THE CASE FOR ACCUSED.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14975, 23 May 1914, Page 6

THE CASE FOR ACCUSED.

A POINT RAISED. Mr Raymond, for the defonce, eubmittod that there was no proof that the invoices of which copies had been produced by Mr Larway accompanied the prime entries submitted to accused. Bis second point was that the prime entries would be passed either on the invoice or on the specification, and there was no proof that a specification io eapport the primo entry, as it appeared, was not. presented by >*orman Barlow to the accused. "We have the fact," he said, "that a specification was sent by the Melbourne Company." His Honour: The invariable course was to present the specification. Mr Raymond : "Either the specification or the invoice. With regard to the specification, it by no means follows , that a copy of the specification sent to Mr Lurwe'y'e firm was cent to

th& Christchnrch firm- I submit there might have boon double invoices—that was tho practice in a recont London case."

; His Honour: Assuming in your I favour, how docs that meet the case? !Mr Raymond: In this way. A primo entry i≤ produced showing a certain number of ca-ses of cut tobacco. If it agrees with tho specifications, accused's duty will have been done. There is no weighing in the case of cut tobacco, and all the eases before the Court show cut tobacco and that only. Therefore, if a specification of cut tobacco were sent forward to the importer here. it. \rould correspond with tho prime entry. His Honour: That imnlies" fraud against ohe. Whom do you Mr Raymond: The two matter* the landin;: waiter had to <-]o was to'compare tho entry with tho specification .-»nd see to th« stamnins. From Mr Oorrterv's evidence it is fair to assume that the done by tho importer, and not iiv the accused. I therefore ask that tho caso be removed. \\ EM OVAL REFUSED. \

His Honour: T don't see there is anything in the point at all. The theory I of the Crowu is that there is a deliher- | ato swindle. In nine instances it has i sijpfp'-fcftjl mid that would justify a jury in finding that ft could not have been done ex-cpfc by collusion. They would think the thins must have been pre-arranged. A man would not run the risk iiloue. It seoms to mc the whole case depends upon the exact nature of tho fraud. Tho prosecution givo details, and say it could uot have happened without collusion. Mr Raymond further asked his Honour to reservo his point, because if tho specification.* submitted to accused agreed with the prime entries, then he was not guiity. i His Houour: But then there were ! the goods. It is a mere- question of fact for the jury to consider whether ho should have discovered tho fraud. I cannot reserve tho appeal, because I ; have not the slightest doubt niout it. COUNSEL'S ADDRESS. ! Mr lUymond. in his address, said that tho questions at issue were broad, and, ij) spite of the mass of details, not confused. RundJo would bo put in the box and would explain tho case. There wero two ways of discharging duties, said counsel. One was the council pf perfection, in which everything was theoretically correct, and tho other was tho position in actual fact. It would bo shown that, by tho pressure- of circumstances, there was thrust upon Rundle such a mass of work that be could not carry out tho duties of tho landing waiter in a perfect fashion. It would bo also shown that the administration of tho Christchurch office was such that for other officers had been plunging* into fraud. Rundlo was an honest man, and believed in his fellow officers, whereas tho. whole thing was honeycombed with fraud. Bundle had never handled

any money aud it could not be suggested that lie had been concerned in the destruction of any of the vital docu- | njents. The Crown relied upon the imputation of guilt to incriminate Rundlo in connexion with Barlow's frauds. On all tho days on which the frauds with which Rundlo was charged took place, there was a special rush of work, and accused depended, properly enough, upon tho co-operation of his fellow officers. It might also bo that falso invoices wore produced to accused, but this could not be proved. As tho prime entries related to cut tobacco, there ivas no necessity to weigt the cases. With regard to the stamping, it would bo shown that the stamp was open and available to importers'in fcho office long before Rucdle entered it. Iα conclusion, Mr Raymond outlined tho course of evidence he proposed to call. This included a very experienced Customs officer who •would say that course of events would most likely be that pursued by Rundlo.

EVIDENCE OF ACCUSED. James Edward liundie, sworn, gave i his ago as 27 years and a half. v lo entered the service at' Napier and cam© >to Christcburch at the beginning of : December, 1011-., as a landing waiter. Previously ho had been assistant landing waiter afc Wellington for four or five months. He took HfU's place, but McKinnon was still there; Hill was a stranger, but he tad Worked with Mcivinnon in Napior. Tho intercolonial office dealt with all intercolonial, coastal, most of tho San Francisco cargo, Ail Vancouver cargo, and all the timber and coal boats. Before accused's arrival there were two landing waiters, bat he took over hie , own. and arrears of Hill's work, who had been transferred to.Lyttelton. He had no reason to doubt the integrity of either Hill or McKinnon. In February, 1912, McKinnon resigned, and ■at the landing surveyor's request, he took' over his back work, and carried on tho whole of the work for some four or fire months. On several occasions ho complained to the surveyor about tho pressuro of work, but was told to hang on, as someone would be i sent to fill McKinnon'e place. Wai- j lac© was transferred, bat was not sent to assist accused until some time after his arrival. The busy days of the week wore Thursday, Friday, and Saturday whon tlie Soate arrived, an J the day after. The cargo -was brought up to Chriatchurch in truck* and unloaded on the floor of the shed, and all tho hfeli-dutietf goods were aa a role placed in tho bond—an 'unenclosed space . INTRODUCED TO BAIU.OT7. "I first got to know Barlow through "McKinnon, when I first took over tne office/ said accused. "I was introduced all round." "Had yoa any reason to doubt Barlow's integrity V* asked Mr Baywond. "None whatever," replied accused. The process of deal-fog with plug tobacco was outlined. As a general rule, said witness, either tho invoice or the specification would be produced by tho importer. Referring to the specific chargea, accused endorsed the statement that as the prime entries wore for "cut" tobacco there would be no necessity for weighing. As a general rule "stamp- ! ing" in that office was done by the importers, and to hie knowledge there were- three stamps available. If the importer stamped the "cut" tobacco \xo (accused) would have no opportunity of seeing it unless bo made a special effort. As for the eize of tlio cases, ho would uofc have noticed these unless he went out with the specific intention of doing so. The certificate of correctness on the prime entry was put on by a rubber stamp, and the word "stamped" was put on, whether he himself stamped tho tobacco or whether tho importer did co. "On busy days," said witness, "a landing waiter has no time to put this word 'stamped' on the entry, as it is first presented, five or six people are waiting, and as a Tesalt, tho entries cannot be completed until after the office closes at night or early next morning." "Could that state of affairs be obviated by adequate staffing?" demanded 3lr Raymond.

"It could. Sir," replied witness. THE PHIME ENTRIES KEVIEWED.

Witness then proceeded to review in detail the prime entries which were the subject of the prosecution. In j regard to the first, on April 26th, 1912, which differed from the invoice, witness said: "There are eoveral explanations. There might be a. false invoice. A tcevious invoice might bo produced, or a false or previous specification. I had to trust, and dj<3 trust to the integrity of my fellow officers. By this I mean that Hill, who was. !4 rationed at Lytteiton, often came ! down to the railway sheds before eight o'clock in the morning. Ho might have bis felkmvconspjratojs there, and he would pass entries and give 'may-goV for goods which had been incorroctly passed before the arrival of the laading-waiter for that ship. I would come in just as Barlow preiented the invoice to Hill and-j

Hii! would say to mc, 'I hare W missed my train, tind cam o at-ros* *I tho stems' I found Barlow wai£t £ get eomo tobacco through, and I havo just seen toe invoice. Ho (Hilii aWi,; band tho entry and tho 'may-Atf J™ time niih the remark, *Thev & aro ail "S. , ?*- , J. remember that being d one " His Honour: I don't like these general terms. Has that happened io you ? Witness: "Yes, it has. His Honour: And you accepted hi* word and nut your signature on?~l les, your Honour. How often has that happened? More than once. added ihat on March loth, 1912, Hill gave a "may-go."

A POSSIBLE WRONG INVOICE. . fcil . re Sard to a possible wromr invoice being produced, asked counsel have you iound any invoice which would lit the facts?— Yes, J have Witness read out from the books of the British Empire Trading Company an invoice dated December 'Tfrh 131 X* which was similar, with tho exception of the date and the boat, to the Particulars given on tho prime eutrv of April 25th.

In the second case, counsel pointed out that tho prime entry was 'dated May 25th, whereas tho "may-go" was dated May 24th. Explaining this, witness said that Barlow would como to the shed, and after passing his bonded entry, would say, "Look heie, we are in a fix. Wβ want .to complete an order, and if wo cannot get the tobacco to-day wo lose a eale. The principal is away and I cannot pet a cheque signed, will you let uip hare a 'may-go , on condition that I pass the entry the first thing In the morning " "I would do so," added witness, "and it has often been done- by myself and, I think, by the other officers."

In another case, where the Wellington invoice was dated December 7th and the prime entry December 6th, witness said the Roods might havebeeu cleared by the Melbourne specification, which was often done.

Counsel csammed witness on tho other primo entries advanced by tho Crown. Hill's handwriting appeared on a primo entry dated March loth. 1912; and in another case Dunn sigued a declaration of correctness. ANOTHER POSSIBILITY. In further evidence, accused said he had sometimes to collect primo entries from_ Campbell, who had sinco been convicted. Barlow might have gone specially to Campbell or done it in tho absence of himself. .

Was ifc neeessai-7 in tout office, asked counsel, to place reliance upon the importers' representatives?— Yes, because of the pressuro of work. Had you any reason to believe they wero fraudulent ?—Nono whatever. > * Did you receive any money from Norman Barlow?— None, Sir. Did you participate in any way in the money defrauded from the Customs?—No, Sir. Were you ever called away from taking entries?— Yes, to go down to the boats. ■'

Would you -give a certificate on tho word of your fellow-officers ?—Yes.' CROSS-EXAMINED. , "Yon were pretty friendly with Norman Barlow were you not?" began Mr Wright in his cross-examination. "Not more so than with any other importers," replied accused. Turning to the primp entries, Mr Wright .subjected witness to a searching cross-examination. Regarding the seven cases for which accused gave a "may-go" before tho payment of duty, witness said ho had no security for the amount of duty claimable., Hβ did not pause to think that Barlows would not want so much as seven cases of tobacco at oneo hi order to oblige a client. Witness claimed that toe whole of the cases cited occurred when ho was alone iv the office, and this would eliminate any suggestion involving any officer other than Hill. Ho did not suggest that Campbell was concerned in any of tho cases they had been investigating, but he did suggest that Hill was concerned in more.than one, although' there was nothing on any of tho prime entries to support that idea. Hβ had not asked Sill to como forward and assist himself (accused). The instructions to open cases, were taken as understood. When the importer said tho case was I ready for stamping he (accused) would say I'm too busy;stamp it yourself." and hand him the stamp. His Honour: If you had carried out all yon were supposed to do, this would Jbave been impof««ble? "Yes, your Honour," replied accused. AN EXPERT'S VIEWS. Herbert John Crowther, retired Civil servant, with thirty-seven years' experience in the Customs Department, carrying him up to 1911, was called. Ho did not know accused, but had volunteered his evidence, as he thought ho could do him some 6ervice. Hβ was familiar with the passing of tobacco, and for some years did exactly tho same olass of work as accused did, at Dunedin. "From tho Customs audit point of view wo put very little credence in that rubber stamp," said witness. "We thought it was perfunctory, because it was always in the one place, as if ptit on like stamping letters." He also said it was customary for landing waiters to rely a great deal upon the shipping clerks doing business with. him. There was no great virtue in a "ma-y----go." If one was satisfied, it was signed. '•Regulations/ eaid witness further, '

''aro very good, and if those regulations were religiously carried out, wo would have the millennium at once. If I were busy," he added, "it would ho impossible for mc to do the stamping, and I would dopute it to somebody clso." Frequently goods arrived before the invoices, and the result was chaos. .

Witness admitted that as a matter of practice some- goods would be passed beiore duty was paid upon them to assist importers.

His Honour commented s>irongly upon this point, and said it was nos the duty of the Customs officers to "assist" the public in this way. It was a violation of tho regulations. 1 OTHER EVIDENCE. James Archibald, storeman for the Globe Delivery Company, eajd ho had had considerable experience in tie i-aihvoy goods shed, and it had been th«> practice iv Christchurch for all employed in the goods shed to stamp gotxls. All tho landing waiters thoro, with tho exception of the present man; had given him the stamp. Mr Cordeiy had Riven it to hhn ; but that tras a long time ago. The aoaJ was usually feopt in tho Customs office, but had lain outside all night, and been found tho next morning. Witness said he. never saxy ■ accused idling, but people used to coui grcgato at Campbell's office in the I afternoon. Iluutllo hod novor been J seen there' 1 by him. Charles Throp, chipping agont-, taid that tho usual practice, up to tho last feu- months, had been for tho clerks to | simply ijo and ask for the stamp and i uso it themselves. Ho sometimes found i .it lying about. Accused was alwava busy. • Bobert. Goorgo Eecleslield. landing waiter, Chmtchurch, said that.in viocused's office one man could not do the work satisfactorily tweivo years ago, | and the work had increased greatly eince then. Iv his opinion Bundle was overworked. Tho Court adjourned at 5.45 p.m. till 10 o'clock this morning. '