DARWIN COMMISSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17348, 20 December 1919, Page 9

DARWIN COMMISSION.

LATE OFFICIALS EXAMINED.

INVESTMENTS IN A MINE.

PRIVATE CODE IN USE. By Telegraph— Association—Copyright. (Received 10.30 p.m.) A. and N.Z. DARWIN, Dec. 18. The evidence taken by the Northern Territory Commission at Darwin so far has chiefly centred round the use by the officials of two codes, Government and private, for their communications. Mr. R. J. Evans, late Government secretary, in his evidence, said that the private code was used to prevent leakage of information. Mr. F. E. Carey, late Director of the Northern Territory, explaining certain correspondence, declared that Dr. J. A. Gilruth, who preceded Mr. Carey as Administrator, was interested in the Daley mine, having guaranteed half the loss on it to Mr. Justice Bevan, Judge of the Supreme Court for the Northern Territory. He also stated in evidence that he negotiated with Vestey 'Brothers for employing Dr. Gilruth on a scientific mission.

Mr. Justice Bevan gave evidence that Dr. Gilruth became interested in the Daley mine about September, 1916, when witness told him that owing to his heavy liabilities he could not go on with it. Dr. Gilruth agreed to take half Mr. Justice Sevan's share. The Minister controlling the Territory was not informed of the matter.

Mr. Justice Ewing, the Royal Commissioner, announced that he could see no justification for the statement that Mr. Justice Be van was interested in Daley River land, and, therefore, proposed to strike his name out of that charge.

Mr. Justice Bevan, in further evidence, stated that the key of the private telegraphic code in use was a combination of Dr. Gilruth's, Mrs. Gilnrth's, and Mr. Carey's initials. He supposed that Dr. Gilruth prepared the key for replying to questions.

Regarding monetary and other relations -between himself and Dr. Gilruth, Mr. Justice Bevan said that they were interested with a man named Hope in the Arrino mining lease. They got Hope to take it up. Each of the three had an equal share in the property.

Asked if Hope was the owner as far as the public was concerned, witness replied: "He was."

Asked if the Administrator, as well as himself, knew that Hope was only a man of straw, Mr. Justice Bevan replied: " I think so."

Asked if there were any other things in which Dr. Gilruth and himself were interested under someone else's name, Mr. Justice Bevan replied in the negative. He did not think it strange that the Administrator should advance money to himself under someone else's name. He claimed that they were acting perfectly straightforwardly.