THE MARINE DEPARTMENT SCANDALS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11403, 21 April 1899, Page 5

THE MARINE DEPARTMENT SCANDALS.

THE PREMIER IN THE WITNESS

BOX,

(Fjioji Our Own Coiuu<:s['pndent.) ■ WELLINGTON, April 20. In the Supreme Court to-day tlio action of Lite Solicitor-general v. James Jones came on for hearing before Mr Justice Denniiilon. Mr Gully appeared for ,the Crown and Mv Gray for the defendant. The application of tho Crown was for the cancellation iff the Home trade master's certificate issued to defendant, mid for an injunction restraining him from using the same on the ground that it was obtained by fraud. ' The defence submitted that the defendant had not obtained the certificate by any fraudulent or collusive act, but says hij was duly examined by the proper and responsible ' otlicers, and was passed, the Minister for Marine (Mr Hall-Jones) having expressly authorised and directed that he (defendant) should be allowed to present himself for examination. He denies that ho has used (or .is using) the certificate, and, therefore, there can be no apprehension of danger to life and property. Mr Gully'outlined tho case for the Crown at considerable length, and indicated that it depended upon this: That Jones went up for examination with the knowledge that' he was unqualified ; also, that the examination took place and that the applicant was passed and a certificate issued to him through the fraud of the7 examiner (Captain Allman), who was also, aware of tho non-existence of the qualification. Counsel apprehended that if this were proved the Crown had been deceived into issuing a certificate. He suggested that the certificate was issued by au officer of State —indeed, the only way in which a certificate of the kind in question could be issued was by an executive officer appointed by the Crown. . It was, therefore, submitted' that the court would declare that the Home trade master's certificate issued to Jones was void, in order that it foe delivered up to the Crown. Tho first witness called was the Eight Hon. It. J. Seddon, who, in answer to Mv Gully, said he first heard of the application'by defendant for a certificate of seamanship a considerable time before he left for England, in 1897. Some time previously he had been dealing with an application made by Joiies for a service certificate. A statement of Jones's services had been submitted by Mr Williams, Captain Jones's employer, but he had a doubt •as to whether it should be granted, as he was advised that the required service had not been proved. Jones was advised to this .effect. Subsequently, a further application was mudc, and, '■ as far as Iris recollection served, a deputation interviewed him. The department questioned the service because no permit had been issued. He knev. nothing of any certificate being granted or of any examination until his return from England. Following the deputation he spoke to Captain Allman, and ashed, him to go into the matter and see if anything could be done in regard to this application for • a service certificate. At -the time he left for England he had no idea, that Jones was to go tip for examination for competency. While on his way 'to Auckland Captain Fail-child inquired if anything had been done in. regard to Jones's service certificate, and witness replied that the matter was still under consideration, and he would communicate with' tho Minister to get it settled. He was not then aware of the • examination having taken place. If anyone had told him that Jones had a certificate he should have said it was the certificate for which he had applied before witness left., Mr Gully: <Did you send any _telegram before you 'left for Home—Witness* Yes. In reference to this'.certificate?-—lt was sent Jo Mr Hall-Jones, Minister for Marine, and was as follows:—"I should bo glad if you would have the question of issuing a 'certificate to Captain Jones settled.. From the papers presented to me, I am of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than (mentioning certain names). Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified." Mr .Gray: I understand that this matter has been going on for some time, Mr Soddon, as may be discovered by these papers (indicating the papers produced in court)? You seem to have been very good-natured about it?— Witness: Oh, yes. I believe that others of Jones's friends spoke to .you about it?— They may have done so. I don't recollect fri.r the moment. They went to the Premier in the hope of getting what they wanted?— People do not always get what they want from me. In this case some little pressure was brought to bear on yon?— Yes: and ,the position I took up wps this: You must have the sea service you allege justified, because doubt has been cast by my department upon that service as'to whether it has been performed or not. I said: "Prove that, and if it is proved, my opinion is that Captain Jones is qualified to receive a service certificate." I said this because Captain Allman had said to me that he would as soon trust himself with. Captain Jones as any other man in Wellington Harbour. You appear to have taken up that attitude for the sake of the regulations?— Yes. Were there any other papers submitted to you besides those -now produced?— Not that I am aware of. There were some other papers that Captain Jones had when the deputation waited upon me. Did they contain anything new?—Nothinir that I remember. Then nothing in the shape of evidence was submitted to you beyond what' is contained in this file?— There were some papers that were brought before me by Mr Williams at the deputation. These were sent by me to Captain Allman, and I think Captain Allman made a minute on the envelope. That was after I had asked him "to go through the papers that had been brought before me by the deputation. I think I sent them on to Captain Allman, and he wrote on the envelope that nothing could be done—that the sea service was not sufficient. I do not think he said that. Where is that minute?—lt was on the' envelope, so far as I remember. W;is that minute kept as an official record?—lt was o;i the envelope. , What became of the papers?— They were returned to the deputation. ■ What was Captain Allman's minute f— "I do not think anything can be done." On the envelope 'there was a minute of yours to Captain Allman?—Yes. What was"your minute? Was it, "Can anything be done for this man"?— Allow me to think for a minute. Very well.—l think it was, "Can anything be done for Jones." His Honor: Was your minute made before or uftfi- All man's? Mr Secirlon: My recollection is that I saw Allnniu personally, and Allman has confirmed what I then said—" Can anything be done for Jones." His Honor: It is suggested by Mr Gray Unit Allman's minute was a reply to your minute.—Mr Seddou : I forwarded the envelope am! what was put before me by the depuration to Captain Allman. I think I hud put on the envelope, " Can anything be done.for Jones." Mr Gray: Allman replied in the negative? y O s . that was in roganU to this service certificate. Do not'contuse this with what took place afterwards. Mr Grny: There was no other information?—l cannot recollect any. There may have been other documents, which were submitted by Captain Jones. What sort of documents?— Letters and certificates as to sea service. It was all done to show that the department was wroiu' in questioning Captain Jones's sea

service. Was there any further evidence to verity his statement as to his sea service submitted to you as Minister?—l should say there was ' something supplementary. *Ynd this supplementary evidence was passed on to Captain AHman, and he said that nothing could be done to give a service certificate?— Yes. And did you accept that?— Yes. I had said that what was alleged on behalf of Captain Jones was unsupported except by the signatures of the parties who made the statements. The question was raised as to the time that had been served at sea by Jones, and I thought Hie only way to settle that was to get affidavits and declarations and clear the matter up. Were they forthcoming?— Not so far as I know. Up to the time you went to England there was nothing further?— No. Plow did you come to send the telegram.' Because I was of opinion; as I still am, that if his sea services were proved Cap-

tain Jones is entitled to a service certificate. If I remember rightly, it was submitted to me by, the deputation that on the occasions when the department said other men were in -charge of the steamer, Jones was actually in charge. His Honor: The suggestion being that ;i, proper master was only put on in order to satisfy the customs? Mr Seddon: I still think Jones is qualified to have a service certificate if the proof -I; have asked for is Riven. He was practically in charge of, the steamers on the trips in (|uostion! The other men were simply taken as .dummies. Mr Gray. Then you believe the 'statements made by Jblie deputation against the reports of .your own officers? You go on to say iir the telegram that fJones is better qualified than some men you, name.—For what ho would have to do under a service certificate. This 'is my opinion, I only gathered from a man of Captain Fairchild's experience' and from what my chief nautical adviser (Captain Airman) -.and others told me. It is not my .opinion,'but the opinion I form from..what.l am told by those whose duty- it is to advise me. And the papers' before you;— And the papers. What about the- second man mentioned in your telegram?— Knowing the two men, 1 stand here and say' Jones is his superior. Although ho is a West Coaster? His Honor: No, no.

Mr Seddon: The'issue of a service certificate to'^ one of the captains mentioned in my telegram had been strongly urged as being a i departure in one case. It was urged, tliat~a service certificate- had been granted in that case, while in the case of Captain: Jones it was refused. Mr Gray'and you'see no reason why it should be refused? . Mr Seddon:' No. . In reply, to Mr-Gully, the Premier said if the department had found that the service required - had been served, in his opinion the department would have granted the certificate. . \ George Airport, chief clerk in the Marine department, said the defendant once came to him and said ho ■ believed he was the cause- of a certificate ot' service not being issued to him. •: The defendant asked witness to withdraw his opposition. Witness told . defendant that he had gone through, the .papers'carefully, and that he did'not tbinkdofendanfw.as qualified: that therefore he opposed the issue of a service certificate to .defendant, and must con-, timie to do so. Witness:-said, "Why don't you go up for examination in the ordinary wav and get a mate's certificate first?" Defendant replied, "It's no use your talking to melfke. tha.t,',Mr Allpo'rt, for I cannot do ofner work." Witness thought defendant said, "I. cannot do the writing." This was. a'few months -before July, 1897. Captain Allman on one occasion said to witness that he'had had an interview with Mr-Hall-Jones, in the course of. which he (Allman) suggested; that the Minister might waive the qualification, regarding' a mate's certificate.

W. T. Glasgow, ■ Secretary for Marine, deposed that ?a memorandum from Mr HallJones on an envelope was brought to him by Mr1 Allpbrt,-and he showed' it to Mr Hall-Jones either' the same day or the next. The.< Minister said something to the effect that he had-a conversation with Captain Allmnn on'the subject, and ttet Captain Jones should.have an opportunity of proving Ms.' knowledge and competency. Something also was said about the regulation admitting services oh a tug boat as equivalent to coasting experience. Witness saifl Captain Jones was not qualified in the absence 'of a mate's certificate. Witness understood "that the Minister was aware of all' this, but nevertheless wished that the examination should be allowed to proceed.- He,understood that the Minister took the responsibility for the examination.

To Mr. Chilly: In a, subsequent inter-1 view the Minister had .expressed surprise that a memorandum undated and unsigned should have been acceptad and acted upon as authority for the' examination. In the other cases he had received informal memoranda from the Minister, • one an important one, but in these cases he had refused to act on them. ,

Captain R. A. Edwin- was. also examined. The defendant. Captain Jones was then called, but did not appear. Durinc; tho 'discussion which followed, Mr Gully said he understood from MiGray that defendant would have been present but be was not aware whether he had been served with a subpoena. His Honor, said it was quite clear defendant ought to be in attendance, as there was a charge of fraud against him to be cleared up. The court1 then.adjourned.