ALLEGED LIBEL

Evening Star, Issue 15539, 8 July 1914, Page 6

ALLEGED LIBEL

[Faosi Cue Own Reporter.] (Continued from Page 8.) CHRISTCHURCH, July 8. After luncheon Dr Hight (recalled) said that during the sitting of the Commission in committee, when it was proposed to -05a.il a certain witness, Mr Fair bairn offered to resign, because that witness would be questioned about matters in which Mr Fairha irn’s firm were interested- That witness was Mr G. F. T. Rowe. Mr Fairbairn placed himself unreservedly in the hands of the Commission, and they decided that there was nothing improper in his retaining his seat. To Mr MacGregor: Certain letters tendered by Mr Rowe as evidence were accepted bv the Commission, hut not as evidence. These letters referred to the Merchants’ Association, making a charge against that body, but witness did not know it was a criminal charge.

Mr MacGregor: Did Mr Fairbairn not abuse his position as Commissioner and atick his competitors, and is not the writing of these letters an indication of it. Witness replied in the negative. Mr MacGregor ; Did it not strike you as improper that Mr Rowe, whp was Mr Fairbairn’s accountant, should produce letters concerning a matter in which Ins principal was involved, in criminal or quasi-criminal proceedings. Witness: No, because Ido not admit that members of the Commission were judges. 1 In every respect they were thereto investigate. Mr MacGregor: Don't you think t hat is very near quibbling? Witness added that he did not think it improper. Mr Rowe was called only by Mr Fairbairn to produce those letters m the main interests of the public. Most of the questions to Mr Rowe were put hy Mr Fairbairn himself.

To Sir John Findlay; Seeing the Commission were instructed to inquire into the operations of monopolies, with a view* to ascertaining whether they affected the cost of living, Mr Rowe's evidence was of mnch value to the Commission. He thought, Mr Fairbaim’s attitude in the matter was that of a particularly conscientious and fai” man.

Mr John Eweri Thomson, of Baldutha, manager for the Inijiort Company, deposed that there were four members of the company—the Hon. Thos. Mackenzie. Mr David Mackenzie, Mr G. H. Thomson, and witness. Mr Thos. Mackenzie held a quarter-share. He did not actively participate in the husineee. It was not true that, all the purchases of the company were from Fairbairn, Wright, and Co. The proportion of those purchased from that firm was about one-eighth or one-tenth of the total purchases. The rest of the purchases were spread over other merchants. The statement that there .were business relations between Mr Thos. Mackenzie and plaintiffs company was absurd. This witness was in the box at 5 o'clock. r lhe case® will last till late on Thursday.