DEFENCE FUNDS

Otago Witness, Issue 3196, 16 June 1915, Page 57

DEFENCE FUNDS

CAPTAIN HENDERSON BEFORE THE COURT. COMMITTED FOR TRIM. ON FIVE CHARGES. At Milton on Monday, before Mr R. J. Achcson, S.M., Captain John Robert Henderson was charged with, on or about February 18, 1913, stealing the sura of £2O, being portion of an amount of £57 12s 4d, paid to him on behalf of the 14th Regiment by Alex. Edward Stewart. He was also charged with, on February 18, 1913, making a false entry—namely, “To refund, range, £37 12s 4d. The two charges were taJcen together. Mr W. C. MacGregor appeared for the prosecution; Mr A. C. Hanlon for the accused. Mr MacGregor said, at the time when the offences were alleged to have been committed, the accused was captain and adjutant of the 14th (Sohth Otago) Regiment. Ho kept the books, and made payments on behalf of the regiment. On February 18, 1913, Mr Stewart, an officer in the Defence Force, paid to the accused a cheque for £57 12s 4d, as the property of the regiment. The money had been held by Colonel Stewart for 18 months in trust. It represented a sum of £SO, the proceeds of a bazaar organised by A Company of Volunteers. The balance of £7 12s 4d was interest which had accrued. On the day on which he received the cheque the accused deposited it at the National Bank in Milton to the credit of the 14th Regiment; but, before paying it in, he drew £2O of the sum in cash, and the amount, credited to the regiment was £37 12s 4d. The £2O had not been accounted for. To account for the credit of £37 12s 4d, the accused, made an entry in the regimental book, “To refund, range, £37 12s 4d.” That entry evidently referred to the payment into the bank, but was obviously not correct, and had nothing to do with the purpose for which the money' was received. After the accused had left for Egypt, towards the end of last year, his books were overhauled by the department, and a number of defalcations were discovered. When he returned, a few months ago, he was spoken to on the matter by the chief detective, and ho said he got the. cheque from Colonel Stewart and took it to Colonel M'Clymont, who was in charge of the 14th Regiment; but he had no knowledge of its passage after that. Alexander Edward Stewart, lieutenantcolonel in the New Zealand Defence Forces, and at present in camp at Trentham, gave evidence corroborative of counsel’s opening statement. He said the £SO was half-share of the profits of a bazaar organised by the old A Company, and the £7 12s 4d was interest. Evidence was also given by James W. Petrie, manager of the National Bank at Milton. Henry Theodore Thompson, Government audit inspector, said there was no entry in the books to account for the £2O which was the subject of the charge of theft. On February 18, 1913, there was an item, “To refund, range, £37 12s 4d,” in Captain Henderson’s handwriting. This item corresponded in amount with the sum paid into the bank on that day. It was not a correct entry of that sum of £37 12s 4d. Chief Detective Herbert, -stationed in Dunedin, said,, on April 26, at Wellington, he had an interview with accused in Mr Wilford’s office. There were also present the last witness and Mr Wilford, accused’s solicitor. When accused was asked about the cheque for £57 12s 4d he said he got it from Colonel Stewart and took it to Colonel M'Glymont. Colonel M'Clymont said he wanted the cheque, as it was marked ‘Regimental funds." Some months later, when he (Captain Henderson) wanted money to purchase some things for the 14th Regiment, he asked for portion of the £57 12s 4d, but Colonel M'Glymont said it was not regimental money, and refused to give it. Ho (Captain Henderson) asked where the money was, and Colonel M'Glymont turned up his

ledger and showed him some entries re fcrring to it. Tire witnesses were not cross-examined.

This closed the case for the prosecution. The accused reserved his defence on both charges, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court in Dunedin on August 9. The second charge against the accused was that on or about February 1, 1913, he did steal the sum of £5, received by him him from John Mao Gibbon Shanks in payment of ammunition, the property of the New Zealand Government.

Mr MacGregor said in this case the accused sold to Mr Shanks Government ammunition which he had no authority to do, received the money, and did not account for it in any way. J. M. Shanks, merchant, of Gore, said that in February, 1913, ho was senior lieutenant in B Company 14th (South Otago) Regiment. He bought from the accused 2000 rounds of Govcrnent ammunition for the .303 rifle, and paid £5 for it. The, ammunition was handed to him by Sergeantmajor Muir, the area sergeant at the time. Owen M‘Guiggan, Defence store-keeper for the Otago Military District, stationed at Dunedin, said that Captain Henderson had no authority to sell ammunition. Witness was the only person with such authority, then only on a written declaration being properly filled in and signed by the Officer Commanding the district. When an officer wanted ammunition he had to write to the adjutant of his regiment, who would fill in the proper form and send it to the District Headquarters, who would refer it to witness. Witness was the receiver of revenue for ammunition sold. Ho did not receive the money paid by Shanks to Henderson, nor did the latter account to him in any way for it. By Mr Hanlon; It was the duty of the Assistant Quarter-master General to sec that the amount asked for was not more than a regiment was entitled to. The Assistant Quarter-master General satisfied himself on that point by the strength of the regiment. It was not witness's place to say whether more ammunition was ever sent than was required for the men in the company at the time the ammunition was received. Arm munition left over in any year was returned into the magazine. Mr Hanlon: Does the regulation state that ammunition left over is to be returned to store?

Witness: I cannot say it docs. Do you know that ammunition left over has always been sold to individual members of companies for practice firing ?-—I do not know that. _ v Have you ever heard of it being done? — No.

How long have you been in your present position?—For eight years. Have you been a volunteer? —I have been a permanent hand for 20 years. And you cannot say that ammunition has been sold by companies to men who were disposed to pay for it to the company’s funds?—No.

Further cross-examined: Mr Shanks applied for ammunition to accused, who was the proper person to apply to. Evidence was also given by Mr H. T. Thompson, Government audit inspector. Chief Detective Herbert said when he questioned the accused in Wellington about the ammunition, ho said: “It is quite impossible for me to elucidate the position m many respects on account of the fact that I have not before me a small book which I had made entries in of, amongst other things, sales of belts and ammunition. This book was used, among other purposes, for keeping an account of such items of cash, in order that a regimental fund might be built up. It was kept by me until I handed it over to M'Clymont on my leaving, or was loft in my office. Without that book I cannot do more than rely on memory, which might load me astray. To give an example, I am asked if I sold belts and ammunition, and received suirfe as the result of such sale. I answer without hesitation that I have done so. The next question is: Where is_ the money so obtained? and my reply is that every sale is entered in such book _ and appears there the credit of the regimental account. To explain my general method in this respect, it must bo understood that these sums so entered as I have set out were, when the occasion required, used by me for any purposes connected with the regiment. For example, when the group had £SO granted by Government for a rifle meeting and the money was admittedly insufficient I increased the amount by £lO 10s from my notebook funds and expended the money in that way.” On May 1, in Dunedin, accused made" a further statement as follows “ I wish to state that the two amounts, D. Moyes £2 and Lieutenant Shanks £5, are not the only sums I received in this respect. I can now remember getting another amount from Captain Colquhoun, of Tapanui. In fact, I think the total amount received in this rcsnect would amount probably to £l4 or £15.”

The accused reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court in Dunedin on August 9. Accused was then charged with, on or about February 20, 1912. stealing the sum of £2 10s, paid to him by David Moyes, of Milton, for ammunition, the property of the New Zealand Government. The evidence was similar to that in the previous case. The accused reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court in Dunedin on August 9. Accused was also charged with, on May 30. 1913. at Milton, stealing the sum of £2 Bs, portion of a sum paid to him on behalf of the New Zealand Government for payment of a party of the 14th Regiment (South Otago Rifles). Mr MacGregor, said the facts wore these: At the military camp at Sutton in April, 1913, a number of men were kept behind as a rearguard to take down the tents and clear up the ground. A number of them became entitled to two extra pay. A voucher for the amount required was sent into headquarters, showing a total of £ls 16s. A few days later a cheque for that amount,. with other amounts —altogether £3l 12s 6d —was sent by the District Headquarters at Dunedin to the District Headquarters at Milton for the payment of these incidental amounts. The cheques were made payable to the order of the accused, and was endorsed and cashed by him. Although he got the money to pay these small amounts' he did not pay a number of them. Some of the men had gone to the front, but at least three were still here. They had signed the acquittance roll as having received the money, but it appeared to'be" the usual practice for the roll to be signed beforehand and sent in to headquarters. The roll was really n voucher to the head office to show the actual amount required. Evidence was given by Roy Barnes (grocer's assistant, Invercargill)-, Robert

Bloxham (carter, Dunedin), and Alfred E. Knarston (grocer’s assistant, Taieri Mouth), who said that although they did extra work at the close of the camp thev had not been paid. Douglas G. G. Hunter, district accountant at the Defence Office, Dunedin, produced documents to show that Barnes, Bloxham and Knarston each became entitled to 16s for two days’ work done by them as members of the rear party at the Sutton camp. Evidence was also given by H. W. Hilton, manager of the Bank of New Zealand, Milton. The accused reserved his defence, and was committed for trial at the Supreme Court in Dunedin on August 9.

Mr MacGregor said, as regarded two other charges, ho did not propose to offer any evidence. The two charges were accordingly struck out.

Mr Hanlon applied for bail. Mr MacGregor said he would leave the matter in the hands of the court. His Worship said, on the charge of stealing £2O the accused would be admitted to bail in one surety of £2OO and himself in £2OO, or two sureties of £IOO each, and on the other charges he would be admitted to bail In his own recognisance of £IOO.