FORTY-SIX CHARGES

Taranaki Daily News, 14 February 1935, Page 14

FORTY-SIX CHARGES

FOUR MEN FOR TRIAL ALLEGED FALSE TIME SHEETS. NEW PLYMOUTH RELIEF WORK. Forty-six charges of forging and uttering relief workers’ timesheets and timecoupons were preferred against four New Plymouth men, Robert Bennoch, William John Pycroft, Albert Edward Lewis and William Henry Cosbrook in the New Plymouth Magistrate’s Court before Mr. W. H. Woodward, S.M., yesterday. After evidence for the police had been led by Detective P. Kearney the men pleaded not guilty and were committed for trial on all the charges to the next session of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth. Counsel, Messrs. L. M. Moss and Clement White, reserved the defence. Each of the accused was granted bail on his own recognisance of £25.

The charges were based on the allegations that Pycroft, employed on relief work at Te Henui cemetery, and Cosbrook, similarly engaged at the Fitzroy Seaside Park Society, had been employed at the Smart Road fertiliser works on the days they were supposed to be working their hours for unemployment relief pay. On these occasions, it was alleged, Bennoch, the foreman at the cemetery, and Lewis, caretaker at the seaside park, had forged and Uttered false time sheets and, with the two relief workers, had signed the individual time coupons, which were then presented by the two workers for their relief pay. In the course of cross-examination it was admitted there was no evidence to show that Pycroft and Cosbrook had not worked out the necessary time on previous days, therefore not receiving pay without doing the requisite hours. • The charges against Bennoch were that he knowingly forged New Plymouth Borough Council workers’ time sheets, with the intention that they should be acted upo£ as genuine, on or about July 31, August 8, August 14, August 22 and September 4 for periods ending on those days. I A further five charges were that, knowing them to be false, he caused W. A. C. Clarke, borough engineer, to act upon time sheets as if they were genuine on or about July 31, August 8, August 14, August 22 and September 4, the sheets relating to periods ending on those dates Pycroft and Bennoch were charged on five counts with forgery in connection with workers’ time coupons on or about July 31, August 7, August 14, August 21 and September 5 and Bennoch had to answer five charges - of causing -H. E. Fookes to act upon the allegedly forged time coupons as if they Were genuine, the dates being August 4, August 11, August 18, August 25 and September 8. SEXTON AT CEMETERY. W. A. C. Clarke, New Plymouth borough engineer, said Bennoch had been employed by the council for a number of years as sexton at Te Henui cemetery. In his position, witness was in charge of all relief workers employed by the council, except those employed by the council light department. A number of men, mostly medically unfit for hard work, were sent to work under Bennoch, whose duty it was to allot work, and keep time sheets, at least weekly, showing the days and hours worked by each man. Bennoch had also to make out a time docket for each worker each week. That docket had to be signed by Bennoch as foreman and by the worker also before he could draw his money. The time sheets had also to be signed by the worker. Witness produced time sheets and time docjcets from Te Henui cemetery for the period July 3 to September 11. There were 11 sheets, all signed- by Bennoch, showing hours of work put in by Pycroft. Signed time dockets for Pycroft from July 24 to September 18 were produced. Witness dealt at length with ,the time sheet entries and dockets in connection with Pycroft’s hours of work oVer the period concerned./ The hours coincided, except on the documents concerning Monday, August 20, and Tuesday, August 21. The time sheets showed Pycroft as having worked eight hours on the Monday and three hours on the Tuesday. The docket for Pycroft showed his hours as eight on Monday and two on Tuesday.

Indirectly, said witness, he had to rely oh the time sheets being correct. They were the only check between the foreman and himself that the men worked the time. Pay sheets for relief workers were made out ffi the borough engineer’s office and the staff had to rely on the time sheets. “Before these inquiries started,” said witness,. “I had no idea there was anything wrong with the time sheets. My-first information came from the Labour Department.” The coupon system was' started to make .a double check on the men and to make the whole system more watertight.

Pay sheets from July 7 to September 29 were produced showing, specially, payments of 13s 8d made to Pycroft in five of the weekly periods in August and September. Pycroft was an 11-hour-a--week man and on relief was allowed Is 3d an hour, a total of 13s 9d a week. The total amount signed for by Pycroft was £3 8s 9d. As far as he was aware Pycroft had been working his time on the job. ' . Bennoch had been a borough council servant for over 20 years, said witness to Mr. Moss. He had held the trust of the borough council and was a wellrespected citizen. It was impossible for Bennoch to have received any personal benefit from the transactions. Bennoch had been in charge of relief workers ever since relief work was inaugurated at New Plymouth. He had had to organise odd jobs for the unfit men. "CASUAL” AT WORKS. A. W. H. Nixon, accountant employed at the office of the fertiliser works at Smart Road, said casual work was done by Pycroft at the works. Witness produced a list of the hours worked by Pycroft, showing him to have • worked at the works from July 25 to September 5, in that time missing only four working days. He had received his pay each week. VZitness gave details of Pycroft’s hours of work at the factory on days for which the witness Clarke had produced Pycroft’s relief work time sheets and dockets dealing with 10 such occasions concerning Mondays and Tuesdays. Harry Egmont Fookes, clerk employed in the inspectors’ department of the New Plymouth Borough Council, said he insisted on seeing the coupons before paying out. He might sometimes pay out without a signature on the coupon if he knew a relief worker or his. wife. ’Hie signature was mainly for identification. Witness said that Pycroft signed his coupons and the pay sheets for a period in August and early September and as far as he could say he had made the payments. Hie coupons were always checked with the vouchers and if there were any discrepancies the payment would not be made without being referred to the engineer’s office. Detective P. Kearney said the Commissioner of Unemployment had made inquiries regarding irregularities in the employment of scheme 5b workers under the jurisdiction of the New Plymouth Borough Council engineer’s department. On /gjiuggr 31 h§ interviewed. Bmich

at his home. Bennoch said he had expected the detective along sooner as he had heard a number of rumours. Bennoch gave a statement and produced a diary in which he said he had made a note of Pycroft’s time worked ahead. There were certain alterations on various days dealing with hours worked ahead.

Pycroft had also been interviewed and had told the detective he had been working at the fertiliser works for a period and had drawn his relief pay at the same time. Pycroft made a signed statement. BOTH QUITE FRANK. Both Bennoch and Pycroft were quite frank, said the detective in answer to Mr. Moss. The hours were put down quite openly in the day book but the hours shown for August 20, 21 and 23 could not have been worked by Pycroft, as on those days he was working at the fertiliser works. There were certain days in July when Pycroft could have been credited with time ahead. “As far as I can see,” said the detective, “Bennoch has not benefited at all as Pycroft has collected the pay on each occasion. Pycroft said he was working ahead to try to augment his earnings.” In reply to a further question by Mi. Moss the detective said that so long as the man had done the work he did not see how the public funds had suffered in any way. “Since starting the inquiry I have been told that this system of getting hours on credit has been extensively used in this town,” admitted Detective Kelarney. “A great many institutions in this town have relief men working for them and it would appear that if these men are guilty then all who have carried on this system of working time ahead are equally guilty.” W. A. C. Clarke, recalled, said he had not at any time issued any instructions to foremen or timekeepers to allow relief workers to work time ahead. The case against Lewis and Cosbrook involved 26 charges. Seven were of forgery against Lewis in connection with the making up of time sheets on or about July 5, July 26, August 3, August 9, August 22, August 31 and September 6 and seven of uttering the sheets,' on or about the same dates. Lewis and Cosbrook were charged jointly with forging worker’s time coupons on or about July 25, August 2, August 8, August 21, August 30 and September 6 and Cosbrook faced six charges of uttering the same coupons on July 27, August 4, August 10, August 24, August 31 and September'7. A. W. H. Nixon, fertiliser works office accountant, said he had prepared a list of the days and hours worked by Cosbrook from July 2 to September 5. He gave the hours of work done on certain days. From July 25 to September 5 Cosbrook missed only one working day. H. E. Fookes gave evidence concerning payments to Cosbrook, time sheets and coupons. TIME SHEET EXAMINED. Iden Whittaker Palmer, assistant in the borough engineer’s office, who made up unemployment relief paysheets and returns, said he had examined the Fitzroy beach time sheet for the period. ended September 6 signed by A. E. Lewis. The name W. H. Cosbrook was on the sheet in Palmer’s handwriting. There was also an entry in the remarks column of the sheet “Omitted by A. E. Lewis per phone 6/9/’34” and the initials “1.W.P.” He had put the entry "there in response to a telephone call, which he imagined had been received by another employee, at present in hospital. Detective Kearney- said that he had interviewed Lewis and Cosbrook, taking with him the documents and sheets concerned. Lewis admitted having made out the time sheets and having made out and signed the coupons. Cosbrook admitted that he had signed for his pay on the three dates "in question and that Mrs. Cosbrook had collected the other four pays. He admitted having worked for the fertiliser company on the dates in question. He made a signed statement. “These two men frankly told me of the system of giving credit for time worked,” said Detective Kearney when questioned by Mr. Moss. The system enabled a local body to use a good man. he said, and enabled the man to obtain outside work. There was nothing to (suggest that Cosbrook did not work the hours for which he was paid. If Cosbrook had worked the time there was no reason to suggest that the public had not had the return for the money. Lewis had a good character and was well respected. He could see no personal benefit to Lewis. “I have not investigated,” concluded the detectiye, “in how many local bodies this system of giving credit for work is in force.” W. A. C. Clarke, borough engineer stated that the work at Fitzroy was being done on the seaside park and at the borough piggery. Lewis was timekeeper and had the right to, put men on either job. It was his duty to make up the time sheets, on which primarily the engineer in charge relied for making up wages. Witness produced the time sheets sent in by Lewis from July 4 to September 28, all except four being bn ordinary slips of paper headed “The following men’s time expires:—” He took it that the workers would have completed their time for the week on the date shown The time sheets detailed in this case all showed so many hours worked before an expiry date and the coupons showed the hours of work done on each day. The total amount obtained by Cosbrook in the period covered by the charges was £5 3s 9d. Cosbrook was supposed .to have been working on the dates mentioned.

Cross-examined by Mr. White, witness said Lewis could derive no person'll benefit. He controlled mostly B2 men who worked broken hours. Lewis retained his position as caretaker and certifying officer to relief workers, he understood. The system of working ahead would benefit either the society or the worker himself.