CHARGE OF OFFICIAL EMBEZZLEMENT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1210, 14 June 1872, Page 2

CHARGE OF OFFICIAL EMBEZZLEMENT.

[from the west coast times.] Harry William Barbor was brought up on Wednesday, at Hokitika, before the Resident Magistrate, charged, under the Larceny Act, with appropriating to his own use money he had received on behalf of the County Government. The information ran as follows : — That on the 12th of January, 1871, the said Harry William Barbor, being then employed in the public service of Her Majesty in New Zealand, and entrusted by virtue of such employment with the receipt and custody of money, the property of Her Majesty, did, by virtue of such employment, and whilst so employed as aforesaid, receive and take into his possession certain money to a large amount (to wit) the sum of Ll7 8s for aud on account of the public service of Her Majesty in New Zealand, and the said money then fraudulently and feloniously did apply to his own use and benefit, contrary to the form of the Statute in such case made and provided. Mr South appeared to prosecute on behalf of the Government, and Mr Purkiss, defended the, prisoner. Mr South stated that the prisoner was only arrested on the previous evening and it was only intended to adduce so much evidence as would justify a remand, for which he would make application. To complete the case against the prisoner, witnesses who were not now present would have to be' brought down from Greymouth. Edward Patten sworn : 1 am County Auditor. In January, 1871, prisoner held the offices of Postmaster, Receiver of Land Revenue, and Beceiver of Revenue. 1 produce the Gazette, containing a notification of' the appointment of prisoner as Receiver of Land Revenue. In consequence of instructions which I received by telegram from the Government of Wellington, on the 80th of- April last, I examined the cash-book and the receiptbook of the Receiver of Gold Revenue. Both books were kept by the prisoner.

The receipt-book contains 1 theicounterfoila; '. pi r;eceiptslgiven for moneys 1 received! I ; discovered 5 , that the sum . of --Ll7 8S paidj by Joseph'Kilgour, of Greymouth/ on tlie v . 12th ; January, 1871, had not been accounted for. I communicated with Mr Kilgour on the subject, and a receipt for Ll7 8s signed -by- prisoner was by Mr Kilgour. There was no entry of that siim in the cash-b6cik, ; nor was it accounted for in any way. On or about the 3rd or 4th of May "I saw "defendant either at .the post: 'office: or afe^myrown office, and I asked him where the sum of ( Ll7 8s paid ■= by'Mr Kilgour was brought; to account. He said he had- used it for his own purposes, and he wanted to know whether the Government would prosecute him. By Mr Purkiss : The sum of Ll7 8s would be gold revenue, .'_■ It was. received as reut for an agricultural lease, under " The Gold Fields Actj 1866." In the receipt-book produced there is no counterfoil for the 1 sum of Ll7s Ba. I know thatj it is the book from which he gave receipts for rents of agricultural. leases, and, for miscellaneous receipts in connection with gold fields revenue. There is a blank counterfoil at the end of the book, and there is the appearance of one having been torn out. It is usual to have such,receiptsnumbered with corresponding numbers on the counterfoils. There are no such numbers in this book. I have examined prisoner's receipt book" for miner's rights, and business licenses. The sum ofJA.7 8s I have referred to was not in those books. Prisoner did not have to receive deposits for mining surveys, but being Receiver of Gold Revenue, he might have received Buch deposits! I have never had' such receipt books printed, but if I were getting such books printed, I should send a specimen to the printer.; If I took such ' specimen from the book,;: that would account for its being missing. The Ll7 8s which prisoner received from- Mr Kilgour on the 12th of January, 1871, prisoner paid into the accouut of the County of Westlahd, on the 30th of Aprils 1872. I did not examine the books tjo* look for that deficiency, as it had already been discovered by some one else. Prisoner was allowed to p.ay,_the, LI 7 8s in", but he was told that such payment would not stop ', any proceedings which might be contemplated to be brought against hinii In point of fact, when I examined prisoner's books, and when I had the conversation with him on the 3rd or 4th of May, prisoner did not owe anything to the Government on account of the Ll7 8. To the Court : Prisoner said in the conversation I had with him on the 3rd or 4th May that he thought he could find the error, then that he could not account for it in any way, but he would look at the books and see. It was afterwards that he said that he had used the money for his own purposes. » On the application of Mr South, prisoner was remanded until the J9fch inst. Bail was allowed, prisoner in LIOO, and two sureties of LSO each. There was a second information against the prisoner for appropriating a similar sum of L 37.83, received by him from Mr Kilgour on the 12th January, 1872, being the second, year's rent for the same agricultural lease. Prisoner was. remanded on the charge to the 19th inst., bail being' allowed to the same amount as in the previous case.