Embezzlement

4 definitions found

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 [gcide]:

  Embezzlement \Em*bez"zle*ment\, n.
     The fraudulent appropriation of property by a person to whom
     it has been intrusted; as, the embezzlement by a clerk of his
     employer's money; embezzlement of public funds by the public
     officer having them in charge.
     [1913 Webster]


  
     Note: Larceny denotes a taking, by fraud or stealth, from
           another's possession; embezzlement denotes an
           appropriation, by fraud or stealth, of property already
           in the wrongdoer's possession. In England and in most
           of the United States embezzlement is made indictable by
           statute.
           [1913 Webster]

From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:

  embezzlement
       n : the fraudulent appropriation of funds or property entrusted
           to your care but actually owned by someone else [syn: {peculation},
            {defalcation}, {misapplication}, {misappropriation}]

From Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0 [moby-thes]:

  60 Moby Thesaurus words for "embezzlement":
     abstraction, abuse, abuse of office, annexation, appropriation,
     befoulment, boosting, conversion, conveyance,
     corrupt administration, debasement, defalcation, defilement,
     desecration, diversion, filching, fouling, fraud, graft, larceny,
     liberation, lifting, maladministration, malfeasance, malpractice,
     malversation, misapplication, misappropriation, misconduct,
     misemployment, misfeasance, mishandling, mismanagement, misusage,
     misuse, misusing, peculation, perversion, pilferage, pilfering,
     pinching, poaching, pollution, poor stewardship, profanation,
     prostitution, purloining, scrounging, shoplifting, snatching,
     sneak thievery, snitching, stealage, stealing, swindle, swiping,
     theft, thievery, thieving, violation
  
  

From Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856) [bouvier]:

  EMBEZZLEMENT, crim. law. The fraudulently removing and secreting of personal 
  property, with which the party has been entrusted, for the purpose of 
  applying it to his own use. 
       2. The Act of April 30, 1790, s. 16, 1 Story, L. U. S. 86, provides, 
  that if any person, within any of the laces under the sole and exclusive 
  jurisdiction of the United States, or upon the high seas, shall take and 
  carry away, with an intent to steal or purloin, the personal goods of 
  another; or if any person or persons, having, at any time hereafter, the 
  charge or custody of any arms, ordnance, munition, shot, powder, or 
  habiliments of war, belonging to the. United States, or of any victuals 
  provided for the victualling of any soldiers, gunners, marines, or pioneers, 
  shall, for any lucre or gain, or wittingly, advisedly, and of purpose to 
  hinder or impede the service of the United States, embezzle, purloin, or 
  convey away, any of the said arms, ordnance, munition, shot or powder, 
  habiliments of war, or victuals, that then, and in every of the cases 
  aforesaid, the persons so offending, their counsellors, aiders and abettors, 
  (knowing of, and privy to the offences aforesaid,) shall, on conviction, be 
  fined, not exceeding the fourfold value of the property so stolen, embezzled 
  or purloined the one moiety to be paid to the owner of the goods, or the 
  United States, as the case may be, and the other moiety to the informer and 
  prosecutor, and be publicly whipped, not exceeding thirty-nine stripes. 
       3. The Act of April 20, 1818, 3 Story, 1715, directs that wines and 
  distilled spirits shall, in certain cases, be deposited in the public 
  warehouses of the United States, and then it is enacted, s. 5, that if any 
  wines, or other spirits, deposited under the provisions of this act, shall 
  be embezzled, or fraudulently hid or removed, from any store or place 
  wherein they shall have been deposited, they shall be forfeited, and the 
  person or persons so embezzling, hiding, or removing the same, or aiding or 
  assisting therein, shall be liable to the same pains and penalties as if 
  such wines or spirits had been fraudulently unshipped or landed without 
  payment of duty. 
       4. By the 21st section of the act to reduce into one the several acts 
  establishing and regulating the post-office, passed March 3, 1825, 3 Story, 
  1991, the offence of embezzling letters is punished with fine and 
  imprisonment. Vide Letter. 
       5. The act more effectually to provide for the punishment of certain 
  crimes against the United States, and for other purposes, passed March 3, 
  1825, s. 24, 3 Story, 2006, enacts, that if any of the gold or silver coins 
  which shall be struck or coined at the mint of the United States, shall be 
  debased, or made worse, as to the proportion of fine gold or fine silver 
  therein contained, or shall be of less weight or value than the same ought 
  to be, pursuant to the several acts relative thereto, through the default or 
  with the connivance of any of the officers or persons who shall be employed 
  at the said mint, for the purpose of profit or gain, or otherwise, with a 
  fraudulent intent and if any of the said officers or persons shall embezzle 
  any of the metals which shall, at any time, be committed to their charge for 
  the purpose of being coined; or any of the coins which shall be struck or 
  coined, at the said mint; every such officer, or person who shall commit 
  any, or either, of the said offences, shall be deemed guilty of felony, and 
  shall be sentenced to imprisonment and hard labor for a term not less than 
  one year, nor more than ten years, and shall be fined in a sum not exceeding 
  ten thousand dollars. 
       6. When an embezzlement of a part of the cargo takes place on board of 
  a ship, either from the fault, fraud, connivance or negligence of any of the 
  crow, they are bound to contribute to the reparation of the loss, in 
  proportion to their wages. When the embezzlement is fixed on any individual, 
  he is solely responsible; when it is made by the crew, or some of the crew, 
  but the particular offender is unknown, and from the circumstances of the 
  case, strong presumptions of guilt apply to the whole crew, all must 
  contribute. The presumption of innocence is always in favor of the crew, and 
  the guilt of the parties must be established, beyond all reasonable doubt, 
  before they can be required to contribute. 1 Mason's R. 104; 4 B. & P. 347; 
  3 Johns. Rep. 17; 1 Marsh. Ins. 241; Dane's Ab. Index, h.t.; Wesk. Ins. 
  194; 3 Kent, Com., 151; Hardin, 529.