SENSATION AT A POLITICAL MEETING.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXX, Issue 439, 17 October 1908, Page 3

SENSATION AT A POLITICAL MEETING.

Declaration by an Ex-

Publican.

Auckland, October 15

Mr Moss, Independent candidate for Parnell, created a sensation while addressing a meeting last night by producing a declaration signed by an ex-hotel-keeper, alleging that money had been paid to a Diceusing Committee to secure the transfer of a license. The hotelkeeper asserted that eight years ago he had an hotel in a country district, and desired to transfer the license to another centre with a firm of brewers (named), who rendered him an account, including three items of £2OO each, and one of £xoo. He alleged he was informed that this £7OO had been paid to secure the approval of the Licensing Committee to transfer the license, and, being helpless, he had to consent. The head of the brewing firm was a man of standing, and the speaker hoped the rumour would be proved to be without foundation. If it could be, he (Mr Moss) would be so pleased that he would give ,£2O to any charity the chairman chose to mention. He was sending the ex-hotelkeeper's declaration to the head of the brewing firm for a denial.

The Hancock Company replying to Mr Moss’ statement, assert they assisted the hotelkeeper in question to acquire a portion of land and erect a new building, but the company had no interest in the hotel beyond being mortgagee holding security for moneys actually advanced. The hotelkeeper did receive .the sums of money mentioned by Mr Moss in the course of business, but these two were actual cash loans to himself. The company did not foreclose on the mortgage, but as the hotelkeeper iutimated he was unable to make the business pay, the company released him of his indebtedness by taking _ over the securities and paying him ,£tooo and releasing colaterial assets worth about ,£BOO. The company was now agreeable to sell the property at less than the actual cost. The Company’s business transactions with the hotelkeeper closed in July, 1906. Two or three months ago the hotelkeeper made a threat that unless paid a considerable sum he would accuse the company as he had done through Mr Moss, but the company declines to be drawn into public discussion through Mr Moss, who is probably acting as the hotelkeeper’s solicitor to obtain evidence to substantiate a threatened action.