“GRAFT” INQUIRY

Hokitika Guardian, 31 May 1928, Page 1

“GRAFT” INQUIRY

(Australian Press Association.) SYDNEY, Alay 29. At tho Royal Commission on civic affairs, Airs Pittock, further cross-ex-amined by counsel for Arnot, denied that she interviewed Arnot and exAhlerman Green in order to see if they would pay income tax for Afaling on £10,600. Alter she interviewed Green and Arnot. she wrote to ALiling suggesting to him that he should return from. Now Zealand and face the whole matter.

In reply to Justice Harvey, who asked what become of certain letters written hy Alaling while in New Zealand to witness, the latter said she thought she must' have destroyed them.

The Judge then warned her that false swearing before lnm rendered her liable to five years’ imprisonment.

She denied that she asked Wright, Municipal Garage Superintendent, to ask Albert if the latter would advance £2090 to pay income tax. She also denied that she attempted to blackmail Arnot into paying £2600 income tax assessed against Maling. Albert, re-examined, said that he had received a telephone message from Wright making an interview, at which Wright said: “If someone comes along and offers you £2600, will yon pay it into the income tax?” WRness refused, and asked AVright if it were Airs Pittoek’s suggestion, hut Wright refused to tell him. adding that tho money would be supplied if "Albert would pay it into the Income Tax Department. Witness refused, and the matter ended. Superintendent A) right, in his evidence said that in an interview with Mrs Pittock, she asked him if he would see Albert and get him to pay income tax. saving that would settle it. Witness replied that it had nothing to do with him, and ho did not want to he mixed up in. the matter, hut eventually he agreed to see Albert, but the latter refused to have anything to do with the matter. Al l s Pittock later told witness that she lmd seen Arnot in reference to income tax, hut Arnot- refused to have anything to do with it, stating his directors had made the arrangement. Inspector Maekay, of the Criminal Investigation Department, gave evidence that he saw Alaling in TYellington. when the latter, at first, denied receiving money from RabcockWilcox, hut later admitted that Arnot had told him that £10,600 was offered by Babeock-Wilcox as a present in connection with their securing the contract, and that Alaling should have £2OOO and £7,500 he divided between certain Aldermen, the balance being required for expenses in bringing the money from London and for income tax. Witness then detailed how Alaling told of money coming otit through' the agency of Albert and through Buckle’s account. Witness added that Alaling told him Albert stuck to over £2OOO and that Maling got nothing out of it.;