The last case[131] in the catalogue of this peculiar description of crimes is that which occurred at Canterbury during the year 1865. This case is indeed so recent that any lengthy description of it would scarcely be tolerated. We may well spare ourselves the trouble, for the Canterbury fraud was little else than a repetition, on a smaller scale, of the one perpetrated at Rochdale, to which we have given so much space. Nor is it a little singular that the actuary in the Rochdale case was in many respects the prototype of the Canterbury actuary: in the estimation in which both were held in their respective spheres, in their character and occupation, there are several points of close resemblance between them. In the Canterbury case we have the old story of misplaced confidence, want of check, and a constant embezzlement of considerable sums of money extending over a long series of years. The actuary and secretary of the Canterbury bank, Mr. Samuel Greaves, was for many years almost the sole responsible official; of course "he bore the highest possible character for probity and honesty": nor will it surprise any of our readers to be told that it came afterwards to be said of this man, "from his many professions he was thought incapable of such conduct as that which was proved against him." The Canterbury bank was established in 1816. Greaves's connexion with the institution dates from 1830, when he was appointed actuary at a salary of 40_l._ per annum. The salary, however, was increased from year to year, up to the time of the exposure, when it stood at the respectable figure of 200_l._ Originally a "hoyman," the actuary of course, and necessarily, engaged in other pursuits than those connected with the bank; and this circumstance, in the same way that it occurred in almost every other fraud of the kind, led to the malappropriation of the money of the bank. It was another case of partial service and partial pay, and an almost unlimited command of money, when among many other business engagements it was always possible that money might be urgently needed. Like Haworth of Rochdale, Mr. Greaves undertook several agencies, among them those for the sale of coal and porter. In 1840, it seemed, from the statements of his counsel, he began to lose money in his business, and was then, to put it in the mild form chosen at his trial, "induced to abstract some of the funds of the bank to meet his pressing difficulties." Once on the downward road, he never turned back; it was impossible to manage it. It was the old story, told with plainness by his own advocate. He took the money, with the full intention of repaying it on an early date; difficulties gathered fast around him, and still the man went on, foolishly trusting to some turn of fortune's wheel to replace him in his old position. He tried speculation, but he lost still more irretrievably; his lucky day never arrived: and at length the weight of anxiety under which the man must