"PAID FOR SEAL"

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 177, 28 July 1928, Page 11

"PAID FOR SEAL"

j COMMISSION'S FINDING. M.P. RECEIVED £5000. SAID HE BACKED SPEARFELT. (From Our Own Correspondent^, SYDNEY, July 20. Judge Scholes' report on his inquiry into the allegations that financial offers were made to several members of the Commonwealth Parliament to induce them to vacate their seats in favour of Mr. E. G. Theodore, ex-Premier of Queensland, was released by the Prime Minister, Mr. Bruce, this week. "Financial benefit was given, probably to the extent of £5000 to Mr. W.. G. Mahony, in consideration of his resigning his seat in the Federal Parliament in favour of Mr. Theodore," was the main finding of Judge Scholes.

Tlie whole inquiry originated in statements made by Mr. W. H. Lambert, M.H.R., that he had received offers from Mr. Theodore to resign his seat in favour of him, and further corroboration by Mr. G. L'ann, an exMinister of the Lang Government in X.S.W., led the Prime Minister to institute a Boyal Commission to inquire into the aßegations.

Referring to Mr. Mahony, the report states, inter- alia, "Mr. Mahony, late member for Dallev, did resign his seat as member for Dalley in favour of Mr. Theodore. Mr. Mahony's banking account in the Commonwealth Bank and the Commonwealth Savings Bank showed that he was a person without means outside his Parliamentary pay, and his account for a long time showed only his regular receipt of that amount. He resigned his seat in favour of Mr Theodore, on January 18, 1927, and on the day before'his resignation he took i a box in a safe deposit firm. In June. (1927, Mr. Mahony bought an hotel at Balmain and paid £250 in notes for it and later £2750, also in noies. Mr. Mahony admitted that he placed a sumi upwards of £5000 in his safe deposit box the day before he resigned his seat! in the Federal Parliament. He paidl the hotel amounts out of it and also £1500 towards his own testimonial. The possession of that sum of £.">OOO was kept a secret by him from all the world. His account of his possession of that money, judged by ordinary standards of the man of the world, viz., that he had won the amount on Melbourne Cup day by backing Spearfelt to win the raoe, is so highly improbable as not to worthy of any belief.

[ "In the financial circumstances surrounding Mr. Mahony and his political actions at that time, the possession of that large sum of money hidden by him in great secrecy, raised In my mind a grave suspicion that that money had not been accumulated by him in the innocent manner related by him. To my mind," said the judge, "I am of the opinion that Mr. Mahony did receive this money in consideration of his resigning his seat in favour of Mr. Theodore."' Referring to Mr. Theodore, who was examined by the commission, Judge Scholes said, "I -was unable to discover anything in Mr. Theodore's banking account which would warrant me in hold* ing that Mr. Theodore provided any moneys other than a sum of £200, ostensibly given to Mr. Mahony by Mr. Theodore as part of a testimonial. It is beyond question that that £200 was given to Mr. Mahony by Mr. Theodore in consideration of Mr. Mahony's resignation of his seat in favour of Mr. Theodore. 7 '

The report created a sensation in political circles in the Commonwealth, and the Federal Government is considering what action should be taken to obviate further operations of this sort. Mr. Mahony, interviewed after tlie commission's report had been published, scathingly attacked the finding and declared that it was biased and not according to facts. He produced letters which were afterwards published in .an evening paper, purporting to come from men who had been with Mahony when he backed Spearfelt at. the Melbourne Cup meeting of 1926.