HERE AND THERE.

West Coast Times, Issue 13699, 6 December 1905, Page 4

HERE AND THERE.

(By Viator.)

The Voucher incident was as dead as Julias Crosar and almost forgotten until the final decision of the Judges who formed the Commission of Inquiry was given the other day. Their findings on every count should have most effectual!? killed the slander and scotched the snake, and one would have thought Mr F M 8 Fisher would have seen fit not only to have handsomely retracted but also to have rttired from public life as be promised he would do, until hd obtained a fresh pledge of confidence from the electors. Hear how specific Mr Fisher wa3 in his charges, in the first instance: "leay,' ( aaid Mr Fisher, "a voucher was charged for reorganising defence stores at Wellington. The amount— l wish the Premier Would write it down bo that he could mr quire about it —was £76 4s 9J, the date was the 9th June, and if my mem ory serves me right the number of the voucher was 15899 .... He, Captain Seddon, weut to O'hristcnurch last year — I have the particulars — ■nd he drew a payment of £76 4a 9d charged againbt the Defence Department. lam quite sure of what I Bay." Time Mr Fisher on the 28th July laat, and now the Supreme Court Judges after most exhaustive examination declare that no such voucher ever e.tiilad, and that no inch paymenc wan aver made. Mr Fisher had to admit before the Commission that Captain Seddon was not in Christchurch At all during the mouth of June of last year on the date when Mr Fisher said payment was made to him. The fact is the exict date, amount, and number of the voucher quoted applied to a voucher for payment to Richard Sneddon, and thete ia where Mr Fisher's mare's nest was discovered. And yet Mr Fisher and Mr T. E. Taylor still justify their action before the country, and declare that phantom voucher is only eluding their grasp. The Premier and his son, Captain Seddon, have been amply and ' honourably vindicated, but Mr Fisher and his advisers will long be held responsible for levelling indiscriminate charges without the slightest foundation.

I heard of another voucher incident the other day which shows that at least one of the Treasury Department officers is not devoid of the Baying grace of humour. A voucher came beiore him for an amount to be paid to a gentleman whose demigo had occurred some time previously and it required his countersignature. Instead of giving bis authority ho wrote on the document "Thia man is dead," and returned it. A short time later the voucher which evidently had not fouad its proper resting place in the meantime, was returned to him again, and this time he inserted the "memo' "This man is still dead."

Yet another voucher story, and this timeja sapieot member of a County Council — not on the West Coast, be it said, nothing of the kind could ever happen there— supplies the joke. It was at the Council meeting, and a voucher was produced to be passed for payment for office requisites. Amongst the items charged vras one, "ribbons for typewriter 2s 6d." Our Councillor who was of an tconumisal turn of mind objected. "We have," he said, "provided the typewriter with a warm comfortable office d in which to do her work, but to supply her with ribbons and such flummeries is not to be thought of. Besides the Audit officer wouldn't pasa such an item." When it was explained that the ribbons were for the machine, he buried bis bead under the blotting pad and was not seen any more during the meeting.

A correspondent who imagines ''Via tor" is a walking encyclo{.as3ia has addressed a question to me which has not only exercised my mind considerably, but has given friends whom 1 have contacted much food for thought. He c^ks if within the forbidden degrees of con* -sanguinity and spiritual affinity a man can marry his widow's niece ? Having forgotten what tbd Catechism says on the subject—if lem ko«w — I rsf-trred the question to eereial friends and here are some of the replies. One old gentle' man of very liberal opinions, after thinking the matter out for some time, said, '"I always hold that on this subject both parties should please themselves." Another to whom I put the query said, "This question baa caused a lot of trouble in the House of Lords for years pa^t and I don't believe it will ever be settled." "Let me see," said the third, "his widow's niece, that would be bis wife's Bister's child" — and then I left him in a hopeless tangle. A lady friend to whom I applied

frankly confessed her ignorance, but said

obligingly she would go and loo* up tha ' prayer book in a minute and see what it

said. The last man to whom I pat the

question said, "No, a man could not mairy his widow's niece because he would be dead," and that stt:led it.

A capital story comes from Wellington

the authenticity of which is vouched for on the authority ot the "Free .Lance":—

here he had the misfortune to lose his year's savings, with the exception of about £5. He went to the police office on Lambton Quay, and described the purse, and said he thought he lott it in the street. The polite official in charge said "he would leave no stone unturned to find tbe purse." The man stayed in town a few days. Walking down a side street he found a gang of men bad taken up tbe pavement and were working hard. In another street he found the same sore of thing proceeding. Whin, however, he saw BTtne men in a hole six feet deep in the middle of the road he dropped a note to the police : ''Dere sir,— lf you don't find me purse by Muodi you needn't turn up a*?y more paveicenr, bee s I've got another job to go to at Marton."

The following incident did not occur at the Arahura, nor yet at the Tobira Flat s*le yards, but it is ceve'thelefaa a 'trae bill.' An intending purchaser arrived rather late in the diy at a horse sale, when the choice- was limited, but in whit place I refuse to divulge. He noticed three animals huddled together in one corner, so going up to the attendant, he said "Trot out the middle one, mate." "What," answered the attendant, with an air of astonishment, "and let the" other two fall down ? Not me ! Wait till the boss comes. I'm taking no risks."

As showing the general opinion expressed at Home as to the slim ness and other qualities of our footballers, I give the following North Country comments on the New Zealanders' play, which have been specially cabled from the Old Country to me :—: —

"Ah never seed awt lahk ifc afoore," said a man from Yorkshire. "They're lahk eels. All over t' shop, except where y'want 'em."

"These Johaies," said one young 'Varsity watcher, "lemind me of what the old lady said about the flea : 'Drat the little beast ; my hand's always going on the place where it recently was.' "

A Lancashire lad : "Eh, moo, but them Noo Zealanders know bow ter fetch a chap down — not arf I Toey flopped them Durham chaps down like Hakenscmidt fellin' Tom Cannon."

A Newcastle "coaly" : "Ah'd read that Zealanders was a hot lot, and by gum they be. If ivry Rugby match was like this I'd give up rea' futba' (i.e., Association)." Which remark shows what a bold the Association game has upon England compared with Rugby.

Another Lancastrian :— "l'd lahk to see 'em up agin yan V ocr clubs. Tbis is labk a gals' alrate playin' the Blackburn Rovers. Bur it's a bit of an eye-opener all t' same."

A "Xorkshireman : t( Sharp ? Yei", aa needles wi' both ends pointed. They're as sharp wi' their bands as them chaps at fairs as takes a rabbit oot o' yer old 'ooman's bonnet, and as quick wi' their feet as a Frinch feightin' mon."