WAS LITTLE LAX?
Another Civil Servant Cfearged wilh Theft Labor Department's Books Show a Deficiency. Wellington's weekly charge of alleged embezzlement by a civil servant was held by Mr. F. 'it. Hunt, S.M., as usual on Wednesday of last week. The officer involved was Willfcim Little, a clerklet. against whom it was alleged that m March and April last he did> steal various Government moneys belonging to the Labor Department, totalling £115 lUs. Mr. C. A. L. Treadwell appeared for accused, and Chief-Detective Ward prosecuted for the police. The evidence showed that Little had been employed m the Labor Department t from Mai;ch 25. ,1920, to April 30, 1921, and his duties embraced the collecting of fees and banking of moneys. Accused had intimated that he was leaving the Labor Department to join the Government Railways. It was then that his books were examined and some rather faulty bookkeeping was disclosed. The figures showed that £359' Is had been collected by way of factory fees, etc., and only -£l4.') Us had been paid m . Acting-officer-in-charge of the Labor Department, R,. T. Bailey, deposed that he carpeted Little on May 7, and asked 'him if he would be surprised to hear that a shortage had been discovered m the factory fet;s. Little replied that he, /would not be surprised if there were ~ K . A FEW POUNDS OUT. His surprise was very marked, however, when he was told that £104 Gs was the amount to the bad. Little said he had no suspicion re any other clerk not being on the level, and added that if there was anything, wrong, he was responsible. He then assured his boss that he was a modeUcivil servant — he neither gambled jror looked on the wine when it was .hops, Tho only explanation he could offer was that he must have made rp a bankslip and mislaid the deposit. Accused stuck to this explanation and said that he accepted full responsibility, and said that if he had known of the deficiency before he left the Department he would have attempted to put things right. Little entered a plea of not guilty, and was committed for trial, stating that he would reserve his < defence. Bail was allowed m. the sum "of £200,
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTR19210709.2.62
Bibliographic details
NZ Truth, Issue 817, 9 July 1921, Page 8
Word Count
375WAS LITTLE LAX? NZ Truth, Issue 817, 9 July 1921, Page 8
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.