|
|
|
|
MIONTUAIRISC NA FIANAISE(Minutes of Evidence)Dé Máirt, 23 Márta, 1971Tuesday, 23rd March, 1971The Committee met at 9.30 p.m.
DEPUTY P. HOGAN in the chair. ORDER OF DÁIL OF 1st DECEMBER, 1970.Mr. E. F. Suttle (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste) was in attendance in an advisory capacity.[Public Sitting]. Mr. William Thornhill sworn and examined.10126. Chairman.—Mr. Thornhill, you have acted as teller in respect of some of the cheques that were cashed at your bank in Baggot Street? —That is so. 10127. We have a list here from you. (Document handed to witness). The first one—£900 on 17th April—that £900 was paid out in cash, an Anne O’Brien cheque, is that correct? —That is right, sir. 10128. Who drew the money? —That I am not in a position—I could not remember that, I am afraid—who actually drew the money on that particular date. 10129. You have the drawer—A. O’Brien— that just means that is the name that was on the cheque? —Yes. 10130. And the endorser—J. Kelly. That just means Captain Kelly signed the back of the cheque? —Yes, if he endorsed it “J. Kelly”—yes. 10131. On the 31st March, 1970, £500 was drawn, again from the Anne O’Brien account, you do not remember who got that money? —No, sir, I do not. 10132. This cheque was not endorsed, was it? —It appears so here—that it was not endorsed. (Mr. Thornhill handed cheques). 10133. Yes? —This particular cheque we referred to has not been endorsed. The £500 cheque has not been endorsed on the back. 10134. And the £900 one? —The £900 has been endorsed by J. Kelly. 10135. These are the only two cheques you have, are they, of the Anne O’Brien account? —Yes, the only two cheques, Ann O’Brien. 10136. Go now to the George Dixon account. You have there on 13/3/1970 £200? (Cheque handed to witness). —Yes, £200. 10137. That is cash? —Cash. 10138. And the signature on the cheque was George Dixon? —Yes, G. Dixon. 10139. Who was the money given to? —I can’t remember that, sir. 10140. We are giving you a code in case some names which we don’t mention here—if a name occurs to you, if that name is on the code, just give us the initial opposite the name. —Of these particular cheques to which you have referred—if I have—you have asked me by code to pick out if anyone has—— 10141. You will recognise a name there, and if I ask you who did this or who got that, if you look at the name there, don’t give me the name. Give me the code letter. On 17th April, £600 was drawn from George Dixon account? —That is right, sir. Yes. 10142. Who got that money can you recall? —I cannot recall who got the money. 10143. It is an endorsed cheque? —Yes. 10144. By J. Kelly? —Yes. 10145. On the 28th April, 1970, there is a cheque for £1,200 and it is signed by White, Loughran and Murphy. That is not endorsed? —No, it is not. 10146. Do you remember who got that money? —No, I do not. 10147. On the 5th March, 1970 you cashed a cheque for £4,000. Again, the cheque was signed by White, Loughran and Murphy. Do you remember who got that money? —On the 5th March you say? 10148. Yes. —The date here is the 25th March. It is for £4,000. 10149. What date is on the original cheque? —The 25th March, 1970. That is for the £4,000. 10150. Those are six cheques, two drawn on the Anne O’Brien account two drawn on the account of George Dixon and two with the signature of White, Loughran and Murphy. 10151. Deputy Tunney.—There is no White. It is just Loughran and Murphy. 10152. Chairman.—It was drawn to that account. The signature is Loughran and Murphy. Do you recall paying those cheques? —Yes, I paid the cheques. 10153. How do you know you paid them? What means have you of being certain of that? —According to the specified slip which I have here I have paid the cheque for £4,000 on the 5th March. I have mixed them. You said the 25th March. 10154. Have you got the original cheque there? —Yes. 10155. Does it not state the 25th March? —It is the 25th March. That should be the 25th March. I paid that £4,000 on the 25th March. The date here is wrong. It should be the 25th March but the 5th is down here. 10156. Those are six payments and I am trying to find out from you how you know you paid them. You do not remember who you paid them to. How do you know you paid all those? What documentary record have you? —I have the record here. As I was telling you at the time the list of cheques I have paid is here. 10157. How was this compiled? How was the pink one in front of you compiled? 10158. Deputy MacSharry.—Are your initials on the cheque? —No, my initials are not on the cheque. My brand is on the cheque. 10159. Chairman.—Your brand is on the six cheques. That is what I was trying to get at. Therefore, on that basis this list was drawn up but you are able to give us no further help. You cannot recall a single person to whom you paid the actual cash? —No, I cannot. 10160. How do you know your brand? Are your initials on it? —As I was on No. 1 cash No. 1 is on it. 10161. Deputy Collins.—Is it customary to pay cash on a cheque without having the person who is receiving the cash endorse the cheque? —Yes, on a cheque payable to cash it is customary to pay it without an endorsement. 10162. I thought the practice was the person who was receiving the cash would actually sign his name and possibly his address on the back of it? —That is if it is made payable to a particular person the payee would endorse it on the back but to cash it is not necessary to have an endorsement. 10163. Have you ever met any of the people who drew those cheques? —No. 10164. Have you ever met Captain James Kelly? —No, I have not. 10165. Were you satisfied the cheques were properly drawn. —Yes. 10166. How? —Because I would go to the account, to the ledger, and ask the ledger supervisor to see the account for myself at times to see they were properly drawn. 10167. You did that in all these cases? —I did so. 10168. Is this your initial on the corner of some of the cheques? There is one for £1,000 drawn on the account of Loughran and Murphy. There is an initial down here on the right-hand corner? —One of the cheques of Loughran and Murphy? 10169. One for £1,200 on the 28th April, 1970? —My initials are not on them. 10170. Whose initials are those? —Those are the accountant’s initials. 10171. What would they signify? —It would certify the cheque should be paid. 10172. In other words the person who was receiving the cash would have gone to the accountant first who would have certified it? —Yes. 10173. Whose initials are they? The accountant’s, I suppose? —Mr. Morrissey. 10174. Mr. Morrissey did not initial the £4,000 one, did he, on 25th March? —No, he did not. 10175. Which would indicate that you paid directly? —Yes. 10176. That would indicate to me that there was some familiarity between yourself and the person who received the money? —No, I would not say that. 10177. Well, why would he have gone to the accountant in the first place, in the £1,200 case, and not in the £4,000 case? —It is quite possible he could have gone to the accountant without I being aware of it for initialling. 10178. Did you ask him to go to the accountant in the case of the £1,200 one? —Not to my knowledge. I did not do that. 10179. It is customary for a person to go to the accountant to get a cheque certified for payment? —Usually, yes. Not in all cases. 10180. £4,000 would appear to me to be quite a large sum just to give out cash? —Well, in paying that cheque, yes. I would have paid that but knowing, of course, that it was in order to pay it myself. 10181. How did you know it was in order to pay it? Did you go to the ledger card? —Yes, I would go the the ledger. 10182. The Anne O’Brien cheque of 31st March, £500. Is that Mr. Morrissey’s initials also? —That is right, yes. 10183. And there was no initial on the £900 cheque? —No initial on the £900 cheque. 10184. Which would indicate that you went to the ledger card? —Yes. 10185. Do you recall if it was the same person who got the cash on these cheques— the Anne O’Brien cheque and the Murphy and Loughran cheque? —No, I do not. 10186. You do not recall? —No. 10187. Do you ever remember anyone asking for facilities in London on any of those accounts? —No. 10188. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Why would the accountant initial a cheque? Would it be to identify the person who would be drawing it or to certify that there would be money in the account to meet it or would there be any third reason? —To identify the person withdrawing the money, yes, and also to give an indication that a cheque is all right for the teller to cash it. 10189. Had you any discussion whatsoever about the accounts in any respect with anybody at all apart from cashing those cheques, the question that they might be running short of cash as some of them did from time to time? Do you recall having any difficulty in that line? —No, I do not. 10190. Deputy MacSharry.—On the 13th March a George Dixon cheque for £200. You paid that cash across the counter, I persume? It was not endorsed? —That is right. 10191. Did you look at the ledger card that day would you think? Usually would you? —Usually I would, yes. 10192. And did you find that the account was £3,800 overdrawn? —Usually I would but this cheque appears to be initialled. 10193. By whom? —It appears to be Mr. Morrissey’s initials. 10194. To have a cheque initialled by Mr. Morrissey or any other person authorised to do so, does the person wanting to draw the money come to you, you refuse them and then they go to Mr. Morrissey? Is that it? —Will you repeat the question, please, sir? 10195. How does Mr. Morrissey’s initials come on them in the first instance? —It is possible that Mr. Dixon, the drawer of the cheque, may have gone to Mr. Morrissey for initialling. 10196. And some of them were not initialled by Mr. Morrissey, some moneys that were paid out? —That is so, yes. Some were not. 10197. It appears that it was only when there was some difficulty, either the person was unknown or that the account was overdrawn that it was necessary to get Mr. Morrissey’s signature? Would that be right? —That is so. 10198. So that when Mr. Morrissey’s signature would be on a cheque presented to you, you would not refer to the ledger cards? —No, I would not. 10199. Deputy Nolan.—You know we are dealing with three accounts—the Belfast Fund for the Relief of Distress, the account known as the George Dixon account and the account known as the Anne O’Brien account. There were a number of lodgments and withdrawals in all these accounts during that period when you were a teller. Could you identify for us or do you know of any person that had any dealings with any of these accounts? —No, sir, I could not identify. 10200. Either on the coded list or outside the coded list? —That had any dealings with the accounts. In what way? 10201. In any way? —No, sir, I am afraid I cannot. 10202. That is the coded list you are looking at, but apart from that list did you meet anybody else? Do you know of anybody by name that you met in the business of the bank that either lodged money, cashed cheques, got cheque books, accounts or anything else? —Cashed cheques. Yes, I am familiar with one, yes. 10203. On the coded list? —Yes. 10204. Give us only the code letter? —F. 10205. Apart from that list then, there is no other person that you can identify? —No, sir, there is not. 10206. On that list or who is in this State or anywhere else? —On that list. That is right. 10207. On that list yes. But apart from that list—that is only a list for a particular reason, they are coded names—but apart from that list did you meet or had you any dealings with any other person? —No, I did not. 10208. You cannot recall anybody else in this State or anywhere else that you had dealings with? —No, I cannot. 10209. Deputy Tunney.—Just one question in connection with the £4,000. Would you be able to recollect whether the gentleman who collected that money, whether he asked for it in single pound notes or Irish notes or English notes? —That I could not recall. 10210. Chairman.—Mr. Thornhill, do you know Captain Kelly? —I do not, sir. 10211. Do you know John Kelly? —No, sir. 10212. Do you know Pádraig Haughey? —No, sir. 10213. Mr. F. is the only one you know? —That is right. 10214. Did you at any stage know anything about the provision of £11,450 for one George Dixon at the Provincial Bank, London? Piccadilly? —No, sir. 10215. You do not know anything about who got the returned cheques and statements? —No. 10216. You appreciate that about 50 cheques were issued from the three accounts and we have only, I think, ten cheques. The rest were returned in the form of—on two occasions—with the statements. You know nothing about that? —No, I know nothing about it, sir. 10217. And there is no other point now that you can think of where you could be of help to us? —I am afraid not, sir. 10218. Deputy E. Collins.—In relation to F could you tell us in what connection did you come in contact with him? —I see here, if I may say so, sir, two of the same, both the top and bottom. I just noticed now. 10219. Chairman.—In the letters A and K? —No, Q at the bottom and F in the top list. 10220. There are different Christian names? —The same name, different Christian names, yes. 10221. You had contact with both, had you? —No. I would say that I am not sure which one, actually. I have just noticed that now. I am not sure which one. 10222. You just knew the surname, is that it? —The surname, yes. 10223. Did you see him in contact with somebody else, that particular person, or did he come alone to the bank? —I beg your pardon? 10224. Did that person draw money? —Alone. 10225. Alone? —Yes, from what I can remember. 10226. Can you remember the particular amount of money he drew? —No, I cannot. 10227. Did he call more than once? —Only one. 10228. Only once? —Oh, it is possible it could have been more than once. 10229. Deputy Collins.—Could you tell me what account did he operate or get cash from? —That I could not say. 10230. You just remember meeting him, is that it? —Yes. 10231. Did he identify himself or did you know him? —You mean did I know him before having a business dealing with him? 10232. Yes? —No, I did not. 10233. You were introduced or he identified himself? —Well, identified himself. 10234. Was he drawing cash or was he making a lodgment or——? —Drawing cash, to my knowledge. 10235. About what date was it? —That would be very hard for me to say, to remember that, different dates. 10236. Can you recollect the account he got cash from? —No, I could not remember the accounts he drew the cash on. 10237. He came more than once then, did he? —Yes, I had seen him more than once. 10238. You dealt with him more than once? —I did. 10239. You cannot indicate on any of those occasions which account he operated or he drew cash from? —No, I could not say that. 10240. Would it be the Dixon account? —You mean how many times—what account he operated more frequently than others, is that it? 10241. Yes? —That I could not say. 10242. About how many times did he call, roughly? —He must have been in three or four times. 10243. Did he take large sums in cash? —On one occasion, or two—I think—he did, yes, large. 10244. Could you indicate the size? That would help us. —Well, I remember it was over £1,000. 10245. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Did I understand you to say that Mr. F was seeking a loan or sought a loan? Did you mention the word “loan” in connection with Mr. F? —Mention the word “loan”? 10246. Yes? —No, I did not. 10247. I am sorry: I must have misunderstood. 10248. Deputy MacSharry.—On 25th March when you cashed the £4,000 on the White, Loughran and Murphy account did you pay out £4,000 in cash? —Yes. 10249. That £4,000 was lodged into the George Dixon account that same day. Did you receive the lodgment as well for the George Dixon account? —No, I do not remember receiving any such sum. 10250. Because on 25th March out of the George Dixon account was taken £200 and lodged in was £4,000 and the person, the teller involved, was Mr. Heywood-Jones so it would be right to assume that whoever took the £4,000 off you walked over to the next teller and lodged it and drew £200? That all happened the same day, two different tellers. You may not have all this information or background to the particular question but you do not remember taking the £4,000 after giving it out and lodging it to the George Dixon account? —No, I do not. 10251. So you did not do it? —I did not do it, actually. 10252. Deputy Tunney.—I gather from you now that there is some confusion in your mind regarding F and Q, is that right? —There is. 10253. There would be nothing about, say, F as written down there, which would make it more likely that if it were he, it would distinguish him more so to you than Q? —Oh, no. I would not say that. It is quite possible that it was Q actually. It could be Q. 10254. Who drew the money? —Yes. 10255. You were not concerned that a man of that name was—that surname—was drawing money in the names of somebody else on a cheque signed by two other names? —He was drawing cheques with his signature. 10256. He was presenting a cheque with the signature of two names different from his own surname? —The cheques were payable to “cash”, you see. 10257. “Cash” in this case was the man who was collecting it, who was not, so far as you were concerned, either Mr. Loughran or Mr. Murphy? —Yes, that is so, so far as I am concerned. 10258. You just remember in that particular case the surname? There was nothing else about it? —Nothing else about it, no. 10259. Deputy Barrett.—You said that Mr. F identified himself to you. How did he identify himself? —Well, it is just possible he could have said he was—just mentioned his name to me. 10260. He did not have to produce anything? —No, he had not. That was not necessary. 10261. Deputy H. Gibbons.—In answer to the Chairman, you said you did not know to whom any of those cash amounts were paid for those various cheques. Is it the position that you recall some of them having been paid to this particular man, F or Q? —Some of them, yes—a few of them. 10262. The position is that you do know some of them were paid to those people? —Yes. To one man I mentioned. 10263. Have you any idea what particular cheques or how many of the six? —That I could not remember. (Document shown to witness). 10264. Chairman.—Can you recall that particular transaction? —I can’t recall that exact transaction exactly. 10265. Can you tell us how it was made up? —I am afraid I can’t. 10266. Is there any particular reason why you seem to have some little bit of confusion in your mind as between Messrs. F and Q? —It is the surname—the name has just appeared to me. That is one of the surnames that I had dealings with, sir. When two are on the list, I just remember that is possibly—that is what led to the confusion, having the two the same. 10267. That lodgment that you are looking at, Mr. Thornhill, is the entry on it in the column “Specification” says £4,000, £1,000 to Anne O’Brien, leaving £3,000, £,2000 in cash and a lodgment of £1,000. Would that be correct? —That is right. 10268. If we check it against the bank statement of that date, 25th March, lodgment £1,000—you have the bank statement there— your own bank statement? —25th March, lodgment £1,000, yes, sir. 10269. You have a lodgment of £1,000 to both George Dixon and Anne O’Brien accounts? (No reply). (Mr. Thornhill withdrew). Mr. Thomas Maloney, sworn and examined.10270. Chairman.—You also acted as Teller? —Yes. 10271. You are on record here in your bank’s submission that you paid cash on two cheques? —Yes. 10272. In the White, Loughran and Murphy account? —Yes. 10273. One cheque was for £1,000 on the 6/4/1970. Can you recall that transaction? —No, I cannot, outside of the fact of paying out the money. That is all. —10274. Do you remember who you gave it to? —No, I do not. 10275. On the 24th April, 1970, you paid out £2,000 on a cheque drawn on the White, Loughran and Murphy account. Do you recall that transaction? —Yes. I only know that I gave this out, the fact that I gave out cash. 10276. Are you recalling the incident or are you merely going on the fact that your brand is stamped on it? —No, I cannot remember this particular incidence as it stands by itself. 10277. You do not remember who you paid the money out to? —No. 10278. Did you know Captain Kelly? —No. 10279. Or John Kelly? —No. 10280. Or Pádraig Haughey? —No. 10281. If you look at the code you will see Mr. F? —Yes. 10282. Do you know him? —Yes. 10283. Did he go to the bank? —Yes. 10284. It was in the bank that you knew him? —Yes. 10285. Was he frequently there? —I would say three of four times with me. 10286. Did you on any occasion give him money? —Yes. 10287. Can you recall the amount at any stage? —Not really. The amounts were around £2,000. 10288. You do not recall the account on which he drew it out. —I cannot. 10289. If you look at the bank returns in the pink book it will help you. —No, it really would not. 10290. Would your own bank’s statement be more familiar to you? —It would not help. The cheques would be as good a help as any. 10291. You only have a limited number of those. Do you know anything about accommodation being sought for any amount on the Provincial Bank, London? —No. 10292. Do you know anything about who received returned bank cheques and statements? —No, nothing. 10293. Deputy Barrett.—Do you remember Mr. F drawing cash on those accounts? —Yes. 10294. Do you remember anybody else? —Yes, I can remember persons but I do not remember names. 10295. You can remember persons. How many would you remember? —Very vaguely. There may be one or two others. 10296. You could not say now who they are? —No. 10297. If we were to produce a photograph of those people could you identify them? —I could not. 10298. Deputy E. Collins.—The cheque for £2,000 was not initialled. What would that indicate? —It is hard to say because I did not look up the accounts. I have not even seen them yet. I can only say I paid it on the presumption it was all right. 10299. The cheque was not signed in your presence was it? —No, it was not. 10300. It was not endorsed? —No, it was paid to cash. 10301. Do you recall any other people operating any of those accounts, the Dixon account and the Ann O’Brien account? —No. 10302. You cannot recall who asked you about this cash? —No, I cannot. 10303. Deputy H. Gibbons.—I want to be clear that even though you remember paying cash to Mr. F you do not remember paying the £1,200 to Mr. F? Is that correct? —No, not in that sense. Those particular cheques I could not tell you who I paid them to. 10304. In fairness to you there are other cheques, which we have not, that you could have paid to Mr F. that we have no record of. Is that correct? —Yes, that is right. 10305. So this probably explains your position but you do not remember paying those two particular ones? —Yes, these could have been paid to Mr. F. They could, but I just do not know. 10306. Or other ones that we just do not have available? —Yes. 10307. Deputy MacSharry.—Mr. Maloney, the coded list in front of you, do you recognise the name of anybody and if you do, refer to it by code, having dealt with them in the course of these accounts? —No. 10308. Just Mr. F? —Yes. 10309. Nobody else? —Nobody else. 10310. Deputy Tunney.—Were you aware of the fact that this account was somewhat unusual, that this was an unusual account in the bank? —No, it was not unusual to me. Not unusual, no. 10311. And when somebody came and presented the cheque to you, you cashed it? You were quite happy that it was OK to cash it? —I do not think I just cashed it off my own bat. I think it was being seen to by somebody although it is not initialled. I certainly would not just hand out £2,000 like that. 10312. Yes, that is what I had thought. Did the person who was collecting the money come to you on the recommendation of somebody else in the bank who told you it was OK, pay? —Yes. 10313. You would not be in a position to say from whom the recommendation came? —I would not, no. It could have been a number of people. 10314. But it would be somebody who was superior to you in the bank? —Yes. 10315. But as far as you were concerned you would not have paid without having got such instruction from somebody? —That is right, yes. Chairman.—That is all, Mr. Maloney. Thank you very much. (The witness withdrew). Mr. Michael Coyne sworn and examined.10316. Chairman.—Mr. Coyne, you paid, according to the record on 17th April, £1,000 drawn on the White, Loughran and Murphy account? —That is correct. 10317. Can you recall that transaction? —I can. 10318. From memory? —I can, yes. 10319. Do you remember who you paid it to? —I do. I paid the money to Mr. F. 10320. In cash? —In cash, Yes. 10321. Could you tell us whether they were English or Irish? —I gave half the money in English and half the money in Irish. 10322. Deputy E. Collins.—Again this cheque was not initialled? —It was not. 10323. Did you know Mr. F? —I did, yes. 10324. From previous transactions on this account? —No, I know him personally, before I joined the bank. 10325. Deputy MacSharry.—Do you know anybody else on the coded list that came in and out of the bank or that you might have dealt with or come in contact with and you can refer to them by code? —No, the only person I would know is Mr. F. Nobody else. 10326. We have not other cheques as you will appreciate. Did you cash other cheques for Mr. F on occasions? —I did, yes. 10327. To the extent of what amount of money, approximately? —The same amount, I think. From what I can remember, I cashed two further ones for £1,000 each. 10328. That is £3,000, total? —£3,000 in all, yes. 10329. That you gave in cash to Mr. F? —That is correct, yes. 10330. And that is the extent of the amount? —That is the extent of the amount. 10331. Did you have any other dealings— you hardly would remember—in this account? —No, they would be the only dealings I did have. 10332. Were Mr. F’s dealings all in the White, Loughran and Murphy account or were they in the George Dixon and Anne O’Brien accounts? —All in the White, Loughran and Murphy account. 10333. Deputy Nolan.—Apart from the names on the coded list, did you meet anybody else who had any dealings with any of these accounts? —I did not, no. 10334. Deputy Tunney.—You, Mr. Coyne, as a member of the bank were aware of the nature of this account? —I knew what the name of the account was. 10335. You knew the title of the account? —Yes, the title of the account. 10336. You have not any recollection of handing out any bank statement? —No, I did not. I was a teller at the time. I would not have. It would not have been part of my duty to hand out statements. 10337. Chairman.—Can you recall, in respect of Mr. F, did he come to the bank alone or was he accompanied on any occasion? —He came on his own. 10338. Always on his own? —Always on his own, yes. 10339. Deputy MacSharry.—Did Mr F seek you out, as it were, because you knew him and would be able to recognise him when he came to cash a cheque? —No, he did not. 10340. Not particularly? —No. I recognised him when he came. (The witness withdrew). Mr. Richard Heywood-Jones sworn and examined.10341. Chairman.—You appear to have a very small transaction? —Yes. 10342. You paid out £200 on 25th March, 1970? —Yes. 10343. Cheque drawn, according to the showing here, on the George Dixon account. You were the teller on that and dealt with that payment. Can you recall the incident? —I cannot. 10344. You just know you did it because your teller number is on the cheque? —Yes, that is all. 10345. Are you familiar with any of the people who were operating this account? Did you take any interest in it? —No, I am not. 10346. You never met Captain Kelly? —Well, I do not recall meeting him. 10347. Deputy MacSharry.—Did you receive a lodgment on the same day, do you recall? —I do not recall. 10348. You do not recall. You could have had? —Oh, I could, yes. 10349. From the same person? —Yes. 10350. Deputy Tunney.—This was the only cheque which you cashed? —On that date? 10351. On these accounts?—— —Yes. 10352. When the cheque was presented to you, were you happy to cash it without any research? —Well, it had been initialled. 10353. It was initialled by some of your superiors before it was brought to you? —Yes. 10354. Deputy Barrett.—Who initialled it? —Mr. Morrissey. 10355. Chairman.—Thank you very much. (The witness withdrew). Mr. David N. Ryan sworn and examined.10356. Chairman.—Mr. Ryan, you acted as teller, did you for some period? —Yes. 10357. Did you cash any of these cheques we are discussing here on that account? —I didn’t cash any of these and, as far as I know, I didn’t cash any of the others. I cannot recall cashing any cheques on these accounts. 10358. Are you familiar with the request to have accommodation provided for one George Dixon in London? —No. 10359. Did you not initial—have you a list in front of you there? The top list, particularly? Are you familiar with any of these people? Can you recall any of them attending the bank? —No. 10360. Deputy Barrett.—Do you know Captain Kelly? —No. 10361. Deputy E. Collins.—Do you recall taking any lodgment to any of the accounts from anyone? —There was one came in in the form of a banker’s payment that I put through to the account. It came in in the post in the form of a banker’s payment. 10362. From? —I don’t recall what bank it came from. 10363. You don’t remember any personal lodgment to any of the accounts? —No. 10364. Deputy Gibbons.—Would it be from the Red Cross that particular money came in, could you recall? —I can’t recall, no. Chairman.—Thank you very much, Mr. Ryan. (Mr. Ryan withdrew). Mr. T. O. Crotty sworn and examined.10365. Chairman.—Mr. Crotty, you have acted as a regular teller? —Yes. 10366. In the Munster and Leinster Bank at Baggot Street? —Yes. 10367. Can you recall paying out any money off this account to anybody? —No. 10368. You cannot recall anybody drawing money on the White, Loughran and Murphy account, on the George Dixon account or the Anne O’Brien account? —No. 10369. Do you recognise any of the names on the list in front of you? —No. 10370. You cannot tell us whether any of these people visited the bank? —No. 10371. Deputy Barrett.—You acted as teller during this period under discussion—is that correct? —Yes. 10372. You have no recollection at all of paying any sums of money out on any of these accounts? —No, none whatsoever. 10373. Deputy H. Gibbons.—Did you lodge any money to any of those accounts? —Not that I recall, no. (Mr. Crotty withdrew). Mr. John N. Nolan sworn and examined.10374. Chairman.—Mr. Nolan did you act as teller? —I did. 10375. Can you recall any of these transactions either as regards lodgments or paying out of money on any of these three accounts? —No. 10376. Can you recall arrangements being made to provide banking accommodation at the National Provincial Bank in Piccadilly? —I believe I initialled a letter which was sent to the bank, one letter, regarding a sum of money. 10377. Can you recall that incident? —It passed out of my mind completely. When I saw the photostat of the letter I realised that I had in fact initialled it. 10378. Otherwise, you do not recall the circumstances surrounding that transaction at all? —No. Surrounding the writing of the letter or anything like that? 10379. Yes? —No. The only reason my initial would appear on it is that I proof-read it, examined it for error, for typing errors at that time. 10380. You are not able to help us then or indicate in any way who looked for it, what particular person looked for this accommodation? —No. I would not, in fact, be able to say even who wrote the letter inside in the bank. 10381. Deputy Barrett.—In your coded list, Mr. F—can you recall him coming into the bank? —Vaguely. Mr. Coyne at one stage told me that Mr. F had called in, I think on one or two occasions, purely that he knew him previously, just in passing. 10382. It was because Mr. Coyne told you you can recall him coming in, is that correct? —Yes. I don’t think I could even tell you what he looked like. 10383. Captain Kelly—do you know what he is like? —I have seen photographs of him. 10384. Can you recall him coming in? —No, I do not recollect him coming into Baggot Street. 10385. Deputy E. Collins.—With regard to the letter with your initials, can you recollect who asked for the letter to be written? —No, I would not normally have that information at any stage of working. I would simply be given a pile of copies of letters to read and correct, if necessary. 10386. You know nothing else about the circumstances in which the letter came about— nothing else in relation to these accounts? —No. 10387. Did you ever have cause to operate the ledger card system? —No, not at the time. I was in “cash” all the time. 10388. Does this mean you would be giving out cash? —Yes. 10389. It is possible that you did handle some of the disbursements from these accounts? —It is possible, but I do not think I did. It is possible because, I probably would not have thought anything of it at the time. 10390. When giving out cash what is the normal procedure in relation to a cheque which you would receive? —If you are going to cash a cheque first of all you want to see that the cheque will be paid so you make sure first of all that there is enough money to meet the cheque. 10391. You would automatically go to the ledger card to cheque on the accounts? —You would. 10392. You do not recall going to either the White, Loughran, Murphy or Anne O’Brien accounts? —I never did. This is what makes me think I probably never cashed any of the cheques. 10393. Is it customary to pay cash on a cheque without the person endorsing it? —If the cheque is payable to “Cash” it is not necessary to have the cheque endorsed. 10394. Is it the practice to have it endorsed? —Ninety per cent. of the time I cash cheques for people I know and the cheque is payable to “Cash”. They do not endorse it. 10395. Deputy H. Gibbons.—You did not discuss this account with Mr. Coyne? —No. 10396. Deputy Nolan.—You mentioned that Mr. Coyne said to you that Mr. F called? You have quite a number of people calling to the bank. It is quite a busy branch? —Yes. 10397. Why did Mr. Coyne pick out Mr. F? —I could not honestly tell you. It was just in passing it was mentioned. 10398. This is unusual in a busy branch? Was there any reason why Mr. Coyne should say “that is Mr. F”? —I am sure Mr. Coyne knew who he was. He was a reasonably important individual. If Mr. Heath came to cash a cheque somebody would probably point him out to me too. 10399. Deputy Tunney.—Did you know Mr. F’s connection with these accounts? —What do you mean? 10400. Did you know that Mr. F was connected with these accounts? Either the main or the subsidiary account? —No. I don’t think, in fact, he is connected with them. I may be wrong. It is just possible he called in to cash a cheque. That is all. I don’t know he is connected with them. Is he? 10401. I thought you said that Mr. Coyne had told you who Mr. F was? —A certain individual called into the bank to cash a cheque, yes. 10402. The certain individual was Mr. F? —Yes, that is right. 10403. That is the man you are talking about? —Yes. 10404. It would not be usual for Mr. Heath to be calling into your bank to cash cheques and the question I put to you was arising from your chat with Mr. Coyne did you gather that Mr. F had any connection with these accounts? —No. Chairman.—Thank you very much. (Witness withdrew). Chairman.—I call Mr. Reynolds. Mr. Vincent Reynolds sworn and examined.10405. Chairman.—Did you act as teller during some of this period? —Not during the period under review, I did not. 10406. You had no contact with the public? —I had contact with the public but not in a teller’s capacity. 10407. Not giving out money and taking it in? —No. 10408. Were you aware of the arrangement being made for the bank account in London? —No, I was not aware. The only connection I had with one of the particular letters is—you may notice I have my initials on a copy—that I had my initials thereon. That is in respect of the fact that I checked the letter before it went to the management for signing. 10409. Apart from that you had not any knowledge of the transaction at all? —No, none whatsoever. 10410. You were just checking for spelling accuracy and typing accuracy. —That is correct. 10411. Deputy Barrett.—Do you know any of the people involved in operating the accounts under investigation? The accounts we are dealing with at the moment? —I would refer to Mr. F there as a person whom I had seen in the office on two or three occasions but beyond that I do not know whether he had any connection with the accounts or otherwise. 10412. Apart from this coded list you have heard many other people mentioned with this account including Captain Kelly and others. Have you seen any of those in the office or do you recollect seeing any of those? —No. I do not know any of the others by appearance on a personal basis or that I would recognise in the street. Therefore I never had seen them in the office that I can recollect. 10413. Deputy Tunney.—The letters you would normally be asked to check, what is the modus operandi in connection with these letters? —The department that I am attached to is the security department where most of the letters originate in the branch. I myself would write some of the letters depending on the parts of the work I was involved in and the person who is above me in the department would write the other letters and there would be other letters coming in from other parts of the office. Most of the letters would be typed in my department and I would check every one of those in the evening before going in for signature. 10414. This letter which would come in to you for typing would come in in longhand from one of your superiors, or would it be dictated to somebody? —It could come in either ways. It could be dictated or it could come in in longhand if it came from outside our department. 10415. Deputy H. Gibbons.—You would vouch for the contents of those letters to the manager? —Grammatically and spelling-wise that they were correct—the information therein, unless I wrote the letter would not affect me otherwise. Chairman.—Thank you very much. (Mr. Reynolds withdrew). (The Committee adjourned at 11 p.m. until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, 24th March, 1971.) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
