COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE

Putaruru Press, Volume XXI, Issue 1234, 12 June 1947, Page 7

COMMITTED FOR SENTENCE

drainage; board clerk Theft Charge Involving £I3OO Misappropriation of funds ’totalling- £l3Ol was admitted at Te Aroha on Wednesday -by Horace Rowfootham, clerk, aged 56, when he appeared before Messrs. W. C. Kennedy and J. R. Nicol, J.’sP., charged with theft of the sum mentioned from the Thames Valley Drainage Board, to which he had been clerk and treasurer since 1932. The changes related to incidents spread over a period of 12 £ years. Accused was represented in Court by Messrs N. I. Smith (Hamilton) and G. H. Nicolls (Te Aroha). The method of checking accounts of the board was outlined by the chairman, Mr. F. E. Hughes, who said vouchers were signed by the chairman and one other member. There were frequently blanks but these had invoices attached. These accounts were scrutinised at the board’s meeting, passed for payment and the total amount confirmed at next meeting of the board. It would be possible for further invoices to be attached to the vouchers'. The clerk 'also had been given blank cheque forms from time to time for payment of accounts which had not been rendered, and for wages. It would therefore be possible to attach invoices not authorised by the beard and at the same time to pay for them out of the board 3 funds. This would not necessarily be detected during audit as the invoices would show as authorised and passed for payment. •I ’ ■ Regarded as Trusted Employee The accused had had long- experience and was regarded as* a trusted employee. 1 l It was not until three months ago that it was discovered that timber ordered for the board by accused had been delivered to his own farm, and as a result close investigations had been made by the auditor and witness. Accused had been confronted at a meeting of the board with various irregularities for which he could not account and had been dismissed. Corroborative evidence was given by William John Kane, Government auditor inspector at Hamilton, who stated that acting on information from , the previous witness, and another memlber of the board, he had gone through the accounts 'back to 193® and found numerous- cases of alleged misappropriation of money. If some items had not been questioned they could easily have been charged arid entirely in order Restitution of £262 Accused had given witness every assistance in unravelling the affair and most of the misappropriation had been ip respect of building materials. -Following hig appearance before the -board Rowbotham had made restitution of various amounts totalling £262. He had interviewed accused on May 21, said Senior-Detective W. R. Murray, of Hamilton, who conducted the police case, and Rowbotham had volunteered a statement in which he had admitted the offences. He had then been arrested, charged and released on bail. A further statement had been made by accused admitting offences in respect of the whole amount of £l3O-0, and he intimated his desire to make full restitution. Rowbotham pleaded- guilty and went into the box. He made a statement following which he was committed to the Supreme Court, Auckland, for sentence. -Bail was fixed at £IOO, £SO on his own surety and one other surety of £SO.