FAMOUS FIRM SUED

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 382, 16 June 1928, Page 23

FAMOUS FIRM SUED

£300,000 MYSTERY BANKNOTES IN ENVELOPE A remarkable statement concerning alleged fictitious accounts was made during the Waterlow conspiracy case in the King’s Bench Division, London. Mr. Albert George Gronow, of Oakleigh Corner, Hatch End, Middlesex, was suing Sir Philip Waterlow and his son, Mr. Edgar Waterlow, for damages for alleged conspiracy to remove him from his position as joint manager of Messrs. Waterlow and Sons, Ltd., the printers. The defence was a denial of the allegations. Mr. Edgar Waterlow denied that any attempt was made to ridicule Sir William Waterlow at a board meeting by producing a toy golfer. His impression was that the toy was shown before the business of the meeting really began. Cross-examined by Sir Patrick Hastings, K.C., Mr. Waterlow said he did not know that de La Rue’s had paid £300,000 under a side arrangement. Sir Patrick: Isn’t it obvious that, a company which got a contract under such an arrangement would at least have to add on to its tender prices to the Government the £300,000 which De la Rue’s had to pay you? —That I don’t know. 30s Versus 10s 7d Supposing the large contractors who cater for this Government work all made an arrangement like this, the Government might possibly not get -the work done except at the price which they fixed?—Yes, if everybody stood out. He agreed that a 1917 arrangement covered certain Government currency notes. The contract, for the printing of those notes was obtained ultimately by Waterlow Bros, and Layton, Ltd. De la Rue’s and Waterlow and Sons, Ltd., both tendered for it, their price being about 30s a 1,000, Mr. Waterlow continued . He did not know that the price quoted by Waterlow Bros, and Layton, who were outside the ring, was 10s 7d a 1,000. Mr. Waterlow said that a Mr. Hayes came from De la Rue’s to pay over money to Mr. Bass, then managing director of Waterlow and Sons, in 1897 or 1898. He (Mr. Waterlow) took the money on Mr. Bass’s behalf. The money was in the form of bank notes enclosed in envelopes, one of which was not stuck down. Mr. Waterlow said he did not count the notes, but wondered at the time how such money was accounted for in the accounts. He was told by the countinghouse that there were fictitious accounts, such as John Smith and Company, into which money would be paid. The hearing was adjourned.