THE INVENTION “FRAUD” CHARGES

Evening Star, Issue 23501, 15 February 1940, Page 12

THE INVENTION “FRAUD” CHARGES

FURTHER EVIDENCE IN GROWN CASE WHEN PROMISSORY NOTE FELL DUE [Per United Press Association.] WELLINGTON, February 15. Further evidence by Ernest Palliser, land agent, of Wellington, opened today’s hearing in the Magistrate’s Court of the case wherein Harvey Maitland Chrystall and Gordon Percy Aston are jointly charged that they conspired, each with the other, by deceit, to defraud Hartley Roy Sellers of sums of money totalling about £6,765. Witness said that • shortly after Aston’s return from Sydney, he was present with Sellers, Batt, and Aston at a meeting in Sellers’s office. Aston was very definite that arrangements had been made for final payment in London on March 31, 1939. He had with him a motion picture camera which he said the Admiralty had given him for the purpose of getting photographic records of the experiments he was to carry out. He also referred to ■ the danger of the plant in England being destroyed from the air, and intimated that the British Government desired to have a large-scale base established in Australia so that warships at Singapore could be treated by the process. He added that tests had been carried out on warships in Australian waters, and the Admiralty was so impressed that he had been givten the honour of flying the White Ensign on his launch.

Witness continued with evidence regarding the delay in meeting the promissory note which was due, and the issue at the request of Sellers of another promissory note, which Sellers forwarded to Chrystall, who later returned it with his endorsement. Aston gave a definite assurance that final payment would be made on March 31, 1939. Aston had also said the Awatea had been fitted with plates prepared by the secret process, and that in the event of war the Awatea would be the first ship to be commandeered by the Government. Witness was invited by Aston to visit the Awatea at Wellington and see where the plates had been fitted. HIS FINANCE IN AUSTRALIA, Aston spoke of his financial interests in Australia, witness continued. He said the Admiralty was insistent on the plant in Australia being quadrupled so that the output would be about 500 tons monthly. Asked about the financial arrangements in London, Aston said they were in the hands of a Sir Robert Dowling, whom he frequently described as “ Scotty,” Both Aston and Chrystall stated that all their communications with the Admiralty- were carried out by means of an earth telephone system, which was Aston’s invention. The two accused said the workshop was at Tahunanui Beach, Nelson, and they referred to the nature of the apparatus used. On March 30, 1939, witness was in Sellers’s office when the latter had a telephone conversation with Chrystall. As a result he (witness) was satisfied that the final payment had actually been made in London. Chrystall was very definite that a cable message, which he said was published in Wellington, referred to the payment, and both he and Aston said it would probably take two or three weeks for the money to be distributed among the interested parties in Australia and New Zealand. At a subsequent meeting Aston said the Admiralty insisted on the hut being retained for experiments, and ho referred to the necessity of clearing a mortgage of £750 on the premises. AFTER SELLER’S DISAPPEARANCE. Some days after Aston left Wellington for Sydney witness saw Sellers writing out a cable to Aston asking if Sellers could now operate on the account in London. Sellers received a reply requesting him and Chrystall to meet Aston in Auckland. Sellers went to Auckland, and returned to Wellington with Aston-and Chrystall on June 3, 1939. ■ Witness learned on July 3 that Sellers was reported missing. On the following afternoon he was present with E. A. Batt when a Mr M‘Beach, of the (Racing Conference staff, had a telephone conversation with Aston, who was in • Christchurch. Witness then spoke to Aston and told him that if anything had happened to Sellers a very grave responsibility _ rested on his shoulders. Aston was quite off-handed, and said Sellers was all right, and was hiding somewhere. Aston also assured him that he and Batt had no need to worry. Witness cabled Chrystall, who

was in Sydney, advising that Sellers was missing, and asking if Chrystall could return immediately. He received no reply, but later Chrystall advised him that he was returning by the Awatoa, In conversation on Chrystall’s return witness said that, in his opinion, Chrystall and Astqn were responsible for Sellers’s disappearance, and that he thought they were a pair of crooks. Continuing, witness said Batt asked Chrystall if ho would swear before a court on the correctness of the statements previously made about Aston and himself being under the Official Secrets Act. After hesitating Chrystall said he would not swear it before a court, but would do so before a judge. He insisted that everything was true in all respects, and gave witness an uuder-> taking that he would satisfy him within 48 hours that there was no fraud. On the following day he sent witness a telegram from Taihape: “ Regret no action indicated by five.” To Mr Leicester, witness said that by March, 1938, Sellers had financially interested himself in the patent, and was deepy interested otherwise, because of the reliance he had in Chrystall and Mr “ X.” From that time to the time of Sellers’s disappearance witness frequently saw Chrystall. Witness added that Chrystall was reluctant to talk very much about the patent because of his being bound under the Official Secrets Act. He always explained that he could not tell as much as he would like. He was always most reassuring about the scientific aspect of the patent. Chrystall appeared agitated after Sellers’s disappearance, but witness thought that was because he■realised there was a grave responsibility. He appeared more guarded and afraid to uttei anything that might incnininate him. In about six months, up to March, 1938, witness lent Sellers £SOO, and took a promissory note from him backed by Chrystall to repay £I,OOO m English currency. . Mr Leicester; What was the time within which the loan of £SOO was to be repaid? . ~ ~ Witness: Within three months. _ Mr Leicester: Subsequently I think there was substituted a promissory note in New Zealand currency, which meant a return of £1,240? Witness: Yes. . Mr Leicester: Was it because of the hazardous nature of the process _or patent that the late Mr Sellers_ insisted on this occasion on your receiving such a large return? » IN SOMETHING BIG.” Witness Definitely not. I took exactly the same view as with other advances I had made to Sellers —that he would honour his obligations as he had done in the past. I had his assurance ho was in something big. Witness continued that Sellers had told him he (Sellers) expected to receive £26,000 from the patent. Alexander O. Jessep, barrister and! solicitor, of Wellington, said that on March 4, 1938, ho was consulted by H, L. Nathan, of Wellington, in reference to a proposed guarantee of £3,000 by him on Sellers’s account at the Bank of Australasia. After witness and Sellers had discussed certain matters, Chrystall had come to Wellington from Nelson, and subsequently Chrystall had told witness that he and one Aston, of Christchurch, and Sellers, were interested in an invention which consisted of a special metal to be fixed to ships. The British Admiralty had agreed to buy the invention, and had paid £BO,OOO into the Bank of England. There were some details to he completed by those sponsoring the invention before the money could be received. Chrystall had added that it would not be possible to obtain a charge on the money under jtho arrangements made with the Admiralty. Sellers and Chrystall offered to repay £3,000, plus an additional £2,000, by the end of May, said witness. Chrystall said he and others had made arrangements for the metal to be manufactured in England, and that from October, 1938, not less than 40 tons a week would be delivered to the_ Admiralty. Chrystall had also mentioned the names of two concerns in Australia. which, he saidj were also financially interested in the invention. SPECIAL TELEPHONE. “ I asked Chrystall if there were any letters from the Admiralty, and both he and Sellers said that Aston was in direct communication with the_ Admiralty by means of a special invention which Aston had produced,” said witness. “It was fixed to the ground and was on a special wave-length. I wrote to Sellers on March 7 advising that my client was unable to give the proposed guarantee. Chrystall had stated that £BO,OOO would be paid over when the final details were completed, and both he and Sellers stated that the invention should bo worth not less than £500,000.