THE AUDIT INQUIRY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXIV, Issue 13891, 27 October 1905, Page 5

THE AUDIT INQUIRY.

SITTING OF THE COMMISSION. YESTERDAY'S PROCEEDINGS. [Per Press Association.] WELLINGTON, Ootobea- 26. The Audit Commission (resumed boday. Mr Fisher, M.H.R., announced that he would now appear personally, _Mr JeHicoo, his counsel, having withdrawn. Tli© Commission said the # inquiry musb be confined to three points—(l) Whether a voucher, signed by a payee, could disappear without any record on the Department's books? (2) Whether a voucher was issued for Captain Seddon at Christo'hurch, as alleged? (3) Did Captain Seddon ever claim or receive any euoh payment, or sign any such voucher? Mr Fisher said he had understood that the inquiry would be into the wihole audit system, and simultaneously into the alleged, .payment to Captain Seddon. '. f The president said that he could understand Mr Fisher making such a mistake. It was a natural oirue, but tihe limitation of the inquiry Ehould have been obvious to his counsel. In reply to Mr Fisher's request for books and papers from the Christchurch Post Office, Mr Skerrett said that; every reasonable opportunity of inspecting the books and papems would be given. Robert Joseph Collins, who had given evidence on the previous day, in answer to Mr Fisher, said that Captain Seddon signed vouchers made in his favour "R. J. S. Seddon.." Vouchers in favour of him were made out in the name of Captain R. J. S. Seddon, and vouchers in favour of tho Premier were made out in the name of the " Right Hon-R. J.-Seddon." Imperial vouchers numßering 7000 or 8000 passed through during the years 1908-4. The search now being carried out would be complete, and was the best kind of search that -could bo devised. Ne w Zealand audit was dispensed with because there was an accumulation of work in the office, and the necessary information could not be obtained from South Africa. He could not conceive the possibility of a fradulent voucher passing through the Treasury, Defence and Audit departments, even with the connivance of an inspecting officer, without detection. There would be a record in the Treasury books-of any document tliat was passed through, whether that document was false or true. Mr Fisher: Assuming fraud, would it be possible for a voucher to be passed through? Witness: It might he passed through, but the fraud would be speedily discovered. James Charles Heywocd stated that he was Secretary to the Treasury, and had occupied his position since ItHG. He had also been appointed as Imperial Paymaster in respeot of payments to be made in New Zealand. Ho was quite satisfied that the soaroh of the Department's accounts which he ib.ad directed to be made had been properly made, and he did not believe it was possible for payment to be made out of the public account without a record appearing in the books of the, Department. Cross-examined by Mr Fisher, the witness said that all receipts of payments made to Captain Seddon were signed " R. J. Seddon," and none were signed "R. J. S. Seddon." Mr Fisher produced a document which bore three signatures, " R. J. S. Seddon," and asked if that document did not controvert the witness's statement, and suggest that a voucher had been passed through the Department and payment for it authorised without the authority of the signature being determined. . The Court examined the document submitted, and Mr Justice Edwards remarked: "These are signatures, no doubt, but they appear to me to, be more like the work of an extremely active spider than anything else." Mr Justice Denniston said that there wore three signatures on the document, and one did not quite resemble tho other two. Dr Findlay: The point is this: that they said that in # Christohuroh they Sa.w a voucher receipted R. <i. S. Seddon. ■ •„•■#« Mr Willis: And made out R. J. S. Seddon. Mr Fisher t The point I wish to getout is this: that Mr Heywood_ ha.s stated there was no voucher signed R. J. S. Seddon, and I have established the fact that there was one signed R. J. S. Seddon. Mr Justice Denniston: I think l&m justified in saying that, in my mind, one of these signatures is R. J. Seddon. Mr Fisher: Two of thorn are plainly R. J. S. Seddon. One is that of the claimant. The other is that of the certifying officer, in both cases R. J. S. Seddon.. Mr Fisher proceeded to examine the witness concerning a vouchor signed by R. J. S. Seddon as claimant, approved by tihe Premier, R. J. Sodden, as Defence Minister, and signed in regard to the quittance by R. J. S. Seddon;Mr Willis put to witness samples of the handwriting of Captain Seddon, saying ho wished to show that Captain Seddon wrote so bad_a hand./and his signature was so variable, t'JTat a witness might almost take a justifiable affidavit that it was anything Mr Justice Denniston: I tlTink from what I have seen you may well presume that. < David Innis was examined in regard to departmental methods and searches for the alleged voucher. The Court adjourned until next morning.