Francis Innes (Innis)
Date of birth / Date established
Circa 1839
Date of death / Date closed
18 Nov 1898
Person/Corporate type
Individual
Biography
Francis Innes (aka Innis) was born around 1839. His father was Henry Innes, an officer in the Royal Navy who served at Malta. Innes came to New Zealand in 1860, and after his military service was appointed the Deputy Assistant of the Commissary General. His first marriage was to K. Kelly, with whom he had a son, Frank. After his first wife’s passing, Francis married Catherine ‘Kate’ Arbuthnott Lyell in 1877, who was an American descended from Scottish aristocracy. Together, Francis and Kate had six children – five sons and a daughter. They resided in Parnell at their home ‘Gardyne’ on Hobson Bay Road, which was given to them by her parents as a wedding gift.
During his service in New Zealand as the Deputy Assistant Commissariat-General, Francis Innes embezzled over £1500 pounds from the Commissariat’s funds. Innes surrendered on the 16th of September 1870 to face trial for embezzlement of Her Majesty’s funds at Auckland’s Supreme Court, before the judge Honor Sir George Arney. He faced three indictments, the first of which was for stealing £1000 on the 31st of January 1869, to which he pleaded not-guilty. Innes pleaded guilty to the second indictment for stealing over £2000, and the subsequent third was withdrawn by the court. Innes was then charged with the felony crime, based on testimony and evidence submitted by Henry Clutterbuck Lewis, the Assistant Commisary-General, who had been sent to New Zealand to investigate missing funds and relieve the accused from his duties. Innes had allegedly stolen £50 of the funds held by the Queen’s Treasury Chest in New Zealand over the previous six months. Added to the felony charge under the Larceny Act YEAR, the prosecution showed Innis had further embezzled £1000 during January 1869. Innes had admitted responsibility to Lewis for the disparity of £1000 and that there were more instances in which money went missing, for which he blamed himself as becoming ‘reckless’, not remembering how much he had taken from the chest. Innes attempted to reconcile some of his debt, promising a payment of £500 to Lewis. He instead sent a messenger with a bag of gold. In court, Lewis denied the responsibility of Innes’ superior, Fred Henry Ibbetson, who was not in charge of the accounts for the month of January. Ibbetson also gave evidence of his connection with Innes at his trial. Curiously, A Dr. Tassell also gave evidence at the trial, testifying he had treated Innes who showed symptoms of taking the stimulant strychnine.
The presiding judge Arney described Innes’ conviction as ‘obtained upon evidence the most painful, and certainly the most overwhelming that I have heard adduced in a Court of Justice.’ Based on the reported court details, it seems those who gave evidence at his trial had treated Innes with affection and regard. Arney continued in the proceedings,
“I will not – I could not – aggravate the feeling of humiliation and disgrace which you must feel, and from which you must be deeply suffering, nor will I harass the feelings of this audience, nor my own feelings, derived from personal knowledge of you; but I must say thus much, that the Court cannot distinguish between grades of society, except in a very slight degree, in the apportionment of punishment which it awards to felons upon their conviction.”
Judge Arney considered the character and conduct based testimonials in Innes’ favour. He considered these to “bear witness not only to your general character, but to your conduct as being a gentleman and officer peculiarly to be relied upon” both in his role in the Commissariat and in his community, for which he maintained a high level of respect. Arney contended, “I believe there is some unexplained cause for the substantial suppression, by yourself, of the manner of disposal of these sums of money. I cannot believe they have been applied by yourself to any purpose of personal gratification.” Because of his gulty plea and witness testimonials, Innes was sentenced to a lenient five year stint of “penal servitude”.
Throughout the remainder of his life, Innes resided in Parnell. He passed away at ‘Gardyne’ on 18 November 1898 at age 59.
During his service in New Zealand as the Deputy Assistant Commissariat-General, Francis Innes embezzled over £1500 pounds from the Commissariat’s funds. Innes surrendered on the 16th of September 1870 to face trial for embezzlement of Her Majesty’s funds at Auckland’s Supreme Court, before the judge Honor Sir George Arney. He faced three indictments, the first of which was for stealing £1000 on the 31st of January 1869, to which he pleaded not-guilty. Innes pleaded guilty to the second indictment for stealing over £2000, and the subsequent third was withdrawn by the court. Innes was then charged with the felony crime, based on testimony and evidence submitted by Henry Clutterbuck Lewis, the Assistant Commisary-General, who had been sent to New Zealand to investigate missing funds and relieve the accused from his duties. Innes had allegedly stolen £50 of the funds held by the Queen’s Treasury Chest in New Zealand over the previous six months. Added to the felony charge under the Larceny Act YEAR, the prosecution showed Innis had further embezzled £1000 during January 1869. Innes had admitted responsibility to Lewis for the disparity of £1000 and that there were more instances in which money went missing, for which he blamed himself as becoming ‘reckless’, not remembering how much he had taken from the chest. Innes attempted to reconcile some of his debt, promising a payment of £500 to Lewis. He instead sent a messenger with a bag of gold. In court, Lewis denied the responsibility of Innes’ superior, Fred Henry Ibbetson, who was not in charge of the accounts for the month of January. Ibbetson also gave evidence of his connection with Innes at his trial. Curiously, A Dr. Tassell also gave evidence at the trial, testifying he had treated Innes who showed symptoms of taking the stimulant strychnine.
The presiding judge Arney described Innes’ conviction as ‘obtained upon evidence the most painful, and certainly the most overwhelming that I have heard adduced in a Court of Justice.’ Based on the reported court details, it seems those who gave evidence at his trial had treated Innes with affection and regard. Arney continued in the proceedings,
“I will not – I could not – aggravate the feeling of humiliation and disgrace which you must feel, and from which you must be deeply suffering, nor will I harass the feelings of this audience, nor my own feelings, derived from personal knowledge of you; but I must say thus much, that the Court cannot distinguish between grades of society, except in a very slight degree, in the apportionment of punishment which it awards to felons upon their conviction.”
Judge Arney considered the character and conduct based testimonials in Innes’ favour. He considered these to “bear witness not only to your general character, but to your conduct as being a gentleman and officer peculiarly to be relied upon” both in his role in the Commissariat and in his community, for which he maintained a high level of respect. Arney contended, “I believe there is some unexplained cause for the substantial suppression, by yourself, of the manner of disposal of these sums of money. I cannot believe they have been applied by yourself to any purpose of personal gratification.” Because of his gulty plea and witness testimonials, Innes was sentenced to a lenient five year stint of “penal servitude”.
Throughout the remainder of his life, Innes resided in Parnell. He passed away at ‘Gardyne’ on 18 November 1898 at age 59.