BRIBERY CASE

Hokitika Guardian, 31 January 1929, Page 5

BRIBERY CASE

GODDARD’S £12,080

WHO OWNS rr:-

(United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.)

I.ONRON. Jan. 80

No decision has yet been '•cached as to the legal ownership of ex-Scrcci.it Goddard’s hoard, ft is one of £12.990

in hank notes. II was seized by the police from the safe deposit. Goddard's advisers arc expected to institute proceedings for the return of the money, less the fine of £2OOO and costs, "contending that the money, however acquired, is still CJoddard's.

BR I USURY OF THE POLICE

LONDON. Jan

The Court’s decision ill the Night Club case lias produced the most outspoken newspaper comment. The Daily Express states: Tbe ea.-e has opened tho authorities’ eves to a police scandal which has been a matter of common knowledge for years. Everyone knowing anything o c Wot End life was perfectly aware tliaf. Hit l proprietors of Night Clubs, the gambling dons and the disorderly houses have paid a regular ribnte to the police. Everyone has accepted ii as a commonplace, except the higher police authorities. THE NIGHT QUEEN’S HAUL. LONDON, J an. SO. The Daily Express states: Airs Movriek was one one time inf crested in five Night Clubs. Tier profits wore easily one thousand pounds .‘toiling per week. The Daily Telegraph states: “It can hardly lie doubted that the ree-nt dangerous cloud of suspicion in the public mind against the Metropolitan Police is traceable in no small degree to the scandals which have sptead from the strange immunity that has boon enjoyed by some’ of the fi-fiion-ahle Night Clubs ‘in London. The sentence passed hv Mr .lustice Avorv may well have' been intended to have a sharply deterrent ofloct. upon other.'.