process Craig adopted in arriving at tho gross amount of salaries. Know nothing about accused assisting customers to meet their bills, but remembered paying money into bis credit. Witness was crossexamined at some length as to the method of keeping the petty cash, his answers being in the direction of showing that wages were occasionally paid out of this fund. Charles William Ohilmau, manager of the Te Aro branch of the Bank of New Zealand, where James Smith and Co. kept an account, also the accused, said the whole of tho cheques produced (54 in number, for salaries) had been duly presented for paymen and honoured, as also had tour others for £450.

To Mr Young! It was not usual to give information to outsiders, though an exception had been made in the case of Craig. Mr Soramerville, tho Wellington manager, had given instructions that Mr Leary should be given every information. Had noticed that James Smith and Co.’b cheques were being paid into Craig’s account, and understood this was being done to enable branch bills to be met. Did not know that the bank had charge of Te Aro House, nor what, its position was with regard to the establishment. Mr Young; Is the firm’s account at your branch in credit ?

Witness (to the Magistrate) •• Must I answer that?

Yes. Witness : No, it is in debit. Witness went on to say that he understood there was an account at the head office, but had absolutely no knowledge of its position or how it was conducted. Understood that Craig received a salary of £SOO a year, and for the half-year ending 31st Starch last there had been £3002 18s 5d passed through his account, £I4OO for the previous half, and £2OOO in the preceding period. Craig was undoubtedly helping Ihe branch firms—for the ostensible reason that he was interested in them. Accused was given an advance of £SOO Jn February, it being understood that the money was to be used in assisting Barnsby and Co., of Dannevirke, to retire their bills. In October Smith and Co.’e cheque for £2OO was paid into Craig's account, the money going to meet W. M. Clark and Co.’s hill. It seemed that Craig’s account was being used for his own purposes and Carter’s (the London partner in the firm). Various sums had been seat to the latter by accused.

By Mr Ollivier: There had been no reason to think that accused said the various branch businesses were sold in order to deceive the bank.

Henry Arthur Hurroll, ooaobbuilder, of Courtenay place, knew the accused and recollected him purchasing a buggy for £4O, which was afterwards paid by cheque, dated .November 15th, 1895. This was afterwards lodged to his firm’s credit at the National Bank. The cheque produced was the one.

To Mr Young; Of course, could not absolutely swear the cheque was the one, but had not a shadow of a doubt about it. The entry in the day-book corresponded with the date on the cheque. Alex. 13 ill in gall said that during 1890 he erected a five-roomed cottage for accused on the same proparty as his residence was on. Received several payments, most of them in notes, but one of £llO by cheque, corresponding with the date of that produced, and similarly signed—by James Smith and Co. This cheque was handed in to Hal'ey and Ewing in payment of a small account, witness receiving in return a cheque for the balance, which was given to Stewart and Co. Corroborative evidence was given by Jardine Ewing and Charles Ballingall, after which an adjournment was made until to-morrow morning at 10 30.