SECRETARY ON TRIAL

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 504, 6 November 1928, Page 15

SECRETARY ON TRIAL

DEFICIT IN FUNDS THEFT CHARGE LAID Mr. Justice Blair and a jury were occupied in the Supreme Court all day yesterday in hearing evidence in the trial of Frederick William Webster. ex-secretary of the Whangarei Co-operative Terminat ing Building Society, who was charged with failing to account for ‘•divers sums” totalling £1,498. Mr. V. R. Meredith prosecuted for i the Crown, and Mr. A. H. Johnston* . | supported by Mr. R. K Trimmer, of i Whangarei. defended. A large part of the day was given |to hearing the evidence of Hugh Wentworth Crawford, chairman of ! directors of the society, and his j cross-examination by Mr. Johnston* Accused had admitted civil liability ! for "not more than £200” to witness. 1 but denied criminal responsibility, j Cross-examined, witness admitted j accused had not represented himself 1 to be an accountant when he was api pointed. Witness denied that he had ever i asked Webster to keep his shares fin--1 ancial when they were not. He always paid a year in advance. Witness did not know whether there were numbers of people who were owing j money on shares. He never saw signs | of extravagance in Webster, neither t had he previous occasion to doubt ac- ; cused’s honesty. , Donald Alexander McLean, another director of the society, corroborated Crawford’s evidence. To Mr. Johnstone: I do not remember a rule requiring directors to vacate office if they became two months in arrears with subscriptions. Webster had often undertaken to keep him right when he had forgotten to bring his book with him. Mr. Johnstone’s cross-examination was not completed when the Court j adjourned until this morning. FINANCIAL SHAREHOLDERS I Donald Clynes Webster, ased 20. a soil of accused and employed by him. said there was no regular banking of receipts. That was done when there was an accumulation. To His Honour: The society’s monev was not counted after being received over the counter. It was then banked without counting. I never took any of the money, nor gave 1.0.U.’s for it. Cross-examined, witness said there had been a practice in the office ot making people financial when they had not actually paid. A lot of that was done. Witness used to write up people as far ahead as they were in arrears. In was done for all the directors except Crawford. Crawford knew that the practice was going on and told witness on one occasion to look up the register and ascertain if members were financial. If not, witness was to make them so. The office wrould then have to wait, until shareholders came in before the money could be obtained. In some cases this led to people being credited for payments they iiad not made. In the last 12 months accused had attended mainly to other agencies. The balance sheets were drawn up by the society’s auditor, Mr. A. M. Rust. Re-examined by Mr. Meredith, witness said it would often be a matter cf memory w T hether shareholders paid up on “financed” shares. Sometimes" 15 or 20 unfinancial people would be informed of an impending ballot. Mr. Meredith then asked leave to recall Crawford to question him in regard to what the boy had said. Objection was taken by Mr. Johnstone that it was evidence called in rebuttal of evidence by another Crown witness. Mr. Meredith contended it was permissible to recall any witness on any point, his case not having closed. Counsel pointed out that the boy’s evidence placed Crawford in an unfortunate position. His Honour agreed this was so, but suggested the point be not pressed in view of the fact that the trial was a criminal one. (Proceeding.)