New Guinea Timber Lease Case Still Drags On

Two New Witnesses Produce Interesting Evidence

THE various trials and inquiries which seem likely to go down in history lumped together as the “New Guinea Timber Case,” still continue to provide occasional entertainment for the Aus tralian public.

It is over 16 months since Mr. Ward called in the Attorney-General’s Depart ment to investigate what was purported to be a timber concession for Raymond Parer, in the Bulolo Valley, New Guinea Since then, J. S. (“Jock”) Garden has been tried for forgery (found guilty); and three men (members of a syndicate of four), J. S. Garden, Harcourt Garden (his son), and Raymond Parer, have been tried for alleged conspiracy to defraud Hancock and Gore Ltd., timber mer chants, of Brisbane, of a large sum of money (and have been acquitted). The fourth member of the syndicate, Edward Farrell, was said to be too ill to stand trial but when his three partners were found not guilty, charges against him were withdrawn.

The present Royal Commission, set up at the request of External Territories Min ister, E. J. Ward, commenced in Sydney on February 1, and at this writing was entering its sixth week.

Evidence generally has followed that given in the previous trials but the case has kept the public interested because of occasional new developments of a sensa tional nature and the evergreen hope that even more public figures will be drawn into the limelight through the cross examination of witnesses. 11/’HEN Edward Farrell, leader of the TT syndicate, did not stand trial for conspiracy with the two Gardens and Parer —claiming that high blood pressure made it dangerous, if not fatal, for him to do so—a great many questions remained unanswered after that trial was over. And, as Farrell appeared determined to resist being called as a witness in the Royal Commission, it seemed that they would remain so.

In early February, however, he was ar rested on warrant and certified bv doc tors, chosen by the Commission, as fit to give evidence. He subsequently gave lengthy evidence on four days.

Under cross-examination he admitted that he had served three years for false pretences in Brisbane, and that he had been introduced to Forshaw (logging manager for Hancock and Gore) by a blackmarketeer friend who had also been serving a sentence at the same time; that in the mid-thirties he had disappeared from Brisbane while a defamation action was threatened against him, leaving no address, and that his wife had subse quently divorced him for desertion.

He said that the Jao invasion had caught up with him in New Guinea (he gives his occupation as “mining engineer”) and that he had “buried £5,000 worth of gold in “rugged country about two miles behind Moresby.” After the war was over, according to Farrell, he returned and retrieved it. No one (including the officials of the Customs Department in Port Moresby) knew anything about it, because he hitch-hiked a ride in an American plane. (During the war, he said, he had hitch-hiked a ride to San Fran cisco, in the same way).

He said that he had not had much to do with the Hancock and Gore affair — except as vendor. He had met them first in December, 1944, when he had a letter, addressed to Ray Parer, and signed, “E.

J. Ward.” The letter said: — Dear Sir, —With reference to your proposed application for a licence to cut and export timber from the

Bulolo Valley, I intend to grant this application at an early date for a total of 4,000 acres.—Yours sincerely, E. J. Ward, Minister for External Territories.

Farrell could not say, however, if the signature were really Ward’s, nor could the letter be produced now. But, Han cock and Gore had professed themselves satisfied and on the strength of it and another letter, signed, “E. J. Ward per J. S. Garden,” purporting to grant Parer a concession, they had paid out £50,000 to the syndicate.

Out of the £50,000, said Farrell, he had given £30,000 to Garden for division be tween Garden, Harcourt Garden and a “fifth party”; given Parer £9,000; and kept the balance of about £IO,OOO for himself He did not know who the “fifth party' was—Garden had inferred that it was Ward and later, Mrs. Ward—but he did not believe it then, or now. He, Farrell, believed that Garden himself had always been the “fifth party.”

When asked if he had ever spoken to Ward he said that in December. 1944 “I stopped Mr. Ward as he was entering his office and introduced myself as the Farrell who was dealing with Garden in the Bulolo Valley syndicate. I showed him my power of attorney for Parer, and he said T know all about it. Garden’s office is just around the corner. He has full in structions to deal with the matter. Fol low carefully everything he te’ls you.’ ”

Ward also had often come into Garden’s room (in the Commonwealth Offices in Sydney) while Farrell and Garden were discussing the matter, and had listened to the conversation although “walking around the room pretending to be read ing.”

In the course of his activities during the war, Farrell had had the run of the Army Inventions,Directorate, whose Syd ney head was R. M. Service, who had presented Farrell to another officer of the Department as a “glorified King’s mes senger.” In view of this, plane priorities were arranged for Farrell, Hancock and Forshaw and the Directorate offices and letter paper were used for their con ferences and correspondence.

Service had had a loan of £2OO from Farrell —which, he says, he immediately repaid.

RAY PARER also dropped several bomb shells in giving evidence. He said that in June. 1947 (about six months before Mr. Ward brought the whole mat ter to a head by having Garden charged) he, Parer, had begun to be seriously worried about certain rumours that Mr.

Ward was in the syndicate, or that a bribe had been passed to him. He said that he had told his brother. Mr. Leo Parer, of the Stanford X-Ray Company, who suggested that he (Leo) should go to Canberra and put the whole thing before Senator B. Courtice, a friend of his. Later, Ray had heard from another brother, Dr. Vincent Parer, that upon being told of the rumours by Mr. Leo Parer, Senator Courtice had said that “he couldn’t afford to carry the informa tion himself —he must go to the Prime Minister.”

Mr. Leo Parer was then called as a witness. He gave the date of his meet ing with Senator Courtice as June 5, 1947; and said he had told him of the rumours of a bribe being passed to Ward and Ray’s subsequent worry. Subsequently, he learned from his brother, Vincent, that Courtice had taken the matter to Chifley.

(Continued Next Pace)

When the case broke, about six months later, Leo Parer had written to Courtice saying that he had always vo ed ‘Labour” but that if Ray became involved he had no alternative but to “release the informa tion.” Parer, apparently, was connected with some unsuccessful attempt to re tain, in Australia, a German called Junge, who, Leo Parer said, was not a Nazi, but who would help him in his X-Ray busi ness.

He denied that this was an attempt to blackmail Courtice.

JOCK GARDEN entered the witness-box on March 9. His story was the same as that told by him on previous trials He denied that he had received £30.000 from Farrell —the amount was £6,500. He said that he had never told Farrell that there was a “fifth party”: or that Ward was having an affair with his secretary and that Mrs. Ward foond out; or that he had paid Mrs. Ward £IO,OOO. The Royal Commissioner, Mr. Justice Ligertwood, commented that the only thing the syn dicate seemed to agree upon was that Hancock and Gore had paid out £50,000.

The inquiry is proceeding.