OPEN TO FRAUD.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20278, 12 April 1934, Page 10

OPEN TO FRAUD.

System of Collection for Home. FALSE PRETENCES CHARGE. The method of contribution by which the Single Men’s Home in Fitzgerald Avenue is maintained was severely criticised by Mr E. D. Mosley, S.M., in the Police Court this morning, when dismissing Alexander Scott Collie under section 18 of the Offenders’ Probation Act on a charge of being a rogue and vagabond, in that he was guilty of collecting money by falsely representing that he was acting on behalf of the Single Men’s Home. “ It is a pity to see the good-hearted British public taken down in this way,” said Mr Mosley at the conclusion of evidence. “ The whole thing is founded on fraud, of course. If the Single Men’s Home wants to deserve the sympathy of the public and collect money for the upkeep of the home, they will have to get a different system. The present one is open to fraud. It is quite evident to me that the accused was guilty of fraud in dealing with with these coupons without authority.” The books of coupons on which the accused had been working, said Mr Mosley, were the ordinary books used bv the official collectors. They had on them the names of the house committee, and accused had admitted that not one of the men whose names were on them was now in the home. The coupons should be numbered and an account taken of all persons having them in their possession. In addition, they should be given a written authority to collect, and. lastly, the money so collected should be controlled by some outside body apart from the house committee. “ Losing Sympathy.” “ Why should people be subject to be taken down in this manner? One is inclined to agree with the old gentleman who was iii the box and feel that there are some of these young men who cr-n’t get work. I don’t want the well of public sympathy to be dried up, and this sort of thing is certainly not causing it to run freely.” Accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. Constable Warren gave evidence that accused had called at his house and asked for a contribution for the Single Men’s Home. The constable had had complaints about collectors from the Single Men’s Home, and accused Collie of false representation. “ When I told him I was going to lock him up he bolted,” said thq constable, “ but he didn’t get far.” Witness was close on his heels when he got to the other side of the road, and Collie stopped, admitting that he was collecting for himself. He said, however, that he was collecting the money to make an amount owing to him for work he had done at the home. Mrs Harriet Sedman, Mrs Jessie Keith and Mr John Quigley, all of St James Avenue, gave evidence that accused had called at their homes on April 5, saying that he was collecting on behalf of the home. Witness’s Fears. “ I got a bit rattled when this young gentleman approached me,” said Mr Quigley, a retired farmer, “ and I told him that when I was a young man I used to go out and look for work. However, I suppose there are some who can’t get work these days. I hope I won’t come back again. It’s the first time I’ve been in the Court in my life, and I don’t feel quite comfortable.” “ I can assure you nothing is going to happen to you,” the senior-sergeant assured witness. “ I hope not,” replied Mr Quigley. *VDid you give him anything?” asked Mr Mosley. “ No,” said witness. “ But if I had had anything in my pocket—well you know the smoothness of some of these young fellows.” The present secretary of the home. Albert Jones, said that he had been in charge of the books since February 10. prior to when accused had held the position. He had heard complaints from his collectors that unauthorised persons were collecting money from the public. He explained that the acting-secretary, who was appointed by the men themselves along with a committee of three, was paid 10s a week for his services. The committee administered the home and the secretary had charge of the collections. A Grave Doubt. Senior-Sergeant Fox (to the Magis trate) : There is at least a grave doubt about the rights of these people to collect at all. But that does not concern this case. From the dock, Collie cross-examined witness as to whether his name was Jones or not, and said that he could produce a witness who would say that it was not. Mr Mosley said he did not consider that that point concerned th»case. Collie, in evidence, said that he had been acting-manager of the home during his period there and was supposed to have received £2 a week for that service. There \vas a considerable sum that he had not received and he was collecting it by use of the coupons Members of the home committee at present, he said, knew that he had the book in his possession and that he was using it for that purpose. The names on the coupons were not those of the present committee. “ Then the tickets are entirely misleading,” said Mr Mosley, who adderl that he remembered himself that Collie had called at his house on Cashmere Hills and had been given money. Witness said he did net remember the Magistrate. “ You did not give me a drink of wine?” he queried. Witness said that he had last worked on Hanson’s Flat, near Westport, where he had a gold claim. He had not registered for relief since he came to Christchurch. He thought it made no difference if he collected money that was owing to him from the home or the public. It came to the same thing were some brieht moments at the conclusion, when Mr Quigley was asked if he wanted to collect witness’s expenses. “ Well,” he said. “ I'm a taxpayer and I might as well get a little bit of my own back.” The witnesses were allowed 2s each “ In my youth I was reared on porridge and the shorter catechism,” Mr Quigley was addressing the Court when the case ended.