CONSCIENCE CLEAR

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19031, 3 June 1936, Page 6

CONSCIENCE CLEAR

BETRAYAL DENIED SECRETS OF THE BUDGET STAND BY MR. THOMAS ANSWER TO TRIBUNAL CONDUCT IMWITAYED (Elec, Tel. Copyright—United Press Assn.) (Reed. June 3, 1.30 p.m.) LONDON, June 2. Interviewed following the publication of the report of the Budget leakage inquiry. (lie former Colonial Secretary, Mr. .T. 11. Thomas, said: “I repeat what ! previously stated on oath 1 to the tribunal, that I made no disclosure of Budget secrets to anybody. “My conscience is clear. I would like to make it clear that immediately 1 heard my son’s name and my own mentioned, I demanded' an inquiry. Secondly, I never, while a member of the Cabinet, knew the form the inquiry would take or the composition' of the tribunal, but immediately f could I appeared twice before the tribunal, on the second occasion to stale 1 had never seen, or heard of, people who gave evidence associating my name with their transactions.

“It is well known (lint every private transaction of mine was investigated by the tribunal. Immediately the tribunal ended its public sittings, I tendered my resignation from the Cabinet because, as explained in my letter to the Prime Minister. 1 was, and am, jealous to preserve the high standard of public morality maintained by all parties in the State.

“It. would be idle to deny Unit resigning from a body of colleagues, with whom I bad worked in complete accord for so many years, in such circumstances was a terrible blow. INDIGNITIES SUFFER ED “Nobody will ever know (be indignities I and my family have suffered, but one bos some consolation'. Thousands of letters from all classes have given me help and encouragement, and. above all. the true comradeship of a loving wife and family lias enabled me to bear up under such a strain. I intend to take an early opportunity lo address my constituents, who for so many years have given me their confidence.” When interviewed Mr. Thomas was obviously suffering from severe shock. He read slowly and deliberately the statement, which had been prepared in consultation with his solicitors. He was surrounded by all the male members of his family. ' Crowds gathered outside the house, but were controlled by flic police. It is regarded as probable that Mr. Thomas will vacate bis seat- in the House of Commons and fight a by-election. The Derby committee of the Naticual Government Association will meet within, a few days to consider the report and its bearing on the future of Air. Thomas as the member for the electorate. SALIENT FACTS

The tribunal sots out the salient facts regarding Sir Alfred Butt, dealing firstly with the readiness on his part, after" a cartful examination of the financial position during the Master vacation, to write insurances on April 20 and April 21 against an increase in income tax; secondly, wilh the withdrawal of those insurances, not because ho changed his view in regard to the likelihood of an increase, but because ho thought tin* terms offered less than the stale, of Hie market warranted; and thirdly with the sale by Sir Alfred on I he. morning of April 21 before his visit to Mi*. Thomas of such .securities as In* 111 on 1 bought, desirable, to sell. The report next deals with his visit- to Mr. I. 11. Thomas at Whitehall, next with the invitation to his son and broker to lunch and then, for tile, first, time, the mention of the Budget to Ihe broker and instructions for the sale, of more securities.

Then came. llm Riving of instructions for insurance against an increase in income 'tax and lea. duty at tlio per mil,led rate as high as 30gns per cent, a, rate not. exceeded in the average, but reaching 40gns in the insurance last effected. The next, point was the olTeeling of insurances in the name of a nominee or nominees, a practice not heretofore adopted by Sir Alfred. SALES OF GILT-EDGEDS One part of the report states there is no shadow of truth in the suggestion that any member of the Berry family, Lord Camrose, his brother, or others of the family, did any insurance on Budget risks. Mr. Bates alleges he made sales of gilt-edgeds and lixed in-terest-bearing stocks amounting to £73,COO because lie feared an increase in ineomo tax. TJio tribunal sees no reason to suppose that lie bad any such object, and believes the sole object was the rearrangement of bis investments to avoid as much as possible of tiic taxation already imposed, or to be imposed. Sir Alfred Butt, in all previous years, had dono his contingency insurances in bis own name. “We do not appreciate his explanation for a change., in asking Mr. Davis to place risks for him in Mr. Davis’ name,” states the report. “Sir Alfred Butt stated that one of the reasons which led him to believe, there would be an increase in taxation was an article published in the Economist. That statement contrasts with the earlier evidence that, after studying the Question the. previous week, he came to (he conclusion that there would not he additional taxation. WTT\ KSSES 1 DEFER ED ’Glow the placing of the risk arranged at the. interview of Sir Alfred with Mr. Kenneth Butt and Mr. Davis would he distributed between Mr. Davis and Mr. Kenneth Butt was not explained, and as far as the, insurance against the lea duty was concerned three witnesses differed altogether. Jt is clear that, as much insurance against income tax and ten, duty increases as possible was placed on behalf of Sir Alfred after that meeting. “Uni •ing the afternoon. Mr. Davis and Mr. Kenneth Butt placed total insurances of £6950 against, an income tax increase and £llsO against the. tea. increase.. All were successful. “It is fair to Mr. Davis to say I hat there was no ground for suggesting that he was aware that use was being made of an unauthorised disclosure of Budget secrets.” The tribunal recalls that (lie Cabinet met on April 9 with Mr. Thomas present when the Chancellor of the Exchequer disclosed the Bud yet proposals, and how Mis Thomas on that day or the. next travelled to Ferring, where he remained until the end of the Easter holidays. The tribunal also recalls how at Mr, Bales’ home at, Worthing nearby, Mi-. Bates and Mr. Thomas were frequently together, and how Mr. Leslie Thomas was also a visitor Mr. Bales went to London on April 14 and immediately comma uka.ted with his brokers, Messrs. Bushy, respecting yos’tranee against an income tax increase and also arranged an afternoon appoint-

merit for the smile day with Mr. Leslie Thomas, a partner of -Messrs. Belishn, who are also stockbrokers for Mr. Hates, who then instructed him to sell £50,000 worth of securities which were giltedgeds and therefore most likely to he .'.fleeted by a rise in income tax. The report relates that 'Mr. Bates took up insurances against increases hi the names of his son and his secretary, explaining, its a reason for such action, [hat he was going away and it was convenient to use their names, so. that they could give cheques when required. Mr. Bates insured against an increase of income lax between -April 14 and -April 20. Sir Alfred Butt, unlike .Mr. Bates, had in the past insured heavily against Budget risks. The report mentions, . without comment, Mr. Thomas’ election insurance in 1935 resulting in a. profit, of £632.