Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 7168x10240 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail
Hide article pages Show article pages
  1. Page 9
    Page 9 thumbnail
  2. Page 10
    Page 10 thumbnail

Article text

On this Page 9
CORRUPTION CHARGES.
MR. GOODE EXAMINED. :
? i
Refusal to Answer Questions. ;
SYDNEY, June 21.— When the Royal
Commission of inquiry into the conduct of
Charles Joachim Goode, Chief Transport
Commissioner, while he was employed by
tne Kailway Commissioners, was ~ con
tinued before Judge Thomson to-day, Mr.
Goode was asked several questions by Mr.
Shand. K.C., who is present to assist the
Royal Commissioner. Some of these he
declined to answer on the ground that he
might incriminate himself. A similar
reason for refusal to answer questions
concerning cheques for £100 and £50 was
given by Sydney Edward Vernon, a carry
ing contractor.
in reply to questions Mr. Goode said
J £n 1 wife ^ad liailk accounts in the
L8hheld branch of the Commonwealth
»nk, and also in the head office of the
bank. His wife also had two trust ac
counts for her two children. Mr Shand
?reduced a cheque for £100 drawn by S
\Ve 'S?n' and endorsed 'C. J. Goode.'
Air.' Shand: Had you any other money
transactions with S. E. Vernon or with S.
ii. Vernon, Ltd.?
Mr. Goode: I decline to answer.
On what ground?— On the ground that
it may incriminate me.
Oh! We shall have to get an altera
lon of this Commission. (To witness):
Do you decline to answer about this
cheq^ you endorsed?— You have not
asked me.
Did you receive this cheque from Ver
non?— Not directly from Vernon.
Are you willing to answer any ques
tions as to how this cheque came to be
given to you?— I decline to answer
You do? On what grounds?— On the
ground that it may incriminate me.
Mr. Goode informed counsel that he
»ad an account in the Commonwealth
Savings Bank, Ashfield. which he opened
only a couple of months aim.
Cartaie Contracts.
Frederick Charles Gareide, Controller
of Stores in the Transport Trust, resumed
his evidence regarding cartage contracts
with which Mr. .Goode had been con
cerned when Chief Traffic Manager of the
Railways. He said that the Railway
commissioners decided to call tenders for
the carriage of surplus wool for the period
August, 1930, to June 30, 1931, and for
the carriage of skins, hides, etc. for a year
from October 1, 1930. Eight tenders were
received. Mr. Goode, in his report on
the tenders dated August 29,
1930. had pointed out that the
tenders of Yellow Express Carriers,
Ltd.. E. M. Neild and Co., Ltd. and the
Australian Transport Company were not
in order and had been eliminated. Mr.
Goode recommended the acceptance of the
tender of J. McMahon and Co., Ltd. How
ever, Yellow Express Carriers Ltd. had
pointed put to the Railway Commissioners
that their prices were the lowest and that
they could provide the best service, and
the contract had been given to that firm.
In 1930, said Mr. Garside, the secre
tary of the department asked whether, in
view of the fact that' Vernon's contract
for hides and skins would expire in Sep
tember, it was intended to invite tenders.
The Chief Traffic Manager, through Mr.
Goode, replied that when tenders were
called previously, the intention was to
give the successful tenderer an opportun
ity to renew his contract for three yeai«.
Vernon was the successful tenderer, and
had carried out his work satisfactorily.
Vernon had applied personally for a re
newal of his contract for a further term
of three years, and that was jrranted.
Tender Cut by 50 Per Cent
A letter was read from the firm of E.
M. Neild and Co., Ltd. to the Railway
Department asking why Vernon had been
granted an increase of 15 per cent, in his
contract price because of increased labour
costs, whereas they had had their tender
rejected by reason of a clause in it which
provided for certain labour conditions. The
reply was that the tender had not been
accepted, as a clause in it was not accept
able to the department.
Referring to his instructions to rep'srt
in October, 1939, upon the delivery of
wool, hides, and skins from Darling Har
bour, witness said that he had found that
the lowest tender, that of the Yellon*
Express Carriers, Ltd., was 50 per cent,
below the prices that had been charged
by the previous contractor, Vernon, and
that if this tender were accepted, the pri
mary producers would be saved about
£2.000 a year in delivery 'harges. He
had recommended the acceptance of the
tender of Yellow Express Carriers Ltd.,
and the Railway Commissioners had ap
proved the recommendation on the same
day.
In reply to Judge Thomson, witness
said that nine tenders had been received
for the cartage of skine. hides, etc., and
Mr. Goode had reported that four of
them were informal. The informaljty in
one case comprised a wrong date, in an
other case the word 'June' had_ been
crossed out and 'September' substituted,
while in another case the blanks had not
been filled in.
Mr. Barton (counsel for Mr. Goode):
Hnve you got those tenders with you?
Witness: No.
Mr. Shand: They are the ones that
went to the Premier.
'It Mhjht Incriminate Me.**
Mr. Sydney Edward Vernon said in reply
to Mr. Shand, that he had been a carry
ins; contractor, and from 1928 until 1930 he
had been engaged in carrying surplus wool
for the Railway Commissioners from Darl
injr Harbour. In 1927 his bnsiness was
formed into a limited liability company.
He had secured contracts from the Rail
way Commissioners to carry skins and
hides from Darling Harbour from October
1, 1926. until September 30, 1930. and had
tendered then for the contract for the en
suing year.
Mr. Sband: When did you first meet Mr.
Goode?
Witness: Oh. that was somewhere about
June or July, 1926, as far as I can remem
ber.
Did he visit your house after that?— No,
sir.
Never ?— Never.
Did you visit his house?— Twice, on
business only.
Mr. Shand. called for exhibit No. 4. a
cheque for £100, endorsed 'C. J. Goode,'
Showing this to witness, he asked: Did you
give Mr. Goode that cheque?
After carefully examining the cheque,
Mr. Vernon replied: I am sorry Mr.
Shand, but I must decline to answer that
question.
Mr. Shand: Why?
Witness: Because it might possibly in
criminate me.
In what way?— I just could not say in
which way.
After some argument between counsel,
Mr. Shand asked: Are you acting under
advice of your counsel?
Witness: x es. sir.
Oh! You are. Very well, I will not press
that question at present.
Judge Thomson: Mr. Vernon, woull
you answer me whether that is your signa
ture to the cheque?
Witness: Yes. it is your Honour.
Mr. Shand: Who signed the cheques of
the account of S. E. Vernon, Ltd?— MyBelf
and the secretary.
A Cheque for £100.
Look at the cheque for £50 drawn on
February 7. 1928. Will you swear that vraa
not given to Mr. Goode? — You are askims
me to go a long way back. I cannot remem
ber.
Will you swear the cheque was not given
to Mr. Goode?— No, I will not.
Look at this other cheque for £50. Wfll
you swear it was not given to Mr. Goode?
— I do not remember.
I will come with something closer, and
«ee if yopr memory is any better on that.
Do you see a cheque for £100 drawn on
October 22, 1928, on your private account.
Was that cheque given to Mr. Goode?— I
must again decline to answer.
Judge Thomson: Have you any Tecol
lection at any time of having given any
cheques to Mr. Goode?— No recollection
at all, sir.
Why do you decline to answer?
Mr. Collins (counsel for Vernon): I ob
ject, your Honour.
Judge Thomson: I want to know the sub
stance of the objection.
Mr. Collins: 1 was goine to submit this
before, but Mr. Shand withdrew his ques
tion. I am prepared to argue it now.
Mr. Shand then asked Mr. Vernon to
look :U a chtque for £100 dated Decem
ber 24. 1929. in liis private account.
Witness: 1 must ;i«:iin decline to answer.
It is not that you forget?— Xot this on*.
Had you any dealings with Mr. Goode—
any business denlinss besides being a rail
way contractor? — Xo.
You w re not engaged in any 'specs'
with him? — Xo.
You did not lay money for him at the
races? — No.
Then I may take it, may I not. th=«t
anything vou jjn'e him was by way o£
gratuities?
Mr. Collins- I object. It assumes some
thing was given.
Witness's Memory Fails.
Mr. Shand (to witness): Look at your
own account for August *- ij»7 Do you

Bee a debit .for a cheque for £75. Was
that given to Goode?— I do not remember
anything about it.
You deny that it was given to Goode?—
No. I cannot at this juncture. It is too
far back for me. It was in 1927.
Further examined, Mr. Vernon said that
on tKe same date that he gave the cheque
for £75, the company had re-imbursed
.him by cheque for the same amount.
Mr. Shand: I want to come to another
circumstance. Look at your private ac
count in December, 1928. You are debited
with £100 on December 19?— Yes.
? On the following day were you not re
couped by the company for that amount?
— Yes, I was recouped on the next day.
If you look at my books you will find that
there was a debit account against myself
with the company running into thousands
of pounds. I paid that money out for the
/company, and was later re-imbursed.
Judge Thomson: Have you any doubt
that this cheque debited against the com
pany was to recoup you for the £100 you
had paid out on the previous day? Had you
any doubt of the relationship of the two
amounts?
Witness: My cheque was for £100, and
the company's was for £200.
When Mr. Shand again referred to the
cheque for £100, witness said: I cannot
answer any further questions about that
cheque.
Mr. Shand: How do you mean, cannot?
— I mean xefuse.
I see, on the ground that it may in
criminate you?— Yes.
'I am Gone. I Will Shoot Myself.'
- Do you know a man named Frank John
eon?— Yes, I have known him for 40
years. He had an interest in my business.
Do you remember hearing that Mr.
Goode had been transferred to Goulburn?
—Yes, I read it in the paper.
Now just about that time did you see
Johnson? — I saw Johnson every day for
years.
Did Johnson come to you at that time,
, and say that he had heard that Goode
: had been arrested, or was going to be
arrested?— Yes.
Did you say that the teller at the bank
had asked Goode to endorse the cheque,
'and the d ? fool did? — No, I did not.
Anything like that?— No. He told me
that we were likely to be arrested because
they had found a cheque of mine endorsed
by Goode at the bank.
Do you remember the police interview
ing you about June 15, 1931?— I remem
?? ber them coming to me some time about
'then.
... Do you remember saying: 'I prefer to
say nothing about this cheque at the pre
'sent moment, but I can give a full ex
- [planation later when I am required to do
SBO?-Yes. '*
: Witness was asked several questions
-with regard to W. J. Sinclair, who was a
director of S. E. Vernon, Ltd.
Mr. Shand: Did Sinclair say to you that
?he had proof of graft with C. J. Goode
in connection with that £100 cheque paid
:by you?— No.
?'.??? Did you tell Sinclair that Goode had en
'dorsed the cheque? — No.
*' Did you speak to Sinclair about this
.cheque?— I never had any conversation
with Sinclair about it.
Did you say to Sinclair: 'I am gone on
this. I will shoot myself?'— No.
The healing was adjourned until to
morrow.

$