## Facts

- Harry Mace Titus, Sr., a civilian, managed Post Exchange Branch No. 10 at Fort Dix, New Jersey, and had possession and control of cigarettes owned by the Army Exchange Service.
- Fort Dix was a federal reservation; the prosecution relied on a federal statute assimilating New Jersey’s embezzlement law for acts on the reservation.
- Titus waived a jury trial and admitted the essential facts.
- On four dates in late 1944, Titus removed cigarettes entrusted to him:
  - Nov. 27: two cases (value $145).
  - Nov. 28: 120 cartons (value $156).
  - Nov. 30: 100 cartons (value $145).
  - Dec. 2: 120 cartons (value $156).
- For the first three incidents, Titus sold the cigarettes off-base at prices above the official post-exchange price, returned to the exchange, deposited only the official price into the register, and kept the excess.
- For the fourth incident, Titus was stopped by military police while leaving Fort Dix with the cigarettes and had not deposited any money for them.

## Issues

1. Whether a post-exchange manager who sells entrusted cigarettes for personal profit commits embezzlement under the assimilated New Jersey statute.
2. Whether depositing (or intending to deposit) the official price—thereby repaying the property’s value—negates the fraudulent intent required for embezzlement.

## Decision

- The court found Titus guilty on all four counts.
- The court held embezzlement was complete when Titus fraudulently converted the cigarettes to his own use by taking and selling them for personal gain.
- The court rejected the defense that repayment or an intent to reimburse defeated criminal intent.

## Legal Principles

- On a federal reservation, state criminal law applies through the federal assimilative statute when Congress has not made the specific conduct punishable by federal law.
- Under the assimilated embezzlement statute, an entrusted agent or servant commits embezzlement by fraudulently taking or converting the entrusted property or funds to personal use.
- Embezzlement is completed at the time of fraudulent conversion; later restoration of the property or payment of its value does not negate the offense or erase the earlier fraudulent intent.
- A scheme to deposit only the official price while retaining the excess obtained from unauthorized sales supports a finding of fraudulent intent.

## Conclusion

The court convicted a civilian post-exchange manager of embezzlement for selling entrusted cigarettes for personal profit, holding that the crime was complete upon fraudulent conversion and was not cured by repayment or an intent to reimburse.


United States v. Titus, 64 F. Supp. 55 (D.N.J. 1946)