THE AUDIT INQUIRY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXIV, Issue 13887, 23 October 1905, Page 8

THE AUDIT INQUIRY.

SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION. AN IMPORTANT PRINCIPLE. [Per Peess Association.] WELLINGTON, October 21. An important preliminary principle bearing on the whole scope of the investigation was settled by the Audit Commission to-day. The tenor of the judgment is that evidence must be relevant, not only to the audit system, but to the alleged voucher. Mr Jollicoe, counsel for Mr Fisher, bad applied that Mr Warburton, the Auditor-General, and Mr Collins, the .secretary to the Treasury, should be called upon to produce all books, documents and vouchers relating to payments made but of the public account during 1903 »nd 1904. He also had applied that a number of witnesses, whom he named, should be subpoenaed, including Colonel Porter, the manager of the Bank of Now * Zealand at Christchurch, and the four suspended postal officials at Christchurch. The Commissioners in their judgment said they would issue a summons to any person named as witness to produce . any voucher which in the years 19031904 was issued in favour of Captain Seddon for payment to him at Christchurch out of the public account of a sum. of between £7O and £BO, or for any other sum for the reorganisation of defence stores, or for any other services, and all boobs, accounts, cheques, requisitions and returns related to or in- any wise referring to such voucher. If the matter submitted to them for inquiry were a matter capable of coming, and which had actually come before them in their Supreme Court jurisdiction, they could make no wider order for tke, production of documents than that. Referring to Mr Jellicoe’s contention that a subpoena could be issued as in the Supreme Court to a witness to produce all documents without reference to their relevancy to the inquiry, their Honors said that the subpoena l duces tecum issued of the Supreme Court was really the act of the party involving no personal discretion of any officer of the Court. Their Honors thought that, before they issued a subpoena in tie present proceedings, they should be satisfied that the documents applied to be produced might prove relevant. The documents applied for by Mr Jellicoe were not deemed so admissible, and their' Honors declined to make any wider order than had already been mentioned. They would issue subpoenas for any witness named by any person admitted as a party to the inquiry, on the conditions set forth, viz., on that person depositing a sum of money sufficient to pay witnesses’ expenses. If a person were known to be a material and necessary witness their Honors would apply to the Colonial Secretary for his expenses, no deposit being required- in such case. Their Honors had no power to enforce the attendance of any witness except subject to these conditions.