THE END OF THE INQUIRY INTO THE FRUIT MACHINES.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 578, 7 October 1932, Page 6

THE END OF THE INQUIRY INTO THE FRUIT MACHINES.

A Sydney Letter.

The Commissioner has to Pursue Truth through a Labyrinth of Lies.

(Special to the “ Star.”) SYDNEY, September 30.

This week saw the closing scenes of the long-drawn-out investigation into the establishment of the gambling devices known as Fruit Machines. The Royal Commission has sat for over fifty days, and of these thirty-seven days were devoted to the Tin Hares. Mr Justice Rogers will no doubt require some weeks to incorporate into a report the huge mass of material that the inquiry has piled up, and in the meantime Mr Monahan’s address indicates clearly enough the lines which the Commission’s finding may be expected to follow.

JN HIS CLOSING ADDRESS for the Crown, Mr Monahan remarked at the outset that the principal persons concerned in the scheme to receive for the hospitals portion of the returns from the Fruit Machines were Ely (ex-Minister of Health), Love (Hospital Commissioner) and Sleeman (Lang’s publicity agent). Vet these three witnesses, said Mr Monahan, contradicted one another in “ matters about which there could be no mistake.” His Honor agreed, and went even further: “There is direct conflict of evidence —someone is saying what he knows to be not true.” As a matter of fact, there seems to have been quite as much false swearing about the Fruit Machines as over the Tin Hares. Counsel appearing for Dr Dick, one of the few witnesses who gave his evidence in straightforward fashion, described most of the testimony as a “ perjury marathon ” and “a hurricane of lies”; and the Commissioner seemed sorrowfully to agree with him. From the legal point of view, it was certainly, as Mr Justice Rogers said, “ a most extraordinar}’- state of affairs, in that the Hospitals Commission should request Government to break the law and that Government should acquiesce in what it knew was the breaking of the law by the installation of the machines.” Counsel for Mr Love (the Hospital Commissioner, at present “on leave”) tried to exonerate him by suggesting that, in his anxiety to help the hospitals, he was prepared to recommend steps that were illegitimate and that as a layman he did not realise the full legal implications of his actions. But the intermediary between Mr Love and Ministers was Sleeman, and the evidence seemed to show that Sleeman in regard to Ely (Minister of Health) and Gosling (Chief Secretary) as well as in his dealings with Love, dominated the whole situation. A Voice in Cabinet. Now it is certain that Sleeman received large sums of money to secure the establishment of the Fruit Machines and their immunity from prosecution, at least for the time; but it was found impossible to trace the money into other hands. Mr Monahan put the case about this money quite bluntly: “Either Sleeman got the money with the knowledge of Ministers, but without any attempt on their part to control its use, or they knew all about it.” But. in any case, said Mr Monahan, “ it was ridiculous to suppose that the money Sleeman received was for Sleeman himself alone.” Mr Monahan’s own opinion is that “some dominant voice in the Cabinet put Sleeman in charge and instructed Ely and Gosling to give him a free hand,” but probable as this may be, it is, after all, only conjecture. But it does seem unlikely that Ministers were, as Mr Monahan said, so feeble-minded that they could permit Sleeman to levy blackmail for the granting of licenses, and collect 10 per cent from the people running the machines, without the permission or knowledge of members of the Government.

Perhaps I had better summarise briefly the main points in Mr Monahan’s voluminous submissions: — In December-January. 1930-1, the sum of £3OOO was paid to Trautwein for the purpose of securing immunity against prosecution for fruit machines in hotels. This £3OOO was so applied by Trautwein; but the ultimate destination of the money is a matter for speculation. While the machines were operating, a regular contribution of 10 per cent of the profits was collected weekly and paid to some person or persons in authority. During this period, immunity from prosecution was actually secured. The Chief Secretary (Mr Gosling) acquiesced in the machines being used in the hotels, though definitely advised that such was illegal. As regards the bearing of the inquiry on the hospitals, Mr Monahan submitted;— That Cabinet sanctioned the scheme, knowing it to be illegal. That Cabinet allowed Sleeman to control the scheme. That though Mr Love was placed in full control of hospital affairs by the Minister, he was really subordinated in this matter to Sleeman. That Sleeman exacted a toll of 10 per cent on the takings that should have gone to the hospitals. That this 10 per cent was passed on by Sleeman to the Labour Party funds, “ or some other destination in accordance with instructions.” As regards Mr Gosling the above references indicate Mr Monahan’s views clearly enough. As to Ely, he points out that the Minister of Health took no steps to see that his own written directions were carried out. And as to Mr Love, 44 the chairman of the Hospitals Commission committed a serious departure from the permission indicated by Cabinet.” Such are the views of Mr Monahan, and from them and from the very comprehensive and contradictory evidence, the Commissioner has to 44 pursue the truth through a labyrinth of lies.” But the general public may already have drawn its own conclusions. Quite early in these proceedings, reference was publicly made to certain papers dealing with the Fruit Machines that are missing from the official file. At the time, it was generally believed that if these papers were traced they might be found to implicate Ministers in some serious way. But as the inquiry progressed, Mr Monahan, who appeared for Mr Gosling rather dexterously, seized upon 44 the missing file ” as an argument in his own favour, contending that if the papers could be discovered, they would justify Mr Gosling completely. For every reason, it seems most unfortunate that these valuable documents are still classified as “ lost, stolen or strayed.”