CONSPIRACY CASE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXI, Issue 19034, 11 June 1924, Page 5

CONSPIRACY CASE

ALLEGED PRISON FRAUDS PROFITS ON BLANKETS. MAN’S FULL CONFESSION. 4 Allegations that a civil servant hai placed large sums in bribes on the understanding that he placed contracts for the Prison Commissioners with a certain firm were investigated at the Westminster Police Court on March 26. In the dock John Neville Noon, aged 42, a clerk of Thrale Road, Streatham, and Percy C. Ayers, aged 59, a contractor, of Victoria Street, S.W., appeared on remand charged with offences under the Prevention of Corruption Acts. Mr Travers Humphreys, prosecuting, said that, Ayers traded as Messrs Percy Ayers and Co., at 39 Victoria Street, Westminster, as 4 * British and Foreign Railway and Government contractors.” Noon, up to December last, was head of the manufacturing branch of the Controllers’ Department of the Prison Commission at the Home Office. During 1922 and 1923 contracts were given to Ayers, on the recommendation of Noon, amounting to £29,000. Last September complaints were received with regard to the quality of certain blankets bought from Ayers Certian irregularities were discovered and in consequence Noon was dismissed. HALVING OF THE PROFITS. As the result of the inquiry, said Mr Humphreys, Ayers was asked to visit the Prison Commissioners, and when he did so he made a full confession, and said that Noon had been blackmailing him. He explained that in 1915, when be was in a very bad financial position, Noon called upon him and told him that he was in a position to place orders on behalf of the Prison Commissioners, but it could only be on condition that he (Noon) shared in the profits. Ayers said he yielded to the temptation, and in about two years he had paid to Noon about £2500, being onethird to one-half of the profits his firm made on the orders. Not only hsd Noon blackmailed him, but had got bold of his son and manager, and obtained money from them. As the result of inquiries counsel said be felt justified in saying that there was very little doubt that Ayers’ state ment was correct as to the very large sums paid to Noon. HOW MONEY WAS MADE. Mr Hufitphreys, continuing, said that in most of these cases the orders were given without any tender at all. An offer was made by Ayers and Co. and was instantly recommended for acceptance by Noon, and went through. Some of the figures for these transactions were astonishing. One related to the 100,000 yards of canvas material, offered by Ayers and Co. to the Prison Commission at 2s 71d a yard. That offer was accepted, and all that Ayers and Co. had to do was to write t« some other firm and order that sam< material from them at Is lOjJd a yard So that the profit on that transaction to Ajzers and Co. for doing nothing except write a letter was 9d a yard on 100,000 yards, or £3750. In another case blankets were sold to the Government by Ayers and Co. at 6s 6d each. The first 2000 were bought at 3s each, which yielded a profit of more than 100 per cent. That apparently was not quite enough for Ayers and Co., and the next time they asked for a slight reduction from the manufacturer and got the price brought down to 2s lid each. HANDFULS OF BANK NOTES. Noon’s salary, according to the pro® secution, was between £460 and £470 a year. He had. however, purchased a large house in Thrale Road, and had employed decorators at a cost of £lOOO. On one occasion it was declared that the decorator asked for a payment on account. Noon put his hand in his pocket and took out two rolls of one hundred £1 notes each. When a further £lOO was suggested, Noon went into a room, and within a few minutes returned with another roll of £lOO. The men were again remanded en bail.