Case XV: Defraudation by a Bank Employee: a Case of Restitution

Marcus, an employee in a bank, is importuned by some dishonest fellow-employees to join them in their defraudations. They urge upon him that some former misconduct of his is known to them, and that it would make him lose his position if these matters were brought to the notice of his superiors. He feels that he must do their bidding or lose his bread and butter, for he has neither knowledge nor ability for another calling. In the subsequent constant state of committing fraud, he omits for several years to go to Confession. But in order to amend for his defraudations in some way, he spends considerable money for alms and Mass stipends. At length he hears a certain sermon which moves him deeply, and induces him to go to Confession.

1. What has Marcus to do on account of his defraudations?

2. What advice should he be given for the future?

Ad 1. Marcus is clearly bound to make restitution. The alms and Mass stipends with which he tried to appease his conscience can in no way be taken in account in this respect. The injured party is known, and restitution must be made to it, otherwise the wrong can not be righted (Lehmkuhl, I. 1019. Delama II. 713). The question with which Lehmkuhl deals in Sec. 1031 has no bearing upon our case, because in his case a former confessor bade the penitent to use the ill-gotten money for pious purposes, while in our case Marcus has done this without having such commutation granted to him.

Ad 2. As Marcus is evidently in an embarrassing position, he may be allowed to pretend assistance in the defraudations of the bank provided he has the intention and means of making restitution for the amount falling to his share. He should keep this money separate from his private possessions, and he must even invest this money in a profitable way, so as to be able to make at some future time as full a restitution as possible to the defrauded bank. The best way for him to pursue would be to open a special bank account for these defrauded sums and leave them in his will, in a legally unassailable form, to the rightful owner. This is advised to provide for the case of a premature or sudden demise. If circumstances alter, however, or if he should be pensioned or freed in some way from the compulsion exercised over him by his fellow-employees, then he must without doubt make restitution as soon as possible, and must not cause it to be delayed until after his death.

Is Marcus obliged to make known the circumstances to his superiors?

Since his fellow-culprits are not subordinate to him, so that he is not responsible for their actions, he is not obliged in justice to take such a step. But when circumstances alter and he leaves his position, then he will be obliged to report the facts to the proper superiors. (Lehmkuhl I. 1013. Del. II. 705.)