ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT BY THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSARY GENERAL.

Westport Times, Volume IV, Issue 705, 1 September 1870, Page 2

ALLEGED EMBEZZLEMENT BY THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSARY GENERAL.

At the Auckland Police Court on the 20th ult., Francis Innes, D.A.C.G., Auckland, was charged with embezzling the sum of £SO. Tho Crown Prosecutor stated that the charge was nominally for £SO, but he would show that iu January, ISG9, £LOOO were deficient, and in June £SOO.

In the course of the evidence, TT. C. Lewis deposed: I am an assistant commissarat. Innes made an appointment to meet me at ten o'clock on Tuesday morning—to which time I had given him to make up the books and hand them over. He did not meet me according to appointment, nor did I see him on Tuesday. I received possession of the books on Tuesday; they were in the chest. I looked through the accounts for January 1868, as now produced. The balance on hand January Ist was £9114 Gs 4d, and corresponds with the receipts produced. This book contains all the items of receipts into, and expenditure from, the Treasury chest for the month of January, 1869, I have carefully compared the vouchers for the month. The balance shown by the book, in Mr Innes' figures, is £73-10 Bs. The totting up by defendant is wrong by £IOOO. The error is in the expenditure, which is made to be £IOOO more thau it actually was. The balance shown in the book ought to correspond with the cash balance in the chest, so that in that month the deficiency was that amount. The balance ought to be £B3IO Bs. The correct totals, in red ink, in the book, are in my handwriting. On Wednesday tho 17th, I received a message from Mr Innes, asking me to go out and see him, I went out about one o'clock in the afternoon, and saw him where I. believe ho resides. I conversed with him regarding the accounts. I said to him how sorry I was to see him in such a position, and asked him to explain the deficiency in the chest, telling him that I had discovnfed £IOOO in January, ISG9. He replied, " That was tho first, but you will find another, and more afterwards. The exact amounts and dates I can't tell you." He assigned no reason for

not knowing the exact amounts. I have since investigated the accounts for June, 1869. From February Ist to 31st May the accounts are correctly kept. The balance on June 30,1869,13 £0,791 5s Bd. There is an error of £SOO in the receipts, which are less by that amount than they ought to be; making for the six months a deficiency of £ISOO.

After some further evidence hadj been given the prisoner was committed for trial. Bail allowed; a personalbond of £IOOO, and two sureties of £750, each.