CHARGES OF BRIBERY.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXII, Issue 8313, 29 February 1912, Page 7

CHARGES OF BRIBERY.

COMMITTEE OF PRIVILEGE.

CONCLUSION OF EVIDENCE.

Per Press Association. WELLINGTON, February 28. Continuing his evidence, Mr John Payne, M.P., stated that, immediately after making the offer of £500 to £1000 to him if he would vote with the Ward Party, McMaster said he wanted witness to see Mr Massey, and they went to the Auckland Club, where they met the leader of the Opposition. There was a little discussion on the political situation, because Mr Massey and witness had already had an interview in Mr Dickson's office. When witness and McMaster met Mr Massey in the strangers' room; of the Auckland Club,! McMaster said : " I have brought Payne over to see you." (McMaster was secretary of Mr Payne's committee.) Mr Massey replied : " Oh, lam before you. I have already seen him." The conversation was then carried on.on general lines. Ho had made an appointment with Mr Massey for 2 p.m., and said that he was then going to give him a definite decision as to how he would vote. The facts leading up to this incident were briefly these : That witness was in the Trades Hall in Auckland, and Mr Dickson came in and said: "I want you to see Mr Massey." They then went towards the Customs building, where they met Mr Massey, and witness, Mr Dickson, and the leader of the Opposition retired to Mr Dickson's office. Witness told Mr Massey that he intended to see him on account of the way in which the "Dominion" had written down Labour over the tramway strike, and that his position as a Labour man in consequence had been very much compromised. He told Mr Massey that he could not tell him how he would vote till he had consulted his chiefs of committee. He made another appointment with Mr Massey, and saw him in Mr Dickson s office on February 9. Witness said his men had not seen the "Dominion's" reports, and that he saw no reason for breaking his pledge. Mr Skerrett : Did you understand that Mr McMaster's statement as to the money was made on behalf of any party ? What party did you think it came from ? -\ Mr Myers objected to the question, and the objection was upheld. Mr Skerrett then asked if witness knew of any circumstances which would indicate to him on behalf oi whom it was made. . Mr Payne: As we were leaving the Auckland Club, Mr McMaster said : "We will get that post office at Kiclimond yet, and we will get the credit of it," slapping me on the back. Mr Skerrett : Was Mr Massey present ? Witness : Yes. Did any part of the conversation take place in Mr Herries's presence t Witness : He was in the room only a few minutes. ' . , ■ Mr Skerrett asked witness to explain the circumstances connected witn the Richmond post, office matter, but Mr Lee, a member of the committee, objected that they were travelling outiside the order of reference. Mr Skcrrett: Very well. The matter is of some importance, because it shows the party to which the gentleman be- ! longed. 1 have no doubt that my friends will bring it out. Mr Payne then proceeded to recount what occurred between himself, Mr Massey, and Mr Dickson in Wellington 'Mr Dickson asked witness to see Mr'Massey in his office. A conversation took place as to how he would vote—whether he was still firm. Witness said he had been hearing the facts of the other side, and could not give a definite answer. Mr Massey said thaf if witness did not remain true to his pledges he would commit P°Mr C My Ser S Cidobiected that this had, nothing to do with the McMaster case. Mr Young (counsel for Mr. McMaster) said the charge against Mi McMaster related to .something which allegedly happened in Auckly.nl on February 9. , +1 The objection was upheld by the was then cross-examined by Mr Young, and asked questions with a view^to sowing that Mr Fow Ids, whom he defeated, was opposed to the liquoi interests, and that McMaster was interested in the hquor trade He denied that McMaster had said he was anxious to keep Mr Fowlds out because of his antagonism to the liquor trade McMaster was under the influence of liquor when he spoke of the offer. Mr Young: Do you take it as a serious offer r 1 , , . •-, Witness: No. I have already said S°You did not ask him on whoso behalf to D rvTS£ NMoM»t«r saying something about being afraid that Mr Fowlds might come back.'—mo. Mr Myors: You met at the Thistle Hotel? Witness: Yes. . n , r < . Who keeps it?—Mr Maurice 0 ConWore you introduced to him? Yes, that, Mr O'Connor is an acknowledged supporter of the Ward Administration? Witness said he did not know. Mr Myers: Did you tell Mr Massey that you did not take the ofier i seriously? . , -. . t This question was objected to, and Mr Myers asked that some member of the committee should put the question, ! because what Mr Payne had said to Mr Massey was the cause of the whole tfM?Skerrett: That is a very improper observation, and I obiect to it, as it directly reflects on Mr Payne. Mr Myers: Did you tell your Auckland friends by whom the- offer was Mr' Young said this question was eaually objectionable, and Mr Skerrett maintained that before the question was asked Mr Payne should be allowed to tell the whole' story, but he had been prevented from doing so. The question was overruled, as applying to another charge. Mr Russell: Do I understand you to say that when Mr McMaster said he was authorised to offer you anything from £500 to £1,000 to vote for the Ward Administration he proposed to conduct you to Mr Massey's office? ; Witness: Yes. He added that from his political experience it was not surprising that he did not take the offer seriously. Mr James Allen: If you did not take the matter seriously, why did you mention it in the House? Mr Payne: Because I was forced to do so. WTiy did you mention it to Mr Massey ? 1 Witness: You are leading up to a

question which Mr Skerrett was blocked from asking. He was, he continued, quite prepared to giv© the whole of the circumstances if he were permitted to do so. Mr Young said that what had occurred in the House or in Wellington had nothing to do with the case against, McMaster. ... .. v ■„ . I At this stage the committee adjourn- | ed till 2.30 p.m. i Charles McMasters was then sworn and examined by Mr Young. Witness said that he was a wine merchant, and j opposed the candidature of the Hon. G. . Fowlcls. He denied being intoxicated | on the occasion of the alleged offer. < He detailed the circumstances leading up to the meeting with Mr Payne. Witness introduced Mr Payne to Maurice O'Connor. Subsequently he saw Mr Payne at the Thistle Hotel, and asked him if it was true that he was going to break his pledge. Witness., asked. Mr Payne to . go, along to the Auckland Club and to meet Mr Massey. Mr Payne .did so. .Witness asked Mr Payne in the presence of Mr Massey if he intended keeping' his pledge to vote against Sir Joseph Ward. His reply was '* yes." Witness said to Mr Payne, by way of a joke, that "he could get £500 if I could handle him." Mr Payne took it as a joke. Witness mentioned no party. He denied Mr Payne's statement that witness said he had been authorised to make the offer. He had not been so authorised. \ . , .. • ■To sMr Myers - Witness -worked for Mr Payne at t}ie election in the ■ interests of his trade. To Mr Skerrett: After the election he was not opposed to Sir J6seph Ward. His reason for asking Mr Payne if he intended to break hiß pledge was that he had been told by many people that Mr Payne would not. He opened the conversation with Mr | Payne by saying that he could get i £500 or £1000 if witness could hanale him. Asked where the humour was in the statement, witness said it was a joke, pure and simple. He was under the impression when =he spoke to Mr Payne that there would'be a dissolution, and he desired to secure the Grey Lynn seat against Mr, Fowlds. He did not own property at Richmond. His wife j owned property there. The Hon. J. A, Millar: Where did you expect to get £500 if Mr Payne j broke his pledge? . ■, > Witness: From no source whatever. To Mr Russell: It was suggested by Mr Payne's committee that witness should bring pressure to bear on Mr { Payne in order that he should keep his pledge. ■■.{•'■ , To Mr Reed:7* When he approached Mr Payne, witness had confidence in, him, and felt that he would say he" would keep his pledge. Sir Joseph Ward asked witness if any suggestion had been made that the Government was in any way, directly or indirectly connected with the offer. Witness: None whatever. Replying to Mr Myers, witness said that he supported Mr Payne at both the first and second ballot.'}. In answer to Mr Skerrett, witness said he told Mr Payne that he only supported him in the interests of his Mr Massey was called,, and said that there was no sign of intoxication on Mr McMaster when he saw him. Mr Skerrett: Could witness understand why McMaster, if perfectly sober, should make such an offer? Mr Massey said he could understand such a thing. „~sta- Payne did not tell,, witness that he understood the offer as a joke. i This concluded the evidence. The Chairman announced that, the committee would deliberate, and submit its report to the House to-morrow.