The Case of the Defaulting Bank Accountant
Part 1
It wasn’t as if George Cruickshank was the first citizen or colonial administrator to be charged with dipping into the till in those early years of Vancouver Island as a crown colony.
“Arrest. Mr. George Cruickshank, formerly holding the position of accountant in the Bank of British Columbia in this city, was apprehended yesterday under circumstances of an extremely painful nature...”
Painful indeed!
According to this gently worded paragraph in The British Colonist of May 12, 1865, he’d been charged with the wilful appropriation of $5000 in gold coin, the property of the said bank, as far back as June 1863.
That was a lot of money in those days and Cruickshank’s arrest shocked those who knew him as a married man with a family and a previously unblemished reputation. That pedigree, and the fact that he was recovering from a serious months-long illness,” explains the editor’s initial reticence in “entering into particulars of the case” other than the dropping of a single hint: Cruickshank had suffered “reverse in business.” This suggested business outside his banking duties; whatever the case, his “estimable wife” was said to have widespread sympathy.
The next issue of the paper carried a lengthy report of Cruickshank’s appearance in police court, headlined, The Bank Defalcation. George Cary, acting for the Bank, accused the accountant of having embezzled $5000 in American gold coin. He did so, he assured Magistrate A.F. Pemberton, with extreme reluctance–that of his client and his own. This would be one of the most painful cases he’d ever conducted (normally he acted as the colonial attorney-general) and the bank, despite its being the victim, “shrunk from this prosecution”. But it had no choice, being bound by charter to pursue prosecution and restitution, and also wishing to clear the reputations of its other employees.
Before proceeding, Cary declared that, should Cruickshank be found guilty, he hoped that the sentence reflected the extenuating circumstances “which greatly mitigated the offence”.
All of this is so out of character for criminal cases of the day. It wasn’t as if Cruickshank was the first citizen or colonial administrator to be caught dipping into the till in those early years of Vancouver Island as a crown colony. But he’s the only one to receive such velvet-glove treatment from the authorities.
James D. Walker, then an inspector for the BBC but manager of the Victoria branch at the time in question, deposed that there were two keys for the safe; he had one, Cruickshank the other. There were two different locks and two sections of the safe, the so-called Treasury for surplus funds not required for the day’s use (which wasn’t to be accessed by the accountant), the other part of the safe was for daily use. To open the vault required both keys; when Walker took up residence in Esquimalt, he gave his key to Cruickshank who in turn gave his key to another bank employee named Rushton (thus maintaining the two-key system).
Upon the cashier being transferred, Cruickshank seems to have managed the bank until Rushton’s appointment when he became both accountant and cashier (meaning he again, temporarily, had both keys to the safe).
To this point, Cruickshank had been on his feet in the dock, as was customary, but at the request of his counsel, D.B. Ring, he was allowed to take a seat in the courtroom. (Yet another extraordinary mark of deference for this accused felon.)
Normal practice was for the daily receipts, Walker continued, to be deposited in the safe which was opened at 10 o’clock each morning when the manager or, in his absence, the accountant, doled out a ‘float’ to the cashier. Again, he stated that two keys were required to open the safe and that “the accountant was always accompanied by someone else”.
So, how could Cruickshank pilfer $5000 if he had but one key and was never alone?
Moving on, Walker explained how, when doing his quarterly audit in October 1863, he found that $5000 had gone missing on September 30th. He’d questioned all employees individually, taken down their replies in writing then had them sign copies of their statements. At that time, he said, Cruickshank had admitted his guilt.
But where were the statements? Where was Cruickshank’s confession?
Inexplicably, Walker couldn’t “lay his hands on them”. This drew an objection from Mr. Ring to their being alluded to in court without their being available as evidence. Cary thought that Walker’s recollection of the general content of the statements was admissible.
Pemberton disagreed: Cary was to “exhaust all direct evidence before producing secondary [evidence].”
It turned out that Walker had sent the original to the London office and, um, he couldn’t lay his hands on his copy.
Cary: “Did Mr. Cruickshank state since July 1863, anything to you about the abstraction of the $5000?”
Walker: “He made a statement to me shortly after the discovery, and another statement within the last week. The statements do not agree.”
Addressing Magistrate A.F. Pemberton: “The last statement was not reduced to writing; the statement was that he had taken the money. He said he took the money out of the cashier’s funds in the morning. He took a bag of coin out of the treasury [one of the two separately locked compartments in the safe] amounting to $5000, put it amongst the cashier’s funds [the other compartment used for daily business transactions], and took it up to the general office. [He] did not state further what he did with the money, he did not...state his object in taking it.”
Cary: “Did he at any subsequent time?”
At this point Walker began to squirm, saying he didn’t want to “make use of a certain document,” but defence counsel D.B. Ring insisted that he “produce the paper” and Cary offered it to him for his perusal before entering it as evidence.
Upon scanning it, Ring wasn’t impressed: “Pooh! Nothing but the signature of an insane man! Nothing could excuse you from producing that paper.”
He insisted that Walker produce the original statements he’d taken from the bank’s employees and Cruickshank’s alleged confession or that they not be allowed to be discussed in court. Cary thought they should proceed, using Walker’s recollection of the documents but Pemberton insisted that he stick to direct evidence before producing “secondary”.
Cary: “Then I must produce the document.” To Walker: “Do you know that signature?”
“Yes! it is Mr. Cruickshank’s.”
Counsellor Ring: “I do not [know the signature] but I insist on its being shown that he did not sign it under compulsion.”
After a sharp exchange between Ring and Cary, Walker began to read: “I, George Cruickshank...do solemnly and sincerely declare that in the month of July [1863], I was in the employment of the Bank of British Columbia, as accountant, and during the temporary absence of James. D. Walker, the Manager of the Bank, I was entrusted with the key of the safe where the cash was kept, and on one occasion in the month when I went down to the safe for the purpose of delivering out the cash for the day...I removed a bag from the Reserve Fund of [$10] pieces, containing $5000 in [U.S.] gold coin, and kept the bag of coin for several days in a drawer in the Bank, of which I had the key, and made use of the money it contained for my own purpose...
“No other person in the Bank had any knowledge of my having appropriated it for my own use. On the loss being discovered by Mr. Walker...I denied all knowledge of it and I make this statement for the purpose of making all the reparation I can to Mr. Walker and the other persons employed in the Bank. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true...”
It was signed George Cruickshank, May 8, 1865 (four days before the affair became public) before Notary Public M.W. Tyrwhitt Drake.
Well, that solves the mystery of how he accessed both compartments in the safe: Walker had entrusted him with both keys! It doesn’t explain the discrepancy in Walker’s testimony that the second statement, the confession, hadn’t been signed–it was–or that he didn’t have it with him in court–he did. And what did Mr. Ring mean by “the signature of an insane man?” More curious aspects of this curious case.
Cary again: “Was there the faintest influence, with or suggestion used that Mr. Cruickshank should make this statement?” Walker: “There was not.”
Initial press reports, although not yet brought out in court, made reference to Cruickshank having had personal financial losses and having recovered from a lengthy illness. It’s now becoming apparent that he’d suffered a mental breakdown and for this reason, Walker explained, when his accountant first confessed, after having previously denied taking the money, he didn’t believe him: “Amongst other ravings [he] accus[ed] himself of murder and forgery... Mr. Cruickshank made the confession to me this week, in presence first of Mr. Edwards and then of Mr. Drake [the notary public]. It did not occur to me to have a legal advisor present, I did not think it was necessary. Mr. Cruickshank dictated the confession himself.”
When Mr. Ring pointed out some of the legal terminology used in the statement, Walker admitted that Cruickshank hadn’t “dictated every word. The whole object of having a written confession was to clear the other officers of the bank. I hoped the matter could be got over without a trial till I consulted my legal advisor.”
Asked as to his awareness of Cruickshank’s state of mind when signing the statement, he contradicted himself (not the first time): “I did not know that he was suffering from aberration of intellect; I heard he was once wandering in his mind.”
Ring: “Did it not occur to you, knowing that Mr. Cruickshank was wandering in his mind, that it would have been a humane thing to have taken a medical opinion on his state of mind before taking this confession?”
Walker: “I think the question has no bearing on the case. I appeal to the court.” When Ring insisted upon an answer, Magistrate Pemberton interjected that Walker wasn’t obliged to give one and the deposition, after being read aloud, was signed by Walker and admitted as evidence. Cary asked that the case be moved to a higher court.
At which Ring played his hand, declaring flat out that his client was insane, that he’d charged himself with “murder, forgery and all sorts of other things, amongst which was this [theft], and his mind was still labouring under these hallucinations”. He asked the court to allow him to introduce medical evidence to the effect that Cruickshank was “of unsound mind at the time of this supposed confession”. In the meantime, he requested that Pemberton set a light bail.
Cary graciously consented to any bail His Honour might set and insisted that the Crown proceed with indictments for embezzlement and larceny. Pemberton then set bail at 300 pounds and two sureties for 100 pounds each. This was a massive sum in 1865–but it was furnished forthwith and Cruickshank released until his trial.
Just one more curious factor in this curious case.
Cruickshank immediately put his liberty to work by making a second sworn statement before a Notary Public.
He’d already confessed to having removed $5000 in American gold coin from his employer’s safe; this declaration was to the effect that he’d been of “unsound mind” and his alleged confession was totally untrue. His medical advisors, he said, had since pronounced him in full possession of his faculties.
Less than two months later, he appeared before Chief Justice David Cameron on a charge of embezzlement laid by his former employer, the Bank of British Columbia. This time, instead of acting on behalf of the bank as he had at the preliminary hearing, George Cary was in his usual role as the colonial attorney-general. An idiosyncrasy of British law allowed him to be assisted by, of all people, the very lawyer who, as Notary Public, had taken down Cruickshank’s now refuted ‘confession.’
Before presenting his case to the jury, after a large number of prospective jurors had been rejected by both sides, Cary asked that the medical witnesses be asked to leave the court; this was done. Bank manager James D. Walker then reiterated much of his testimony at the hearing other than these salient facts which are more detailed: He’d been manager of the Victoria branch for three years, there were two cashiers besides Cruickshank the accountant, and, somewhat curiously, he (Walker) had no power to hire or fire staff which was done by the head office in London although he could “appoint persons in an acting capacity”.
As noted, the safe had two compartments, upper and lower. One held the gold, the other the daily cash, and both were accessible upon the safe doors being opened. Receipts were written for any monies removed from the vault which required two keys plus two combinations to open; Walker had one key and Cruickshank the other, until, upon moving to Esquimalt, Walker had made the accountant acting manager and gave him his own key. Cruickshank in turn was supposed to give his key to one of the cashiers so as to maintain the security system. Cruickshank’s sole duty in terms of the safe was to unlock it and lock it at the beginning and close of each business day.
Now, for the first time, we understand that, upon unlocking both doors to the safe, the money in the ‘treasury’ as well as the daily receipts were accessible for the day. Meaning that not just Cruickshank but the cashier to whom Cruickshank gave his own key could also have appropriated the gold. Currency and ordinary coins were counted daily but the American gold pieces were bagged and, it seems, taken at face value except during audits.
Walker’s count of all the safe’s contents in early July had matched the ledgers but for $2-3, the difference in exchanging British sovereigns to American currency which was favoured in the colony. However, his quarterly audit early in October “found exactly $5000 deficient”.
After lunch, Cary objected to the presence of Dr. Trimble, a defence witness. When Cameron permitted Trimble to remain, Cary resumed questioning the manager who again explained the two-key security. Defence counsel Ring objected to Walker’s stating that Cruickshank had removed money from the safe, even for business purposes, during his absence. Cameron concurred.
Walker then told how, upon discovering the loss, he’d questioned Cruickshank and the two cashiers. Ring jumped in, wanting to know if the accountant was “in a sane state of mind, and capable of making any disclosure”. When Cary explained that he was referring to Walker’s questioning his staff, not to the alleged confession presented in police court, Ring replied, “Oh! I thought you were springing the disclosure upon us. Bear in mind, then, that I shall make the same objection when the time comes.”
Mr. Cary, to laughter, “Oh, you always get hold of some cock and bull story.”
(To be continued)
Have a question, comment or suggestion for TW? Use our Contact Page.