REPORT ON MINING SCANDAL.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18615, 10 July 1930, Page 9

REPORT ON MINING SCANDAL.

Mr Theodore’s Fierce Outburst. REPUDIATION FROSf BRISBANE. United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyrigh t (Received July 9, 10.35 p.m.) BRISBANE. July 9. The solicitors who appeared for Messrs McCormack, Goddard and Reid at the Maungana inquiry, declare that there is no foundation for Mr Theodore’s statement in the House of Representatives yesterday, that they with Mr Theodore’s counsel, had in any way criticised the Mungana finding, or had described it as “scandalous.” They added that Mr Theodore had been entirely misinformed. The Premier, Mr A. E. Moore, referring to the Maungana-Chillagoe scandal, said he was not going to be rushed into doing anything that might be absurd. He pointed out that the evidence given before the Royal Commission could not be used against any invidivual who might be prosecuted. MR THEODORE RETRACTS. STATEMENT BASED ON WRONG INFORMATION. United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received July 9, 10.35 p.m.) CANBERRA, July 9. Mr Theodore corrected his statement in the House to-day. He said his statement was based on a telephone message which he was now convinced was incorrect. “DAMNABLY FALSE.” MR THEODORE’S AMAZING OUTBURST. In the Federal House of Representatives on Tuesday, Mr Theodore, contrary to expectations, made no attempt to answer the charges of fraud and dishonesty levelled against him by Mr Justice Campbell. Mr Theodore, in the course of a long statement, said he did not want anyone to infer that his retirement from Ministerial office was in any sense an admission that the report of the Royal Commission was justified. He merely desired to correct wrong impressions on a couple of matters which were agitating the public mind. One was that he had only himself to blame for not appearing before the commission and giving evidence. The terms of reference of the commission, however, in no way impunged his honour. He had 1 tried to appear before the commission ! at the end of May, but the dates sug- \ gested had been unacceptable to the commission. He next received an invitation to give evidence before the commission on July 7, but this was unacceptable to him owing to the fact that he was preparing the Federal Budget. He wrote suggesting another date after the delivery of the Budget, but received an answer from the commission saying that his letter was vague and unsatisfactory. Mr Theodore added that he thought that he should have been heard, particularly as his banking affairs had been raked up by the commission. It was a recognised principle in British justice to grant an adjournment in such circumstances, and the commission should j have enabled him to give evidence. “Is it any wonder that I have come to the conclusion that I am the victim of a hired assassin?” asked Mr Theodore, who went on to repeat the charges. He said: “I am not going to answer these now', as I am looking for a better opportunity, but all the charges are false, damnably false.” He read a, letter he had received that day from his solicitors and counsel before the Maungana Commission. This stated: “The commissioner’s finding is ! absolutely unjust and biassed. There i is no oral evidence to connect Mr Theodore in any way with the charges, and we regard it as a scandalous decision, based mainly on assumption and inference.”