BOROUGH FUNDS

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVII, Issue 8, 7 December 1926, Page 2

BOROUGH FUNDS

COUNCIL’S FURTHER INQUIRY. CONCLUDED LAST EVENING. The inquiry instituted by the Borough Council into the municipal office system of handling cash was concluded at a further special meeting last evening, when evidence was given by the assistant-town clerk (Mr Crozier). Councillors discussed the position at some length, when it was agreed that the system itself, with a slight niodihcation, was as efficient as could, be cie- * Tbo inquiry, it wifll bo remembered, was established in consequence of the jury- which tried a man accused of the theft of £220 from the borough offices, adding a rider to its verdict of acquittalcriticising the method of handling money and banking. adopted in the municipal offices. The deputy-Mayor (Cr A. J. Graham) presided, there being also present: Crs Eliott, Hodgens, McLeavey, Fitzherbert, Canton and Edwards. There was a moderate attendance in the public gallery. Last evening’s proceedings commenced with the questioning of the assistant-town clerk (Mr Crozier) by Cr Graham. . The deputy-Mayor reminded Mr Crozier that he had previously stated that he had no knowledge of money being left on a shelf behind the counter when waiting to be banked, although Messrs Newson and Strange had declared that he (Mr Crozier) must have -been aware of the practice. In reply Mr Crozier stated that he could not say whether he had been in the front office when the banking was lying on the shelf. At any rate, he had never seen it placed there, but then he was only in the front office a few’’times a day. He went in about 9 a.m. and usually again half an hour later, but might not re-enter the office during the forenoon or until such time as ail inquiry or business took him there. Referring to statements of other members of tlie staff previously examined lie said: It is an exaggeration to say that I am in that part of the office dozens and dozens of times a day. I may be in there only half a dozen times in a day. Further questioned by Cr Graham, he recollected instructions being given that the staff was to exercise special care in the handling of cash. “Did you take action to see that the clerks exercised special care?” queried Cr Graham. Mr Crozier made a statement about having to reprimand a clerk over an irregular endorsement of a cheque. “But did you exercise supervision to . see that money was not left lying about the office P” questioned the de-puty-Mayor. “Yes; by instructing the clerks to bank as soon as the cash was made up,” replied Mr Crozier, adding that he had seen no money lying about. Again Cr Graham put his question in its original form, when Mr Crozier stated that he had not taken any specific steps beyond that mentioned. Banking,. lie. had noted, was done up to time with one exception, when he had drawn attention to the omission—everything had seemed to be operating correctly. “It was your duty to exercise strict supervision. Do you think that you did so asked-Gr’Graham. “I should think - so. I would say ‘yes’ to that,” was the reply, Mr Ciozier adding that he had found practically all the clerks satisfactory in the discharge of their duties. He had instructions to report any irregularities and did so.

When asked by Cr Edwards how many times a day he was in the front office, Mr Crozier replied, as he had done to Cr Graham, about six times a day. “But the town clerk says 10 to 15 times a day,” observed Cr Edwards. “Well, 1 bad to go there at least six times a day. On some days it might bo 15 occasions,” was the reply. T ‘Do you still say, notwithstanding what has been declared by others about cash being left on the shelf, that you never saw it there?” was Cr Edwards’ next question, which was affirmatively answered. That completed the evidence, observed the deputy-Mayor, who then invited further questions of either, the town clerk (Mr J. R. Hardie) or his assistant.

How was it, asked Cr McLeavey, that when so much money was ready to be banked, it was not baDked at once or some provision made for its safe keeping? Where was the boy when it was ready to be taken to the bank on the occasion of the theft?

The lad was out at the time, stated Mr Hardie, who, when further questioned, pointed out that an influx of customers temporarily diverted the duties of some members of the staff. If the cash had been placed in tho drawer or the cash register all would have been well. * SYSTEM TRIED FOR 24 YEARS. How long, asked Cr Fitzherbert, had the present system of handling cash been in vogue in the office—particularly the practice of sending a boy to the bank with the money? “Ever since I have been with the council—24 years,” replied Mr Hardie, adding that the recent theft was the only occasion upon which anything had been missing. For many years he himself had handled the cash, and in those days checks were not so rigorous or frequent as now. There was a time when -he used to make up the banking on a table a few feet behind an ordinary counter without a grille. Then thousands of pounds were exposed to the view of the public. Mr Carter, a local bank manager, Cr Edwards mentioned, had stated that his office had much the same system as obtained in the council’s, although he (Cr Edwards) did not entirely endorse this.

Asked by Cr Fitzherbert if he had confidence in tho system, the town clerk replied in the affirmative, stating that it was the common practice of Government and most other offices to send money to the bank by a boy.

THE DEPUTY-MAYOR SUMS UP. The deputy-Mayor, summing up, said that after considering the whole of tho evidence he had come to the following conclusions: (1) That the office cash was checked daily by the assistant-town clerk and handed to the town clerk, who placed it in the strongroom under lock and key; that the following morning it was taken over by the cashiers and made up for the bank. (2) That prior to August last definite instructions were given to each cashier that ho was individually responsible for tlie making-up and banking of his cash each day. This was borne out by the schedule of duties produced. (3) That each cashier was warned to exercise the greatest care in tho acceptance of cheques and in the handling of money. (4) That the cashiers, after getting money ready for banking, placed it on a writing desk behind the public counter without any authority for so doing, and shared equal responsibility for its safe custody; that if not banked at 12.30 (when the office closed for lunch) the money was removed to tho strongroom. (6) That since August last Mr Newson was instructed to hand over his cash to Mr Strange, who rang it up on his cash register and was made

responsible for the banking of ali moneys received. (6) That it was Mr Strange’s custom, after having made up the banking with the assistance of Mr Newson, to place the money on the desk as formerly, and on going to lunch at noon to leave it there under the assumption that Mr Newson, who was in sole charge of the counter between 12 noon and 1 p.m., knew that it was there and. would be responsible for its safe keeping until the junior came to take it to the bank. Cr Graham stated that he had difficulty in understanding why the assistant-town clerk, who was responsible for the immediate supervision of the office, failed to see the money so placed. He could only conclude that he failed to exercise that strict supervision that the town clerk expected of him. (7) That the council’s banker had stated when giving evidence during the inquiry that the system' adopted in the office was a good one and nothing more could be done. The checking of cash by banks, he had further stated, was done once weekly only, whereas in the borough offico it was carried out daily. He had recommended that the cashiers be placed in separate boxes and isolated from each other. Cr Graham pointed out that the success of any system depended upon the faithful and conscientious discharge of their duties by the clerical staff. The deputy-Mayor came to the conclusion: (1) That if the instructions of the town clerk had been carried out in their entirety, money would not have been left on the desk, but would either have been banked or placed in the strongroom. (2) That since August Mr Strange had alone been responsible for the banking of the money and that he had no authority to leave it in Mr Newson’s care. (3) That Mr Newson failed to grapple with the situation when he found an intruder behind the counter. (4) That the assistant-town clerk’s oversight of the office was not as thorough as it should have been, otherwise he must have observed the frequent practice of leaving the money on the desk in full view of the public. CR ELIOTT’S MOTION. The following resolution was then moved by Cr Eliott:— “That the council is of the opinion that the system under which the cash is received passed through the cash register and banked is quite satisfactory and difficult to improve upon, as far as any dishonest person among the public is concerned; that the cash should be counted over and signed for by a responsible officer who should do the banking, and each cashier during his absence at lunch or elsewhere should leave his cash, for which he is personally responsible, securely locked up and not in the charge of some otner employee.”

Seconding the resolution, Cr Edwards said . that a responsible officer must receive tlie money from the cashiers.

That, said the Town Clerk, could easily be done. The resolution was supported by Cr McLeavey, who, however, stated that the success of any office system depended upon the honesty and efficiency of employees. The resolution was also supported by Cr Hodgens. He, however, alleged that an unfairness had been done to Newson in “standing him down” soon after the -theft of tlie money. Except for his failure to take a different line of action when a stranger leapt over the counter, there had never been any reason to place a large measure of blame on him. He criticised the supervision of Mr Crozier. if, added Cr Hodgens, Mr Strange was to ,be'reprimanded tho officer , higher up i should be spoken to much more srtongly. A SOUND SYSTEM. Tho inquiry, observed Cr Fitzlierbert, Was concerned only with the efficiency of the office system which had been criticised by a jury’s rider. He thought that uow the jury and the public should be satisffed that the system was as good as could be devised. No system was infallible. Every week Government officers and others were before the court on charges of peculation—the human element had to enter into any arrangement. If Government and other offices could not devise a perfectly sale system, how could. the council be expected to do sop The Town Clerk had closely and efficiently guarded tlie interests of the council for years past. There was, he thought, no blame attachable to the boy who took the money to the bank. Had the jury seen the town clerk previously, lie felt .sure that it would not have issued the rider occasioning the present inquiry. Still, the resolution would make for a further safeguard and for that reason he supported it. Briefly, Cr Canton voiced his support of the resolution, stating that the matter should end there.

Although the council’s system of handling cash was universal, it was boing slightly altered as the result of the inquiry and the jury should not be criticised, observed Cr Edwards. At once Cr Fitzherbert declared that lie had not criticised the jury, recognising as he did its right to its own opinion. ABSENT COUNCILLOR’S STATEMENT. The Deputy-Mayor at this stage informed the council that he had a statement expressing the views of Cr Oram who had sent an apology for absence. He was about to ask the town clerk to read it when Cr Hodgens asked if Cr Oram was in town. Receiving an affirmative answer he then asked was it usual to consider the statement of an absent councillor in such circumstances. Certainly, replied Cr Graham, it was not usual in this body but it was a matter for the council whether or no it should be read but as a matter of courtesy he thought it might be. He added that he was unaware of its contents. Cr. Edwards stated that he would strongly object to the statement being read if it reflected at all on any member of the staff, past or present. . “Well, I don’t know what it contains,” the Deputy-Mayor told the council. Requested to read it over himself first, Cr. Graham complied, then quietly remarked: “I will put it back in the envelope.” The carrying of Cr Eliott’s resolution then terminated the inquiry except that Cr. Edwards asked if the council had a fidelity bond and was assured that it had one.