Graft Charges

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 223, 9 December 1927, Page 9

Graft Charges

AMENDMENT TO N.S.W. LIQUOR ACT “THE HIGHEST BIDDER”

Reed. 10.25 a.m. SYDNEY, To-day. The Cabinet has decided to hold an inquiry into the allegations of payments by grocers, who held wine licences, in connection with the amendment to the Liquor Act. The form of the inquiry has not yet been decided, but if necessary a Royal Commission will be appointed.—A. and N.Z.

A Sydney cablegram of October 6 read as follows: __ . . At a meeting of the Wine and Spirit Grocers’ Defence Association, serious allegations were made by the chairman, Mr R. Roney, in connection with the securing of amendments to the Liquor Act. He stated that some months ago the members, of whom there are 235, were asked to subscribe £25 each for the purpose of establishing a fighting fund to obtain an amendment to the Liquor Act. "Keep Quiet" The amendment was to allow grocers to sell wine and spirits in a single bottle, instead of the minimum quantities of two gallons as at present. Later he saw several Ministers and was told to keep quiet so as not to cause newspaper controversy and what they wanted would be introduced in Parliament. Subsequently he received an urgent message to attend Parliament House. He did so and was shown the proposed Bill, but intimated that he was not satisfied. Then the brewers, who were afraid that single bottle sales would injure hotelkeepers, got on the scene and when he complained to a prominent Labour man of the treatment, the latter declared: "JLf somebody was getting £50,000 or £60,000 and you got the amended Act it would be cheap for grocers at the price." "The Highest Bidder" Mr. Roney, in reply to questions, said that surely they did not want to be told how the money, which had been subscribed for political means, had been spent. If the Government had been honourable they would have got the Act amended. He had been told that this was not done because they did not pay for it. If they had paid the money over before the Bill went before the House there would have been no doubt about its passing. In fact the amendment was up for sale to the highest bidder.