ALLEGATION OF CORRUPTION

Press, Volume LXXXIV, Issue 25654, 17 November 1948, Page 5

ALLEGATION OF CORRUPTION

British Tribunal Begins Inquiry CONNEXION WITH MINISTERS (N.Z .P. A.—Reuter—Copyright) LONDON, November 15. The tribunal set up by the Prime Minister (Mr Attlee) to inquire into allegations affecting Ministers of the Crown and Government officials began its sittings to-day. The AttorneyGeneral (Sir Hartley Shawcross) in his opening address said that there had been an allegation of corruption, not in a strict sense as defined by the Prevention of Corruption Act, but in the broader sense, as generally understood by the public. “There have been searching inSuiries by the police,” he said. “The •irector of Public Prosecutions has reported, and I agree with his report, that there is not at present sufficient evidence to support any prosecution in relation to the matters which are the subject of the inquiry.” Sir Hartley Shawcross said that in certain commercial circles it was not unusual to give occasional presents, perhaps at Christmas. Those things might not be done openly but it would be indignantly denied that they were in any way connected with bribery.

The inquiries which followed information received by the authorities converged until they centred upon a man called Sydney Stanley, round whom the tangled web they would have to unweave seemed to have been spun. A deportation order was 'made against Stanley, who had used at least five other names, in 1933.

Sir Hartley Shawcross said that Stanley, by his verisimilitude, formed an intimate association with Mr John Belcher, Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, struck up a lesser friendship with Mr George Gibson, a Bank of England director, and again to a lesser extent with the Minister of Works (Mr Charles Key). He claimed be on terms of close friendship with other Ministers and the leaders of all parties.

Eight Separate Heads Five of six specific allegations arose in regard to Stanley. Another part of the allegations dealt with a man named Liversidge, who claimed to be a friend of Mr Belcher. There were eight separate heads of the inquiry: (1) Allegations concerning the* withdrawal of the prosecution of Sherman’s Pools.

(2) Allegations concerning the paper allocation to Sherman’s Pools.

(3) Allegations concerning a proposal to turn Sherman’s Pools into a public company. (4) Allegations relating to the proposed importation -of amusement machinery.

(5) Allegations concerning certain building licences for a building in Berkeley square. (6) A proposed licence for the export of cement bags to Belgium and France. v

(7) Allegations about gifts said to have been made to particular public servants.

(8) Certain statements concerning various subsidiary matters. Sir Hartley Shawcross dealt with the payment of Mr Belcher’s hotel bills by Stanley during the Labour Party Conference at Margate. He said: “There is very little in the case which is not the subject of a very sharp, clear conflict of testimony. It may well be that when all concerned have given their evidence there will be explanations of all the various matters involved.”

He read a statement by Mr Belcher, who said he was very angry when Stanley invited him to lunch at his flat and Harry Sherman arrived soon afterwards. Mr Belcher told Sherman that as far as the prosecution against Sherman’s was concerned he would not interfere with the proper func-’ tioning of the Board of Trade machinery. Sir Hartley Shawcross. Mr Belcher, and the President of the Board of Trade (Mr Harold Wilson) discussed the matter. Mr Belcher then decided that proceedings against Sherman’s should be withdrawn.

Receipt of Cheques Sir Hartley Shawcross said that Stanley had received cheques for £5OOO and £7OOO from Sherman’s. Sherman said that they were a loan and when he pressed for repayment Stanley said he had distributed the money. According to Stanley, both were payments to him on account of £50,000 which he alleged Sherman had promised him for work in connexion with the flotation of Sherman’s Pools as a public company. Sir Hartley Shawcross said that such a flotation would require Treasury permission and the proposed flotation did not proceed.

Mr Belcher and Mrs Belcher, said Sir Hartley Shawcross, had stronglv and indignantly denied allegations by Harry Sherman that Stanley, who was also known as Solomon Wulkan, had been paying Mr Belcher £5O weekly and making occasional gifts of £lOO to Mrs Belcher. He said there was no corroboration of Sherman’s allegation. •Sir Hartley Shawcross added that Stanley withdrew large sums from his banking account from time to time. The disposition of that money would have to be investigated. The tribunal then began to hear evidence, after which it adjourned till to-morrow.

The “Daily Mail" says that Mr Belcher to-night conferred with lawyers over specific allegations which Sir Hartley Shawcross told the tribunal had been made against him. The legal conference was necessitated by the fact that much of what Sir Hartley Shawcross outlined came as news to all but the Scotland Yard and Treasury officials working on the case. This was the result of Mr Justice Lynskey’s ruling that no one might be informed beforehand of statements made about them by witnesses, go that each day may bring fresh surprises to the principal figures concerned. BALKAN PEACE TALKS

PARIS, Nov. 15. Representatives of Greece, Jugoslavia, Bulgaria, and Albania to-day conferred with the president of the United Nations General Assembly (Dr. H. V. Evatt), the Secretary-General of the United Nations (Mr Trygve Lie), and Mr Sarper (Turkey), in the first direct attempt to end the Balkan crisis by mediation. An official communique said: “An informal discussion was held in an atmosphere of practical conciliation. A further meeting will be held tomorrow.”