'The case for the prosecution against Mr. A. H. Leslie, who is [charged on three separate counts with falsifying the accounts of the International' Recreation Club, was concluded in HM. Police Court last Wednesday afternoon.
Mr. Ranald MeDonald, defending counsel, asked for an adjournment consider the evidence before giving his address on the merits of the case as presented by the prosecution, which has been conducted by Mr.
John McNeill.
"The Registrar complied with Mr. MeDonald's request and said he too would be glad of the opportunity of going carefully through all the evid-fence as he was to decide whether the Sceused was to be charged and com mitted for trial or not, and he adjourned the case until 10 am. on. Monday, April 1, when, he said, defending' counsel' would have" the opportunity of addressing him and call any witnesses he desired.
Mr. MeNeill concluded the case for the prosecution that day with the evidence of Mr. N. T. Lee, who said he was in the employ of the IRE. and had been since August 1, 1934. His duties were to help the accused with the bridge accounts, to help another Chinese clerk with the! members' monthly accounts and 10} do racing work.
was on August 18 ur 16 last year Mr, Lee said, that the accused authorised him to receive the daily collection of money received from members. Daily collections came from various sources, by post, persons payment by members to the club, and through shroffs.
All letter matter, witness said, was handled by the accused, who ' gave him the cheques received and he entered them in daily collection books, then locked the cheques in his drawer. Members paying thei hills personally did so either to him, the accused, or the other Chines? clerk, and he again kept an account fof all money thus received. The: same applied to money taken each' day by the four, shroffs employed by the club.
Tu the collection books the witness identified entries, against which were the initials of the accused in pencil. 'These entries, he said, were sums of money—the accused' told him—which' were paid in by members for office "hours.
Every day at about 6 pin, witness seid, all the money he had received was handed to the accused, and the accused after checking the amount, put the money into his own safe. Mr. Lee also identified that the alleged entries in the journal and ledger of ERE. were in the handwriting of the accused, and also the signature at the foot of the balance sheet.
Finally witness said that on a cally average the forms of payment by members in respect of their accounts to the club were 30 per cent. in cash, and 70 per cent. by cheques, native orders, and compradore orders.
"At the morning hearing, defending. counsel resumed his cross-examination Recused's room during the time he fas working at the IRE. Mr. Spink sold he made Jspecisl examination of the safe but thought it en ordinary one. He said ho had not used the safe for any" purpose. Re-examined by Mr. MeNelll, Mr. Spink seid that during the time he acted as secretary of the club, he made use of the safe in the [secretary's office.
Tu reply to questions regarding the bridge accounts of the TRE. Mr. Spink said he knew that when the bridge accounts started in July, 1933 the turnover. was some $500, which sum had increased to $6500 by December, 1934. The total turnover from July, 1983, to December, 1934 amounted approximately to $57,000 Witness said that a special banking account was Kept with the Agricul tural Industrial Bank of China for the bridge accounts.
'Answering questions put by Mr. 'MeNeill in' re-examination on the bridge accounts, witness said that the Jelub: was entitled to.a ten per cent. [commission on the turnover.
Mr. MeNeill: In December when the turnover was some $6,500, what was the state of the bridge accounts? /—The bridge accounts at the end of 1924 showed several amounts due to the account but not pald. All win-mings had been paid.
Mr. MeNeill: "What was the out standing amount due from losers?—Tam unable to say but I can ascertain that.
The club, Mr. Spink said, had not received fis commission of some: '$6,000 due at the end of December.
Asked by defending counsel whether he could describe the system at collection of money due from members by shroffs, Mr. Spink replied that he did not know what austen was used, and added, that since Thomson & Ca. took over no shroffs were used, as all were suspended, Mr. MeDonald: Do you or do you not know that $20,000 was missing in 198371 do.
Mr. Spink said he believed a report lof the missing sum was made to the committee of the club by Mr. /Blaker, and instructions of procedure with regard to that sum were given to Mr. Blaker.
Under the ordinary rules of the jelub Mr, G. ¥. Woo still was the honorary treasurer of the club, Mr. Spink said. No salary was attached the position, the duties of which, 80 far as he knew, were signing cheques drawn on the club's banking, Witness said that he knew th Jaccused did almost all the work in keeping the books of the club, anc had practically no assistance. Asked whether he thought it "fair to call the accused an accountant, Mr. Spink said it was a difficult question te answer, but when pressed to answer replied' that he thought the accused] "fair accountant."
Defending counsel next asked the witness whether or not he had approved of the pencil draft of the balance sheet, which was drawn by the accused. That duty, witness replied, rested with Mr. Blaker; he Jcould not say that he approved of i himself. He checked the balance sheet with the ledger and found it correct according to the ledger on hho disputed li because there was ne justifeation or supporting evidence of the Balance as shown by the mem bers' monthly accounts. The accused added later, gave him every assist. ance.
Referring to the sum of $45,375.49 as shown in the balance sheet and the books as owing in respect of members' monthly accounts, defend ing counsel asked whether the entry meant that that sum was to be ae. counted for. Witness sam "yes," and Jaded that was the reason why, when he saw the nature of the entry, he wanted full particulars. It did not Inecessarily mean, witness continued, that the amount was banked—it meant that the amount was outstand-{ng and due to the club in respect of unpaid members's accounts.
Quoting the frst charge against the accused, which states that the amount in the balance sheet was $45375.49, whereas in truth the amount should be $22,698.12, defending counsel asked whether that sum. $22,693.12, was due. Mr. Spink replied that was' the sum due up to Decem ber 31, 1034. He knew because he had made a\ thorough audit of the members' accounts and found that it agreed with that figure except for a small difference of about $160.
'Mr. MeDonalé: Now Mr. Spink, from' comparison of the collection [books and the paying-in books, it was easy at any moment to ascertain how much had been collected and not aid in?—That is so.
On the question of an amount of Japproximately $5,000—L.0.Us, _advanced to certain persons by the ac-Jcused,—Mr. Spink said no action was taken as yet regarding that sum. No tentative balance sheet had yet been drawn up and he had not attempted to make a balance sheet because the audit was suspended and, as far he knew, no instructions' hea since been received by his firm, Re-examined by Mr. McNeill, Mr. Spink said that it was: the duty of the committee to approve the balance sheet, and the duty of Mr, Blaker to approve the audit of the balance sheet.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.