THE HINE CHARGES

Evening Star, Issue 14513, 3 November 1910, Page 4

THE HINE CHARGES

TO-DAY’S PROCEEDINGS. I'Feom Onn Paeliamentaev Repoetee.] WELLINGTON, November 3. The Committee of the House resumed their investigation of Mr Hi no’s charge against Mr Walter Symes for having, while a member of Parliament, taken money in connection with petitions re the West Coast native leases in 1904-05. Mr Honan prodded. Mr Myers appeared for Mr Hin© and Mr Skerrott for Mr Symes. Geo. B. Pearce, M.P. for Palea, said he was one of the West Coast lessees. lie was on the Committee appointed to act for the “ confirmed ” leaseholders. The whole of the coots were paid by Levy. The cwsts amounted to £5,000. Tho firm of which Mr Symes was a member were leaseholders. He did not know that Mr Geo. Johnston was appointed manager for the lessees in connection wit hj these | petitions. | To Mr Skerrett: He knew nothing of litigation between tho Public Trustee on one side and Mr Symes and his brother on tho other. The name of the firm of W. and A. Symes appeared among the list of petitioners to Parliament in 1905. Tho £3,000 mentioned was accumulated expenses since 1889 in connection with these leasee. Mr Myers put in a letter written by Air SymCii io Mr Gower, on© of tho leaseholders, who was imablo to b© present to , give evidence before the Committee. | Sir J. G. Ward said he had no objection to letters being put in, but he wanted to ask Mr Myers whether Gower had communicated to the Government the contents of the letters. i Mr Myers: No, that is not suggested. | Tho liii-t letter was from Symes to Gower, at Whenuakura, dated Stratford, 6tli August, 1806. Symes wrote: May I ask were W. and S. Gower paid their claim? If so, they do not require any further information. Tho information you ask for is rather lengthy, and does not come within my paaliomentary duties, but is a matter of business, and can only be furnished upon payment of my fee of £2O for commission and charges. Upon receipt of your cheque for the above amount particulars and information will be supplied. P.S.—I am preparing a petition for the signatures of those who were not included in that petition. Tho next letter was to S. Gower, dated 26th June, 1908 It was as follows: Dear Gower,—l am juet sending this as a reminder, feeling assured that it has escaped your memory that tho cheque you promised me has not yet coma to hand.—With kind regards, bolive mo, yours sincerely, Walter Stmes. Another letter from Symes to S. Gower, dated 13th November, 1908, read : Dear sir,—l was very much surprised to see a letter from yourself to Hemingway, of tho 2nd inst., published in the Stratford ‘ Evening Poet ’ of yesterday, in which you say I demanded of you £5 for commission for tho recovery of money paid on confiscated leases. This statement is contrary to fact, and so is your whole letter. I never called at your homestead at Maangamiagi in my life, but on December 2, 1905—not three weeks, but four days prior to the last election—in company with J. Granville and James Sexton, on our way to Omona, passed your shed when shearing was in full swing. In the course of conversation I asked you if your brother William had told yon the result of tho lessees’ petition. You naid “.No.” I told you I had been successful in establishing a case,, and that a claim of £2,000 had been placed upon the Supplementary Estimates. You said it was the first you had heard of it, and that you were pleased to hear of Iho good result, and asked me if there were any expenses incurred. I said “ No,” but three or four lessees suggested that wo should make a little surprise present to a few of the members (and I mentioned their names) who hud prominently helped to get the matter through. You at once acquiesced, and said you would be pleased to join. I said it would not cost ua more than a Over each. Nothing further was done in the matter, as I was too busy to attend to it until I met you at Pa tea races on tho 25th April last. When 1 mentioned your

brother William’s death, you said : “Did my brother ever give you that cheque?” I said: “What for?” You then said : “ For the presents you mentioned for helping to get the arbitration money refunded.” 1 told you be had not done go, and T had never seen your brother, nor had I mentioned the matter to him. Yon said : “ 1 will send you a cheque.” T heard nothing further from you, nor did 1 do anything until some limo'in the early part of last June. 1 met one of the lessees, who reminded me of our conversation ic surprise presents, and ashed mo if 1 had done anythin'.' in tho matter. I said not beyond mentioning the fact to one or two, youmclf included, and that yon mentioned (ho matter at the last Pa ton races by ashing if William had ever given me a cheque. I told tho lessee in question I would get the matter going and fix it up before the close of the ecfekm, and wrote you accordingly, but never mentioned any amount, as no amount was mentioned at Patea. The matter was

one entirely for your own consideration, and whatever the amount of your cheque was I would supplement it with a like amount, as would all the ©there. The only blameahle thing about it, co far as I am concerned, is that 1 have not had time to eeo the others, and since it is sought to make political capita! out. of tho matter, 1 decline to do anything further iu the matter (beyond paying my quota of £5 at any time towards the suggested project). It wan not even my own suggestion, but that of others, who wished to show (heir appreciation of a spontaneous and kindly act, but which my political ojv- . .‘ ! i’ - want to misconstrue, and in ~r J ‘V»f no further misconstruction can ’.)■■ placed upon my action I now r<yon tho amount of four cheque (£5), and filial!, as soon as possible, see these who asked me to undertake the matter, when I Khali give thorn my reasons for declining to art further and for the stops I have taken.

—(Signed) Walter Symes. Mr Myers mentioned that dower never mid in "Symrs’s <hequo for the £5 mcn-tie-'-'d in ih-> letter.

The next charge was that Mr Byrnes, in 1905, while a parliamentary election w;:n in prospect, rn which he wuu a candidate, and being then actually a member of Parliament, ' threatened a certain newspaper that he. would use his inlluenee as a member to prevent Government advert Dements be;ing civen to tho newspaper unless he received "its su]>p-ai t. or was (rented io it is own satisfaction by the newspaper during the election contest. William B. Anderson, one of tho directors of tho ‘ Stratford livening Post,’ said that that paper absorbed tho ‘ Egraant Bottler’ and the ‘ Egmont Post,’ one, of which only had previously been on tbo list_ of papers receiving Government advertisements tho ‘Stratford Post’ being not o j. tho list. Mr M'Cluggage (one of the directors) approached Mr Syincs personally by letter, and received tho following reply: Mr M’Cluggagc, J.P., Wellington, 4th October, 1805.—1 am duly in receipt of your confidential letter re getting tho paper put on the list of Government advertisers. This mil depend entirely on tho treatment meted oat to mo during the election. I believe I could fix the matter up, but will not do so until after the election, and as I am treated so I will treat your paper. You arc at liberty to make uso of this privately with tho manager and directors, but not for publication. —Walteb Btmes.

On Mr M‘Cluggage communicating tliis to the directors, tliey decided to send the manager to interview Ministers in Wellington. This was done, and the paper was put on the list. Joseph M'Cluggage, a director of the company, said he knew Mr Syracs well, and was supporting him in tlio forthcoming election. To tho Hon. J. A. Millar: Mr Byrnes's letter v as v jrrivota letter to- himsalf, JU

bad been read at on election meeting Ip Mr Hemingway, secretary to Mr Symet Witness thought this most improper. He did not know how Mr Hemingway got the letter.

To the Chairman : Tbs receipt of tie letter mode no difference to the paper's treatment of Mr Byrnes. William Charles Whitlock, proprietor of the ‘ Hasting.) Standard,’ formerly manager of the ‘ Egmont Settler, and subsequently manager of Hie ‘ Stratford Post,’ sard that ho came to Wellington after seeing a letr ter from Mr Symes to Mr M’Cluggage. and approached the Colonial Secretary in an endeavor to get the paper on the list of those to which the Government advertisements were given. Mr Jennings, MJP., arranged the interview. He had shown the letter to Mr Jennings, but not to the Minister. He told the Minister that Mr Symes had not helped the company in the matter. He sent in a formal application after tbc interview, and his request was granted. Mr Millar contended that this letter, which was (hi only evidence against Mr Symes, had been purloined. 'Sir Joseph Ward remarked that the letter had an important bearing on important evidence which he wished to call later. Arthur Edward Copping said the paper was absolutely independent in politics, and had been fairly treated in tbe matter of Government advertisements.

Sir Joseph Word inquired regarding a Press Association telegram from Stratford, published in Wellington, stating that Mr Hin© had been given an enthusiastic reception at a local railway station. Witness replied that he, as Press Association agent, had sent a brief telegram, but not the longer message which had appeared in Wellington as a Press Association telegram. That telegram had been sent without his knowledge and authority. C. E. Major stated that he had no connection with charge No. 2, in which it waa alleged that he was associated with Mr Symes in the sal© of land with A. Bayly as one of the parties. The transaction was with Frederick Bayly. It was arranged to hear charges No. 1 and No. 2 to-morrow.