THREE CASES LEFT TO POLICE

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25713, 27 January 1949, Page 5

THREE CASES LEFT TO POLICE

Stating that all allegations made in letters addressed to the inquiry had been investigated, the report said that the tribunal had left tnree cases to the police to take action. None of these concerned any Minister, but one did concern certain officials in a Government department. The tribunal understood that the case in which these Government officials were concerned was being submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The tribunal, announcing its findings on various points in the evidence, said of Mr Belcher’s illness, during which Stanley took him flowers: “We are satisfied that one of the causes of Mr Belcher’s ill-health was indulgence in alcohol.”

The allegations that Mr Belcher betted heavily and boasted that Alfred Cope, a bookmaker, “never sent him accounts when he lest,” were groundless gossip, said the report. No betting transactions had taken place between Cone and Mr Belcher. '

The tribunal said that it was impossible to say what was the true nature of the transaction in which the football pools chief, Harry Sherman, claimed that he had given Stanley £12.000 and that Stanley had told him he had used the money to bribe Mr Eelcher and other officials. Stanley’s story of the transaction was quite fantastic. Sherman’s story seemed also highly improbable. There was no evidence that any part of that £12,000 was received by Mr Belcher, Mrs Belcher, or any of the officials whom Stanley met.

Referring to allegations that Mr Belcher and Dr. Hugh Dalton were both seeking business directorships,

the tribunal said that it was satisfied that Mr Belcher was at that time seeking neither a directorship nor any other position outside the Government. Stanley had exaggerated casual talk of a visit by Mr Belcher to Mr Isaac Wolfson, the millionaire head of the Great Universal Stores. The tribunal believed that Stanley, without any authority from Mr Wolfson, had made the offer of a directorship to Dr. Dalton, who had declined it.

The tribunal accepted the statement by Mr Charles Key. Minister of Works that he did not know that the suit Stanley had made for him was meant as a gift, and that he had always intended to pay for it. It was satisfied, however, that in spite of Mr Key’s denials the suit had been a gift from Stanley. “Unfit for Public Life” “The Times,” commenting on the report, says that Mr'Belcher and Mr Geprge Gibson may have cause to reconsider their qualifications for public life. The “Daily Telegraph” says that the retention of any public office by Mr Belcher and'Mr Gibson would appear incongruous. The “Yorkshire Post” says: “Mr Gibson and Mr Belcher are unfit for public life.” The “Manchester Guardian” says that the tribunal has exposed the unhealthy atmosphere which a too powerful bureaucracy creates. The “Daily Herald” says: “Nobody with any human feeling could fail to have compassion for Mr Belcher and Mr Gibson. They have been guilty of the kind of laxness which is common enough in private business. What they failed to realise is that in public affairs such laxness cannot be condoned.”