Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CANTEEN SCANDAL

ACCUSED’ PLEAD GUILT'S SENTENCES DEFERRED By Telegraph.—Press Assn, —Copyright LONDON. May 22. In the canteen case, owing to the Judge ruling that defendants were agents of the Crown, all the defendants, following counsel’s advice, pleaded guilty. >-entences were deferred. This case has created quite a sensation in Great Britain. Originally, there were five persons involved, and as all of them were, or had been, connected with the army, it was decided to hold a court martial. Further inquiries indicated more extensive ramifications, and it was decided that the court-martial did not give sufficient scope for inquiry, and 16 summonses were issued. Of the defendants eight were military officers and eight civilians, all the latter being connected with the firm of Lipton. Ltd. ‘The summonses were granted at the instance of the Public Prosecutor, under the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1906. The defandants are;— Honary Lieut, and Quartermaster ‘William James Armstrong. Norfolk Regiment: Sergt.-raajor George Fetchy Bennett, West Riding Regiment: Honorary Lieut, and Quartermaster James Burns. Sth Hussars; Honorary Lieut, and Quartermaster Thomas Henry Johnson. Koval Lancaster Regiment: Honorary Lieut, and Quartermaster William Kelly, Leinster Kegiment; Staff-sergt. Thomas Millward, Array Service Corps: Honorary Captain and Quartermaster George Edward Mitchell. Devon Regiment; Honorary Captain and Quartermaster Charles Quarell. Suffolk Regiment. The members of the firm of Lipton (Ltd.) concerned are; — John Cansfield. general manager and a director; Archibald Minto. formerly head of military department: James Craig, was general manager of the military department in Ireland: Daniel Lvnch. manager of the canteen department for Ireland; Andrew Laing, mihtarv manager of the Aldershot department: Frederick William Owen, an inspector in connection with the Salisbury branch of the military department: Edward Arthur Pegley, formerly an inspector of the military department in the Colchester district: Alfred Swain, indoor shorthand clerk of military department. Subsequently, to these were added Lieutenant - Colonel Whittaker. a retired array officer, and a subordinate civilian. Mr Muir, who acted as public prosecutor, in outlining the case, said that keen rivalry existed between the different firms to secure _the contracts, for which a rental of £l7 to £2O monthly was paid to supply messes of 100 men. The duty of making complaints as to the quality of the provisions rested with the quartermaster and tiie sergeant-majors A persistent system of bribery was instituted by the conductors of Lipton s military canteen. The chief witness would be Sawyer, a former employee in Lipton's, who had been instructed by Minto. formerly the head of Lipton s military department, in 190:1. to secure the influence of the noncommissioned officers as eheapl) l us possible. The canteen business grew rapidly under Sawyer, who. later on, was personally entrusted to make the payments, thus making plain that the heads of the firm desired to conceal their responsibility. They were prepared to repudiate their subordinate if anything was revealed. In self-protection the subordinates obtained written authority. When Spwyer wanted the brib€*s lie had to go to Minto. or Cansfield, the general manager. Among the documents was a letter signed by James Rossness, formerly Lipton's manager at Malta, addressed to Minto. on October IS. 1905, wherein be said; “Colonel Whittaker writes to-day for his six-monthly cheque. I suppose the contract requires renewal.*’ Evidence would be given, said Mr Muir, showing that when "Whittaker went to Sheffield he made a fresh contract, abnormally favourable to Lipton's. Mr Muir added that the financial position of Hie military defendants was such as not to place them beyond temptations by wealthy tradesmen. The subordinate civilians were all servants of a wealthy corporation, with the choice between obedience to orders or the loss of their positions. The persons primarily responsible were Minto and Causland, the former being controlling mind.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19140525.2.57

Bibliographic details

Southland Times, Issue 17659, 25 May 1914, Page 6

Word Count
617

CANTEEN SCANDAL Southland Times, Issue 17659, 25 May 1914, Page 6

CANTEEN SCANDAL Southland Times, Issue 17659, 25 May 1914, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert