ARMY CANTEENS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 13352, 9 April 1914, Page 3

ARMY CANTEENS.

THE CONTRACT SCANDALS

(Press Assn.— By Telegraph— Copyright, (Received April 9. 9.30 am.) LONDON, April 8.

Archibald Minto, one of the defendants m the Army canteen scandal, surrendered himself on his return to England, and was remanded until the 12th

The charge is one of conspiracy under the Corrupt Practices Act, which provides for a maximum fine of £500 or two years' imprisonment, or both; or if dealt with summarily m the police court, a fine of £50 or four months' imprisonment, or both. Counsel for the defence argued that no evidence of special services to contractors had been tendered. Lipton, Ltd., had paid the quartermasters for voluntary services rendered, apart from their military duties. All the defendants m the firat case were committed for trial. The defendants ar© as follows: — Military. — Hon. Lieutenant and Quartermaster William James Armstrong, Norfolk Regiment ; Sergeant-Ma jor George Petchy Bennett, West Riding Regiment,* Hon. Lieutenant and Quartermaster James Burns, Bth Hussars; Hon. Lieutenant and Quartermaster Thomas Henry Johnson, Royal Lancaster Regiment; Hon. Lieutenant and Quartermaster William Kelly, Leinster Regiment; Staff-Ser-geant Thomas Millward, Army Service Corps; Hon. Captain and Quartermaster George Edward Mitchell, Devon Regiment; Hon. Captain and Quartermaster Charles Quarrel!, Suffolk Regiment. Civilian.^— d[ohn Cansfield, general manager and a director of. Lipton, Ltd.; James C. Craig, ' was general manager pf the military department of Lipton, Ltd., m Ireland; Daniel Lynch, manager of the canteen department of Lipton, Ltd., for Ireland; Andrew Laing, mUitary manager of the Aldershpt department of Lipton, Ltd., been m the service of the firm for about 10 years; Frederick William Owen, an inspector m connection with the Salisbury branch of the military department of Lipton, Ltd. ; Edward Arthur Pegley, formerly an inspector of the military department of Lipton, Ltd., m tha Colchester district, but left the fifhi about two yeara ago; Alfred Swain, indoor shorthand clerk m military department of Lipton, Ltd. , The^ form of tJie summonses is the same m the cases of all the defendants. They are charged: For that they did on or about February 1, 1903, and on divers other subsequent days, unlawfully conspire, combine, confederate, and agree together and with other persons — being officers, warrant officers, non-com-missioned officers,, and others serving m his Majesty's Army or being employed by Lipton, Ltd.— -that money should be corruptly given to and accepted by divers officers) warrant officers, non-commis-sioned dffjeers, land others serving m the army as inducements to the said officers to do divers'" acts m violation of their official duties ; and that gifts and considerations should be corruptly offered, and given, to, and accepted by, divers army officers as inducements and rewards for showing favor to Lipton, Ltd., m relation to the affairs and business of the Crown.