THE HOROWHENUA CASE.

Patea Mail, Volume X, Issue 121, 20 October 1897, Page 3

THE HOROWHENUA CASE.

HOW A LIBERAL GONERNMENT PAYS THE DEBTS INCURRED THROUGH THE OBSTINACE OP ITS MINISTERS. (Evening Post.) The examination of the Public Trustee, Mr J. C. Martin, took place in Chambers before the Chief Justice this morning. Its purpose was to find what means were possessed by the Public Trustee to satisfy the costs of the recent action brought by tbe Public Trustee against Sir Walter Buller and Major Kemp, in which the costs were ordered to be paid by tbe Trustee. James Crosby Martin, Public Trustee, said in answer to Mr Skerrett that costs amounting to £635 17s 5d had been awarded against him in the case. The defendants had obtained a decree by consent of his own cousel. Witness did not pay out any moneys, because he was advised that he had no property which he could legally use for the payment of that money. The auditor would not pass the payments, nor without the approval of the . Minister would the auditor allow witness | to make any payment. Asked as to what steps he had taken to obtain the fees, witness said that before the commencement of the proceedings he • had noticed that no provision had been made as to the payment of costs. As the | property was not vested in him he did not | see how he could legally pay under the | provisions of the Trust Office Act. In j December Messrs Stafford, Treadwell and ! Field advi-ed him that he could not I apply any Public Trust funds to the I carrying on of the action, and that he j should apply to the Government that tbe i costs should be paid out of the Consolidated Fund. Witness sent a copy of the letter to the Government, and was referred to Sheridan, Native Land Purchase Officer, with an intimation that any funds the Public Trustee required could be bad on application to him. Witness Wrote t« Mr Sheridan and received a telegram from him that witness could have as much money as he liked on his (Mr Sheridan’s) return to town. Witness subsequently applied for the money* but received no answer. When the decree was served upon witness he forwarded it to the Government with the request that he should be put in funds to pay tne costs. He got no reply, and accordingly sent the accountant in his office to endeavour to draw the money from Mr Sheridan’s office. The accountant returned with the statement that Mr Sheridan was not able to give witness the money. On the Gtb September witness wrote to Mr Sheridan informing him that the money had jbeen promised, press’ng for immediate payment, and asking that the Minister’s approval might be obtained, Received no reply to that memorandum, but received a message that the Minister wished to delay the payment of the money until witness’s own solicitor’s costs were received. as the Minister wished to consider those costs and the costs of Messrs Buller ami Bedard at the same time* On 9th September witness wrote asking that the Government should place him in a position to pay the costs, and slating that be had no power to apply the funds’ of the office to that purpose. From the 3rd September the accountant went morning and afternoon to get this money, hut without result. Then Mr Stafford wrote to witness, stating that he would finally urge that the Government should pay the fees, as it would be a deplorable position if the Public Trustice was charged with disputing the decree of the Supreme Court, and an execution was put in foi the costs. Witness forwarded the letter to the Premier, but received no reply. Witness then thought that if he would get the consent of the Audit Office to pay it out of the general fund, he would pay it without further reference to the Government. Hence witness laid it before Audit Inspector of his office. On the 20th September that gentleman informed him that the Auditor-General and the Audit Office would not pass tbe payment except as Unauthorised Expenditure, and then only on the approval of the Minister. Witness wrote to the Premier forwarding a copy of all correspondence, and received a memorandum that as soon as the costs of witness’s solicitors were rendered and taxed the whole matter would be taken into consideration. The application for witness’s examination was then made by the Court, ind wituess wrote to the Government informing it of the action of the Chief Justice in adjourning the order. Mr Stafford’s coSts had been, in the mean- ■ time, rendered and taxed by tbe Kegistrar. On the 9th October witness received the Registrar’s allocation, which witness forwarded to the Govermneat. He did not know that he could do anything more than be had done. Mr Skerrett—l understand that so far the Government have given you no reply to your application to provide the funds, and have not intimated whether they would ask Parliament for authority to appropriate the money ? Witness—So far X have received no advice.

So far as you are personally concerned, you have done all in your power to provide the necessary funds to satisfy judgment ?—Yes; If 1 bad the power to pay J wuld have paid immediately. Witness further stated that the only fund the Public Trust Office possesses is the Public Trust Office Fund—a common fund—kept in the Bank of New Zealand and operated on by cheque drawn by himself, or in bis absence by the Deputy Trusteee, with the counter-signature of the Chief Clerk, Last night £17,596 3s 7d was in cash in that account. He kept a profit and loss account, showing the profit made by working the department. The credit in this account on3lst September was £Bll7 15s 3d. At the balance '(X 31st March he was bound to take a ' fourth of that amount and pass it to the credit pf the assurance fund. Then the reserve and assurance fund had to answer any deficiencies there might be on securities, and then if that assurance fund ac* count was not sufficient the Consolidated Fund was answerable for the balance. The remaining three-quarters of the profit and loss account he held to the order of the Colonial Treasurer. The amount lying to credit of the reserve and assurance fund, as at 30th September, was '''iri’l69 Os 9d, If the judgment was properly payable out of the Deserve and Assurance Fund that money was more than sufficient to pay the amount. Thebanker knew nothing of any profit and loss account. Witness’s account at the bank was simply all one general account. With a few exceptions he could not earmark any securities in which the money of the Public Trust Office was invested. The offices of his Department here and elsewhere were held on lease. Witness objection to facilitate the

ment of the legal question as to whether he had power to pay the costs out of the office fund. Witness continued—lt is nothing to me personally. I told you I tried my best to get authority to pay the money. I believe the Solicitor-General has also been advised that the fund is not liable. Mr Stafford has advised me so. The Audit Office has" refused to pass the payment, and the Government has sent me no authority. Mr Skerrett--There is no other property that you know of P—No. This concluded the examination. Messrs Stafford and Baldwin appeared for the Public Trustee, and Messrs Skerrett and Buller for the other parties. The probable action to be taken now will be an application for a charging oder on the funds and a writ of mandamus compelling the Public Trustee to pay.