Papers Past | Parliamentary Papers | Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives | 1899 Session I | MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO...

Image
Text
Research info
Title and Usage info

H.—26.

1899. NEW ZEALAND.

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT.

Presented to both Houses of the General Assembly by Command of His Excellency.

EEPOET. ,_ __ * To His Excellency the Eight Honourable Uchter John Mark, Earl of Eanfurly, the Governor of the Colony of New Zealand. May it please youb. Excellency,— In compliance with your Excellency's Commission of the 22nd day of June, 1899, directing us to inquire into certain matters connected with the Marine Department of the colony, we have investigated the matters therein referred to, and now have the honour to report as follows :— Under the headings in our Commission numbered 1, 2, and 3 several cases have been named in evidence in which it has been either asserted or suggested that something improper or irregular had happened. We now proceed "to take seriatim those cases which seem to call for some opinion from us, premising that any which we do not mention are either insignificant in their character or entirely without such primcl facie evidence as would have justified us in undertaking an uncertain and perhaps long and costly inquiry for the purpose of finding out the facts. The first case we shall mention is that of Captains Bendall and McLellan, who passed at Wellington their examinations in the syllabus of compass deviation, the one in December, 1898, and the other in January, 1897. Upon these cases we have heard the evidence ot Captain Marciel; and they, together with pag e2 os. many others, were reported upon by him as an expert, at the request of the Government in January of this year. Captain Marciel has pointed out blunders in the answers of these candidates which he thinks should not have been passed over by the Examiner, and in his evidence he has adverted to a coincidence of error in the answer given by each candidate to the same question which may suggest a suspicion, although not more than a suspicion, of some common source of information having been made use of in the examination-room by each of them. The point is that, while the data of the computation were correctlygiven by each, and would therefore have led to a correct result, yet these candidates do not seem, in this instance, to have used their own data, but, in some unknown way, to have arrived at an incorrect result. The suspicion suggested by the evidence of other witnesses is that the candidates were assisted by reference to written computations which were in the possession of Captain Allman, the Examiner ; and, certainly, if those computations, which have been put in evidence, had shown the same error, the suspicion would have amounted to a moral probability. But the answer is correct in Captain Allman's paper, which negatives any presumption that it was copied from in this particular instance. It must here be mentioned i—H. 26.

that these computations in compass deviation were worked out for Captain Allman by Captain Yon Schoen, a teacher of navigation in Wellington. At a later date, some time in February, 1898, Captain Yon Schoen went to Mr. Allport, Chief Clerk to the Marine Department, and made serious statements affecting the conduct of the Nautical Examiners, which are referred to in another part of our report. Upon this occasion he left with Mr. Allport his own book containing his original computations, from which had been taken those which he had supplied to Captain Allman, telling Mr. Allport at the same time that, if he would compare the computations in the book with the answers in the examination-papers of Captains Bendall and McLellan, he would find reason to think that the statements he had made were well founded. Mr. Allport seems to have thought, upon making the examination suggested, that this was so; but whether it was that the suspicion suggested in these cases was strengthened in his mind by other instances of wrong-doing asserted by Captain Yon Schoen, which were less open to doubt, or that his understanding of the points referred to in the computations became less clear after he had forgotten Yon Schoen's explanations, Mr. Allport certainly was not able to make clear to us any grounds of suspicion beyond those indicated by Captain Marciel. We feel unable, therefore, to carry this matter further than Captain Marciel, who appears to be a witness of high intelligence and competency, has already done in his report and in his evidence. The case of H. E. Walley may next be mentioned. The suggestion involved in the statements made in evidence is that this candidate was wrongfully obstructed, in presenting himself for examination, by a technical objection which had never been raised before, and that thereby he was subjected to inconvenience and injury. This candidate applied in October, 1898, to be examined for a mate's certificate, but was met by the objection, on the part of Captain Allman, that the service shown in his application did not comply with the regulations, because neither the full term of foreign-going service nor the full term of home service required by the regulations had been performed, although more than the full term of service had been fulfilled if that term could be made up partly of one kind and partly of the other. The view taken in the office of the Secretary of the Marine Department was opposed to that of Captain Allman, who was, however, supported by the opinion of the Solicitor-General. The question was referred to the various Marine Departments of the Australian Colonies and of Tasmania, with the result that different views were held upon the point. But from the London Board of Trade the opinion was obtained that the candidate ought to be allowed to make up his qualification partly by one kind of service and partly by the other. But it was new too late for the candidate to avail himself of the permission to be examined in New Zealand, and he was obliged to go to Sydney for that purpose —the only compensation made him for the delay being the return of his examination fee of 10s. 6d. The only comment which it concerns us to make upon this case is that no reason whatever has been given us to suppose that Captain Allman had any desire to " obstruct the candidate in his efforts to obtain a certificate," or to regard his objection as other than bond fide, supported as it was by a legal opinion, and by the practice of the Marine Departments of several other colonies. The case of Boderick Matheson is one in which the candidate stated in his application for examination for a master's certificate that he had not failed in any previous examination, whereas he had failed, in a previous examination at Melbourne, to satisfy the tests for vision. Captain Yon Schoen drew up this candidate's papers for him, and was cognisant of this suppression of fact. Mr. Matheson was again rejected upon the same grounds as in his previous examination. As this " suppression or non-disclosure.of fact" was by and on behalf of a candidate, and not on the part of any official person concerned in the examination, the case does not seem to call for any further remark. It appears, however, that Mr. Matheson, after a medical examination, was subsequently passed by Captains Marciel and Allman acting together. In the case of Peter Mclntyre, who was.examined in December, 1896, for a certificate as master, the candidate was at first rejected for failure to answer a

Marine 99/363.

Evidence, page 152.

Murine 98/M45,

H.—26

question which afterwaxds turned out to have been erroneously framed by the Examiner, Captain Edwin. We were informed in evidence that the intention of the question was to bring out certain cross-bearings, whereas it was so constructed that the answer could only show parallel lines. Upon this mistake being discovered the candidate obtained his certificate. It would probably be going too far to draw from a single instance of this sort any inference disparaging to the competency of Captain Edwin as. an Examiner, and from any other point of view this case seems to offer nothing calling for remark. We have now to give an answer, so far as we have been able to get information on the subject, to the question contained under the fourth heading in our Commission: "At whose instance or suggestion, and under what circumstances, the provisions of the Shipping and Seamen's Acts relating to the adjustment of compasses and the employment of apprentices or boys came to be initiated." So far as the evidence before us goes, it appears that the legislation now in force relating to the adjustment of compasses, and contained in section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," or, at all events, the framing of regulations for the purpose of carrying into effect the provisions of that section, was suggested by a question asked in Parliament on the 26th July, 1895, by Mr. Pirani, M.H.R.,: as to the intention of the Government to appoint persons to act as adjusters f of compasses. Eegulations for that purpose were framed in February, 1896. They were similar to the regulations in force in the Colony of Victoria, and were drawn up by Captain Allman, after consultation with the officers of the Marine Department, information having first been obtained from the chief Australian Colonies. These regulations were altered early in July, 1897, in consequence of the strong remonstrances of the captains of British ships, who regarded it as a grievance that they should be obliged, before sailing from Wellington, to have their ships swung and compasses adjusted by an officer appointed by the New Zealand Government for that purpose. The alteration in the regulations was made for the purpose of meeting their views, at all events, so far as to allow them to select their own adjusters. Upon the subject of " the employment of apprentices or boys," we find no direct legislation except in section 7 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894," which provides that two apprentices may be carried in the place of one ordinary seaman. But, according to the evidence before us, the other provisions of the same section, together with the First Schedule to the Act, specifying the minimum number of men to be employed on different descriptions of vessels, have exercised a decided indirect influence in reducing to a very small figure the number of apprentices now to be found in the colonial marine service. On the other hand, it is a question how far this result has, under any circumstances, become inevitable owing to the increasing substitution of steamers for sailing vessels. But the answer to the question with which we are now dealing is, that the legislation in question was initiated, and the schedule drafted, by Mr. Millar, M.H.R. Some interesting views upon this question, regarded as involving considerations of : policy, will be found on the various pages of the printed evidence noted in the margin. Prior to formulating our report on the application of James Jones for a certificate of service as home-trade master, on his examination for the certificate of competency which he obtained, we deem it necessary to give an outline of the procedure adopted at the hearing of this case. Mr. Hanlon appeared, instructed, he stated, by the Government, to assist the Commissioners by calling as witnesses all persons in any way concerned in the matter, but specially disclaimed appearing for any particular Minister. He obtained from us certain subpoenas, and called the following witnesses : The Right Hon. R. J. Seddon, the Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Mr. George Allport, Captain Allman, Captain Edwin, Captain Yon Schoen, James Jones, Mr. A. R. Hislop, Mr. A. G. Johnson, Mr. R. E. Bannister, Dr. Fitchett, Mr. Hugh Gully, Mr. E. Horneman, Samuel Burgess, Mr. John Hutcheson, Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.R., Mr. John Alfred Plimmer, Mr. Harold Beauchamp, Sir Arthur Douglas, Mr. R. Thompson, M.H.R., and Thomas Redmond.

Evidence, pages 25 58, and 150.

Evidence, pages 27 210, 216, and 218.

iii

H.—26,

Mr. Hislop requested that he might appear for Mr. John Hutcheson, M.H.R., who had first mentioned the allegations of irregularity in the House. But, as no charges before the Commission were laid by Mr. Hutcheson, the request was refused. Subsequently Mr. Hislop reappeared with a list of charges made by Mr. Pirani, M.H.R., and was permitted to appear in respect of certain of them, and to examine any of the witnesses called. The following are the charges as laid before us : — Gentlemen, — Wellington, 11th July, 1899. I beg to hand to you certain charges which I make against the Eight Hon. E. J. Seddon and the Hon. Wm. Hall-Jones, arid I request that you will be pleased to investigate the same. I have, &c, The Commissioners appointed to Inquire into Certain Feed. Pirani. Matters relating to the Marine Department. That the Eight Hon. Eichard John Seddon, on or about the 17th day of April, 1897, then knowing that one James Jones had not performed the service entitling him to a certificate of service under subsection (1) of section 34 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894," endeavoured to procure the issue of such certificate to the said James Jones by representing to the Hon. Hall-Jones, who was then Minister of Marine, that the said James Jones was entitled to such certificate of service, whereas he well knew that the said James Jones was not so entitled. 2. That the said Eichard John Seddon, knowing that the said James Jones was not entitled either to a certificate of service under the section aforesaid or to a certificate of competency under " The Shipping and Seameu's Act, 1877," boasted to the said James Jones, after the issue of a certificate of competency, that he (the said Eichard John Seddon) had been able to procure the same. 3. That the said Eichard John Seddon, after it had been alleged that irregularities had taken place in granting certificates either of service or of competency, denied during the session of Parliament of 1898, in his place in the House of Eepresentatives, that any irregularity had taken place, although he knew that the said James Jones had received a certificate in contravention of law, inasmuch as he (the said Eichard John Seddon) knew that the said James Jones had not performed the services entitling him to a certificate of service before described, and that he was not entitled to be examined for competency as a master, inasmuch as he never was the holder of a mate's certificate and had not performed the requisite service. 4. That the said Eichard John Seddon, with a view to preventing the true circumstances attending the procuring of a certificate of competency by the said James Jones being known, stated, in or about the month of February last, to the Press Association in Dunedin that he had, prior to the granting of a certificate of competency to the said James Jones, had no conversation with the said Hall-Jones, and that he had not written to him, and, further, that the first that he knew of Captain Jones or his examination was after a speech was made in the House of Eepresentatives by one John Hutcheson, whereas he at the time knew that he had communicated by telegram with the said Hall-Jones, urging him to grant a certificate of service to the said James Jones, and was aware prior to such speech that the said James Jones had, in contravention of law, received a master's certificate. 5. That certificates had been improperly issued to certain persons named in the telegram of the 17th April, 1897, sent by the said Eichard John Seddon to the said William Hall-Jones, and that the said Eichard John Seddon took no steps to initiate the proceedings necessary to cancel the same. That the Hon. William Hall-Jones, in or about the month of , then being Minister of Marine, wrongfully used his power to order that one James Jones should be examined in order that he might procure a certificate of competency entitling him to a master mariner's certificate; whereas the said William Hall-Jones knew that the said James Jones was not entitled to be allowed to be examined or to receive, though he should pass an examination successfully, such certificate, he not then being the holder of a mate's certificate and not having performed the requisite service. That the Hon. William Hall-Jones, knowing that such certificate had been granted, for a long time suffered the said James Jones to retain the same without protest or taking the necessary steps to recall the same ; and, further, that he, on being questioned during the session of 1898 as to the existence of any irregularity in the granting of certificates in any case, denied that any irregularity had taken place, he then knowing of the circumstances aforesaid. That the said William Hall-Jones, during the session of Parliament of 1898, induced one Captain Allman, being the Examiner who had improperly granted a certificate of competency to the said James Jones, by promises of support, to make an incorrect report of the circumstances, and, knowing that such report was incorrect, caused the same to be published—such report being known as " Captain Allman's first report " —thus retarding the steps necessary to be taken to have the certificate aforesaid annulled. That the said William Hall-Jones, on or about the 26th day of February, 1899, with a view to preventing the true circumstances from being made known, sent a telegram to the Eight Hon. Eichard John Seddon stating that the said Eichard John Seddon had had no conversation with the said William Hall-Jones as to the said James Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him, whereas he knew at the time that he had received a telegram on such subject from the said Eichard John Seddon dated the 17th day of April, 1897 ; and such telegram of the

H.—26

26th day of February was so framed as to suppress the fact of such telegram of the 17th April having been received. One of the accusations so made charges the Premier with having made a certain assertion in his place in the House of Representatives. This we caused to be struck out. It appears to us that, acting under a Eoyal Commission, it would be a grave infraction of constitutional law, and a gross breach of the privileges of the House, were we to include within the scope of our inquiry any allegation respecting words alleged to have been spoken by a member of the House of Representatives in his place in Parliament. Of any words so spoken it seems to us that the House is the sole judge. As it seemed probable that, in the course of the evidence to be adduced, allegations would be made affecting certain of the witnesses, Dr. Findlay was permitted to appear for Captain Allman, Mr. Gray for Captain Jones, Mr. Atkinson for Captain Yon Schoen, and Mr. Travers for Captain Edwin and Mr. Allport, and to cross-examine the various witnesses on any testimony given affecting their respective clients, without any written charges being then made. Mr. Hanlon proceeded to call the various witnesses, whose evidence is forwarded herewith, and they were examined by the counsel above mentioned. At the close of their evidence certain allegations or charges were handed by as to the counsel for Captain Allman, Captain Jones, Captain Yon Schoen, Captain Edwin, and Mr. Allport, and to Mr. Glasgow personally, specifying the accusations against them which seemed to have arisen in the course of the evidence, on which we desired to hear them. The following were the allegations :— Captain Allman. —That, in contravention of law, and with the intent to enable James Jones fraudulently to pass an examination for master, he received from the said James Jones certain papers prepared before his presenting himself for such examination, and did fraudulently certify that such examination was duly passed. Captain Jones. —That, in order fraudulently to pass an examination for master, he did procure for the sum of £17 from Yon Schoen certain papers containing answers to questions purporting to be put in the course of such examination, and did induce the Examiner, Captain Allman, to receive such answers as if they had been duly written by him in the examination-room, whereby he fraudulently obtained a certificate of competency as master. Captain Yon Schoen. —That he provided James Jones with answers to certain questions to be put to him at his examination for master wilh the intent to enable him to pass such examination fraudulently and in contravention of law, receiving as consideration therefor certain moneys from the said James Jones. Captain Edwin. —That, without having been present at the examination of James Jones for master, he signed a certificate that such examination had been duly passed. That he knew at the time of such examination that the examination in question was held in contravention of law, inasmuch as James Jones did not hold a mate's certificate. Mr. Glasgoiv and Mr. Allport. —That they allowed James Jones to go up for examination as master without holding a mate's certificate. That they accepted as authority for thus contravening the law a memorandum from the Minister, unsigned, undated, and unaddressed. There was no need to formulate charges against the Premier and the Minister of Marine, as that had already been done by Mr. Pirani. We requested that each counsel would confine himself to the facts affecting his client, as he would have done had the allegation against him been made in manner specified by our Commission. We then proposed to adjourn for twentyfour hours, but, as there were no further witnesses to call, counsel preferred to go on at once. Dr. Findlay, for Captain Allman, stated that his client admitted the facts charged, but desired to address on his motives. This we deemed unnecessary. On his urging the matter further, we pointed out that Captain Allman's motives were fully disclosed in his evidence and his reports, and that we were prepared to give them ample consideration. Mr. Gray, for Captain Jones, and Mr. Atkinson, for Captain Yon Schoen, addressed us chiefly in extenuation. Mr. Martin Chapman addressed us on behalf of Mr. Glasgow, and Mr. Travers for Captain Edwin and Mr. Allport. Mr. Hanlon stated that he had no instructions to appear for the Premier or for Mr. Hall-Jones, and that he did not propose to address us on the case. We could not, therefore, hear Mr. Hislop on behalf of Mr. Pirani. In fact, it appears somewhat doubtful whether we were right in allowing him to appear at all. The Commission specially directs that an accused person shall be entitled lo appear either personally or by counsel, but no such direction is given with

H.—26

regard to the accuser. No witnesses were called by Mr. Hislop, all those whom he desired to examine having been subpoenaed by Mr. Hanlon. Mr. Pirani was subpoenaed, but declined to give evidence in support of his charges. The facts of the case proven before us are the following : — In 1895 James Jones made application for a service certificate, and a schedule of his services was forwarded to the department, signed by Captain Williams, of Wellington. The services therein set out were scrutinised by the officers of the department, and a large proportion of them struck out, thus reducing the term of Jones's service below that required for the issue to him of a service certificate. Jones appealed to the Premier, on whom certain deputations also waited. Jones was well known as an exceptionally good seaman ; and, owing to the destruction and absence of records and to Captain Williams's statement of his services, there appeared to be some doubt whether his application should have been rejected by the Marine Department. In February, 1896, the matter was referred by the Premier to Mr. Glasgow, and the rejection confirmed by the latter (page 6). This was communicated to Jones, who then made a fresh appeal to the Premier, on whom a deputation also waited on the subject. Certain further testimonials were also sent to the Premier, and forwarded by him to Captain Allinan, with an inquiry whether anything could be done for Jones. Captain Allman replied in the negative, though admitting Jones to be " highly qualified." The matter then remained closed, though liable at any time to be reopened on proof of further service by Jones. In April, 1897, the Premier left Wellington for Manukau in the " Tutanekai" on his way to England; and on that trip was further addressed on Jones's case by the late Captain Fairchild, who, from his own observation, was of opinion that he (Jones) had served the time. Thereupon the Premier sent a memo, telegram to Mr. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine, as follows: — Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Wellington. Onehunga, 17th April, 1897. I should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones, of " Duco," settled. Prom the papers presented to me lam of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than ,of . Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified. E. J. Seddon. Mr. Hall-Jones consulted with Captain Allman over this telegram, and decided that, as there was no fresh evidence in the matter, nothing should be done. This concludes the whole connection of the Premier with the application of Jones for any certificate. No communication whatever on the subject passed between him and the Minister and Department of Marine from the date of the last-mentioned memo, telegram in April, 1897, to the speech of Mr. John Hutcheson in August, 1898. With these facts proven, it is hardly needful to advert to the second charge made by Mr. Pirani —viz., that Mr. Seddon boasted to Jones that he had procured for him a certificate of competency. This charge is obviously founded on a declaration signed by Jones (page 23), in March, 1899 ; but in examination before us Mr. Seddon denied having used any such words as those attributed to him, or any to the same effect. Three witnesses were produced who were present at the time—in a cabin 10 ft. square—and who could certainly have heard the words if spoken, and did not hear them. The only witness in support of the charge was Jones, who stated that every word spoken about him by Mr. Seddon was "gospel truth" (page 124), and contradicted himself and his own declaration in such a manner as to show that not the slightest reliance Could be placed on his testimony. We are of opinion that Mr. Pirani has entirely failed to prove any of the charges made by him against the Premier. With respect to the certificate of competency, the questions of fact are more difficult to decide, owing to the complication of contradictory evidence. It appears that about three weeks after Mr. Hall-Jones received the Premier's telegram of the 17th April, Mr. Jones visited him and requested him to reconsider his decision touching the certificate of service, which he declined to do. On the next day but one Jones called again, and Captain Allman was sent for, and at that interview the examination for master was first mentioned, and also

H.—26

the fact that Jones ought to have a mate's certificate in order to enable him to sit for such examination. There appears then to have been a discussion on the point whether the Minister of Marine had the power to dispense with this mate's certificate. Captains Allman and Jones state that the Minister undertook to use this power, and to issue a permit accordingly allowing Jones to go up at once for examination as master. Mr. Hall-Jones, on the other hand, states that the question remained undecided, and that he gave to Captain Allman an envelope with the memorandum upon it, —Jones, "Duco." Permit Exam. Master, —as a reminder that he (Allman) was to look into the matter. Captain Allman denies that he ever received this envelope, but states that it was brought down—he is almost certain by Mr. Horneman, Private Secretary of Mr. Hall-Jones—and delivered to Mr. Allport, on Bth July, in his (Allman's) presence. On the other hand, Mr. Horneman denies that he brought down this envelope; and Mr. Allport states that he received it from Captain Allman. Subsequent to this Mr. Hall-Jones states that he heard nothing about Jones's examination until after Mr. Hutcheson's speech in August, 1898. Of the irregularities that took place at the examination it is not contended that he knew anything whatever. Mr. Allport states that at the time that this envelope was handed to him he also received verbal instructions, purporting to be from the Minister, through Captain Allman, directing that Jones was to be allowed to sit for examination as master, though not the holder of a mate's certificate. These instructions, with the envelope, he carried to Mr. Glasgow, Permanent Secretary of the department, and we are of opinion that upon these communications, and these alone, Messrs. Glasgow and Allporfc acted in this matter, and issued an official letter to the Collector of Customs directing the examination of Jones for a certificate of competency as master, notwithstanding the absence of a mate's certificate. It is true that Mr. Glasgow now states that before issuing this letter he had an interview with the Minister of Marine on the subject, at which the instructions were practically confirmed, and also that Mr. Allport now affirms that Mr. Glasgow told him about this interview at the time at which it is alleged to have taken place. But against this evidence we have, first, the positive denial of Mr. Hall-Jones that this interview ever occurred; and, secondly, the fact that in January last, when these two officers were censured by him for accepting an unsigned and undated memorandum on an envelope as authority for violating statutory regulations, their own memoranda (page 54) admitted that they had no authority whatever in the matter beyond the unsigned memorandum and Captain Allman's assurances. Had such an interview with the Minister as Mr. Glasgow now describes actually taken place, and had the fact of its occurrence been communicated to Mr. Allport, as now stated by the latter, there can hardly be a doubt that they would then have stated the fact, and would thereby have relieved themselves from this censure instead of accepting it (page 54). We do not attribute deliberate violation of the truth to either of them, but we feel it impossible to rely on their singularly intermittent memories. We are unable to believe that the unsigned memorandum on the envelope was intended by the Minister as an. instruction to the department, or that he authorised the assurances given by Captain Allman. With respect to the latter, his testimony was contradicted by so many witnesses, and on so many points, during the inquiry that very slight reliance can be placed upon it, especially with respect to conversations. There is little need to dwell on the examination, which is admitted by both Allman and Jones to have been a mere sham and pretence, saving as to the. rule of the road and visual tests. During the examination on these points Captain Edwin was present, but quitted the room when the writing commenced, though he subsequently signed as one of the Examiners who had apparently been present during the whole examination. This appears to have been the custom hitherto, but will probably now be discontinued. The evidence showed that Yon Schoen prepared Jones's papers, and gave them to him in order that he might hand them to Allman, who was about to destroy them, and in effect did tear up some of them, but stayed his hand on an appeal from Jones. Subsequently he

vii

H.—26

VIII

assisted Jones throughout the examination, and certified that he had passed it properly. It does not appear that there was any collusion between Allman and Jones previous to this time. Yon Schoen appears to have induced Jones to apply for a certificate of service in the first instance, on obtaining which he (Jones) was to pay him £20, and to have made up an ingenious list of services in support of this application. On its being rejected, and after the suggestion "that he should go up for examination" had been made by Allman to the Minister, Jones applied to him for instruction sufficient to pass an examination for a competency certificate ; and he then supplied Jones with the papers given to Allman. Jones having obtained his certificate, Yon Schoen gave the information to Mr. Hutcheson against his own client: not, as he explained, with a view " to this entente," but in order to have the examinations properly conducted —possibly with himself as Examiner. It is unnecessary to advert to the various allegations framed by ourselves, as they are already sufficiently dealt with in the foregoing part of our report. Our opinion on Mr. Pirani's charges against the Hon. William Hall-Jones may be gathered from the preceding portions of our report; but we may here make a more categorical statement on the subject. Upon the first charge we find that Mr. Hall-Jones never did " order that James Jones should be examined." But we are of opinion that Mr. Hall-Jones was so far favourably disposed to the proposal made by Captain Allman, that Jones should be admitted to examination, that he might easily have so expressed himself to Captain Allman as to leave the latter to suppose that there would be little difficulty in the matter if he (Allman) could find anything in the regulations to meet Jones's case ; but we see no reason to doubt that Mr. Hall-Jones did expect further information from Captain Allman before anything was done, although he may have been rather too easily disposed to act upon the latter's recommendation without carefully examining its legality for himself. This view may explain the apparently exaggerated account of the remarks of the Minister given by Captain Allman to Mr. Allport—remarks which he interpreted as amounting to actual instructions. The second of these charges we consider unfounded. The third charge is supported only by some statements made in evidence by Captain Allman, which, however, do not go to the extent of the charge as stated, ■—statements, moreover, upon which Mr. Hall-Jones had not been cross-examined. Upon examination of these statements of Captain Allman, we are of opinion that some of the remarks attributed by him to Mr. Hall-Jones are capable of an innocent interpretation, and we have already given reasons for accepting Captain Allman's narratives of conveisations with rnueh caution. If a further reason for distrusting this witness's memory is required, we may refer to his remarkable version of the Premier's telegram to Mr. Hall-Jones, which, if the original had not been preserved, might have had a material influence in misleading our judgment. We have no hesitation, therefore, in saying that this charge is unproven. The last of these charges relates to Mr. Hall-Jones's telegram to the Premier on the 26th February, 1899, and would never have been made had the distinction between the certificate of service and that of competency been kept in view. The telegram must in fairness be understood as referring only to the latter, the question of the service certificate having at that time no bearing on the question, and therefore presumably not under the contemplation of the Minister when he framed the telegram in question. We regard this charge, therefore, as unfounded. Finally, taking into consideration the immense comments on the Jones case and the minuteness of the facts, we desire to express our respectful astonishment at the " intolerable deal of sack " that has been poured over this " pennyworth of bread." Our report is accompanied by the following documents: (1) Commission, (2) Minutes of Proceedings, (3) Minutes of Evidence, (4) Copies of Exhibits, &g. We have the honour to be, Your Excellency's most obedient servants, C. D. B. Ward, ) n J. G ILE s, 'j Commissioners.

167 and s _

MINUTES OP PROCEEDINGS.

Saturday, Bth July, 1899. —(Supreme Court Buildings.) Commissioners : Charles Dudley Eobert Ward, Esquire, District Judge ; Joseph Giles, Esquire. Notice ordered to be inserted in the newspapers naming date of commencement of inquiry and place of meeting, and asking persons concerned to attend. Notice inserted accordingly. Letter sent to Mr. Glasgow, Secretary to the Marine Department, asking him to attend the inquiry at 11 o'clock on Monday, the 10th instant.

Monday, 10th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. The Secretary read the Commission. Mr. Hanlon, instructed by the Government to get out all the facts, opened the inquiry, and asked for an adjournment until 2 o'clock p.m. Adjourned accordingly. The Commission resumed at 2 o'clock p.m. Mr. Hislop asked leave to appear on behalf of Mr. John Hutcheson. Leave refused. Mr. Hanlon asked that subpoenas be issued to the Et. Hon. E. J. Seddon, Premier; the Hon. William Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine; W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine Department; George Allport, Chief Clerk, Marine Department; Captain Allman, late Nautical Adviser; James Jones, master of the steamer " Duchess " ; Captain Edwin, Examiner of Masters and Mates ; and to Captain Yon Schoen, to attend at 11 o'clock on Tuesday, the 11th instant. Subpoenas ordered to issue accordingly. The Commission adjourned at 2.30 o'clock p.m.

Tuesday, 11th July, 1899.—(City Council Chambers.) The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Travers appeared for Captain Edwin and George Allport; Mr. Gray appeared for James Jones; Dr. Findlay appeared for Captain Allman. Mr. Travers asked if an indemnity would be given to certain witnesses. Mr. Hanlon stated that he had no authority to give any indemnity. Charges made by Mr. Pirani, M.H.E., against the Et. Hon. E. J. Seddon and against the Hon. William Hall-Jones were handed in by Mr. Hislop, who appeared for Mr. Pirani. The Et. Hon. E. J. Seddon, Premier, was sworn and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 5 o'clock p.m.

Wednesday, 12th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. A. E. Atkinson appeared for Captain Yon Schoen. Mr. Seddon continued his evidence, and was cross-examined by Dr. Pindlay, for Captain Allman; Mr. Gray, for James Jones; Mr. Travers, for George Allport and Captain Edwin. Mr. Hislop cross-examined-Mr. Seddon in connection with Mr. Pirani's charges, Mr. Seddon having consented thereto without having received due notice thereof. The Commission adjourned at 4.30 o'clock p.m.

Thursday, 13th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. A. E. Hislop was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. A. G. Johnson was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray. Mr. E. E. Bannister was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray. The Hon. William Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Dr. Pindlay, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Travers. The Commission adjourned at 4.30 o'clock p.m.

H.—26

Feiday, 14th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. The Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones was cross-examined by Mr. Hislop and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine Department, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray, Mr. Travers, Mr. Hislop, and Mr. Atkinson. The Commission adjourned at 5 o'clock p.m.

Saturday, 15th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Glasgow was cross-examined by Dr. Findlay. Dr. Fitchett, Crown Law Officer, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray, Mr. Hislop, and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. George Allport, Chief Clerk, Marine Department, was sworn and gave evidence. The Commission adjourned at 1 o'clock p.m.

Monday, 17th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Allport continued his evidence, and was cross-examined by Dr. Findlay, Mr. Gray, Mr. Travers, Mr. Hislop, and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Hugh Gully, Crown Prosecutor, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray, Mr. Hislop, Dr. Findlay, and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. E. Horneman, Private Secretary to the Minister of Marine, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Dr. Findlay, Mr. Gray, Mr. Travers, Mr. Hislop, and Mr. Atkinson. The Commission adjourned at 4.55 o'clock p.m.

Tuesday, 18th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Samuel Burgess, messenger to the Minister of Marine, was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray, on behalf of Dr. Findlay, and Mr. Hislop. James Jones, master of the steamer " Duchess," was sworn and gave evidence, and was crossexamined by Dr. Findlay, Mr. Travers, Mr. Hislop, Mr. Atkinson, and Mr. Gray. Captain Edwin, Examiner of Masters and Mates, was sworn and gave evidence, and was crossexamined by Dr. Findlay, Mr. Travers, and Mr. Atkinson. The Commission adjourned at 5.15 o'clock p.m. until 11 o'clock on Thursday, 20th instant, Wednesday being a public holiday (Arbour Day).

Thuesday, 20th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Atkinson continued his cross-examination of Captain Edwin, who was again crossexamined by Mr. Travers. Captain Allman, late Nautical Adviser, was sworn and gave evidence, and was crossexamined by Dr. Fmdlay, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Travers, and examined by Mr. Hislop. Captain William Bendall and Captain Hugh McLellan were notified, in case they desired to give evidence or to be represented by counsel, that evidence touching their examinations as Adjusters of Compasses would be given by Captain Allman. The Commission adjourned at 4.45 o'clock p.m.

Feiday, 21st July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Hislop continued his examination of Captain Allman ; who was then cross-examined by Mr. Atkinson and Dr. Findlay. Mr. Allport and Mr. Glasgow were recalled, and questioned by Mr. Travers. Captain Yon Schoen was sworn and gave evidence, but claimed the privilege of refusing to answer any questions that might incriminate him, and was cross-examined by Dr. Findlay. Captain Yon Schoen refused to answer a number of questions on the above ground. The Commission adjourned at 4.45 o'clock p.m.

Satueday, 22nd July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Dr. Findlay continued his cross-examination of Captain Yon Schoen, who was then crossexamined by Mr. Gray, Mr. Travers, and Mr. Atkinson. The Commission adjourned at 12.45 o'clock p.m.

Monday, 24th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. Atkinson continued his cross-examination of Captain Yon Schoen. Captain Marciel, Examiner of Masters and Mates, was sworn and gave evidence, and was-cross-examined by Dr. Findlay and Mr. Atkinson.

H.—26

Mr. John Hutcheson, late M.H.E., was sworn and gave evidence, cross-examined by Mr. Travers, Mr. Atkinson, Dr. Findlay, Mr. Gray, and Mr. Hislop. Captain Bendall, Adjuster of Compasses, was sworn and gave evidence. Mr. J. A. Millar, M.H.E., was sworn and gave evidenc The Commission adjourned at 4.30 o'clock p.m.

Tuesday, 25th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. John Alfred Plimmer was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Gray and Mr. Hislop. Mr. Harold Beauchamp was sworn and gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Atkinson. Sir Arthur Douglas, Under-Secretary for Defence, was sworn and gave evidence, and was crossexamined by Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Eobert Thompson, M.H.E., was sworn and gave evidence. Thomas Eedmond, messenger to the Premier, was sworn and gave evidence, and was crossexamined by Dr. Findlay. Mr. Travers, for Captain Edwin and Mr. Allport; Mr. Chapman, for Mr. Glasgow; Mr. Atkinson, for Captain Yon Schoen; and Mr. Gray, for Captain Jones, then addressed the Commissioners. The Commission adjourned at 4.15 o'clock p.m.

Wednesday, 26th July, 1899. The Commissioners met at 11 o'clock a.m. Mr. J. A. Millar, recalled, gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Atkinson. Mr. John Hutcheson, recalled, gave evidence, and was cross-examined by Mr. Atkinson. This concluded the evidence, and the Commissioners adjourned to consider their report.

iii

iisriDEx:.

EVIDENCE. Witness. Pace Allman, Captain .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ~ 248 Allport, George .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ _ _ Bannister, R. E. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. 49 Beauchamp, H. .. .. .. .. .. ■ .. .. ' Bendall, Captain .. .. .. .. .. .. . _ 215 Burgess, Samuel .. .. .. .. .. .. .. t _ 12 2 Douglas, Sir A., Bart. .. .. .. .. .. ~ 217 Edwin, Captain .. .. .. .. .. .. .. _ _ j^ 2 Fitohett, Dr.. F. .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ 9(> Glasgow, W. T. .. ... .. .. .. .. .. .. 76183 Gully, Hugh .. .. .. .. .. .. ~ _ _ 115 Hall-Jones, Hon. Wm. .. ~ .. .. .. _ _ g 0 Hislop, A. R. .. .. .. .. , .. _ Horneman, E. .. .. .. .. ~ -^20 Hutoheson, John, M.H.R. .. .. .. ~ Johnson, A. G. .. .. _ _ ah Jones, James .. .. .. _ Marciel, Captain .. .. .. ' _ p 202 Millar, J. A., M.H.R. .. .. .. .. ... . .. 216,220 Plimmer, J. A., jun. ... .. .. oig Redmond, Tbomas .. . .. oio Seddon, Right Hon. R. J. .. .. .. .. • .. _'_ & Thompson, Robert, M.H.R. .. .. .. .. .. Yon Schoen, Captain .. .. .. ..

H—26

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Monday, 10th July, 1899. Mr. Hanlon: lam instructed by the Government to appear to get out all the facts, so far as they are known to the Government, in connection with the matters relating to this inquiry. I shall, therefore, name to your Honours the witnesses who I think will be able to throw any light upon these matters. Judge Ward : There are so many matters. Mr. Hanlon: All the matters contained in the commission. I shall name the various witnesses I wish to have examined, and ask your Honours to issue subpoenas to them. Of course they will not be my witnesses. Judge Ward : You are conducting the inquiry generally ? . Mr. Hanlon: Yes; but I wish to have it understood that whatever witnesses are called your Honours will permit me to examine them fully. Judge Ward : Examine and cross-exanine ? Mr. Hanlon: Yes. Judge Ward : So far as any witness shows any hostility, or there is any doubt about his animus Mr. Hanlon: What I want is to make the examination as searching in each instance as I possibly can. Judge Ward : That is an important matter, of course. Mr. Hanlon : Then, as to the procedure. Your Honours will see from the commission that provision is made that if any person may be prejudicially affected by the evidence he is to have twenty-four hours' notice, and may be represented by counsel. Judge Ward: In respect to that, I might mention that the Commissioners have received a letter from Captain Allman, one of the parties implicated, requesting that we recommend the Government to provide him with counsel, he being unable to provide counsel himself. We would like you to state that to the Government, and let them take what course they may be advised. Mr. Hanlon: I shall take an opportunity of communicating that to the Government as the most convenient method of dealing with the matter. Judge Ward : If you have any allegations to make affecting any one, you will have to put them in writing and serve a copy on the party whom you think implicated. It is distinctly laid down in the commission that, " before inquiring into any allegation which affects the personal conduct of any person, you shall cause him to be served with at least twenty-four hours' notice in writing of the allegation, with such particulars of time, place, and circumstances as you think sufficient." You will probably submit the allegation to us, and we shall see whether it is sufficient in accordance with the commission. Mr. Hanlon : Very well; on that point I shall also take an opportunity of conferring with the Government. With regard to the subpoenas ? Judge Ward : They will have to be issued under the hand of the Commissioners. That is prescribed by the Act. Mr. Hanlon : At this stage, will it be convenient to adjourn in order that I may consult the Government on that point regarding Captain Allman, and also with regard to formulating any charges against any person or persons, so that notice may be given ? They have to get twentyfour hours' notice. Judge Ward: Precisely ; but we are anxious not to waste more time that is necessary. Of course, there are some delays which are unavoidable. Can you give that notice to-day ? Mr. Hanlon: If the Commission would adjourn, say, until 2 o'clock, then whatever notice was necessary could be arranged for, and, if no charges are made in the meantime, then the case might be opened, and we might adjourn until to-morrow in order to take evidence. In the meantime subpoenas might be served. At 2 o'clock I shall be able to say whether any charges will be formulated or not, and what subpoenas may be necessary, so that they can be issued to-morrow. Dr. Giles : Had you any intention of giving us an outline or resume of the matters to come before us ? Mr. Hanlon: With regard to the most important charge—that is in connection with Mr. Jones's certificate —I would outline that; but there are other matters not so intricate as that, for which no opening would be required. They are in a very small compass. Dr. Giles : Are you going to call Mr. Glasgow as a witness ? I ask, because we sent word to him, not knowing what guidance we might have. Mr. Hanlon: Yes, I would ask that a subpcena be issued for Mr. Glasgow, in order to have him examined. Judge Ward : I thought Mr. Glasgow was here this morning, and now see that he is here. Dr. Giles : In the absence of any other witness, we thought he would be a convenient witness to give us a description of the constitution of the department. Mr. Hanlon: I think it would be inconvenient to call Mr. Glasgow first, and I think I should be able to put the position in a more chronological order if you allow the matter to stand over until I—H. 26.

H.—26

the case is opened. Then I shall call the witnesses in what I think the most convenient manner, so that your Honours will be able to understand all the evidence that will be led. The Commission adjourned until 2 o'clock.

The Commission resumed at 2 o'clock. Mr. T. W. Hislop : I have to apply for leave to appear before the Commission on behalf of Mr. John Huteheson. Mr. Hutcheson was the member of the House at whose instance the inquiry was first set going, and he is a gentleman who has taken all along a great interest in seafaring matters. Judge Ward : But how is Mr. Hutcheson concerned otherwise ? Mr. Hislop : He is not concerned except in that capacity, and as a member of the public who, as I stated, brought the matter prominently before the House in the first instance and before the public since. In the matter of the Police Commission Mr. Taylor stood in the same relation to that inquiry as Mr. Hutcheson does to this. Judge Ward : We do not wish to take that as a precedent. Ido not know what status Mr. Hutcheson would have in the matter. He makes no charge against any one that I know of. Mr. Hislop : Well, he has not, so far. Judge Ward : If, in the course of the inquiry, any person makes any specific charge against another, and desires to have that charge investigated, it would have to be formulated in writing to the Commission, and then notice would have to be given ,to the party charged, and the case investigated in the ordinary way. But lam not aware what position Mr. Hutcheson would occupy in the matter. He seems to have brought the matter forward, but he makes no charge at present. When he does we shall be happy to hear him by counsel or personally, whichever course may be desirable. Mr. Hislop: I have not had time to look into the commission, but from listening to it when read this morning it seems to be a very wide commission. The inquiry includes not only irregularities and misrepresentations and improper practices, but also by what mode the Shipping and Seamen's Act may be amended. Mr. Hutcheson might possibly assist the Commission in coming to a conclusion in the matter. Judge Ward: If Mr. Hutcheson desires to give evidence in the matter we shall be happy to hear him. I have no doubt his seafaring experience would be of great benefit. But as a member of the House who brought forward the charges in the House necessitating the Commission—l do not know that this gives him a status to appear before the Commission. If he have a status, Ido not know precisely how you would use it. Do you mean that he would ask for permission to examine all witnesses ? Mr. Hislop : Yes, your Honour. Judge Ward : Then certainly we should not allow it, because in that case we might have every person in Wellington who desires to elicit the truth—and I am sure every one does—asking leave to examine witnesses by counsel. Mr. Hislop : Of course we have had the matter under consideration with regard to formulating charges, but do not want to be put in that position now, because we wanted to hear evidence before doing so. Judge Ward : We shall be glad to see you here, but not to examine the witnesses—that is a different matter altogether. Dr. Giles : I quite concur. Mr. Hislop : If we can determine to formulate charges, we might be allowed to come before the Commission to-morrow. Dr. Giles : I think in the Police Commission Mr. Taylor did formulate charges. Mr. Hislop : No; I think not before the Commission. Mr. Hanlon: With regard to the letter sent by Captain Allman to the Commissioners, I would like to say this : that it is recognised that Captain Allman is without means, and if the Commission now, or during the progress of the inquiry, are of opinion that, in the interests of a full and exhaustive investigation, it is reasonable that Captain Allman should be represented by counsel, then the Government will, if so advised by the Commissioners, favourably consider the question of the payment of his counsel. Judge Ward: Then when we come to any matter in which Captain Allman is concerned, we will, if desirable, make that recommendation. Mr. Hanlon: As to formulating charges, the Government do not propose to formulate any charges, but simply to elicit all the facts they can in connection with the matter ; and if in eliciting those facts it appears to the Commissioners that any person may be prejudiced, then notice may be given. Of course a difficulty arises in this way : that you would not be able to see whether any person was prejudicially affected or not until the charges were formulated; but, as no charge will be formulated, there will have to be that risk as to the witnesses. As to the conduct of the inquiry, there are certain witnesses whom I would like to have here before I open the case, in order that they may hear, and, if necessary, be able to make application to be represented on account of what, I will say, is the nature of the evidence that will be led. I think, therefore, at the risk of a little waste of time, it is necessary the case should not be opened until those witnesses whom I shall name shall be summoned before the Commission. Then, having attended, if they see that they are likely to be affected in any way, they can make application to be represented. A delay of twenty-four hours will be saved by the course now suggested being taken. I would therefore ask that subpoenas be issued to the Eight Hon. the Premier, the Hon. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine; Mr. Glasgow, Secretary of Marine; Mr. Allport, Chief Clerk of the Marine Department; Captain Allman, late Nautical Adviser; Captain Jones, whose certificate is in question ; Captain Edwin, and Captain Yon Schoen. These are the eight witnesses I would like to have subpoenaed for to-morrow morning.

H.—26

Judge Ward: Very well; you can undertake to serve the subpoenas if they are issued. Mr. Hanlon: Yes, I will undertake to have the necessary subpoenas served. Judge Ward : We can sign the subpoenas .this afternoon, and hand them to any messenger you assign. Mr. Hanlon : If it meets with your Honours' approval, the proceedings might stand over until to-morrow morning, to issue the subpoenas to those concerned: then the Commission can go on without any intermission until conclusion.

Tuesday, 11th July, 1899. Mr. Hanlon : I propose very briefly to outline the facts in reference to this inquiry, in order to prepare the minds of the Commissioners for the evidence, necessarily voluminous, which I propose to have called in order that every circumstance may be elucidated, and that your Honours may be in a position to frame a true and valuable report in connection with the matter. I first of all propose to read the part of the speech delivered in the House of Eepresentatives by Mr. John Hutcheson, member for Wellington City, relating to some irregularities which he alleges have taken place in the Marine Department. He says (see Hansard, 26th August, 1898, pp. 279-280) :— I am informed by a responsible citizen that there is at the present time a captain in command of a passengercarrying coastal steamer who was allowed to fill in his examination-papers in a private house. My informant also assured me, on his word of honour, that the candidate's hand was guided in the formation of every letter and figure in the examination-papers. If I were to give a vivid picture o! this man engaged in the laborious task of holding the candidate's hand, I would require to be allowed the same privilege which was claimed by the Minister of Lands, and I should have to put in Hansard a sketch of the two men's hands doing the work; but, unfortunately, lam limited to the meagre resource of my tongue to depict the laborious process. And, Sir, this captain is in command of a vessel carrying living souls every day on the coast of New Zealand, and that is how he obtained his certificate of competency. Mr. Seddon : It is almost impossible for it to ba correct. Mr. J. Hutcheson : Well, I asked my informant, if he were compelled by a superior authority to go and give his evidence, what would he say in the event of his being charged with the onus of proving the fact ? He said, " I would ask the man to write his name, and he could not." Now, the captain's examination, Sir Mr. Seddon : How long since is that? Mr. J. Hutcheson : Quite recently, Sir. Does the Right Hon. the Premier know of a oase where a oandidate for a master's certificate of competency was failed by reason of his inability to perform a mechanical and physical impossibility ? Last year a captain now in charge of one of our passenger-carrying coastal steamers came to me and complained he was failed because the examiner wrongly alleged he could not perform almost one of the last ques--tions in his examination-paper. He was given the data for a cross-bearing ;he could not make the bearings cross, and the examiner promptly failed him. He came to me and complained. Hβ said he was certain he was correct and the examiner wrong. I said, "Itis a difficult matter to sheet home." But a little pressure was brought to bear on the authorities, and the Right Hon. the Premier knows that when he submitted the matter to the Nautical Adviser of the Government, who was instructed to test the problem and project it on the chart, he produced parallel lines, and any tiro in geometry knows thatparallel lines never meet; consequently the bearings could not ctSss. That candidate was allowed to resume his examination from the point where he had been wrongly failed, and although I am given to understand that the examiner tendered his resignation, I do not know that it is yet accepted by the Government. Mr. Hall-Jones : He never tendered it. Mr. J. Hutcheson : I understood he did, Sir; at any rate, there is now in the archives of the Marine Depart ment a copy of the examination-paper. Mr. Hall-Jones : No. * * * * # Mr. Hutcheson. —What I know has come to me without my seeking; and, knowing something of what I am talking about, I have grave reasons for great dissatisfaction as to the administration of this particular departr ment. Now, Sir, in addition to the cases I have already quoted, there is that of the candidate who was peremptorily failed; and I never yet knew of an appeal from the decision of an examiner being tolerated, except through the superior influence of a Minister. And ba it remembered it was only by breaking the regulations that the candidate in question secured justice. One of the strictest rules governing the examination of candidates for certificates of competency in the mercantile marine is that they shall neither take into nor out of the examination-room any notes, books, papers, or references. Had the candidate in question not surreptitiously taken careful note of the bearings on his cuff, he would have been taken no notice of, because he had first to establish the fact that he was right and the examiner wrong. I maintain, and lam open to adduce still further proof if required, that one competent officer, properly paid and given proper power, can examine every candidate of all grades, home and foreign service, that offers in the Colony of New Zealand. ... In the introduction of a new style of examination, and in the use of a new instrument called the " deviasoope," the working of certain examination-papers was prepared outside the department, and certain clerical errors and erasures and faults in the figures were made by the preparer, and, strange to say, the papers of two successful candidates now in the archives of the Marine Department carry the same mistakes and erasures as the originals contained. But these candidates have got certificates, and are now licensed to adjust compasses. ... I have had enough evidence, by coming in contact with the officers of the department, to satisfy mo that they have no desire to yield up their influence and authority over the Marine Department." I think that is all of the speech it is necessary for me to read in order to show the nature of the allegations made in connection with the Marine Department by Mr. J. Hutcheson. Now, in consequence of that speech the Minister of Marine made inquiries from the Secretary of Marine (Mr. Glasgow), who was unable to give any information about the matter. Captain Allman was away out of town, but on his return he said he knew nothing about these statements, and that they were utterly untrue. Further inquiries were instituted, and it was ascertained that Captain James Jones was the person referred to by Mr. Hutcheson, and steps were taken to elicit the facts concerning him. It appears that in 1895 James Jones made application for a service certificate, and there was a schedule of Jones's services produced, signed by Captain Williams, of Wellington. The services set out in the schedule were checked by the department, and found to be of such a character that the certificate could not issue, and Captain Jones was informed of that fact. The application was renewed, and a deputation waited on the Premier. One of the reasons given was that no permit had been issued to Jones for taking steamers out of the harbour. The Premier was in some doubt about the matter, and he spoke to Captain Allman about it, and asked if anything could be done with regard to the application of Jones for a certificate, and it was said that, if satisfactory proof were given of the service, it was a question whether the certificate should not be

H.—26

granted. Now, in 1897 the Premier went to England, and on his way to Auckland he was spoken to by Captain Fairchild, of the Government steamer " Tutanekai," who asked what was causing the delay in issuing the certificate to Captain Jones, and if anything was going to be done with regard to it. Mr. Seddon replied that so far as he knew the matter was under consideration, and he would send to the Minister to get the matter settled. On arrival at Auckland the Premier wired to the Minister of Marine, saying, that he would be glad if the Minister would have the question of issuing the certificate to Captain Jones of the " Duco " settled. Now, it will also appear from the evidence that late in 1896, or early in 1897, Captain Jones interviewed Mr. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine, and said he had applied for a service certificate, but the department would not issue it. The Minister made inquiries, and on getting the papers from the department found that the department had advised that there were inaccuracies in Captain Jones's statement of service, and he declined to interfere with the decision which had been arrived at. Then, about some three weeks after the Premier left for the Old Country, Captain Jones asked the Minister of Marine to reconsider the matter, but he declined. Then Captain Jones asked the Minister of Marine if he had consulted the Nautical Adviser, Captain Allman, and he replied that he had, and that Captain Allman was of the same opinion as the other officers of his department. At a subsequent interview, at which Captain Jones was present, Captain Allman suggested that Captain Jones might go up for a certificate of competency. Of course, for a service certificate, service has to be shown; but for a certificate of competency you have to show something more. After discussion, Captain Allman said that Captain Jones had not the qualification of a mate's certificate to qualify him, and it might probably be necessary for a permit to be issued allowing Captain Jones to sit for examination. Dr. Giles : Can you tell us the meaning of the word " permit "—permit to sit for examination ? Mr. Hanlon : It means that a permit might be given for him to sit for examination without a mate's qualification. Mr. W. T. L. Travers: On what authority ? Mr. Hanlon : I do not say. I am saying that this is what Captain Allman said to the Minister. Judge Ward : Although there is no authority for granting such power? Mr. Hanlon: Probably not. What Captain Allman wished to put to the Minister was that before the Collector of Customs would allow Captain Jones to sit for examination, some permission 'would have to be given by the Minister for Captain Jones to sit without possessing the qualification of a mate's certificate. That is what Captain Allman put to the Minister. that time the Minister took a note on an envelope in the following words—"Jones, 'Duco.' Permit Exam. Master." Mr. Travers : Where is the envelope ? Mr. Hanlon : I shall produce it. Mr. Travers : They are the words written on the envelope, but not in the form my friend puts them. Mr. Hanlon : Quite so. I shall put that in evidence. Mr. Travers : I am advised that the word "permit" is pronounced as a verb, and not as a noun. That is the difference. Mr. Hanlon: That is a question for the Commissioners. These words were put on the envelope, as the Minister will say, as a reminder to himself to get information from the Secretary of Marine. Then Captain Allman said he would look into the regulations and see if Captain Jones's tug service would count, and the Minister handed the envelope to Captain Allman. Captain Allman: That's a lie. Judge Ward : Who made that statement ? Cap tarn Allman : I did. Judge Ward : Then you will leave the room. Mr. Hanlon: The Minister states that he handed the envelope to Captain Allman and heard nothing more about it until the statement made by Mr. Hutcheson in the House. Dr. Findlay : Permit me to apologize for Captain Allman, your Honours. He has been in a nervous condition and has not had any sieep. I feel that he gave way under the strain. I also feel embarrassed by his absence. Judge Ward : If you can answer for your client's behaviour in future. Dr. Findlay : Plainly, it was offensive and improper conduct; but I will speak to him, and I do not think the Court will suffer from any further interruption from him. Judge Ward : Very well; you may recall him. Captain Allman (on entering): I regret, your Honour, that I made that remark at the particular time. Judge Ward : Very well, Captain Allman, we will excuse you this time. Pray do not make any remarks at a future time. Your counsel will do that for you, if necessary. Mr. Hanlon : I would like to trace the events from the writing of the envelope by the Minister of Marine. It will be seen from the evidence, according to the statement of Mr. Allport, Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, that he took the envelope from Captain Allman, and that Captain Allman stated that the Minister had instructed him to tell him (Mr. Allport) to dispense with the requirement for obtaining the certificate. Upon this point there will be some conflict of testimony. However, Mr. Allport, acting on the envelope as a Ministerial instruction, sent a letter to the Collector of Customs, dated the 12th July, 1897, as follows: — I have to inform you that tho Minister of Marine has directed that Captain Jones, of the s.s. " Duco," is to be permitted to go up for examination for a certifioate of competency as master, home-trade, without the qualification of having in possession a mate's certificate for one year. If Captain Jones makes an application to be examined, he should therefore be examined without production of a mate's certificate. GuoEGi) Allpqbt, for Secretary.

H.-26

Then Captain Jones sat for the examination on the 13th and 19th July, and I think it will be made apparent to your Honours that very grave irregularities occurred in the examination-room, and that, as a matter of fact, there was no examination at all. However, it will be needless for me to dilate very much on that subject, because the evidence is very simple. There is a good deal of documentary evidence, and it will not be a very difficult matter for your Honours to arrive at a conclusion on that particular point. Notwithstanding these irregularities, Captain Jones was passed by the examiners, and a certificate issued to him until it was cancelled by the Supreme Court in April of this year. I understand it will be said by Mr. Glasgow that, on the 9th or 10th July, 1897 —that was, two days after the envelope is said to have been written by the Minister of Marine—he (Mr. Glasgow) took the envelope to Mr. Hall-Jones, the Minister, and showed to him. Mr. Hall-Jones, I understand, will deny that that was so. However, on that point also, there is a great deal of documentary evidence, and it will throw sufficient light on the subject to enable your Honours to form a conclusion on that point. These seem to be the facts relating to the examination of James Jones; but it will be necessary for me to go back a little in order to show what the Government did in connection with it. After the rising of the House in November, 1898, the Government received certain information from Mr. Allport, Chief Clerk, and then applied to Captain Allrnan for a report, which he furnished, and it explained the position in detail. Upon this information the Government suspended Captain Allman and Captain Edwin, who were both examiners, and then, after consulting the officers of the Crown, they proceeded against Captain Allman and Captain Yon Schoen for procuring the certificate by false representations. Judge Ward : How does Captain Yon Schoen appear in it ? Mr. Hanlon: He is a tutor here, and there will be a good deal of evidence which will show the connection that Captain Yon Schoen had with the matter. He was a coach and tutor, and it appears that he knew a great deal more about the information in the department than he should have known. These two were proceeded against in the Supreme Court, but the case fell through-on a technical ground. Captain Allman after that was dismissed. There will also appear, during the progress of this inquiry, that there were irregularities in connection with two others —Captains Bendall and McLellan—in reference to the issue of licenses as adjusters of compasses. It will appear that irregularities were disclosed by Captain Yon Schoen to the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department. Judge Ward : When ? Mr. Hanlon: I cannot give you the date of them, but I think it was in February of 1898. Dr. Findlay : Can you indicate who were concerned in those irregularities you last mentioned ? Mr. Hanlon : No, Ido not propose to indicate who are connected with them. That will come out in due course. I mention these at this stage because, as the certificates of these two captains are in question, it is advisable it should be known at once, so that they may get notice if they wish to be represented. Ido not know that it is necessary to open any other matter, because there are many things that will be inquired into; but they, no doubt, will develop as the evidence proceeds. That is all I propose to say by way of opening. I will now call the Eight Hon. the Premier. The Bight Hon. the Premier : Might I be permitted, by courtesy, to make a short statement ? I have obeyed the subpoena issued by your Honours. It is my intention to give evidence and to assist you as far as lies in my power. When a previous Commission was sitting, which had no connection whatever with this, on constitutional grounds I declined to tender evidence ; but the circumstances are very different in this case. First, there are no charges in this case. Secondly, having had a great deal to do with the administration and the legislation in connection with this department, and the officers of the department being also involved, I considered that, under the circumstances, I ought, in justice to the Commission, to tender evidence. Not only that, but it is the wish also of my colleagues that I should do so. Eichaed John Seddon, sworn and examined. 1. Mr. You are Premier of the colony?—-Yes, I hold that position. 2. You know Captain James Jones, of the " Duco " ?—Yes, I do. 3. Do you know that he applied for any certificate under the Shipping and Seamen's Act?— Some time —a considerable time —before I left for the Mother-country I had occasion to go into the matter of an application which had been made by him for a service- certificate. I think the application, as far as my recollection serves me, had been made in 1895, and I think it was in 1896 that I was dealing with it. There had been an application filed giving the periods of service, making over three years. The department had sent a reply in the negative. This was taken exception to, and as it came before me there was nothing to show on the papers the ground of the refusal. As far as I recollect, I think I had a conversation with Mr. Glasgow, the Secretary, and he then told me that there was a doubt—in fact, they were pretty well satisfied.—that the services contained in that written statement had not been rendered—that is, the time. I then took a course which I conceived to be in the interest of the department and the Government, and if I had the file I would show you that. [File produced.] 1 have here the file with an application. There is an application made, signed James Jones, 15th May, 1895, and at the head of it is " Application for certificate of service." There is a statement with this, signed J. H. Williams, owner steamships " Duco " and " Mana." On this there are services shown of time amounting in the aggregate to three years five months and nine days. The next paper to it on the file is a copy of the original signed by Mr. Williams, and it is certified as being a copy of the original by George Allport, 6/6/95. On this copy there are redink marks, showing no record against some. Some are marked with Jones's name inserted after the name of the boat. In respect of some of the times, the figures of the original are deleted, and red figures are inserted.

H.—26

i. Do they principally reduce the time ?—These are reductions. They are notes made, I presume, by Mr. Allport—by the department. With the original paper was the following letter :— Sic,— Featherston Street, Wellington, 14th May, 1895. This is to certify that Captain Jones has served in my employ as master of the steam-tugs " Mana " and " Duoo " for a continuous period of eight years. From entries in my books, I find that between September, 1886, and December, 1894, Captain Jones's sea-going service as master of the above-mentioned tugs amounts to over three years and two months. During the twenty-six years that Captain Jones has been in the employ of my late father (Captain W. R. Williams) and in that of myself, he has given every satisfaction, beiDg always strictly sober and attentive to his duties, and I find him a most trustworthy and competent navigator and shipmaster. Yours, &0., J. H. Williams, The Hon. the Minister, Marine Department. Owner steam-tugs " Duco " and " Mana." On the 4th June, 1895, the official number of the memorandum being 755/82, I find the following copy of a memorandum which had been sent to Captain James Jones : — Sib, Marine Department, Wellington, 4th Jut c, 1895. With reference to your application for a certificate of service as master home trade, I have the honour to state that your statement of service has been referred to the Collector of Customs for verification, and he reports that from the records in his office it appears that the time in which you actually served as master in the home trade is not sufficient to entitle you to a certificate of service under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894." During some of the periods shown by you, the reoords show that Captains Bendall, Butt, Lawton, and Leys were in charge as master. Under these circumstances, I am unable to issue the certificate for which you have applied, and I return herewith your river-master's certificate and testimonials. I have, &c, Mr. James Jones, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The next was from Mr. T. J. Walker, Assistant Surveyor: — Memo.: Collector. No traoe of ship's papers from 1887 to 30th June, 1890, can be found, but, from the clearances since 1890, it appears that, in nearly every case where the " Mana " and " Duco " made outside trips, Captain Jones was not in charge. The exceptions are as under: — 1890. 30 Dec. "Mana" to Orongorongo," J. Jones, master. Returned on 30th December. 1891. 3 „ " Terawhiti, „ „ „ 3rd December. 1892. 9 Jan. „ „ „ „ „ 13th January. 1892. 1 Dec. „ „ „ » Returned on same day. 1892. 5 „ 1892. 17 Nov. „ Otaki. „ „ Towing " Weathersfield" to Wellington. In other instances, where the vessels went outside, the following masters wero in charge—viz., F. Lawton, J. Leys, Wm. Bendall, R. Butt. There is no record in the Tide-Surveyor's Report-book of many of the trips claimed to have been made by Captain Jones. F. Walker, Aoting Tide-Surveyor. Ist June, 1895. There is a paper signed by Mr. McKellar, dated 22nd May, 1895 : — The Collector, Wellington. Will you please cheok over with the vessel's clearances the statement of service in the " Mana" and " Duco " given in the sheet attached to Captain Jones's application? Ido not think that the particulars of service given therein can be correct, as in nearly every instance when permission was granted by this department for the vessels to go beyond the harbour it was subject to the oondition that a sea-going master was to be in charge, and the Collector was informed of this at the time. Captain Jones only holds a river certificate. 22nd May, 1895. D. McKellar, for Secretary. There is a memorandum signed by Mr. A. Laing at the bottom : — Minute. Please see attached memo, from Mr. Walker, Acting Landing-Surveyor. Captain Jones does not appear to have the necessary service to enable him to get a certificate. A. Laing, Acting Collector. 3rd June, 1895. Then Mr. Glasgow writes : — Minute: The Collector, Wellington. With reference to the Landing-Surveyor's report attached, will you please furnish for the Premier a statement showing the trips on which Captains Leys, Lawton, Butt, and Bendall, or any Master other than Captain Jones, were in charge when the vessel went outside. W. T. Glasgow. From that date I identify myself with connection with the papers, and it is from my asking for that information you hay there are no records, and where the red ink marks are put and fixed definitely by Mr. Allport on the 6th June—that you have on record when Captains Lees, Bendall, and Allman were in charge, all in order. I find then a memorandum from myself to Mr. Glasgow, Secretary of Customs, and a letter from Mr. Glasgow, dated 21st February, 1896. Hon. Premier. I have had a further examination made of the service set forth by Captain Jones of the " Mana " and " Duco." Up to June, 1890, there are no records in the Customhouse to enable the service to be checked. Subsequently the trips are marked in red ink, with the result that it is found that if Jones took the " Mana " outside in many of the cases given in his list he did so without any authority or permit from this department. A permit to act as master outside the harbour was only given to him once, in the case of the " Mana " going to the " Weithersfield" at Waikanae. Permits were given only on condition that a certificated master was in command. The names of these masters are inserted in red ink on the document attached. In some cases the time is much exaggerated, as will be seen by the red-ink corrections. I have no hesitation in saying that the required service has not been proved, and I could not recommend the issue of a certificate. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1896. Reply accordingly.—R.J.S., 26/2/96. On that I minuted " Eeply accordingly." ■ What is the date ?—26th February, 1896. Were you at this time acting as the Minister of Marine ? —Yes, in the absence of the Minister of Marine I would be taking his papers, or sometimes, when I wanted to ascertain if everything was going right, I asked for -the papers. When the first letter to Captain Jones was sent, there was.

H.—26

nothing to show on the papers why this had been done. Of course the department had come to the conclusion that there had not been sufficient service. Was further application made after that reply had been sent?— Yes, the position was that there was some time when the vessel had been away without record, and that the services given and certified to by Mr. Williams had been performed. That was the matter at issue between the department and Captain Jones. 5 And did a deputation wait upon you in connection with the matter?— Yes, and I think I was interviewed by Captain Jones himself prior to the deputation. 6. Then after the deputation had seen you, did you look into the matter further ?—Yes Anyone looking at this file will see the large number of times recorded of service. There are nine times marked m red ink, and that raises a doubt in my mind as to how, where there is no record, that should be looked at. There was a positive statement of Captain Williams on the one hand, and there was no record by the department on the other, and that always weighed on my mind, that there might be something in the contention of Captain Jones as to his service ■ + o ni JT °u U f , c statement of his takin g the vessel out of the harbour without a permit ?—That also had to be considered, whether a captain who disobeys the law in that respect should have the time counted. Ido not think it should myself. 8. During this period is it correct that you were dealing solely with this service certificate?— f-"i ulf £ 6W , an y thm g whatever about an application or examination for another certificate until after Mr. Huteheson made his speech in the House. Up to that time, if anyone had mentioned anything about Captain Jones's certificate, I should have taken it to apply to this service certificate, owing to having been brought into it by these papers. 9. What was your next connection in the matter so far as you remember ?—At the time of the deputation, as far as my recollection serves me, or at some time, there were some letters or testimonials produced by Captain Jones, or whoever it was that came to see me about the matter I have proof of that from a memorandum I have here, that I find among the papers- "Mr Allport—Captain Jones says he sent in a letter, signed by a number of sea-captains. Letter does not appear to be attached.—T. Hambe. 8/12/96." 10. Who is T Harner ?—He is my private secretary. " Mr. Hamer-The documents referred to were returned to Captain Jones along with his other testimonials, when he was informed that the certificate could not be issued. 8/12/96." . H - Who signed that ? Mr. Allport. The next is : " Will Captain Jones kindly supply letter Lfr T Fam™ / ' 2/9 T,'', t ? aptaln joneS SayS the erS have not beeQ -turned to k?T i £ 1 i /12 / 96 - That , hel P s m y memory considerably, because it fixes the date about which there has been some doubt as to when the matter had been brought under my notice There is a letter signed by Mr. Glasgow on the 26th February, 1896. and this shows first that there were some letters signed by a number of captains in Captain Jones's interest with a view of furthering Captain Jones's application. I wanted to get this letter after Mr. Allport says he had returned it to Captain Jones. Then Captain Jones says it was not returned to him 12. Had you seen these letters ?—Yes, I had a recollection of some of the captains, or some testimonials, supporting Captain Jones's application. That runs in my memory. I wanted to go through the letter again, and these memoranda will show that. But not only that it has another bearing, because, about the time the deputation came to see me, these papers or testimonials and other letters were either brought to me or had been sent, and at that time I sent for Captain Allman, One has so many thousands of things running through one's head. But I might tell your Honours tnat my recollection is that, just about the time the deputation was leaving I met Captain Allman about the entrance of the Cabinet-room. Ido not think he was present with the deputation but I either met him in the Cabinet-room or about the entrance to the Cabinet-room, and I think I told him what the deputation had been seeing me about. ♦ tir yoU wu T an y^ in g about the se testimonials ?—My recollection is not complete as to that time-whether I then handed to Captain Allman these testimonials or whether I sent them to him a few days alter lam inclined to think it would be the latter, because of the minute that was on the envelope to the effect, " Can anything be done for this man? " or something of that 14. You made that minute on the envelope ? Yes. to Ward ' ] What iS the datS ° f that envelo Pe?—That I cannot say, but it must be prior 16 Mr. Hanlon.] But you made a minute on the envelope?—l either said to Captain Allman £■* ?*w ° ! nvel °P e > " Gan an y thin 8 be d ° n e for this man ?"or " Captain Jones," or some" tiling oi tiiSjti sort. 17. What became of the papers?— They were sent on to Captain Allman. lam in doubt ■ I am not sure whether I gave them to him or sent them on a day or two after. But, as I say as far I remember there was a difficulty as to this service, and the only reason I referred to Captain Allman was to see whether there was anything disclosed in these letters to alter the position I cannot recollect at the time what they were. + - 1^u I !u Ye y ° U an y/ ec ° llection as to what Captain Allman either said or minuted in connection with these papers ?-Yes; it was that they threw no further light on the matter, or I think it was minuted that « Nothing can be done." It was an envelope addressed to me with these papers from Captain Jones, as far as I recollect, and there was nothing to make them official; and they were just sent on to Captain Allman, and he said, « No, nothing can be done," and, as far as mv recollection goes, they were sent back to Captain Jones. y i a 19 , i aQy rat f;, they Were not kept o ffi cially ?—No, because since that it comes to my knowg ? ,v a * ° a P tain AUman saw this envelope in the possession of Captain Yon Schoen, so there is proof that that must cither have gone to Captain Jones, who gava it to Captain Yon Schoen or else

H.—26

that it had been sent to Captain Yon Schoen—if what Captain Allman states in his memorandum to the Government is correct, and I believe him. 20. Did you tell the deputation of anything with regard to the service that had been set out, or its verification ?—Yes. It seemed to me I was bound to stand by the department, and the view taken by the department, until there was proof positive given as to the service. 21. Did you state that to the deputation ?—Yes ; I stated that to the deputation, as I stated it to anyone who saw me about it. I said, "It is in a nutshell: prove the service, and then it is a question whether this certificate shall not issue." Section 34 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894 " says : — Every sea-going vessel of twenty tons net register and over, not included in the foregoing provisions, shall carry as master thereof a duly-certificated man, whose certificate shall not be of a lower grade than a Home-trade master's certificate : Provided further that any person, upon producing proof to the Minister of Marine of his having been in command of any vessel of fifteen tons or over trading on the coast of New Zealand for three years or over since January, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-four, may ba granted a oertifioate of service, and the possessor of such certificate shall be held to be a duly-oertificated man. According to this, any man in charge of a craft of 20 tons sailing with timber or firewood, or in charge of a fishing-smack at the Bluff, could obtain the same certificate as applied for by Captain Jones, who had been in charge of a steamer for years, and it seemed to me very hard lines for Captain Jones that the regulation did not apply. I have never been able to satisfy myself whether this word " since " was intended to be prior, because it would be construed up to a day that right forward any person in charge of a craft of 15 tons for three years could get a service certificate, and, knowing the Act as I did, and the position put before me as to what Jones had done, and there being no record that the service claimed had not been performed, I held the opinion that, if satisfactory proof had been given of this service, Captain Jones was qualified, and certainly more competent than men who have got these certificates and are entitled to them, according to the Act, to-day. 22. Well, after you handed those papers to Captain Allman, and they were sent to Captain Jones, what was your connection with Captain Jones's application?—l should say that I did not hear the last of it immediately afterwards. This question was, to my mind, open in this way— that, if the satisfactory proof had come in, then it would be for the Minister of Marine to consider the application in connection with the proof submitted, and the evidence with the proof of the service. I considered it was open to be considered again if there was satisfactory proof. 23. Was that the position of affairs at the time you left for England ?—Yes. I may say that I did not trouble myself about it: it was a small matter concerning an individual. At that time it was not such a matter of moment as it seems to be to-day. 24. That being the position when you left for England, was anything said or done by you after you left Wellington ?—Yes, I left Wellington in the " Tutanekai." 25. When ?—I think about the 15th April, 1897. I left for the Manukau. 26. Did anything take place on the boat regarding it ?—Yes. On the trip, in a yarn with Captain Fairchild, he brought up the question of Captain Jones's certificate. I may say that he had. spoken to me about it prior to that—as to the time he had known Captain Jones, and the time he had been plying about the harbour. Captain Fairchild was of the opinion that he ought to have served the time. However, there was no pressure used—there was nothing more than an expression of opinion that the matter ought to be settled and not kept hanging over, or, as he said, " keeping him on a string." If Captain Jones produced the proof, I said, I had the matter pretty safe, and the onus of producing that proof lay upon him, and that the department had taken up a very safe position all along. 27. In consequence of what Captain Fairchild said to you, did you do any thing ?—Yes ;as far as my recollection serves me, a telegram was dictated or written between Onehunga and Auckland, and about when I was on the wharf I think the old captain said something about " Don't forget Jones," or something of that sort. 28. Is that the telegram you sent [produced] ?—This is the telegram, " Wellington, 19th April." 29. That is the date on which it was received in Wellington?— Yes. 30. Eead it, please ? —lt was sent on the 17th. That would be on the Saturday. It is addressed to the Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Wellington, and is as follows:—"I should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones, of ' Duco,' settled. From the papers presented to me I am of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than Captain . Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified." In the first place, the telegram was sent to my colleague, and a memorandum between colleagues is not supposed to be an official document; nor was Ito know that any of the officials would see the telegram. I think Mr. HallJones, the Minister of Marine, did quite right in the course he took in showing it to Captain Allman, and asking him in respect of what I said here, because I said here, " Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified." Captain Allman did tell me, either when he came into the Cabinet-room or about that time, that Captain Jones, as a seaman, was well qualified to hold a certificate, except that, owing to this technicality, it could not be done; and I may say that Captain Allman has since that committed to writing what he then told me, and has sent it to the Government, with regard to Jones's qualification. 31. Was that telegram sent by you in reply to any other telegram or not ?—This telegram was sent by me through what Captain Fairchild had said to me. 32. Then you proceeded to England, and were away until September ?—Yes. 33. Then, at any time after your return, did you hear anything further about Captain Jones's application?-—No, I did not. It shows you that I did not think much about it. If I did I should have inquired from Mr. Hall-Jones. I never spoke to him nor to anybody else about it, and if any one had said anything to me about Captain Jones or the certificate, I should have considered

H.-2d

it referred to his application for the service certificate. How coiild I know ? I was never written to. I was absent from the country when the application for the examination was made, and when the examination was held and the certificate granted. 34. And before leaving for England, do you say you knew nothing about Captain Jones going up for examination for a certificate of competency ?—I swear that positively. If anybody had said to me that he had got a certificate I should have thought that proof had been given, and that he had got a service certificate. 35. When was it after you returned that you first heard anything about Captain Jones or his certificate ?—When the speech was made by Mr. Hutcheson. 36. On the 26th August, 1898 ?—Yes. I think Mr. Pirani had said something about it too, but I could not tell you who was the first. I think both spoke about it. 37. What was done in consequence of that, to your knowledge ?—Well, I immediately went to the Cabinet-room and told my Secretary to ring up for Captain Allman at once, and I was then informed that Captain Allman was away at the lighthouses, and would not be back for some few days. 38. What did you do then ?—I sent for Mr. Hutcheson, and asked him to give me some clue by which we could trace the irregularity he said had occurred. I felt very much concerned about it, and he then told me that he could not possibly do so, nor could he give me the name of his informant. 39. Did he say why he could not give the name of his informant ?—I understood from him that he was not in a position, that he had got it in confidence, and he said, " I cannot disclose the name of my informant," and I then said, "You have put yourself in a very false position. You have made a public statement on the floor of the House practically reflecting upon a department of the Public service—a serious reflection." I assured him that I knew nothing whatever of anything wrong, and then I wished to probe the matter to the bottom, and wanted his assistance to do it; and I pointed out the serious position with reference to loss of life and property unless he helped to elucidate the matter. And I asked him to help me in the matter. 40. What did he say ?—He said he would try. He said he felt himself that it should be seen to. 41. Was that all that took place at that conversation ?— Yes. One cannot recollect word for word, but I am giving you the purport, and why I sent for him, and all that occurred so far as my recollection serves me. On the following day, I think it was—l think it was a Saturday—at all events, it was before the House sat again, Mr. Hutcheson came to me and told me he was very glad to be able to tell me he was in a position to give me the name of his informant, and the name he disclosed was that of Captain Yon Schoen. 42. Then what was done ? —He told me at the same time that Captain Yon Schoen would see me if I sent for him, and my answer was, I think, " All right." At all events, I led Mr. Hutcheson to believe that I would send for Captain Yon Schoen and would see him. But I made up my mind that it was my duty first to see the official head of the department and the Nautical Adviser, and I did so. Mr. Glasgow knew nothing whatever about it—had not the slightest conception that such a thing was possible. That was his statement to me. 43. Was that statement made to you personally, or was any other person present ?—I am not certain whether Mr. Hall-Jones was present. At all events, lam certain I had that assurance from him, and that it had great weight with me, coming from him. 44. What was the next step you took ?—I had given orders, on the night Mr. Hutcheson spoke to me, to my Secretary that whenever Captain Allman arrived in Wellington I wished to see him at once. Whether any one on my behalf went to meet him or not I cannot say, but my messenger, Mr. Eedmond, denies that he went. 45. You left a message with the Secretary to send for Captain Allman ?—Yes, feeling sure that as soon as he arrived I would see him. 46. Did Captain Allman come and see you ?•—-Yes, Captain Allman came, and the Minister of Marine and myself were present in the Cabinet-room in the Parliamentary Buildings. 47. Who usuaHy occupies that room? —I do. 48. Did you see Captain Allman before Mr Hall-Jones came on the scene, or not ?—No. My recollection is that the whole of us were there together. I was at the head of the table, to the best of my recollection, where I always sit, and Captain Allman was at the other end of the table, and such an interview as that was bound to be vividly implanted on my mind. Mr. Hall-Jones was sitting on the left of the table. 49. Will you detail to us the conversation ?—Well, I had the newspaper report of what had been said by Mr. Hutcheson, and I think I asked Captain Allman if he had read it, and he said he knew about it. I think it was Mr. Hall-Jones who said, " Now, Captain Allman, is there anything in that?" 50. And his reply was ? —There is nothing in it—it is untrue. He denied it. 51. Mr. Travers.] He denied the irregularity complained of? —Yes; and I said, "It is a very strarige thing; it seems to be given so circumstantially, captain. Is there anything that could have led to it ? " And, I think, he then said, " I know who it has all come from. It is Captain Jones. He brought something in an envelope before I and Captain Edwin, and I tore it up, and I suppose it has all arisen from that. I assure you there is nothing in it." I believed Captain Allman. I had every confidence in Captain Allman, and, having his assurance and the assurance of Mr. Glasgow, I then came to the conclusion that I would not send for Captain Yon Schoen— that I could not do so without throwing a reflection upon them. Here was a man who would not even give his name, who would not allow his name to be disclosed, who was casting a serious reflection upon the whole of the Marine Department, and I came to the conclusion that I could not 2—H. 26.

H.—26

have anything to do with a man like that, and I declined to send for him I may say here that I think it was at the second interview with Mr. Hutcheson that I told him I had not the slightest knowledge of whom it could be or be connected with, and I told him the only application I knew of with regard to a certificate was the application by Captain Jones for a service certificate. , . .„ , ~ T . q 52 You told that to Mr. Hutcheson?—Yes, and he has since verified what 1 said. 53 Did Mr. Hutcheson make any reply to your statement that you knew no ■ one except Captain Jones who had made an application for a certificate ?—Yes ;he said he did not know who it could be. Following this up in respect to that interview, if you give me the fales,*there is a letter I sent to Mr. Hutcheson with respect to that interview, and his reply to it. lnere is a letter to me saying that a condition had been imposed before Captain Yon Schoen would be sent for In a memorandum that Mr. Allport had sent into the department, he had said that Captain Yon Schoen had told him that I was going to see him, and that a condition had been imposed respecting that interview that nothing should be disclosed about Captain Jones. I would like to have Mr. Allport's memorandum on that: — In m^mor^ta?SThta date asking me to state in> writing my recollection of confidential made to me by Captain Yon Schoen bearing on the examination of Captains Bendall and MoLellan in compassat this office, and in course of conversation he stated that the mode of conducting the examinations in Wellington was becoming worse, and that something ought to be done to place them on a better footing. On my asking in what way they were improperly carried out, he at first did not appear nXned to give any particulars, but afterwards said that he would show me that there were good grounds for bis statement if I would take the information confidentially. On my saying that I would accept the information as confidential, he went away and brought a book to me. He said that he had prepared certain papers for Captain Allman for the examination in compass deviation, a copy of which was in the book, and that he had good reason to believe that Captains Bendall and McLellan had been given these papers to copy at their examinations instead of doing the work themselves; that if the work in his book were compared with their papers the working of the questions would be found to be identical, including the copying of some errors which he pointed out in the book. He left the book with me, and after he had gone I compared the work with the papers, and it appeared to me to be identical. Captain Yon Schoen afterwards called for the book, and when I gave it to him he asked me if I was satisfied that he was correct in believing that the work had been copied from a paper of which his book was a oopy. As near as I can recollect, I replied that I was sorry to say that it was. He writes further :— Secretary, Marine Department. . '. . . ~ , IN response to your request for an explanation of my reasons for not informing you sooner of the information which Captain Yon Schoen Save me regarding the alleged improper passing of Captains Jones, Bendall, and MoLellan, I have to state that when Captain Yon Schoen, in the course of conversation in my office, alleged that the mode of conducting the examinations in Wellington was getting worse I asked him in what way, and after some hesitation, he said that he would show me that there were good grounds for his allegation if I would take the information confidentially and treat it as such. As it did not strike me at the time that the information which he intended to give was of the nature that it turned out to be, I said that I would treat what he said as confidential, and he then went avvavand brought some papers and a book. He then told me of the part he had taken in connection with the preparation of the papers for Jones, and that he had supplied Captain Allman with a oopy of the compass-deviation work which was in his book, and which he believed had been given to Captains Bendall and McLelian to copy from when they went up for examination. He left the papers and book with me so that I might compare them with the examination-papers, and satisfy myself whether such was the case or not. After he had left I compared the work and when he came for the documents he asked me whether he was not correct. I said that I was sorry to say that I believed he was I also said that as I had promised to treat the information as confidential I should feel m honourhound compelled to do so, but that I considered that he should agree to its being communicated to the Secretary of the department. This he would not agree to, giving as his main reason that he would never do anything that would iniure Jones who had been a pupil of bis. On different occasions, when I saw him afterward?, I endeavoured to get him either to communicate the information to the Government or to release me from the promise to keep it confidential, but without success. As soon as I read the statements made in the House by Mr. Hutcheson I knew that Yon Schoen must have supplied them to him, and I then saw him, and told him that as he had done so he must either communicate what he knew to the Government or I should consider myself released from the promiss which I had given him and inform the department of what I knew. . He promised to think over it, and the next day he told me that he had informed Mr. Hutcheson that he was willine to see the Premier and communicate the information to him, but he repeated that be would not furnish proof of Jones's case without a promise that his certificate should not be interfered with. Shortly afterwards he saw me, and told me that Mr. Hutcheson liad seen the Premier, who was willing to receive the information from him without touchina Jones whose name had not, however, he said, been mentioned to the Premier, but only his case referred to, and that he was expecting to be sent for any day. This is the history of the matter up to the date I told you of what I knew. On that morning I found, on going out of your office, where I had been with papers, that Captam Allman had asked Mr Grix to give him Jones's papers, and as I then thought that he probably wished to destroy them, and as I had not heard that the Premier had seen Yon Schoen, I considered that I was justified in telling you what I did. I admit that I made a mistake in giving Yon Schoen the promise that I did, and should not have done so had I known at the time the nature of the information he was about to communicate, but, having given it, I felt that I should do a discreditable thing if I broke it, and in consequence, much as it was against my own peace of mind, I felt bound to keep it until I got an opportunity of being released from it. At the same time, I did what I could to keep the evidence intact by initialling each examination-paper on the back, and looking them up to prevent their being abstracted or tampered with. L . , . L , ■ n I may add that if I had decided to tell you what I knew as soon as the information was given to me Captain Allman would, no doubt, have denied its truth, and Yon Schoen might also have denied that he had told me anything, as at that time he was very emphatic that he was not, at the time, prepared to go further, in which case, having no nl-hHT evidence than my own word, I might have been considered the fabricator of statements for the purpose of injuring Captain Allman. Geobge Allpobt. 21/12/98. 54. Did you make a minute on that?—l minuted, " This is pure fabrication on the part of Yon Schoen, or he has been misinformed." Mr. Jones's name was not mentioned, nor was anything whatever said about certificates or the interfering therewith. I obtained from Mr. Hutcheson the name of his informant, and said I would send for him. On consideration I altered my mind, and from what has taken place it is a good job I did, as I have asked Mr. Hutcheson to give me his recollection of what transpired at the interview." I will clear that up by Mr. Allport's further

H.—26

communication. There is another letter from Mr. Allport, in which he gives the date that Captain Yon Schoen told him. This is the one, No. 10, 28th December. By my instructions, Mr. Glasgow asked Mr. Allport to fix the dates. Secretary, Marine Department. Is reply to your memorandum of this date, I beg to state as follows :— 1. As near as I can recollect, Captain Yon Sohoen stated that Jones came to him, and after telling him that the Minister o£ Marine had, after consultation with Captain Allman, agreed to allow him to be examined for a hometrade master's certificate without being in possession of a mate's certificate, he asked him to work out a set of papers for him as he could not do the necessary writing himself. He said that he worked out a set of papers, held Jones's hand while he copied them, and gave him the questions for the work on separate sheets of paper. He said that Jones took the copies away for the purpose, as he understood, of getting the Examiners to aocept them instead of his doing the work in the examination-room. 2. As near as I can remember, it was about the beginning of this year that Yon Sohoen gave me the information about Jones, Bendall, and MoLellan. 3. It was very soon after the date of Mr. Hutcheson's speeoh in the House (26th August, 1898) that I saw Yon Sohoen, and told him that he must release me from my promise to treat the information as confidential. lam not sure whether it was as soon as I saw the purport of his remarks in the newspapers, or whether it was when the number of Hansard containing the full report of the speech came out. 4. It was a few days after I told Yon Schoen that he must release me from my promise to keep the information confidential that he told me that Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, and that he (Yon Schoen) was expecting to be sent for ; that is, early in September. 5. It was eitber a day or two before or a day or two after the Prince of Wales' Birthday that I informed you of the information which had been given to me by Yon Sohoen. The Premier and the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones were down in Canterbury at the time. You said that you must tell them as soon as they returned. George Allpoet. 28/12/98. Now, there is my letter to Mr. Hutcheson. This is the letter I sent to Mr. Hutcheson after I saw from Mr. Allport , s memorandum that Captain Yon Schoen had told him that I had conditionally agreed to see him : — Dear Sir,— Premier's Office, Wellington, 26th December, 1898. During the investigation in respeot to the examination of masters and mates, and which you referred to in your speeoh in the House, one of the officers has made the following statement:— That Captain Yon Sohoen had seen him during the session and had told him that Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.R., had seen the Premier, who was willing to receive the information from Captain Yon Schoen without touching Jones, whose name had not, however, Yon Schoen said, been mentioned to the Premier. Seeing that I gave no such promise as to Jones or as to any other person who had obtained certificates—in fact, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates or interfering therewith was never mentioned—will you kindly oblige by giving me your recolleotion of what took place at the interview. Yours faithfully, John Hutcheson, Esq., M.H.R., Wellington. E. J. Seddon. And this is Mr. Hutcheson's reply:— Deab Sir,— Boulcott Street, 27th December, 1898. Your memorandum bearing yesterday's date came to band this evening. While asking me for my recolleotion as to what took place at a certain interview, you say, " In faot, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates or interfering therewith was never mentioned." lam also bound to state that, to the best of my belief, such subjeot was never mentioned. And, further, I can positively assure you that I never made suoh statement to Captain Yon Schoen, as here, again, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates was not mentioned between us. Yon Schoen, while expressing the greatest solicitude for his client, seemed to rely for safety on being able to preserve his incognito, and even until this day he has not disclosed the name to me. I only discovered some few days ago the identity of the man in question, and, while I regret to find he is one who I have always regarded as a friend, yet I am in honour and duty bound to repeat that indemnity was not asked for by me nor offered by you, nor did I lead Captain Yon Schoen to believe such was so. I am, &c, Right Hon. R. J. Seddon, Premier. ■ John Hutchbson. The Secretary, Customs. Attach this to the file of papers. Mr. Hutcheson bears out my recollection of what took place, and confirms what I minuted on Mr. Allport's memorandum in respect of Captain Yon Schoen's statement.—R. J. S. 28/12/98. 55. Is there any more of that correspondence you wish to refer you ?—I wish at this stage to say this : that Captain Yon Schoen, when he made the statement that Mr. Allport has put in his memo., stated that which was absolutely untrue. 56. Judge, Ward.] What precise statement?— That it was conditional on Captain Jones not being interfered with that I had consented to see him. 57. Mr. Hutcheson corroborates that ?—Mr. Hutcheson's letter is correct as to what took place. That can only be elucidated between Captain Yon Schoen and Mr. Allport. 58. Mr. Gray.] I understand that Mr. Allport said that Captain Yon Schoen had said so ?— This is the paragraph : — He (Captain Yon Schoen) promised to think over it, and the next day he told me he had informed Mr. Hutoheson that he was willing to see the Premier and communicate the information to bim, but he repeated that he would not furnish proof of Jones's case without a promise that his certificate should not be interfered with. Shortly afterwards he saw me and told me that Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, who was milling to receive the information from him without touching Jones, whose name had not, however, he said, been mentioned to the Premier, but only his ease referred to, and that he was expecting to be sent for any day. In the first place, I say Mr. Hutcheson never said it was under that condition I was to see Captain Yon Schoen, nor did he or any other person. 59. Judge Ward.] Mr. Hutcheson's letter stated the same thing?— Yes; in his letter of the 27th December. So that Captain Yon Schoen must have deceived Mr. Allport, if what Mr. Allport says is correct. 60. Dr. Giles.] Unless Mr. Hutcheson misinformed Captain Yon Schoen?—Yes. 61. Mr. Hanlon.] After Captain Allman had said certain papers had been brought into the room and torn up whilst Captain Edwin was there, what happened then ?—As I have said, my recollection is that Captain Allman did say that in my hearing, but whether it was on the first night I saw him or subsequently I could not say. It is puzzling me, but it is one of the points on which I am in doubt—whether it was the first interview or at the subsequent interview that he

H.—26

said it must-have arisen from that. Why I think it is at the subsequent interview is that it is probable I should have told Mr. Hutcheson about it and given him that information. , At all events, it is one of the points on which my recollection is at fault. Probably Mr. Hall-Jones and Captain Allman could clear up that point. 62. What steps were taken by the Government after that?— There was no action taken. 1 ; have said that I had the assurance of Mr. Glasgow, and Captain Allman's assurance, and that I did not send for Captain Yon Schoen, and did not feel myself justified in doing so under the circumstances :in other words, I supported the department. I think Parliament prorogued about Saturday, sth November, and I left Wellington and went down to the Christchurch show, and came back to Wellington about the 15th November. I arrived on the 15th, I suppose about midday, and then went the following day up to the Palmerston North show. I did not see Mr. Glasgow or any one in connection with marine matters at that time. I was away nearly a week. That would bring it to about the 22nd or 23rd when I came back, and then for the first time after my return I learned that there was information which supported what Mr. Hutcheson had stated in the House" —that there had been grave irregularities. 63. Prom whom did you learn that ?—I think, from Mr. Hall-Jones—either from him or Mr. Glasgow. It would be from one of those. Ido not think it was many days after. -. 64. Mr. Traverse Up to that time you relied that the whole thing was regular. You believed Captain Allman did everything regularly and properly?— Yes. 65. You discredited these rumours ?—Yes, I did. I had every confidence in the department and in Captain Allman, and I had not much faith in Captain Yon Schoen, because he had been an applicant for Captain Allman's position. Previous to this there had been some little friction._ He was getting all the assessorships given to him by the department, and others were complaining, and I then thought Captain Yon Schoen was a man with a grievance, and I believed in my department. 66. Mr. Hanlon.] What ensued? —When on my travels North I made a practice of taking my papers and correspondence with me and dealing with them on the journey. I received a letter from Mr. John Hutcheson. 67. When was this ?—After I came back from Christchurch and went North. That letter was attached to another file connected with complaints which had been made by Mr. Hutcheson about the manner in which candidates were treated on examination. The fault he found then was not that they were passed too easily, but that they were failed improperly when up for their examination and not passed. His letter is dated 14th November, 1898 : — Dear Sir,— 14th November,-1898. Concerning the charges of gross irregularities in the examinations of masters and mates made by me in the financial debate, I strongly desire that you will at once send for Mr. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine Department, who, I have reason to believe, is in possession of such information as will enable him to corroborate the principal oharges I made? In fulfilment of your statement to the House (see Hansard, page 316), and in order to allay a feeling of deep distrust gaining ground among the offioers of the mercantile marine, I look with confidence to your probing this matter to the very bottom. Should you discover my statements to be substantially correct, I trust you will aofc with that promptitude and thoroughness which has always characterized-you; if not, then no injury oan ensue to any individual, as I have religiously refrained from giving the matter any publicity. Hoping to hear from you on the subject in due oourse, I remain, &c, The Eight Hon. Premier. John Hutcheson. Bring up on return.—B. 3. S. What confirms my recollection as to it having been brought before me during my journey are these words : " Bring up on return to Wellington. —B. J. S." That is in lead-pencil; and that is what Ido with any correspondence of importance if lam travelling; so from that I say I received this on my return to Wellington from the South, and when opening my correspondence when travelling this letter would come before me. Then, on returning to Wellington I find the following minute: "The Secretary, Customs. —I wish to see vouin reference to this matter.— E. J. S. 26/11/98." 68. Did you see the Secretary ?—Yes. As I say, this letter got on to the file, because there is a.letter dated the 15th November from a Mr. James Martin, who had been a candidate under examination. I do this to clear the department and the Secretary of Customs, because from this letter there can be no doubt that it is definite concerning the irregularities mentioned by Mr. Hutcheson. It is clear that this letter referred to what he had stated in the House. On the 15th November, the day following, there is a letter from Mr. Martin, who had been a candidate, complaining of the way in which he had been treated in the examination; and there is another which had been before Mr. Glasgow; it is dated 28/11/98; and there are some memoranda in respect to this, and from the memoranda on this it is quite evident that Mr. Glasgow considered that this referred to the irregularities in connection with these examinations. That accounts for that letter being on that file. It would be treated in connection with these irregularities, and not the irregularities that Mr. Hutcheson referred to in his letter. 69. Then, you say you saw Mr. Glasgow on your return? —Yes. 70. What took place at that interview ?—Discussing the matter ; it was a question as to what course we should take on the evidence we had, and Mr. Glasgow wrote a memorandum. What happened was this: it was decided that the charges should be formulated. The result of the conference between Mr. Glasgow and myself was that Captain Allman should be written to. The following is the memorandum, signed by Mr. Glasgow on the 29th November, three days after I had intimated that I wanted to see him, and it was received by Captain Allman on the Ist December. It is as follows :— Captain Allman, Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. I am instructed by the Premier to invite your attention to the statements made by Mr. J. Hutcheson, M.H.R., in a speech which he delivered in the House on the 26th August last. (See Hansard, page 276, No. 17.)

H.—26

These statements seriously reflect on the administration of this department, and I am direoted to ask you to be good enough to furnish a report on them for the information of the Premier. For convenience I have oaueed the portions of the speech referred to which contain the reflections to be extracted and underlined, so that you may know the particular parts on which you are required to report. I also forward copy of a letter signed by F. Farmar, J. L. Martin, and J. Irvine, and addressed to the Premier, in which a complaint is made as to the manner in whioh the examination was conducted at which they were candidates. Also, a further letter, signed by J. L. Martin, as to statements made to him by F. Lawton. The Premier is desirous of having your report on these letters. 29th November, 1808. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. ; On the same paper, at the back, is the following memo. : "The Secretary for Marine.— Be Mr. Hutcheson's remarks : I have reported fully to the Eight Hon. the Premier. Prom your conversation this morning I gathered you had seen it. For other particulars, see minutes on letters referred to. —Geobge Allman. Forwarded to the Premier, 21/12/98." 71. Will you tell us what the next step was?— The next step was that some one told me verbally—l do not know whether it was the Minister of Marine, but I understood that it came from Captain Allman. That was before I got Captain Allman , s written statement. Of course, Mr. Glasgow told me what had been disclosed to Mr. Allport. He told me that in the first instance, but between that and the written statement—or it lies in my mind that some one told me—that Captain Allman admitted that there was truth in what had been alleged. 72. Was Captain Allman written to for particulars'?— Yes. 73. And he furnished a report ?•—-Yes. The report is to the following effect:— The Right Hon. the Premier (per favour of the Hon. Hall-Jones). Confidential Rbpobt re Mr. Hutche3on's speech in the House of Representatives on the 26th August, 1898. So as to put things as clearly as possible before you, it will be necessary for me to give you a full account of my experiences during the time I have been in the Government service. To simplify matters, I have classed Mr. Hutcheson's remarks into three parts—namely, Parts 1., 11., and 111., beginning at the bottom of his speech—and I will deal with the items in rotation. The other papers put in as evidence of my statements I propose to call Exhibits, marked A, B, G, D, &c. As you are aware, I received my appointment at the close of 1894, and early in January, 1895, I took up my duties in the same room with the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department. Owing to the position having been vacant some time there was an accumulation of departmental work, which I gave my attention to at once, after which I was busily engaged framing new regulations in connection with shipping matters, consequently I did not devote much attention to examinations till near the end of the year (1895). In my early associations with this office I became acquainted with Captain Yon Schoen, teacher of navigation, for the first time in my life, although he had previously called at the Club Hotel, where 1 was staying, and left his card. He was in the habit of calling at the Marine Office to see the Chief Clerk—l presume in connection with his nautical assessorship, he having been employed in that capacity from time to time. On several occasions he and I had conversations, both in the office and in the street, regarding the then new regulations relating to the examinations of masters and mates, which were coming into force, or had come into force, on the Ist of March, 1895 (see Exhibit 4, first page). Also, we discussed the revised and additional examinations in compass-deviation (see Exhibit A, first page), which was to come into force on the Ist July, 1895. It is needless to say that these conversations brought about quite a friendly feeling—at, least, as far as I was ooncerned I formed a very high opinion of Captain Yon Schoen, whioh he led me to believe was mutual. Pabt I. In one of our conversations —some time in May, 1895, I think it was—Captain Yon Sohoen informed me he had obtained the new guide-book on compass-deviation, and that he had the whole thing at his finger-ends, including the deviascope. [Note..—The deviasoope is a model representing a vessel entirely built of wood, consequently there is no deviation.] For the purpose of illustrating the deviation in an iron vessel magnets are plaoed in various positions on the model. Being anxious to obtain the additional knowledge, and to enable me to teach the other examiners before the Ist July, and not having a guide-book myself (at my request guide-books were ordered by the department, but they did not come, or arrive in the colony, till the Ist or 2nd July), I arranged with Captain Yon Schoen to give me lessons, and for that purpose I attended his school every night for about one week, wh=n I considered I had learned all that was required. Regarding the preparation of compass-deviation examination-papera, the fact is simply this: there are two ways or methods of working most of these problems, the method used at sea, and the scientific method, the one is a short method, and the other is a long method. I was conversant with the sea method, which is generally accepted for examination purposes of this kind, but I was not very well aoquaintei with the scientific or long method, so I asked Captain Yon Schoen to work me a set of papers for my own use and guidance, the questions I provided myself [see Exhibit B]; they were copied from the only Board of Trade questions I ha 3 [see Exhibit C]. The Board of Trade answers to these questions I cent to the Government Printing Office to get blank copies printed [see Exhibit D], and it got mislaid at that time. The answers on the papers lo3t correspond with thosa shown on [Exhibit B]. The other portions of examinations are contained in the Deviascope Hand-book [see Exhibit 3, pages 42 and 43], from which Exhibit Fis taken from ; afterwards, I gave Captain Yon Schoen a copy. The remaning portion of the examination, both questions and answers, are contained in Exhibit C, pages 17 to 46. You will observe that the books alluded to are public to every one, and are procurable now at several stationers in town. Having received tuition from Captain Yon Schoen, naturally friendship ripened to some extent. He invariably intercepted me on my way from the buildings at lunch-time and after 5 p.m., and frequently accompanied me to my hotel, where we generally had refreshments together at my expense, and talked on various matters—deviation of the compass, in particular, next, his admiration for the present Government, whom he knew I had a great regard for. After all this teaching and learning business, muoh to my surprise, Mr. Pirani asked a question in the House on the 26th July, 1895, concerning compass-adjustment. Subsequently an Act was passed (a very necessary one) and regulations made. The regulations adopted were identical with those in force in Victoria, which provided that adjusters should pass, or had passed, a stated examination, and that they should be employed in turn. When the regulations came into force Captain Yon Schoen held the necessary qualifications, and the other Adjusters (Captains Strang and Bendall) had not. On representations to the Minister the regulations wera suspended for six months, to enable these men to study for the examination required. Subsequently both men passed. I gave them questions from Exhibit C, and most of the problems are worked the short or sea method.

H.—26

After this the three Adjusters (Captains Strang, Bendall, and Yon Sohoen) were notified in turn by the Collector when their services were required. This system appeared to work well for a time—till about June, 1897 —when the shipmasters asked that the regulations be altered so as to enable them to saleofc chair own adjusters, which was granted. Since the regulations have been altered Captain Strang has left Wellington, and another Adjuster (Captain G'fford) haa started business. He and Captain Bendall do nearly all the compass-work now. To condense what I have written in explanation to Part I simply amounts to this: I went to school to learn something I did not kaow, and I mi.stook Captain Yon Sohoen for a friend. No doubt it is disappointment that has evoked his displeasure. PART 11. Going back to my early experience as regards examinations in Wellington, is as follows : — Towards the end of January, 1895, I called and saw Captain Edwin, and we went over the new regulations [see Exhibit A] together, with the result that we found that, although the style of problems had not been altered very much, the rules had become far more stringent regarding aecuraoy. I therefore instructed Captain Edwin (and the other Examiners afterwards) to put the break on gradually, whioh he did, with the result that near the end of the year there were complaints made by candidates about examinations, and Captain Edwin in particular. From the data of these complaints I took a more active part in examinations, having more time at my disposal, and I made several suggestions to improve the state of affairs, which were adopted. In the oase mentioned by Mr. Hutchason, Captain Edwin made a mistake in the figures when sotting the chart problems, and the result of this mistake was that the question given was an impossible one. Captain Edwin did not detect his error, and ho failed the candidate wrongfully (by mistake on his part). To rectify this mistake the candidate was allowed to proceed with his examination from the point where he was failed, by your orders, which was only right and proper. The condensed explanation of Part II is that a wrong question was accidentally set. Pabt 111. Part 111. no doubt refers to Captain Jones, of the " Duoo." To enable Jones to get a coastal certificate I suggested to the Hon. Hall-Jones that he might be allowed to go up for examination for the certificate required, knowing that he already held a certificate of competency as rivermaster, which was obtained at Wellington some years ago. Subsequently permission was given, and Jones was duly informed. Some little time afterwards I met Jones near the wharf. He informed me he was studying at Captain Yon Schoen's school, and that he was coming up for examination shortly. Soon after this Jones put in his papers, and was told by Captain Edwin to come up next morning. A little after 9 a.m. next day I made out the necessary examination-papers in the examination-room. Captain Edwin came in soon afterwards, and Jones arrived at 10 a.m., the appointed time. Both Captain Edwin and I conducted the sight-tests, after which Jones took his seat, and we gave him Exn. 9e papers to work. I took my seat at another table, and Captain Edwin was preparing to leave the room, when Jones gave me over envelope (whether it was open or not I cannot remember). The envelope contained examination-papers. I showed them to Captain Edwin, and he said, " Destroy them." I was destroying them, and had destroyed part of them, when Captain Edwin left the room in a hurry. Just at that moment Jones interposed, and said, "For God's sake, Captain, don't destroy them. I did them myself, so help my God." He pleaded, and pleaded, about losing his billet, his wife and family, and other things, and in a weak moment I gave way. The papers I had destroyed I supplemented by others, which are on the file, now in possession of the Hon. Hall-Jones. The remaining portion of the papers that Jones gave me are herewith attached, and correspond with the ones on the file, and are marked "Exhibit H," Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, and are in the handwriting of Captain Yon Schoen. Up to the time that Jones gave me the papers alluded to I had not the slightest or remotest idea his education was so limited, although a capable coasting captain. After Captain Edwin left the examination-room in the morning he did not return to it till 1 o'clock, neither did I see him during that time. When Captain Edwin did return Jones had gone. Captain Edwin, as far as I know, had no knowledge of my having accepted the papers Jones brought into the room. I regret very much that I was not outspoken or candid enough to tell you (when you asked) the whole truth, that I had only destroyed part of the papers. lam not writing this full explanation with a view of justifying my conduct. I know I did wrong, and no living being could feel it now more than I do. I must say I never thought Captain Yon Schoen would lay suoh a trap, if such was intended at that time, which has criminated himself and perhaps sacrificed his old friend, Captain Jones. This brings my narrative down to about the middle and towards the end of 1897, at the time when Captain Gifford started in business in opposition to Captain Yon Schoen. Several candidates failed during the above-mentioned period; where or what sohool they came from I did not know. Shortly afterwards Captain Yon Schoen met me in the street in a very friendly way, and asked me to let his men pass in preference to the other teacher's men. I told him all the men were treated with every consideration, and that no oce (he being their teacher) knew it better than he did. Then he made an allusion to make it worth my while to pass his men. I told him he had said enough, that I would not do such a thing if he gave me the whole of New Zealand. Since that time I have endeavoured to avoid him as much as possible. But one day, just prior to the opening of last Parliament, we met. He asked me if his men (who were then under examination) would pass. I said yes, if they did their work. His reply to this was, "If they don't pass I will see Pirani about it; he has his knife into the Government." Up to the time Captain Yon Schoen attempted to bribe me I had no idea as to his real motives and his real character. I have stated the whole facts as well as I can remember, and leave the whole matter in your and your colleagues' hands, feeling sure you will not damn my reputation for life through being " sold " by a man who professed friendship. If I had not been soft-hearted perhaps it would not have occurred. I feel that it is necessary to inform you that I think the probability is that Jones, and perhaps Captain Edwin, will not admit anything under any circumstances. On the next page, sir, you find the matter outlined as regards possibilities or probabilities, which I trust will not eventuate. Geo. Allman. 17/12/98. If an inquiry were held and if Mr. Hutcheson's statements were proved (leaving myself out of the question altogether), the position, in my opinion, would be as follows : — 1. Jones would lose both of his certificates. 2. He would be publicly disgraced. 3. He would be deprived of the means of earning his living. i. Captain Yon Schoen would be found guilty, as explained in the application-form [Exhibit I]. 5. The Crown would then have to prosecute Captain Yon Schoen. 6. Captain Yon Schoen would certainly be convicted, and most likely would be sentenced to gaol for any period up to fourteen years with or without hard labour. Fourteen years, I understand, is the extreme penalty of the law in such eases. Geo. Allman. 17/12/98. If, on the other hand, Mr. Hutcheson's statements were found to be incorrect, — 1. Captain Yon Scboen would be found guilty, as explained in paragraph 4. 2. The Crown would still be bound to prosecute, as explained in paragraph 5. 3. The result would be exactly the same as explained in paragraph 6. Note.—There is sufficient evidence contained in Exhibit 4, Nos. 1, 2, 8, and 4, to furnish ample proof to convict Captain Yon Schoen in both cases, without cal'ing any witnesses. I presume Captain Yon Schcen has no idea that these proofs are in t your possession. Geo. Allman. 17/12/98.

H.—26

Mr, J. Hutchison's Speech, 36th August, 1893. (I-) The honourable member for Palmerston alluded to a certain candidate who was examinee! in a writing examination. Ha scarcely quoted the full case, Sir. lam informed by a responsible citizen that there ia at the present time a captain in command of a passenger-carrying coastal steamer who was allowed to fill in his examinationpapers in a private house. My informant also assured me on his word of honour that the candidate's hand was guided in the formation of every letter and figure in the examination-papers. If I were to give a vivid picture of this man engaged in the laborious task of holding the candidate's hand I would require to be allowed the same privilege which was claimed by the Minister of Lands, and I should have to put in Hansard a sketch of the two men's hands doing the work; but unfortunately lam limited to the meagre resource of my tongue to depict the laborious process. And, Sir, this captain is in command of a vessel carrying living souls every day on tbe coast of New Zealand, and that is how he obtained his certificate of competency. Mr. Seddon.—lt is almost impossible for it to be correct, Mr. J. Hutcheson.—Well, I asked my informant, if he were compelled by a superior authority to go and give his evidence, what would he say in the event of his being charged with the onus of proving the fact? He said, " I would ask the man to write his name, and he could not." Now, the captain's examination, Sir - Mr. Seddon.—How long sinoe is that? (2.) Mr. J. Hutcheson.—Quite recently, Sir. Does the Bight Hon. the Premier know of a case where a candidate for a master's certificate of competency was failed by reason of his inability to perform a mechanical and physical impossibility ? Last year a captain now in charge of one of our passenger-carrying coastal steamers came to me and complained ho was failed because the Examiner wrongly alleged he could not perform almost one of the last questions in his examination-paper. He was given the data for a cross-bearing ;he oould not make the bearings cross, and the Examiner promptly failed him. He came to me and complained. He said he was certain that he was correct and the Examiner wrong. I said, "Itis a difficult matter to sheet home." But a little pressure was brought co bear on the authorities, and the Right Hon. the Premier knows that when he submitted the matter to the Nautical Adviser of the Government, who was instructed to test the problem and project it on the chart, be produced parallel lines, and any tyro in geometry knows that parallel lines never meet; consequently, the bearings could not cross. That candidate was allowed to resume his examination from the point where he had been wrongly failed, and although I am given to understand that the examiner tendered his resignation, I do not know that it is yet accepted by the Government. (3.) Sir, I will pass from that, and there is one more case I will give. In the introduction of a new style of examination, and in the use of a new instrument called the " deviascope," the working of certain examination-papers was prepared outside the department, and certain clerical errors and erasures and faults in the figures were made by the preparer, and, strange to say, the papers of two successful candidates now in the archives of toe Marine Department carry the same mistakes and erasures as the originals contain. But these candidates have got certificates, and are now licensed to adjust compasses. Sir, the proper adjustment of compasses is an exceedingly important thing. The deviation-card—a wrong deviation-card—in the hands of a captain of a steamer is as a lighted matoh in the hands of a child against the open mouth of a barrel of gunpowder. With this was another paper. At the same time that this was placed before me that I have just now read there is a minute saying, " The following remarks have no connection whatever with Mr. Hutcheson's statement." This is in Captain Allman's handwriting, and came before me about the time that the other statement came to me :— The following remarks have no connection whatever with Mr. Hutcheson's statements :— During 1896 the question of granting Captain Jones, of the " Duco," a certificate of service as master in the coastal trade was brought under notice and considered from time to time. Captain Yon Schoen took a prominent part in it, You will, perhaps, remamber that he and Jones interviewed you ; you sent foe me to give particulars ; I had none to give, not having previously seen Jones's papers. A day or ho afterwards you sent me Jones's papers. On the envelope was a memorandum to this effect: " Can you do anything for this man ? " After examining Jones's papers, I replied on same envelope that I did not think so. My object in mentioning this incident is that some days afterwards Captain Yon Schoen showed me the same envelope, and inferred that I had blocked the way. [I returned Mr. Jones's papers and certificates, envelope and all, to Mr. Jones.—B. J. S.] I told him it was not so, and that I considered Jones as good a coasting master as there was in New Zealand. From this date up to the time of your departure for England I did not hear any more on the subject, until the Hon. Hall-Jones told me he had a communication from you on Jones's behalf. Knowing Jones personally as a good seaman and captain, and well capable of doing any coastal work, I suggested to the Hon. Hall-Jones that he might be allowed to go up for examination. Geo. Allman. Placed before me, 16/12/98.— R. J. S. 74. That is not dated ?—No. I put this minute on the paper : — The Hon. the Minister of Marine. I have gone carefully through these papers, and am shocked at what is therein disclosed. Captain Allman's conduct, aocording to his own admissions, is reprehensible in the highest degree. I advise that you should place these papers before the Secretary of Customs, who is the head of the Marine Department; and he will report and suggest, no doubt, what course should be followed. Prompt and decisive aotion is necessary. Attach these to the other papers.— B. J. S. 17/12/98. Mr. Hall-Jones on the same day says, " Mr. Glasgow.—(Urgent.)—For recommendation please.— W. H. J. 17/12/98." I may also say that 1 sent for the Solicitor-General, and discussed the position with him as to what course we should take. 75. Did you get any reply from Mr. Glasgow ?—There is a letter from Mr. Glasgow dated the 17th December: Hon. Minister of Marine. I have the honour, in accordance with your instructions, to report ag follows on Caplain Allman's memorandum on Mr. Hutcheson's charges :— 2. Captain Allman's admissions that he was obliged to place himself under Captain Yon Schoen'a tuition in view of the new regulations governing examinations in the use of the deviascope is fatal to his standing as Chief Examiner. If Captain Yon Schoen could so master the details of these regulations as to understand what was required from candidates in reply to the questions stated, tbe inability of the Government Examiner to do the same without tuition raises a serious doubt, to say the least, of his competency. In any case he has made a serious mistake and indiscretion in seeking assistance from a teacher of navigation whose pupils would come before him for examination. 3. There is the further admission that he got Captain Yon Schoen to work a set of papers for his (Captain Allman's) own use and guidanoe, that is, to work out the answers to questions copied from a Board of Trade examination-paper. The Chief Examiner should be able to work out answers himself to any problem.

H.—26

4. Captain'Allman does not meet the insinuation clearly involved in Mr: Hutcheson's remarks—namely, that the candidates' answers are copied from the workiDg-out of certain examination-papers prepared outside the department, errors, &c, being the same in both. Captain Allman either has not seen the significance of the charge or he has not seen his way to meet it directly. ~ , It is scarcely necessary to comment on Captain Allman's explanation with reference to the candidate whose paper contained a question put by Captain Edwin on obviously wrong premises. The most serious charge in Mr. Hutcheson's speech is that relating to the issue of a certificate to James Jones, at present master of the " Duchess." Captain Allman admits that he accepted answers whioh were not written in his presence, but elsewhere. He has reported that James Jones passed his examination, where, as a matter of fact, no examination had taken place. The plea put forward is that he acted out of compassion and on the earnest entreaty of Jones. This, however, really aggravates the offenoe from a departmental point of view, for no one who displays such a lamentable want of backbone as well as principle is fit for the position as Chief Eixaminer. This offence overshadows in importance any question as to competency in connection with the oircumstances referred to in the second and third paragraphs of this memorandum. Were the question only one of competency, resignation might be allowed, but under the circumstances connected with Jones's certificate I regret that I cannot suggest this course, especially as the question of cancelling the certificates must be faced. It would, in my opinion, be more difficult to cancel the master's certificate if the omoer on whose false representations it was issued is simply allowed to resign. It is therefore, with very great pain and regret that I feel it to be my duty to report that, m my opinion, Captain Allman has been guilty of conduct which renders him unfit to continue in the Civil Service ana if this view is sustained by the Government I see no alternative but his dismissal. If adequate ground for less harsh treatment, but still sufficient to meet the gravity of the offence, could be put forward, I would only be too glad to consider it; at present I do not see any other alternative. . , The Civil Service Act allows an inquiry to be held if any accused Civil servant denies the truth of any charges brought a«ainst him. I think Captain Allman should have the section of the Act pointed out to him. He can scarcely venture now to deny the truth of the charge in the matter of Jones; but notwithstanding, I think he should be definitely asked whether ho desires a formal inquiry. This course may save complications hereafter. Captain Aliman has drawn attention to section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 18/7, which makes it a misdemeanour to make, or assist in making, any false representation for the purpose of obtaining a certificate, and he suggests the prosecution of Captain Yon Schoen. lam very doubtful whether an indictment could be framed. Caotaln Yon Schoen has undoubtedly aimed at getting a certificate for Jones in an improper way, but whether he has personally made false representations is a matter of grave doubt. As to Jones, so far as I can see, he made no secret of the facts, and made no false representations. The false representation which obtained the certificate for Jonos was that of the Government Examiner, who reported that Jones had passed the examination. lam of opinion that Jones's certificate must be cancelled,but this should not be done without legal advice. In the event of dismissal being decided on, it will be necessary to consider the very serious question whether it is not the bounden duty of the department to go farther and to order a prosecution of Captain Allman under section 32 The v.ew which the Board of Trade may take of the circumstances must not be lost sight of. The disclosure, which will be inevitable, will damage the reputation of New Zealand certificates, and abstinence from prosecution may be construed to imply that this is not an isolated case, and that the department is afraid of further disclosuresIt is however, scarcely necessary at the present stage to give a definite opinion as to the advisability of prosecuting. ' 17th December, 1898. w - T - Glasgow, Secretary. There is a marginal note stating that in the meantime he should be suspended. 76 That is opposite the paragraph saying what should be done with Captain Allman /—Yes. On it is a memorandum by Mr. Hall-Jones : "Mr. Glasgow.—Kindly see Mr. Eeid m re the legal position.—lB/12/98." Then, on the 19th there is the following memorandum from the Secretary of Customs: — I HATOPeen Mr" Reid, who has very kindly discussed the general question of procedure without going into details. The following is my further recommendation after this interview. Ido not wish it to he understood that Mr. Reid is responsible for what I state, as there is nothing in writing between us :— The following steps appear to be necessary : 2* AuTquTrTunder section 26 of "The Civil Service Aot, 1866." Mr. Reid thinks that this is required, notwithstanding the fact that Captain Allman does not deny the truth of the accusation. 3 Formulation by the department of charges. , 4 Transmission of a copy of the charges to Captain Allman. (See section 23, Civil Service Regulations ) 5. The appointment by the Governor of a Board of two persons to make inquiry. (Seotion 4 of The Civil Servioe Aot Amendment Act, 1871.") ... ,L ■ i.± -vi v Mr Reid expressed the opinion that the proceedings should not be too precipitate, as it might possibly be advisable to have the papers of all the candidates passed by Captain Allman examined by an expert, with the view of discovering whether o? not there are more cases. This course might be desirable; but there are two difficult.es m the way first, lam at present unable to suggest any suitable expert who is not an Examiner ; and, secondly, the examination would take so much time that the suspension, which should take place at once, would be unduly proloS I thmk that it is improbable that other cases of this kind exist. In the meantime, Mr. AUport will look through the papers and see whether any irregularity is noticeable. . ... . .. ~, .. I suggest Mr. J. C. Martin as one of the Board. The other should be a nautical man I think, if possible, but at nresent I am unable to name any suitable person. * P Tne questions of cancellation of certificates and of prosecuting any person or persons must be held over until after the inquiry. fiT ,, nnß Secretary 19th December, 1898. w - L - <J LASG ° W > beoretary. 77 Then I think, there is some reference to Mr. Allport in• connection with the matter a few days after that: is that so ?—I have read Mr. Allport's recollections this morning. 78 Did you have an interview with the Solicitor-General ?—Yes, and I was surprised at the advice tendered by the Solicitor-General, because I thought the case was so clear in the face of Captain Allman's admissions. But the Solicitor-General told me of a case in New South W ales which was almost parallel to that of Captain Allman's, where the Civil servant had taken action at law for damages and succeeded. We therefore decided to act cautiously and to follow the SolicitorGeneral's advice strictly. .... jot 79. Did you approve or disapprove of Mr. Glasgow's suggestions in his memorandum ?—1 think I approved of them. 80. At that time? —At that time. 81. Was Captain Allman suspended?— Yes. 82 When?—l could not tell you the date, but I think just about that time.

*In the meantime he should be suspended.—W. T. G.

H.—26

83. Was it the 16th January ?—lt was some time after this, and there was a memorandum of mine. I may say that about the time I was dealing with- this matter, on the 27th December, I wrote the following to the Minister of Marine: — Hon. Minister of Marine. Premier's Office, Wellington, 27th December, 1898. As requested by you before your departure for Home, I have carefully gone through these papers, and indorse the course recommended by the Secretary. Nothing but a full investigation will meet the case, otherwise a doubt is cast upon the genuineness of the certificates which have been issued. On reading Captein Edwin's explanation as to the examinations of Captains Bendall and McLellan some doubt arises in my mind as to whether or not the oharges as drafted in this case against Captain Bendall are too strong, and as to whether the evidence on the papers warrants the reflection whioh is unmistakably oast upon them; for in their case we have only the statement of Captain Yon Schoen to Mr. Allport, in which the former stated that he (Captain Yon Schoen) had supplied Captain Allman with a copy of the compass-deviation work which was in his book, and whioh he believed bad been given to Captains Bendall and McLellan to copy from when they went up for examination. Captain Edwin says, Re examination of W. Bendall and James McLellan : Your statement'that the papers of William Bendall are almost verbatim -r with the answers given in Towson's book is quite correct, and I think it will be found to be much the same with the papers of most of the candidates for examination in the Syllabus, and this is because the candidates learn the answers to all the questions word for word, and when filling in their papers they will not willingly depart from the exact words of the answers given in Towson's book. The above remarks apply also to the examination of James McLellan." Captain Edwin further states : " Both William Bendall and James McLellan gave most satisfactory evidenoe by the use of the deviascope; they had carefully made themselves acquainted with its working and its application to the written questions of the application." I think it would be well if the paper? of other captains who have been up for examination were looked into, in order to see if what Captain Edwin alleges is correct, as the result of such an examination might throw further light upon the subject; and, seeing that Captain Edwin was co-examiner with Captain Allman in respeot to the examination of Captain Jones and Captains Bendall and McLellan, and has signed the certificates, it would appear to me that his conduct should, in connection with such examination, be also made the subject of inquiry. Mr. Allport's conduct in connection with this unfortunate affair is also reprehensible, for he is the next officer to the Secretary controlling the Marine Department, and the information conveyed to him by Captain Yon Schoen, even though confidential, was of such a grave character—the lives of persons and property being at stake—that he should have communicated the nature thereof to his superior officer, the Secretary of the department, even though he had withheld the name of his informant, for had it not been that the matter was brought up in the House by Mr. Hntcheson, the member for Wellington, the information would, according to his own showing, have still been kept back from the head of his department and the Ministry, and the alleged wrong-doing have continued for an indefinite period. Mr. Allport in his memorandum does not state that the information given to him by Captain Yon Schoen after Mr. Hutcheson had made his speech was given in confidence. Mr. Hutoheson made his speech on the 26th August last, but the date is not given by Mr. Allport upon which he states that he told the Secretary of Marine what he knew. I think that date should be fixed, for I presume that immediately the Secretary was in possession of the infocmation he placed the matter before you as Minister of Marine, and commanoed to make the necessary investigation. I note that Captain Allman's explanation is dated the 13th Deoember. The Secretary, with his departmental experience, will be best able to judge as to what should be done in Mr. Allport's case. He admits that he had come to the conclusion that there had been a wrong-doing, and very properly and carefully places in safe keeping the papers and evidence of the same, but at the same time refrained from placing the matter before the head of his department and the Minister in charge thereof, who really ought to have been the first to have been acquainted with what was alleged to have been going on. No time should be lost in appointing the Board. I quite approve of the appointment of Mr. Martin, as recommended by the Sesretary, but I fear there will be a difficulty in obtaining another member of the Board within the Civil Service who has nautical experience; and, seeing that expert evidence may be called, to avoid delay it would probably be as well to appoint the head of one of the departments to act with Mr. Martin, and also to ascertain whether those selected are prepared to act forthwith. In respect to Captain Yon Schoen, it is perhaps worth while to await developments, for in my opinion there is sufficient on the papers to warrant my coming to the oonolusion that he ooached Captain Jones —prepared the papers for him, and knew the object for which they were to be used. He subsequently attempted to stipulate—knowing the certificate had been obtained by fraud —that it should not be canoelled, because Mr. Jones was a pupil of his ; that, if Captain Allman is to be believed, he promised to " make it worth his while " if Captain Allman passed his other candidates, which he quoted when he gave the information to Mr. Allport confidentially, and he must have known that this placed Mr. Allport in a false position, and he also sought to obtain an interview with me, perhaps with the same object in view. The object he had in view, however, is obvious, and I sincerely hope that his conduot will be brought under review by the proper authorities. R. J Seddon. On this Mr. Hall-Jones minutes : " Mr. Glasgow.—Urgent—Kindly lay the whole matter before the Solicitor-General, for his recommendation as to the course that should be taken.—W. H.-J., 7/1/99." It strikes me that in respect of Captain Bendall, who holds a responsible position, and whose reputation is unsullied, that we had papers on the file condemning his character, and the same with regard to Captain McLellan, and it was all done in confidence and was not to be disclosed by Mr. Allport. In justice to Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan I deemed it only right that the papers should be examined as to the similarities and as to the text-books. Later on, I believe, Captain Marciel did go through the papers. I wish to make that clear. With regard to Mr. Allport, I wished to ascertain what date it was communicated to him in confidence in the first instance. Then, according to his own showing, he had shown it either two days before or two days after the Prince of Wales' birthday—that would be the 9th November. He does not disclose that. He had kept it, therefore, from the time he went himself to Captain Yon Schoen and demanded to be relieved from the confidence—he had kept it from the 9th September until the time he told the head of his department. After telling Captain Yon Scheon he must be relieved from this he does not tell the department. He does not clear that up, and there is a point there which I wanted to have cleared up. When he had seen Captain Yon Schoen at the time Mr. Hutcheson's speech was made he kept it from the head of his department. He told Mr. Glasgow about the time of the Prince of Wales' birthday. I came to Wellington on the 15th November. That was after Mr. Glasgow was in possession of it. I have no recollection of Mr. Glasgow seeing me, as I was here only for a day, and in all probability he was awaiting the return of his own Minister, Mr. Hall-Jones. Mr. Glasgow had evidently put it before his Minister after the 22nd, on my return. 84. Then, you mean to say that after Mr. Hutcheson had delivered his speech in the House and Mr. Allport had seen it could be given, he still retained it from the head of the department? —If he is correct as to going to Captain Yon Schoen at the time Mr. Hutcheson had made it, and 3—H. 26.

H.—26

according to his memo, he says, "I knew he got it from you." There is nothing to account for why he did not between that date and the 9th November disclose it to Mr. Glasgow. Of course, I was away, but returned on the 15th. Following on that, there is the following memo, from Mr. Glasgow:— Hon the Minister. Referring to the Premier's memo, dated the 27th ultimo, in which he approved of my recommendation as to the course to be taken in the matter of Captain Allman, I have to inform you that further action was stayed by direction of the Premier on account of a suggestion made verbally by the Solicitor-General, that it would be better first of all to submit the papers of candidates examined by Captain Allman to an expert to ascertain whether there is evidence of urther irregularities, and, if so, to what extent. In consequence of thifi it was arranged, with the Premier's approval, to bring Captain Marciel to Wellington for that purpose. Captain Marciel will be in a position to report on Monday, the 9th instant. The Solicitor-General was apparently disposed to think that the circumstances warranted prosecution of the parties conoerned, a course which might be considered when the extent of the delinquencies was discovered. In the meantime it has occurred to me that time might be saved if the possibility of prosecuting in the only case about which there is absolute certainty that certificate was obtained through dishonest means were considered. So far as I can see, if a charge were laid against Captain Allman under section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," the only evidence will be that of Mr. Allport, who could only state what Yon Schoen said to him—■ viz., that Captain Jones came to him, and, after telling him that he had obtained permission to be examined for a home-trader master's certificate, asked him to work out a set of papers for him as he oould not do the necessary writing himself; that he worked out the papers, held Jones's hand while he copied them, and gave him the questions on separate sheets of paper. He said that Jones took the copies away for the purpose, as he understood, of getting the examiners to accept them instead of requiring him to do the work in the examination-room. This would have to be verified by Yon Schoen, who might or might not support Mr. Allman. Yon Schoen might conaider that he was open in some way to be implicated, and might, therefore, choose to be reticent aa to what he said to Mr. Allport. Jones's papers could be placed b.;fore the Court, but the difficulty would be to prove the charge that Jones did not write them in the examination-room. Captain Edwin could not be brought as a witness, because a. charge would have to be laid against him as well as Captain Allman. If Yon Schoen is called as a witness, I presume that would prevent the department from laying a charge against him ; and if the department find ground for laying a charge against him I think it is not possible to call him as a witness against Allman. So far, therefore, as the charge against Allman is concerned, I do not see where tho evidence to support it can come from, and if the jury acquits, the department will be in a more difficult position than at present to deal with him under the Civil Service Act. [Note. —In any case Captain Edwin's evidence would be very doubtful in view of his written explanation.— W. T. G.] As to laying a charge against Yon Schoen under the Shipping and Seamen's Act, there is no doubt that he has oonspired with Jones to obtain a certificate improperly, but he has not personally made any " false representations," so far as I can see. The difficulty seems to be that Allman, Yon Schoen, and Jones are all guilty in this matter, the first named especially ; but if an information is laid against one the evidence of one or both of the others is necessary, and the question is, would they be compelled to give evidence which might inoriminate them ? If they abstain from giving evidence the charge will, it appears to me, fall to the ground. The evidence derived from an inspection of Jones's papers is no doubt very strong, but it is, I think, ineffective without the examination of Jones or Yon Schoen. If Jones could bo got to admit that he could not write anything more than his own name, and if he could be examined on the clear indications of pencil-marks on the papers, something might be brought out. —W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, 7/1/99. Mr. Glasgow.—We should be guided by the opinion of the Crown Law Officers as to the course to be taken, I expected a statement of the case would have been submitted to the Solicitor-General before now. Kindly prepare this statement as early as possible.—W. H.-J, 7/1/99. 85. Then he makes another note on that to lay this and the other papers before Mr. Eeid ?— Yes. " Lay this and the other papers before Mr. Eeid for his recommendation." 86. What was the next step ? —The statement of the case is put before Mr. Eeid :— The Solicitor General. The allegation is that James Jones did not write the answers to some of the questions in hie examination for a hometrade master's certificate in the examination-room before the examiners, and that Captains Allman and Edwin falsely certified that Jones had passed his examination. [Note. —The examination of Jones took place on the 19th July, 1897.] That Jones brought the answers already written out to the examination-room, and some of these answers were accepted by the examiners as valid. The proof is as follows : — , . The writing of the answers does not correspond with Jones's signature. That Captain Yon Sohoen informed Mr. Allport some time ago that he, Yon Schoen, worked out papers for Jones, and held the lattar's hand while he copied them. That Captain Allman admits that Jones brought answers already written out to the examination-room, and that some of these were destroyed, but others were accepted. Captain Edwin who signed the certificate, conjointly with Captain Allman, that Jones had passed his examination, states that Jones brought the written answers to the examination-room, but he, Edwin, believed they were torn up. He saw some of them torn up. Under these oircumstances, can an information be laid against Captains Allman and Edwin under section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," or against James Jones or Captain Yon Schoen? Or can any or all of these parsons be proceeded against under any other Act for using fraudulent means to obtain the certificate which James Jones is now possessed of ? W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, 7/1/99. 87. To refer back for a moment, did you have any interview with Captain Allman about Christ-mas-time ?—Yes. 88. What was the nature of that conversation ?—Captain Allman desired an interview with me, and I think it was on Christmas eve. He seemed to be very much cut up, and to feel his position acutely. 89. Where was this held ?—ln the Cabinet-room at the Government Buildings. He practically went through the statement —repeated it verbally—that he had put in in writing, and assured me that he had no conception before the time that Captain Jones brought the papers into the room ; that there was no collusion between him and Jones. 90. Had he any application to make ?—He said it was done on the impulse of the moment, and that he had been miserable over it ever since, that it was the more emphasized when Captain Yon Schoen had tried to bribe him, and, knowing that he was in his power, tried to coerce him, into unduly passing his candidates.

11.—26

91. Was anything said about resignation?—He wanted to know the course the Government were going to take. I told him it was not finally decided, that it was very serious, and I advised him to go and see a solicitor. I think that is what I told him. 92. Is it correct that he asked the Government to allow him to resign?—l could not say that he definitely asked to be allowed to resign. He asked us to look over it, and he pointed out the difficulties under which he laboured from the day he first went into the department. But he did not at that interview, nor at any other time, either say or lead me to infer, that iv respect of Captain Jones'and his acceptance he had been influenced by any person. I believed him then, and believe him still, that it was on the pleadings of Captain Jones that he gave way. I come to that conclusion on the papers and the surroundings of the whole thing. 93. Did he allege collusion on the part of any person whatever ?—No, he never did that. 94. What further steps were taken by the Government?—l think I went down the West Coast after Mr. Hall-Jones returned to Wellington, and I had a communication from him. As there were some doubts as to taking proceedings only against Captain Allman, I very emphatically said proceedings must be taken against all three. 95. That is, Captain Allman, Captain Jones, and Captain Yon Schoen ?—Yes ; and that was the view of my colleagues. It was my impression that they wanted Captain Allman to be singled out. Not that there was a desire to screen the others, but that there would be a difficulty in getting the others, while they had the confession against Captain Allman himself. 96. To whom did you say emphatically proceedings should not be taken against Captain Allman only ?—To the Minister of Marine. 97. Who made the suggestion ?—Mr. Hall-Jones. 98. Dr. Giles.'] He suggested, but agreed after that, that all three should be proceeded against ? —Yes. It seemed to me that that was the opinion he had come to, but that from what Mr. Glasgow had said in his memo, there was a doubt as to the evidence that could be brought against the other two; and, if I remember aright, I said, " As regards Captain Yon Schoen, you have the evidence of Mr. John Hutcheson, and you also have the evidence of Mr. Pirani, and they will probably help you to come to the conclusion that there is evidence against him." 99. Mr. Hanlon.] Were proceedings then taken? —Yes; proceedings were taken against them, with the result that the charge broke down on technical grounds. 100. They were charged with procuring a certificate by false representations ?—But what took place was never contemplated by law. Captain Allman and Captain Jones were acquitted, and a nolle prosequi was entered against Captain Yon Schoen. 101. At the time these proceedings fell through and the men were acquitted, was Captain Allman still under suspension, or had he been dismissed?—l cannot tell you that from memory. My recollection as to the dismissal is that it had been decided upon before I left for the South. I saw something in the newspapers, and I told the people that it had been decided upon. 102. Did Captain Allman write a second communication to the Government ?—Yes. I did not know anything about that; I never saw it. I saw it for the first time when making inquiry the other day. I said a second statement had been referred to elsewhere, but I never saw the original of that up to this time. I have seen a copy of it. 103. Dr. Giles.] What is the date of that ?—The date of the memo, is the Ist March. 104. Mr. Hanlon: There was a letter sent by the department on the 28th February. This is a copy of the letter: — (No. 366/99.) Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 28th February, 1899. I have been directed by the Minister having charge of the Marine Department to inform you that you are accused under the provisions of " The Civil Service Act, 1866," of conduct rendering it unfit that you should continue in the Civil Servioe of the oolony, and that the grounds of such acousations are set forth in the document enclosed. You are, therefore, desired to state whether you admit or deny the truth of the accusations, or any of them, and, if so, which, and to furnish me with your reply on or before noon on Thursday next, the 2nd proximo. And I am further directed to inform you that subject to such reply, or if no reply is then received, the Governor in Council will be advised to take such further action as may be necessary. I have, &0., Captain George Allman, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

CHARGES. To George Allman, of Wellington, Master Mariner. In accordance with the provisions of " The Civil Service Act, 1866," and its amendments, and the regulations in force thereunder, you, the said George Allman, holding office in the Civil Service of New Zealand as Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, are hereby accused of and charged with the following breaches of duty, and that by reason thereof you have been guilty of conduct rendering it unfit you should remain in the said Civil Service of New Zealand, that is to say,— 1. On or about the 13th and 19th days of July, 1897, or on or about one or other of these dates, one James Jones, of Wellington, mariner, having made application to be examined under the law and regulations then in force for a certificate of competency as master of a home-trade ship, was examined accordingly. 2. Such examination was conducted by you, as one of the examiners, negligently, irregularly, and improperly, and, as regards that part of the examination which you conducted in person, contrary to the law and regulations prescribed in that behalf, particularly in the following respects : — (<x.) On that part of such examination which relates to navigation being commenced, the said James Jones produced and handed to you certain papers and documents, known or marked as " Exn. 9q," " Exn. 9c," and " Exn. 9d," containing answers already written, but the questions to which the answers purported to relate were in blank, although such questions were on other forms in the handwriting of one George Yon Schoen, of Wellington, master mariner, and whioh the said James Jones also produced and handed to you. (6.) You thereupon filled in the questions on the forms first before referred to in your own handwriting, oopying them from the forms in the handwriting of the said George Yon Sohoen as aforesaid.

H.—26

(c.) You admitted and received such papers as part of the examination-papers of the said James Jones, and you also reoeived and admitted for such purposes a paper known as " Exn. 9," which had already been prepared and brought by the said James Jones into the examination-room, and was not written by him there, or in aooordanee with the regulations for the examination of masters and mates. (d.) On the eonolusion of this irregular examination you made and signed a certificate reporting to the Secretary of the Marine Department to the effect that the said James Jones had passed his examination, whioh said report was oontrary to the fact. (c.) Upon such report the said James Jones, on or about the 26th day of July, 1897, obtained a certificate of competency as master of a home-trade passenger-ship, to which certificate he was not legally entitled. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine Department. Marine Department, Wellington, 28th February, 1899. 105. He replied to that ?—Yes. 106. That is the reply [produced] ?—Yes. (Eeceived at noon, 2nd March, 1899— W. T. G.) Sir,— Wellington, Ist March; 1899. I have now to acknowledge receipt of your letter, No. 566/99, dated yesterday, enclosing statement of certain charges of breach of duty on my part in connection with the examination of one James Jones, of Wellington, mariner, for a certificate of competency as master of a home-trade ship, and I understand that I am desired to state whether I admit or deny the truth of these charges, and further, whether I desire to furnish you with any reply to them. I desire to avail myself of your invitation to reply to these oharges. It will be necessary for me to repeat here the substanoe of the fully detailed report furnished by me confidentially to the Minister of Marine (Mr. Hall-Jones), on the day of last. The additional facts whioh I desire to submit to your consideration are rather a matter of extenuation than of defence to the specific charges, a copy of which you have been good enough to enclose to me. You will understand, therefore, that what lam about to state must be read in conjunction with and in explanation of the terms of the confidential report I have just referred to, and I shall endeavour to avoid repetition hero of what may be found in that report. It will be necessary to say a word by way of introductory explanation of the essential faots of this case : During the year 1896 the question of granting Captain Jones, of the " Duco," a certificate of service as master in the coastal trade was brought under the notice of the Marine Department, but not under my notice. For this purpose an application was sent in by Captain Jones for such a certificate, accompanied by declarations as to his seaservice. As you are aware, the declarations accompanying this application were false in many important respeots. It was stated in these declarations that Captain Jones had been outside the Wellington Heads for over three years, and you are also aware that upon reference to the Colleotor of Customs at Wellington the statements made in these declarations were plainly shown to be false, and that in numerous instances when Captain Jones had been outside the Heads for a few hours it was put down as eleven days, and in some instances twenty-one days. The declaration, in fact, was a deliberate attempt to mislead the department as to Captain Jones's sea-service. I need not amplify these statements, since you are well aware that they are true, and that you yourself recorded to the Minister of Marine a long report stating that the declarations were not true, and that consequently the certificate applied for by Captain Jones should not be granted. This was in the year 1896. After the Minister of Marine had been furnished with your minute as to the conduct of Captain Jones regarding this false declaration, and after you had informed the Minister that the certificate applied for should not be granted, I received a message from the Premier that he desired to see me, and that I was to come up to the Cabinet room to see him there. I obeyed, and there I found Captain Jones and Captain Yon Sohoen along with the Premier. The Premier asked me for particulars of the case, but I said I had none to give him, not having myself actually examined the papers, and, knowing as I did that he had your minute on the papers, I could give him no further information than he already possessed. A few days afterwards the Premier sent me Jones's application along with all the other papers, inoluding the false declaration I have referred to. On the envelope containing these papers was a memorandum signed by the Premier, " Can you do anything for this man?" After examining the papers sent me, and finding your minute that the declarations were incorrect, I replied to the Premier on the same envelope that I did not think so. Some days afterwards Captain Yon Schoen met me, and showed me the same envelope which had been sent me by the Premier, and which still oontained his note and my reply. He then informed me that I had blooked the way to Jonea getting his certificate, and said that he considered the Premier's remark to me upon the envelope was an equivalent for an order to me to pass Jones. jThis was all in the year 1896. There was then a considerable interval. I mentioned the matter to Mr. Ward, who was then Minister of Marine, and I told him that the declaration made by Captain Jones had been proved to be false and full of lies, and that the matter had been brought before me several times, but that I did not see my way to do anything. Mr. Ward replied, "Do not have anything to do with it," and tell Jones " to go about his business," or words to that effect. I did not hear anything more about the matter for some time until the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones, who had taken Mr. Ward's place as Minister of Marine, spoke to me about the matter. This was in 1897. He spoke to me several times about it, and said he thought it was a hard case as Jones had done much sea-service. I replied to Mr. HallJones that the Aot would not permit the claim he made for sea-service to be admitted. The next important incident in this matter happened just prior to the Premier's departure to England from Auckland ;it would be about the end of April or beginning of May: I received a message from Mr. Hall-Jones that he desired to see me in his office. I went to his office, and he mentioned this matter again, and said he had recoived a communication from the Premier on Captain Jones's behalf. The communication was a telegram from the Premier to Mr. Hall-Jones, and the latter handed the telegram to me to read. It was dated Auokland, and, so far as I recollect, it read, " See that Jones gets his certificate before I return." If these were not the exact words they were certainly its purport. The Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones and I then had a long conversation about the matter. I admitted that Jones was an excellent seaman and knew his duties, being a good praotical man, but I pointed out to the Minister that the Act plainly prevented the granting of a certificate upon Jones's actual sea-service. He asked me if there was any other way of getting the certificate. I then explained to the Minister that the application of Captain Jones was for a home-trade service certificate as master, and that the condition upon which such a certificate would be granted was entirely in the hands of the Government of the colony, since its effeot was limited to the coastal waters of New Zealand, in my opinion. I then explained to the Minister that, under the existing law, in the absence of the necessary sea-service, Captain Jones would have to pass an examination to be set by me. I then said I would hunt up the regulations and see if I could find any clause which would meet Captain Jones's case. The Minister approved of my doing so. A week or, perhaps, ten days later I saw Mr. Hall-Jones again at his office, and I told him that I was of opinion that Captain Jones might be permitted to sit for his examination under clause 26 of the 1895 regulations, which provides that. " service in a tug-boat employed partly within smooth and rough waters would count as sea-service for a master or a mate in the coastal trade, and for the purpose of obtaining a coastal certificate." My reason for recommending this was that I knew Captain Jones had a river-certificate of competency. I stated this to Mr. Hall-Jones, and he said he would consider the matter. Some days later I again saw Mr. Hall-Jones in his office, and this matter was mentioned. I then pointed out to Mr. Hall-Jones that it would be necessary for him, as Minister of Marine, to give an order to the department to grant permission for Jones to go up for his examination, as he did not hold the mate's certificate.

5.—26

You are aware that the regulations do not provide that the Minister oan dispense with a mate's certificate ; but as Captain Jones had been outside the Heads really in the position of captain for a long period and on many oocasions, and had sometimes been as far as Picton, and as I believed the Minister was anxious that Captain Jones should be passed, I recommended Mr. Hall-Jones to dispense with the mate's certificate in this case. He consented to dispense with the certificate, and I then pointed out to him that he would have to give an order to the department authorising the department to permit Jones to sit for his examination for a coastal master's certificate. After I left the Minister's room I saw you at your office. I told you what had transpired, including the fact that I had reoommended the Minister to permit Jones to sit for his examination. You told me that you thought I was foolish to do so, but I replied to you that from what had happened upstairs I knew that the Premier and Mr. Jones the Minister were anxious that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for bis examination, and that an order would be sent down by Mr. Hall-Jones to the department giviug him permission to sit. In the evening of that day I was in the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department's (Mr. Allport's) room, and I explained to him that the Minister and myself had arranged that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination, and that an order would be sent out accordingly. While I was there the messenger came down and handed Mr. Allport a document, whereupon Mr Allport said, " Here is the order you were talking about." He then read it out, and, as far as I recollect, it granted in express terms authority for Jones to sit for his examination. It ran as follows: "Jones, ' Duco ': Permit examination." On the day following the receipt by Allport of this order you were, unfortunately, absent from duty, and Mr. Allport acted in yourplaoe in this matter. On the authority of the order he had received from Mr. Hall-Jones he wrote the Collector of Customs, Wellington, stating permission had been given to Captain Jones to sit for his examination. I may mention that Allport knew that Captain Jones had not the required mate's certificate, and the Collector of Customs also knew the same fact. The Collector of Customs, in turn, wrote the Examiners, Captain Edwin and myself, the authority to examine Captain Jones for a master's coastal certificate. Both Captain Edwin and myself knew that Jones had not the required mate's certificate. On the receipt of instructions in this way the examination proceeded ; the detail of what was done at this examination has been fully given in the confidential report I have given to Mr. Hall-Jones. I would add that the actual coastal master's certificate granted to Captain Jones was signed by yourself as Seoretary of Marine, and a memorandum of delivery of the certificate, written upon the certificate itself, was signed by the Collector of Customs. To yourself, the Collector of Customs, my co-Examiner (Captain Edwin), the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, and myself the fact was well known that there was no regulation in existence authorising the dispensation of a mate's certificate. This fact was also well known to the Minister, Mr. Hall-Jones. Each of the officers I have mentioned, therefore, knew that the Minister had ordered the dispensation of this condition, and I would therefore beg to summarise the ciroumstanoes extenuating my conduct as follows : — (a.) That I was of the opinion Captain Jones was an excellent seaman, and was an experienced shipmaster, so that no danger would arise from his possessing a certificate which made him a coastal master. (6.) That I was plainly led to understand that it was the desire of the Hon. the Premier and the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones that Captain Jones should get the certificate he applied for. (c.) That each and all the officers I have mentioned were more or less aware of the same fact. (d.) That the irregularities which took place in connection with his examination were due partly to my consideration of Captain Jones's qualification, and partly by my desire to carry out the almost express wishes of my Minister. (c.) Ido not desire to inculpate any of my fellow-officers, but, as I understand the letter now under reply is merely preliminary to my dismissal, I must point out that each and all of my fellow-offioers were aware of the fundamental irregularity, which the Minister himself had permitted in dispensing with the requisite mate's certificate, and as I found eaoh of these gentlemen willing to overlook this irregularity for the apparent purpose of carrying the Minister's wishes into effeot, I was weakly, perhaps, induced to fall in with these wishes and facilitate, as I did, Captain Jones's obtaining the certificate of a coastal master. I feel that this is not a justification for my oonduct, but in view of my tenure of office, and of the responsibilities of a wife and family which lie upon me, I was induced to do that which I now very much regret. On the assumption that my Minister contemplates my immediate dismissal, I desire to point out that I have already been placed upon my trial, my reputation, which until the present has been unsullied, has been damaged, if not destroyed, and I shall, in the event of dismissal, be without occupation or means of livelihood,while I have to maintain a wife and family. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Geobge Aldman. 2/3/99. 107. Then it was just after that he was dismissed?— Yes. As I said, it appeared in the public prints that he was to be dismissed, because the question had been raised that the Government were going to whitewash the whole of them, and I deemed it to be my duty to place before the whole of the colony the fact that we were not going to do anything of the kind, and I did so. I will quote a telegram from the New Zealand Times of the Ist March, 1899 :— Dunedin, 28th February.—The Premier has authorised the Press to make the following statement on his behalf in reference to the oharge circulated that he was a party to Captain Jones going up for his master-mariner's examination without previously having obtained a mate's certificate : " I neither spoke to the Hon. Mr. Hall Jones about Captain Jones's examination, nor did I write to him. I went away to England in April, and the examination took place in July. The first I knew of Captain Jones or his examination was after Mr. Hutcheson, senior member for Wellington, had made his speech in the House. The evidence given by Mr. Allport in the Magistrate's Court was inoorreot. The Minister of Marine was summoned by the defence, and would have given evidence. There was no direction for Jones's captain's examination. Counsel for the Crown entered a nolle prosequi against the expressed wish of the Minister to go on, and then prevented the Minister of Marine clearing himself from the implication that he had given a direction or interfered in the slightest way." I did not say that was the first I knew of Captain Jones. Of course, I had known Captain Jones for years, and it is palpable on the face of it that that report was incorrect. But I said this, and repeat it now : that I was not aware of Captain Jones having been up for examination, or having passed an examination. I was away on the occasion ; nor did I receive anything from the Collector of Customs, either written or verbal. 108. Did Captain Allman write anything to the department subsequently to that long letter you have read ? —The sequence is that on the 6th March Mr. Glasgow writes to Captain Allman as follows:— (No. 617/99.) Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 6th Maroh, 1899. I have to honour to inform you, by direotion of the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, that your letter of the Ist instant in reply to my letter of the 28th ultimo, together with your memorandum dated 13th December last, addressed to the Premier, has bean plaoed before the Governor in Council, who is of opinion that you have been guilty of oonduot which renders you unfit to oontinue in the Civil Service, and has accordingly dismissed you from the Service under the power contained in section 23 of " The Civil Service Aot, 1866." I have, &c, Captain George Allman, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Seoretary,

H.—26

109. Is there' any reply to that from Captain Allman?—l do not know of any. There is a minute here: " Gazette notice approved, 6/3/99." There is a letter here of the 6th March from Captain Allman : — (Beceived 6th March, 1899.— W. T. G.) Sib,— Wellington, 6th Maroh, 1899. I beg to support several of the statements made in the letter I wrote you on the Ist instant in reply to yours of the 28th February, regarding my connection with the examination of James Jones for a master's home-trade certificate. Your letter reached me on Tuesday, the 28th ultimo, and I was required to furnish my reply by midday on Thursday. This time was altogether insufficient to enable me to obtain evidence in support of my statements, or, indeed, to properly express the defence I have to rely upon in answer to the charges made against me. I beg, further to claim the right of asking you to attach to my letter of the Ist instant the enclosed declaration of Jamea Jones, so that the declaration and my letter may be read together. I have, &c, The Secretary of Marine Department, Wellington. Geo. Allman. Forwarded for information of the Minister of Marine.—W. T. Glasgow—6th Maroh, 1899. " Forwarded for information of Minister of Marine.—W. T. G." I want to say that there are statements contained in that letter of Captain Allman's which differ very much from the statements in his first letter, and which to my knowledge are incorrect. 110. Judge Ward.] What is the date of the letter of dismissal ?—The 6th March. 111. And the date of this letter to which you are referring?— The Ist March. There is a reference there to me as to Captain Jones undergoing examination. I say that Captain Allman never in his life said to me a word about Captain Jones undergoing examination, nor I to him. There was never anything transpired between Captain Allman and I about Captain Jones undergoing examination. I also desire to call attention to the service outside the Heads referred to on page 2 of the letter, and the conclusion as to Captain Jones being well qualified from the time he has been outside the Heads. There is a contradiction in the same letter. 112. Dr. Giles.] You say the statement is false about Captain Jones going outside the Heads?— Yes ; and in another place he says he considers him qualified. The next was as regards " That you yourself recorded to the Minister of Marine a long report stating that the declarations were not true, and that consequently the certificate applied for by Captain Jones should not be granted." Here is the whole of the papers as far as I know, and the statement made by Mr. Glasgow contained in the letter of the 15th November is in the letter I myself approved. There is Mr. Glasgow's letter of the 4th June. Then there is a letter, which I approved, on the 21st February, as follows: — Hon. Premier. I have had a further examination made of the services set forth by Captain Jones of the "Mana " and " Duco." Up to June, 1890, there are no records in the Custom-house to enable the service to be checked. Subsequently the trips are marked in red ink, with the result that it is found that if Jones took the " Mana " outside, in many of the eases given in his list, he did so without any authority or permit from this department. A permit to act as master outside the harbour was only given to him once—in the case of the " Mana " going to the " Weathersfield " at Waikanae. Permits were given only on condition that a Certificated Master was in command. The names of these masters are inserted in red ink on the document attached. ' In some cases the time is much exaggerated, as will be seen by the red-ink corrections. I have do hesitation in saying that the required service has not been proved, and I could not recommend the issue of a certificate. Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Reply accordingly.—B. J. S. 26/2/96. The Collector, Wellington. I have noted in red ink on the attached statement the names of the masters as given by you, but there are some trips shown there since the 30th June, 1890, which are not accounted for in the particulars supplied by you ; that is, those against which nothing is remarked in red. Can you give any information as to who was master on those trips?—W. T. Glasgow, 11/2/96. The Seoretary. I have had the files gone carefully over again, and inserted further particulars so far as could be found. As all inward papers were also searched," I can only conclude that some trips noted on Mr. Williams's list were made without permission, and without report to this department. The periods embraced within the dates given as coastal service represents the time the "Mana" was engaged on general harbour-work, and making the occasional trips to the places in the column " Where trading." The greater portion of these would be one-day trips, which would not mount up to any lengthy period in a year. I have made inquiry at the office of Inspector of Steamers re any record there of permits to go outside the harbour issued prior to June, 1890, but find none reoorded there. It is suggested that at that time permits were issued direot from Marine Office, and that Jones possibly made use of them as authority, and it was not then, apparently, the practice to require him to enter and clear each time; that this will account for there not being any record for the full period since 1887.—D. McKellab, 19/2/96. • That shows that there was a good deal in Captain Jones's contention. As regards the examination, or obtaining the certificate, I knew nothing whatever about it until after I returned. My telegram about which so much had been said referred to the service certificate. I knew nothing about that examination. 113. Do you want to say anything more about his letter?— Yes. In reference to the telegram, which shows his memory is very faulty, he says here it was dated Auckland, and, as far as I recollect, it says, " See that Jones gets his certificate before I return"; and the telegram says, " I should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones, of ' Duco,' settled. From the papers presented to me lam of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than Captain . Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified." I say, as regards the matter, I knew it was still unsettled, and that there had been an application made to have it settled. Mr. Ward had been Minister of Marine, and after he had left I had been dealing with the papers. He left on the 16th June, 1896. As regards the qualification there, it was not that he was qualified to hold a certificate, but that he was a competent seaman, and I had that from Captain Allman and some other captains. There was a technical bar owing to that and other circumstances. Captain Allman, in this and every other document he has written on the subject, has said the same thing. 114. Will you read that ?—

8E.—26

In the matter of " The Justioes of the Peace Act, 1882," and its amendments. I, James Jones, of the City of Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I know Captain Allman, who was Nautical Adviser to the Government and principal Examiner of Masters and Mates. 2. That I was present in the office of the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones early in the month of July, 1897, having gone to his office to obtain from him an order authorising me to be examined for a master's certificate. 3. I stated to Mr. Hall-Jones that I understood that I could not go up for a master's certificate until I got a mate's certificate, and that I had not a mate's certificate, and Mr. Hall-Jones replied, " I will fix that all right, and you will come back again in a week's time and get your ticket." I said " For the practical part I can do anything, but I'll be hanged if I can do the writing." I then said to Mr. Hall-Jones, "It will be no use for me to go to Captain Allman and tell him I have permission to sit unless you give me an order telling Captain Allman that he was to allow me to sit for the master's certificate." Mr. Hall-Jones then rang his bell, and the messenger came in. He told his messenger to go for Captain Allman and tell him he wanted to see him. The messenger did so, and Captain Allman came upstairs in a few minutes. I waited in the room. When Captain Allman came in Mr. Hall-Jones told him that he was to allow me to go up for my certificate, and that he (Mr. Hall-Jones) was going to dispense with my having a mate's certificate. He said to Captain Allman that he would give him an order, and Captaia Allman said it must be an order to the department. Mr. Hall-Jones then said he would give an order to the department. I saw nothing handed by Mr. Hall-Jones to Captain Allman, but Mr. Hall-Jones wrote something on a piece of paper there. I left the room, leaving Captain Allman with Mr. Hall-Jones. i. The first time I saw the Hon. the Premier after I got my home-trade master's certificate on the 19th July, 1897, was after he had returned from England. He and some other gentlemen were on board the " Duchess " one day. I did not know the other gentlemen, but I knew Mr. Seddon. I asked them to come and have a whiskey. Mr. Seddon and the other gentlemen came into the stern-cabin. I put down the glasses, and Mr. Seddon remarked about ' the size of the tumblers. Mr. Seddon said, " I fixed that all right for you, old man. I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do in spite of the lot of them." I told him I was very much obliged to him, but it was no use talking about that now. This was all that was said about the matter then. I then left them with the whiskey, saying they could enjoy themselves. 5. As regards my relations with Captain Allman, I declare that, except what was done through the agency of the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones, there was no arrangement of any kind between Captain Allman and myself that he should pass me for my master's examination. I never suggested to him before the examination for my master's certificate that he should pass me, nor did I attempt, except through the Ministers, to bring any influence to bear upon him. I had, in fact, no conversation with Captain Allman at any time with regard to my "master's examination. I have to admit that I told Captain Allman in the examination-room when I produced the papers to him and he began to tear them up that I had done them a 1 myself, and Captain Allman took me at my word. When Captain Allman refused at first to accept the papers I made an appeal to him, and I also told him that he knew very well that he had got his orders to pass me. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the provisions of an Act of the General Assembly of New Zealand intituled " The Justices of the Peace Act, 1882." James Jones. Declared at Wellington aforesaid, this 6th day of March, 1899, before me, H. Cooper, a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. 115. Will you kindly give the Court your version of what took place on that occasion ?—I have no hesitation in saying that Captain Jones's declaration is untrue, and I should think, myself, that he was very much "at sea," or very jolly, at the time he said that. The only time I was at Day's Bay was on the occasion of the New Zealand Times picnic. I think that was about the 19th February, 1898 —at the beginning of the year, at any rate. I will test Captain Jones's memory, first of all, about the stimulant referred to. My recollection is that one of the gentlemen of the company referred to here thought that as, I believe, prohibition obtains at Day's Bay, he would fortify himself with a little stimulant, and it was he who invited me to have one. 116. Judge Ward.] What was the gentleman's name ?—Mr. Johnson. There were four or five gentlemen present; I think Mr. John Plimmer was present. I am not sure whether Mr. Bannister, of the Times, was there with Mr. Hislop, of the Marine Engineers. We were in the cabin, and my recollection is that some one said, " Send for Captain Jones, and ask him to join us." They were all present; and as to my saying to Captain Jones that I had " fixed that all right for you, old man ; I put my foot down, because I was determined to accomplish what you wanted me to do in spite of the lot of them " —I say that statement is untrue. As I stated, I did not know anything at that time of the examination. 117. What date was this?— About the 19th February, 1898. It was months after that when Mr. Hutcheson made his speech in the House. 118. Mr. Hanlon.] Do you say you did not make that statement ?—I certainly did not. I did not know that he had a certificate at the time. If he had put a question to me about it I would have said that I had asked Mr. Hall-Jones to deal with the matter. If I had known anything about that I should not have required to make the investigation, or to say what I did to Mr. Huteheson in the House. 119. Dr. Giles.] When you returned you did not make any inquiry ?—No, I never bothered myself; I simply made some common-place remark to the old chap. Ido not think he came inside or sat down. He simply came and had his refreshment and went away. I say that what he says in this respect is untrue. 120. Mr. Hanlon.] Is there any further light you think you can throw on this question of Captain Jones's certificate, or the circumstances leading up to it ? —Nothing further than that I know the statement was made that the Government were responsible for this statement of Captain Jones's in the case for the cancellation of the certificate. 121. That is, in the Supreme Court ?—Yes. I say that matter was left to Dr. Fitchett and the Crown Solicitor. It had been represented that they could not cross-examine upon it. When I wished to give some evidence to the Court, which would have been gentle, the Court held, on the objection of Mr. Gray, that I could not say anything, and my lips were closed; and in respect of this I was told I could not give evidence upon it. However, the matter was left entirely to Dr. Pitchett and the Crown Solicitor.

H.—26

Wednesday, 12th July, 1899. Judge Ward : Before proceeding with the evidence this morning the Commissioners have certain remarks to make with respect to the charges made by Mr. Pirani. First, with respect to the second charge made against the Premier, it seems to us our commission does not entitle us to go into evidence of all conversations that may have taken place between the Premier and any other person. The evidence of words spoken no doubt is admissible, but merely as evidence of acts having been done. We cannot say that an allegation that a certain conversation took place can constitute a charge in which we could interfere under our commission, but with respect to the third charge the case is very different. There the charge runs thus : " That the said Eichard John Seddon, after it had been alleged that irregularities had taken place in granting certificates either of service or of competency, during the session of Parliament of 1898, in his place in the House of Bepresentatives denied that any irregularity had taken place. . . ." It appears to us that, of words spoken in the House, the House itself must be the sole judge. No action at law will lie regarding words spoken in debate, and obviously no charge such as this with respect to words so spoken can be entertained by such a tribunal as a Royal Commission constituted by the Crown, without grave breach of the privileges of Parliament. That is how the matter stands as far as we are concerned. Whether preferring the charge constitutes a breach of privilege is a question for the House and not for us. We must delete that charge at once. I observe, too, that in the charges against Mr. HallJones it is said that " on being questioned as to the existence of any irregularity in the granting of certificates in any case he denied that any irregularity had taken place, he then knowing of the circumstances aforesaid." Now, if this question were put in the House, the same remarks apply to that as to the charge against Mr. Seddon. Mr. Hislop : May I ask your Honour if any notice has been given of the remaining charges ? Judge Ward : The charges, I believe, were handed to the Premier yesterday. Mr. Seddon : I will accept notice of the charges at once. Ido not need twenty-four hours' notice : a few seconds will do. They were only put in to give you [to Mr Hislop] an opportunity of being here. I can reply to them at once. Mr. Atkinson asked leave to appear for Captain Yon Schoen, and leave was granted. Cross-examination of Mr Seddon continued. Mr. Hanlon : You were going to deal with the complaint of Mr. Farmar ?—Yes. I have now a letter dated the 25th October, 1898, from Farmar, and a letter from James L. Martin, dated the 15th November. These are the communications that I referred to in giving evidence yesterday, and which refer to that portion of the commission in which unfairness in examination of candidates is alluded to. During the session of 1898 this was one of the grievances in respect to Marine matters brought under my notice by the then member for Wellington City, Mr. John Hutcheson. He seemed to feel very strongly that these candidates had not been fairly dealt with in respect to the examination. I said that if there were any complaints to be made they should be made in writing. It is a matter of record, and the officer involved should have an opportunity of knowing what is complained of. The first letter referred to is dated the 25th October, and is as follows:— Sir,— Wellington, 25th October, 1898. We, the undersigned, crave your kind indulgence in the following complaint : — Yesterday we presented ourselveH, according to instructions, for examination, Mr. Farmar as first mate, foreign, Mr. Martin as second mate, foreign, and Mr. Irvine as first mate, home-trade. We found three Examiners ready to examine ua—Captains Edwin and Allman and Major Sir Arthur Douglas, Bart. The examination-room was very small, and we were jammed elbow to elbow at two small tables. We were not permitted on finishing a paper to take it up to the three Examiners, but were ordered to keep our seats, and if we required anything to sing out. This extraordinary request was exceedingly annoying and disturbing to all of us. The Examiners were, as far as we could judge from what we saw and heard, quite incompetent to look over the work. They were apparently not only unable to do any part of it themselves, but they were (?) amongst themselves in their effort to find out from the Board of Trade answer-sheets whether our work was right or wrong, and so noisy that it was an utter impossibility for us to concentrate our mind upon the work we were engaged in, and upon the successful solving of which our living depended, especially as Messrs. Farmar and Martin had been lately failed by Captain Edwin in a previous examination. It took the three Examiners from fifteen to twenty minutes to deoide whether Mr. Farmar's work was right or wrong, and similar in the case of Mr. Martin. Then the continuous knocking at the door of the exami-nation-room as the Examiners went backward and forward from one room to another was very disturbing. In faot, we might just as well have tried to pass our examination in the main street. Once or twice, when almost goaded into desperation, not being able to concentrate our mind upon our work, we were on the point of respectfully deolining to go on with our examination under suoh adverse oiroumstances, but we all held our peace and bore it all, intending to seek justice from you, sir, when all was over. The result was that both of us failed. And now, sir we humbly petition you to inquire into this matter, and after having satisfied yourself that our grievance is just, then, sir, will you kindly annul our examination of yesterday and allow us to be examined afresh without payment of further fee, and by some other competent Examiner who will not try and revenge himself on us for having dared to write to you regarding this matter. We are, &0., F. Farmar, o/o Leary and Co., Wellington. Jambs L. Martin, Oldham House, Taranaki Place. I, the undersigned, being one of the candidates examined, passed my examination yesterday as mate for the home-trade. I corroborate all that has been said by Messrs. Farmar and Martin, and beg to state that if my examination had been one for the foreign-trade I do not think I could have passed it in that room crowded with Examiners and the unseemly noise prevailing. J. Ibvine, The Right Hon. R. J. Seddon, P. 0., &0., Premier of New Zealand. c/o Harbourmaster, Wanganui. Dr. Giles.] Whom was this letter addressed to ? [Mr. Seddon.] It was addressed to me. This letter was referred to the Secretary of the Customs :— The Secretary, Customs. This refers to the matter which I wish to see you about, and whioh has been brought under my notice by Mr i Hutcheson, M.H.R.—R. J. S. Right Hon. Premier. Please see papers herewith M. 2314/98. I will attend whenever you send for me.—W. T. Glasgow. 28/11/98.

H.—26

There was a further letter on the 15th November: — Eight Hon. Mr. Seddon. Sic, — Wellington, November 15th. Since Me. Farmar and myself wrote re our examination for a first and second mate's certificate respectively, I have the honour, sir, to inform you that whilst Mr. Frank Lawton (now A.B. on board the S.S. Queen of the South) was being examined for a mate's certificate in the home-trade service, the Examiner held a lengthy conversation with him, in which he asked him if he know either of us, and if he did, to ascertain which of us it was that had written the Premier about the Examiners, and to tell us that he would have passed our work had it not been for Major Sir Arthur Douglas, who was master of the situation. Now, sir, do you not think it an awful thing for a Government Examiner to pass a candidate's work and entitle him to a certificate, then employ him as his agent to inform other candidates that had previously failed that had it not been for Major Sir A. Douglas he would have passed him, or else he had been illegally failed, for that is what it really means. Sir, I now beg of you to do something for me, as I am a married man and have to shovel coals to eke out a living for myself and family, while being so detained, and my home is in Dunedin. Hoping to get a reply soon, —I remain, &c, Jas. L. Martin. Oldham House, Taracaki Plaoe, City. The original of this letter was copied (that is the letter of the 25th October), and on the copy are the minutes made by the Secretary, and by the officers whose conduct had been complained of by Messrs. Farmar and Martin :— Sir Arthur Douglas. As you assisted in conducting these examinations, I would like to have your remarks on this letter.—George Allman. 17/12/98. The Secretary Marine Department. This letter has been referred to me, but I must decline to discuss with unsuccessful candidates the question of either my competence or bona fides as an examiner.—Arthub P. Douglas. 19/12/98. Referred to Captain Allman in connection with my memo, to him, dated 29th November last. —W. T. Glasgow. 20/12/98. Seoretary Marine. This letter, like the contents of similar epistles, is a tissue of lies from beginning to end. For siza of rooms please see plan attaohed.—George Allman. 21/12/98. Hon. Premier. For your information. Under present circumstances it is perhaps inadvisable to go further into these complaints.— W. T. Glasgow. 21/12/98. I quite agree.—R. J. S. 21/12/98. A further minute is on the back of the copy of the letter dated the 15th November. Right Hon. the Premier. Captain Edwin and I were in the examination-room all the time Mr. Lawton was there. Neither of us had any conversation with him outside the actual examination then taking place. As a matter of fact, I had no knowledge of this correspondence till December Ist, and the statements made are false.—Geo. Allman. 17/12/98. We see that from this the Government declined to interfere in the matter. The Examiners were practically the officers, and theirs the responsibility. The complaints were simply forwarded on to the officers through the head of the department, and that is how that matter arose. I say here that neither directly nor indirectly have I interfered with these officers, nor have I influenced them directly or indirectly. They have the responsibility, and the responsibility has been theirs from beginning to end. 3. Mr. H anion.'] Now, with regard to complaints re the adjustment of compasses?— Yes, complaints were made on all sides. You might get me the file of papers in respect to the adjusters. There were complaints made by some captains that after the Act was passed it was dangerous to adjust the compasses as provided by that Act. This file partly commenced with the question which appeared on the Order Paper on the 26th July, 1895. It is as follows : — Mr. Pirani to ask the Minister of Marine, Whether the Government grant licenses to adjusters of compasses of iron ships, and, if so, on what conditions, and what qualifications are required of candidates for such licenses? If such licenses are not issued, will the Government take such steps as may be necessary to make provision for licensing adjusters, so as to ensure that the compasses of all iron vessels shall be adjusted by persons who have proved their competence for the work ? The advice to the Minister, as to reply, is as follows: — Hon. Minister. At present adjusters of compasses are not licensed, and to lioense them would require an amendment of the Aot. Prior to 1877 the law required that adjusters of compasses should be licensed by the Minister, but " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," following the law in the United Kingdom, put the responsibility of seeing that the compasses are adjusted on the owner, and the Government Surveyor is required to obtain a certificate from the owner that he is satisfied that the compasses are properly adjusted. In Victoria adjusters of compassses are licensed. I have a copy of the Victorian regulations. I understand that this is the case in New South Wales also. Captain Allman, Nautical Adviser, is of opinion that the law should be altered to give the necessary authority to license. W. T. Glasgow, Seoretary. Returned from Minister to-day.—G. Allport. 8/8/93. 4. Dr. Giles.] What session was that ? —The session of 1895. The result of that simple question was this file of papers before the matter was adjusted, and that practically meant that nothing was done. It was found to be unworkable when the regulations were passed, and I think only two or three persons in the colony, and only one in Wellington, were qualified, This is so far as my recollection serves me. It was found that Captain Yon Schoen practically was the only one here who, when the regulation was first passed, was entitled by law to adjust compasses. But the difficulty was pointed out by the captains who formed a deputation and waited upon the Minister.— M. 96/1901.—N0. 855/88 Premier's Office, Wellington, 30th October, 1896. Sir,— The attention of the Government has been called to the remarks on the regulations for the adjustment of compasses in New Zealand, which appeared in the Nautical Magazine for September last. These remarks do not correctly represent what is meant by the regulations, as it is stated that they provide for the appointment of an 4—H, 26,

H.—26

" engineer surveyor "to certify the correctness of compasses. This is not so, as under the regulations it is the duty of the licensed adjuster, who makes the adjustment, to prepare and sign the compass-cards and deviation tables, copies of which he then forwards to the Engineer Surveyor. This is done so that the officer may note that the vessels have been swung, as it is necessary that lie should know that the compasses have been adjusted, because, in the case of steamships, passenger certificates cannot be issued until the Engineer Surveyor certifies that he has surveyed the vessels and that, amongst other tbing«, their compasses have been adjusted by a licensed adjuster. In the case of sailing vessels the cards and diagrams are sent to that officer for convenience' sake, so that he may forward them to the Marine Department along with those for steamers. When they are received by the department they are examined by the Nautical Adviser. I think it would be advisable that you should communicate this information to the editor of the magazine referred to with a view of its being published. I enclose for your information two copies of the regulations mentioned. I have, &c, The Agent-General for New Zealand, London. W. C. Walker, for the Premier. Evening Post, Friday, 23rd October, 1896. The regulations issued by the Marine Department of New Zealand for the adjustment of compasses on board vessels belonging to the colony, and for the licensing of adjusters properly qualified for the work, have come under the notice of the Nautical Magazine published in London, which points out that the regulations provide for the appointment of an Engineer-Surveyor to certify the correctness of the compasses who may perhaps know nothing of the deviasoope and Napier's diagram. Surely (adds the writer) the New Zealand Shipmasters' Association ought to have this flaw removed, or the new regulations may land some of its members on the rooks. Evening Post, Saturday, 24th October, 1896. The remarks of the Nautical Magazine respecting compass adjustments in New Zealand, which appeared in our yesterday's issue, do not, it seems, correctly represent the matter. The regulations do not require the Engineer Surveyor to certify the correctness of compasses. This is done by the Licensed Adjuster, who sends copies of his diagrams and deviation card to the Engineer Surveyor, in order that that officer may note that the vessel has been swung. It is necessary that he should have this information in the case of steamers, as passenger certificates oannot be issued until the Engineer Surveyor is satisfied, amongst other things, that the compasses have been adjusted by a licensed adjuster. In the ease of sailing vessels, the cards are sent to that officer for convenience' sake, so that he may forward them to the Marine Department along with those for steamers. When the diagrams and cards are received by the department they are submitted to the Nautical Adviser for examination. Hon. the Premier. I recommend that the accompanying letter be sent to the Agent-General correcting the mistaken impression on the part of the Nautical Magazine as to the New Zealand regulations governing the adjustment of compasses. W. T. Glasgow, 30/10/96. (Evening Post, Monday, 23rd November, 1896.) The Secretary of the Marine Department, Mr. W. T. Glasgow, was interviewed on Saturday by a deputation from the Shipmasters' Association, consisting of Captains Woster, Banks, Croker, Bate, Marshall, Bowling, and Kennedy (secretary), who protested against tho enforcement of the Act of last session requiring that foreign-going sailing-vessels built wholly or partly of iron should have their compasses adjusted before leaving New Zealand ports. The deputation asserted that the regulation was unnecessary, and that if it was enforced shipowners would be put to needless inconvenience and expense. Mr. Glasgow, in reply, pointed out that it was not within the power of the department to interfere with an Act of Parliament; but he promised to lay the representations of the deputation before the Government, so that, if necessary, some amendment might be made in the law next session. (Evening Post, Tuesday, 24th November, 1896.) We are requested to explain that the deputation which waited upon the Secretary for Marine on Saturday in reference to the regulation requiring foreign-going vessels to be swung for compass adjustments was one composed wholly of masters of English vessels in port, and was introduced by the Hon. E. Richardson. From the Collector of Customs at Auckland to the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Memorandum in reply. Referring to your memo., M. 96/1901, No. 492/98 of 23/10/96: It has been impossible to comply with the regulations at tbie port, as, owing to the frequent and somotimes continuous illness of the only Licensed Adjuster of Compasses, Captain Tilly, there has been no one to do it. Possibly Captain Robertson, Harbourmaster at Onehunga, may pass and make himself qualified ; but he does not intend to work for no fees, and such would be unjust to him. Captain Clayton does not intend to qualify, as his eyesight is not so good as it was. Captain Worsp, lately Surveyor of Associated Underwriters, decides he will not qualify for license ; and the only other applicant is a Captain Fernandez, and it is questionable whether he will pass the examination successfully. Thus far we are unfortunate in Auckland, but from no departmental neglect or oversight. Alex. Eose, Collector, 3/11/96. I may say that further correspondence took place : — Adjustment of Compasses of Ships. Hon. Minister. Marine Department. With reference to the accompanying memorandum from Captain Allman, suggesting that the law as to requiring compasses to be adjusted by a licensed adjuster should not be enforced In the case of foreign-going ships, I have to state that I think it is probable that if attention had been called to the matter wben the Bill was before the House, the operation of the law would have been confined to home-trade and intercolonial ships. The matter appears to have escaped the notice of the Shipmasters' Association and other persons skilled in nautical matters, and no comment was made. It is, no doubt, a serious responsibility to advise the Government not to enforce a law which has been passed by the Legislature, or, rather set aside its application to certain cases clearly within its operation, but the oircumstances warrant consideration, and I submit the remarks of the Nautical Adviser for the favourable consideration of the Government. I think I should make it clear that the grievance is principally in connection with traders between the United Kingdom and New Zealand, which aro not required by the Board of Trade to have compasses adjusted unless they are passenger steam-vessels. The masters adjust their own compasses, which do not vary very much from year to year, and they look upon interference with them in a colonial port as a very great grievance. There is also the case of ships belonging to foreign countries—America, Germany, &c. It seems out of place to apply a colonial' law to such vessels, at least so far as their compasses are concerned. Marine Department, Wellington, 9th December, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. For Cabinet.—W.C.W.—lo/12/96. In Cabinet, 12th December, 1896.—Referred to Minister of Marine.—A. Willis, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department. In accordance with your instructions that I should report on the bringing of foreign-going vessels under the regulations for the adjustment of compasses, I have to state that I never contemplated the bringing of foreign-going

H.—26

vessels under the regulations for adjustment of compasses. This work is done for them at Home by competent adjusters, under the regulations of the Board of Trade, and the masters of these vessels are competent to undertake the calculation required for ascertaining any change which may subsequently occur. As it was essential {or the safety of the public in New Zealand that better provision should be made with reference to the adjustment of compasses in this colony, the regulations at present in force were gazetted and are on the same lines as those in the Australian Colonies, and of the Board of Trade, as far as passenger steam-ships are concerned. lam of opinion that it is not desirable that ownere of foreign-going vessels should be obliged to have the compasses adjusted in New Zealand, unless there has been considerable or extensive damage to the ship necessitating repairs or alterations. I sincerely trust that the Act will not be enforced as regards these foreign-going vessels. At the same time, I think all vessels engaged in the intercolonial and coastal trades, where applicable, should comply with our regulations concerning the adjustment of compasses. Geo. Allman. —7/12/96. There is further protest, and the first comment is from the Evening Post of the 11th December :— (Evening Post, Friday, 11th December, 1896.) If further proof is necessary in support of the statement made in another oolumn, that the Customs authorities in other parts of the colony do not insist upon the compasses of deep-sea vessels being readjusted, we may take a case cited by Captain Worster, of the " Waitangi," now in Napier, in a letter to Captain Kennedy, secretary of the local branch of the Shipmasters' Association. Captain Worster points out that the barque " Andes " was recently allowed to leave Napier for London without any such regulations being carried out. Again, the ship " Pleione " left Nelson without the Customs authorities insisting upon such a course. When a deputation waited on Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Under-Secretary for Marine and Customs, in respect to this matter, that gentleman promised that such regulations would be uniformly observed in all ports of the colony. This is certainly not done, and it is manifestly unfair that shipmasters trading from Wellington should be the only sufferers. There is more comment, but as the matter was brought under my notice, and there was so much force in the contention that there had been a mistake made—and I believe it is still law to-day,— so far as the Government could, we have by regulations met the objection. I may say that practically the Act is a dead-letter. I will quote the section if you have the statutes :— (" The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1895," section 4, subseotions 1 aud 2.) i. (1.) It shall be the duty of the master and owner of any ship built wholly or partly of iron to take care that whenever she proceeds to sea from any plaoe in the colony she has her compasses properly adjusted by an adjuster licensed by the Minister : Provided that the Minister may, by warrant under his hand, exempt any vessel or class of vessel plying within restricted limits from the operation of this section. (2.) The Minister may from time to time make regulations for the licensing of proparly-qualified persons to be adjusters of compasses, and may prescribe the examination to be passed by applicants for such'licenses, and fix the fees to be paid for the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation tables. From my recollections and dealings with this matter, I think it had been contended that a wooden vessel, having boilers of iron and engines, must have her compasses adjusted. The finding of the department was against that contention, I think. At any rate, I think there was a regulation passed to amend that. But we found ourselves in this position :We were advised to pass an Act of Parliament, and we passed an Act of Parliament, and then found there were very few persons in this colony who could do the work ; so, to remove that difficulty, I presume, Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan went up for examination for a license as compass-adjusters. On the 11th June, 1897, the New Zealand Times published the following item : — (New Zealand Times, Friday, 11th June, 1897.) The Shipmasters' Association.—Deputation to the Minister fob Public Wobks. A deputation representing the Shipmasters' Association, and consisting of Captains Kennedy, Wheeler, Post, Downie, Smith, Sinclair, and Grant, waited upon the Minister of Public Works yesterday afternoon, to discuss with him a number of matters of vital importance to shipowners, sea captains, and the public. Sir Eobert Stout introduced the deputation, saying that they had no personal ends to serve, but were actuated with a desire to benefit the colony in the suggestions which they were about to make. The Question of Adjusters. Captain Downie opened the ball by impressing upon the Minister the advisability of allowing shipmasters to appoint their own adjusters of compasses. A similar course was adopted in the old country, and he thought that it was desirable here. The Government Adjusters might be competent men, but it was possible that they might not always have the confidence of the shipmasters. There were instances in which their computations of errors in the charts were not correct, and if they had been implicitly relied on the ships using them would have got into serious trouble. Mr. Hall-Jones: Is that quite recently, since the Adjusters have been licensed ? Captain Downie : Yes, within the last few months. There is a strong feeling that this should be remedied, and that we should be allowed to select our own adjusters. The Minister pointed out that in appointing Government Adjusters they had followed the lead of New South Wales. Captain Downie interrupted to say that he had recently had a sample of New South Wales adjustment. He had been appointed to bring the Dingadee over from Sydney after she had met with an accident. The compasses were adjusted before starting, but when he got 300 miles out he found that the adjustment which had been given him before leaving was seven degrees out of truth. Mr. Hall-Jones said the reason of the appointment of Government Assessors was the incompetent way in which the work had been performed previously. If, was found, in some oases, that incompetent men had done the Work and charged very low fees. It was thought that good men should be taken on, even at a higher fee. The opinion which he had obtained from the Nautical Adviser of the Government did not agree with what Captain Downie had just stated. Still, the deputation were the men who were principally affected. It was at Captain Allman's suggestion that the alteration was made, and he would consult with him on the subject before giving a definite expression of opinion. I may say the result was this : The alteration of regulations as far as we could to meet the complaints. Practically, as the law stands, it may have served the purpose intended, but it was not in the interests of the marine shipping in the colony. 4. As to the legislation regarding the employment of apprentices and boys at sea? —Well, in that respect the complaints are general, and whether it is that the owners of vessels take up a negative position respecting that legislation and going to extremes, it is not for me to say; but the fact is, that we have very few boys on our vessels, and there are very few apprentices. There may be a trimmer or two, but, generally speaking, there are none, or very few men, who have been trained as seamen, and the result is that our fleets are recruited outside the colony. A great

H.—26

many of those on the boats are foreigners ; they are very good seamen, but still the recruiting is not within ourselves. Probably some of the experts will be better able to give evidence on this point, as the complaints are so general. We know, as a fact, that there are so few boys employed that we desire to have the matter inquired into, and to provide a remedy, legislative or otherwise. 5. At whose instance or suggestion and under what circumstances did the provisions of the Shipping and Seamen's Act relating to the employment of apprentices or boys come to be initiated ? —I think it was general, and intended to be in the interest of the men themselves, so as to prevent too many boys being employed on the steamers. This was complained of, and it was alleged that the boys were forcing the men off the vessels. I think that was the reason for this being done. In working it, it would appear that the other extreme has eventuated, but whether it is indicative of the position taken up by the owners of the vessels or not, that is for the Commission to decide from the evidence. 6. Does the file you have before you throw any light upon the subject ?—Yes. You see questions have been asked, and the matter has been brought before Parliament. Both sides of the question have been given. I have no hesitation in saying that very few boys are engaged as apprentices on our New Zealand steamers or sailing vessels. Something would be required to be done. 7. Well, now, is there any other matter connected with the Marine Department to which you would like to refer, Mr. Seddon ?—No. As I have said in my evidence previously, there are one or two matters which require attention, matters that can be explained, and which I called attention to yesterday. I have had at different times control of the Marine Department. There was a change in the department on the ground of economy—it was called economy. The department was placed under Mr. Glasgow, and the head of the Marine Department (which had been separated at that time) was retired. Mr. Allport was the Chief Clerk, and practically the head of the department, under Mr. Glasgow. That is the position of the department at present. I may say, that previous to this I had confidence in Mr. Allport. I knew he was the adviser of Mr. Glasgow. With the many duties Mr. Glasgow had to perform, it would be most important for him (Mr. Allport) to have a detailed knowledge of the work of the department. And when looking through the correspondence last night, I called the attention of the Commission to what appeared to me to be an error of judgment or shortcoming on the part of Mr. Allport. I allude to that time the speech was made by Mr. John Hutcheson in the House on the 26th of August, 1898. There is something said by Mr. Allport—namely, that he had thought Yon Schoen would see me, or had seen me, and that that ground might have weighed with him in not telling Mr. Glasgow. I think it only just to point out this: He states in the memorandum to me, that he thought it was his duty to inquire whether I had seen Yon Schoen, but he does not put that in the memorandum in explanation why he had not brought the matter under the notice of his chief at the time. I want to be just to everybody in connection with this matter. Dr. Findlay : I desire to put some questions to Mr. Seddon oq behalf of Captain Allman. Judge Ward : On behalf of Captain Allman ? Well, I do not know exactly what status Captain Allman has at present, but if there be any particular point on which he desires to defend himself, surely it will be better after he has given evidence on the matter? If you wish, then Mr. Seddon could be recalled. At present I do not know what status you have. Counsel for any witness might claim the right to cross-examine all the other witnesses, and that would lead to endless confusion. Dr. Findlay : I submit, your Honour, that under the first reference there is provision that witnesses giving evidence may be cross-examined. Judge Ward : Quite true; but by whom ? Dr. Findlay : By the parties affected, I presume. Judge Ward : What reference is it ? Dr. Findlay : I will give your Honour the reference directly. Mr. Seddon : Without wishing to interfere with your decision, Sir, I might say that it will be very inconvenient for me to have to come backwards and forwards here just at present every time any one wishes to question me. I have my own work to do, and would prefer to finish here now. Judge Ward (to Dr. Eindlay): There is no allegation against Captain Allman at present. Dr. Findlay : I do not know whether Mr. Hanlon has formulated a charge against Captain Allman, but certain things have been disclosed against him. Judge Ward : I quite agree with you. I would be very sorry to prevent Captain Allman from having the opportunity of defending himself against any charge that has been made. But if the Premier wishes to get through all his evidence at once, there can be no objection. Mr. Seddon : I would prefer to get finished. Dr. Findlay (to Judge Ward): Have I your Honour's permission to question the Premier ? Judge Ward : Yes, under the circumstances. 8. Dr. Findlay.] I understand, Mr. Seddon, that you admit having had an interview with Captain Allman in the Cabinet-room prior to your departure for England ?—Yes. 9. You are aware of those present at a deputation who were waiting upon you for the purpose of furthering Captain Jones's claims, re a service certificate?— Yes. 10. I suggest to you that the deputation consisted of Captain Yon Schoen, possibly with others, but Captain Yon Schoen was present?—He was present as one of the deputation. 11. Can you remember that on this particular occasion Captain Yon Schoen was present ?—■ I think he was present at the time Captain Allman came into the room. 12. Do you recollect that when Captain Allman came into the room Captain Yon Schoen expressed to you and to Captain Allman his opinion as to the qualifications and service of Captain Jones ?—There is no doubt whatever that Captain Yon Schoen did urge that the service had been performed. That document which is signed by Mr. Williams is, I believe, in Mr. Yon Schoen's handwriting.

H.—26.

13. The document is a declaration as to the service which had been performed by Captain Jones ?—Yes. 14. A declaration which sets out that Captain Jones had had over three years' sea service ? —Yes. 15. That declaration the department declared to be false, practically, by saying that the service had not been performed ? —Yes. 16. That, you say, is in the handwriting of Captain Yon Schoen?—Of course, I am not an expert in handwriting. I have seen the writing, and I should say, from a casual glance, it was his writing. But I would not swear to it, because Ido not know his writing sufficiently well. But, knowing the writing on the files, it led me to think it was his handwriting. 17. Have you been able to ascertain in whose handwriting these answers were which were given to Captain Allman in the examination room ? —Well, there is a similarity between the handwriting in the answers and the questions. 18. Is it true that you are aware that Captain Yon Schoen is the conductor of a Navigation School in Wellington ? —Yes. 19. Has he been so for many years?— Yes. 20. He applied for the position of Nautical Adviser to the Government?—-Yes. If the file is given me I will find his application. It is dated 13th December, 1894. [Application read]. Judge Ward : Is all this necessary ? Dr. Findlay : I did not ask Mr. Seddon to read it through. I only want to get at this fact. From the statement just made, he (Yon Schoen) was a teacher of twenty years' standing. He started in 1877. At the time of this interview he had been a teacher for twenty years. Mr. Seddon: He was one of the applicants for the position, and by this list and on the recommendation of the Department, Captain Marciel was No 1 and Captain Yon Schoen was No. 2. That is the recommendation for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the Government. 20a. Dr. Findlay.} He was an unsuccessful applicant then for the position which the Government gave'to Captain Allman?—Yes. I will read the recommendation that was made to the Government. Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. Hon. Minister. I submit herewith the applications received for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. The advertisement was as follows :— " Marine Department, Wellington, Ist September, 1894. " Applications will be received at this office up to noon of Wednesday, the 26th September, 1894, for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the Department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, at a salary of four hundred pounds (£400) per annum. " The successful applicant will bs required to perform all suoh duties in connection with the Marine Department as may from time to time be determined on. " Applications must be accompanied with a statement of the applicant's service at sea and copies of certificates and testimonials, and no application can be entertained from any person who does not hold a certificate of competency as Master Extra. " By command. " W. T. Glasgow, Secretary." N.B. —Time was extended to the 17th October, 1894. There are seventeen applicants. Of these, ten do not possess the qualification stipulated for—viz., extra master's certificate. Captain Strang, who is among the ten, appears to be very well qualified for the position in aii other respects. I think, however, that it will be admitted that the Chief Examiner must have the highest certificate obtainable, if the certificates issued in New Zealand are to command the confidence and respect of the Board of Trade and the other oolonies. If the proposal to waive this qualification were entertained, I submit that the claims of Captain Edwin and Sir Arthur Douglas should have consideration. Of the seven candidates who are possessed of extra master's certificates, the best, in nay judgment, appear to be Captain <T. A. H. Marciel and Captain G. Yon Schoen. The former has been nine years in the P. and 0. service, is thirty-five years of age, has excellent testimonials, and educationally appears, to be a man of superior status. Captain Yon Schoen has also good testimonials, and would, no doubt, be a competent Examiner. I have seen both these gentlemen, and I am of opinion that the appointment of Captain Marciel would be most advantageous to the Department. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 18th October, 1894.—Refer to Cabinet.— J. G. Wabd. 22/10/94. In Cabinet.—24th October, 1894.—Stand over for one month.—A. Willis, Secretary. Referred, 24/11/94.— W. T. G. 21. That refers to the Nautical Adviser, I understand?— That refers to the position which was subsequently given to Captain Allman. 22. Dr. Giles.] Was Captain Marciel appointed at the time?— No. Captain Allman was appointed. The appointment of Captain Allman did not take place until he had obtained an extramaster's certificate. A statement has been made that the certificate had been ohtained by fraud. The Government inquired into it, when the rumour was first mooted, and on the files you will find that he went through an examination taking three or four days, and the Marine Board in Sydney certifies that Captain Allman did his work quickly and well. Then, when this came up again, I cabled to the Minister for Marine, New South Wales, and he cabled back to say that the statements made were incorrect, and that there was no foundation whatever for such outrageous statements made by Mr. John Hutcheson. 23. Dr. Findlay.] Have you got the statement as to the competency shown by Captain Allman in his examination ?—I think so. Yes. Sib, — Sydney, 16th March, 1899. I have the honour to report that George Allman was examined for an extra-master's certificate in December, 1894. He commenced his examination in Navigation on Tuesday, the 4th, at 9.30 a.m., and finished on Friday, the 7th, at about 4 p.m. —about 28 hours. I allowed him to come up each morning at 9.30, as he had to be in Wellington at an early date. He was examined in seamanship on the Bth. George Allman was only before me once for his examination as extra master. He was very quiok and correct with his work. I have, &c, John H. Bedfoed, The Seoretary Marine Board of New South Wales. Examiner in Navigation, Marine Board,

H.—26

There is a letter accompanying that from Mr. Eeid, Premier of New South Wales. 24. Are you aware that Captain Allman's application was accompanied by testimonials showing the highest qualifications as a seaman ?—Yes; they are here on the file in book form. 25. Will you tell me what positions Captain Yon Schoen held in the Government service in the year 1897? —Captain Yon Schoen has held on many occasions the position of Nautical Assessor. I got a little list prepared the other day for my own information, and on that list I found that he was the Assessor for the following vessels : —

26. He was Nautical Assessor in those cases ? In addition to acting in this capacity, I understand he was Adjuster of Compasses ?—Yes. 27. Are fees paid by the Government for that work ?—For adjusting compasses he is paid by those who employ him. He holds a license from the Government. 28. Will you tell me whether in his capacity as Adjuster of Compasses or as Nautical Assessor, he would have occasion to see Mr. Allport occasionally ? Would his duties in any way justify him in attending the Marine office, in the Government Buildings ? —-Well, I know he had the run pretty well of that office—Yes. I have nothing against Yon Schoen except in regard to this matter of Jones, but he had the run of that office. 29. You told Mr. Hanlon that in your opinion he was a man with a grievance ?—Yes, he had a grievance. First of all, I think he would naturally expect the appointment that Captain Allman received. 30. Did the shipmasters petition you regarding Yon Schoen ?—There had been some complaints, but the attention of the Government had been drawn to the fact that he had been Assessor in these cases. I know it was in the mind of the department that one who was presenting so many pupils —because he must have passed something like six hundred—he would be sitting as an Assessor in cases where his own pupils would be officers. He had this grievance, and he had also the run of the Marine office, but of course this business might have taken him there. I know he was on good terms with the department. 31. Do you know that in the year 1897, and since then, there has been a rival school of navigation conducted by Mr. Gifford ?—Yes, I know there has been that school. 32. Do you know there has been a very keen competition between the schools for pupils?— Not to my own knowledge. 33. Have you ever seen a letter, a copy of which appeared in the papers, addressed by Captain Yon Schoen to a pupil of the rival school ? I will read you the letter, and you might be able to tell me where you heard of it or saw it. It is addressed to Mr. Hood : — Dbab Sib, — Trinity House, Hill Sbreet, Wellington, 10th September, 1897. I have been waiting for you since last Thursday week, on which day you left the " Takapuna " to take your place (as contracted upon between you and me) at the Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Wellington, 1 have received official information, upon which I will not enlarge. Suffioe for me to say that I think you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House, in Hill Street, to-morrow (Saturday) afternoon, at half-past 3 o'clock. I shall stay in for that purpose. Yours truly, Mr. Hood, Princes Street. Yon Schoen. This was in the Press of Christchurch on the 16th September, 1897. My attention was drawn to it first when this thing came out about Jones. I have seen it. 34. Well, may I ask you whether the suggestion was followed by the department? The officer to whom this was addressed was a pupil of a rival instructor. Do you know whether any inquiry was made as to the means by which Captain Yon Schoen got the official information to which he refers in this letter?—No, I cannot speak upon that. 35. Now, in your statement to Mr. Hanlon you read papers which showed that Captain Yon Schoen had prepared some compass-adjustment work for Captain Allman, and that Mr. Allport, in his statement, said that he saw Captain Yon Schoen, who told him that this work had been supplied to two candidates —Captains Bendall and McLellan—and asked Mr. Allport to show him the papers for the purpose of comparison. Now, I wish to ask you, Mr. Seddon—l understand this work consists of a large number of figures—if you ascertained how Captain Yon Schoen came to know that Captains Bendall and McLellan had answered any question upon that work ?—The only way that comparison could be made was for Captain Yon Schoen to see the original papers, and they could only be shown to him by Captain Allman or whoever had custody of them. 36. Had Mr. Allport the custody of them ? —They would be kept in the department. 37. Assuming it was Captain Allman or Mr. Allport, was it in accordance with the duty of either to show an outsider the work done by examinees in the examination-room ?—I should say not, but if Captain Yon Schoen had done these papers for these candidates, as he admits he did for Captain Jones he would have the original himself.

Name of Vessel. Where Inquiry held. DateB of Inquiry. Grace Dent Thurso Halcione Fifeshire John Bell Coromandel Coromandel Ohau .. Marramarra Delmira Takapuna Manaia Wainui Wanganui.. Greymouth Wellington Lyttelton .. Wellington Westport .. Wellington Wellington New Plymouth Wellington Wellington Wellington Wellington 28th February to 2nd March, 1895. 9th to 22nd August, 1895. 15th January, 1896. 4th to 8th January, 1896. 8th and 9th April, 1896. 20th April to 3rd May, 1896. 29th May and 1st and 5th June, 1896. 12th, 13th, and 15th June, 1896. 16th and 22nd June, 1896. 14th and 15th December, 1896. 18th and 19th December, 1896. 3rd, 5th, 6th, and 9th February, 1897. 23rd, 24th, and 26th July, 1897.

H.—26

38. That is not suggested. The suggestion is that the papers were shown to him either by Mr. Allport or Captain Allman, and by that means Captain Yon Sohoen was enabled to make the disclosure alleged ?—Mr Allport said he had satisfied himself from the papers that it was so; but how Captain Yon Schoen knew it was so, I cannot say. 39. Now Captain Yon Schoen had twenty years' experience as a navigation teacher, and I presume knew the regulations applying to a service certificate ?—Yes. 40. And you told the Commissioners that he accompanied Captain Jones on the day in question ?—I know that Captain Yon Schoen was present on one occasion. 41. And can you say whether Captain Yon Schoen claimed before you that Captain Jones was entitled to a service certificate ?—Yes; no doubt about it. 42. There was no discussion before your departure for England as to the examination of Captain Jones ? —No ; I knew that they had been to see Mr. Hall-Jones about it before I left, and that is why, of course, I said get it settled. I knew they were still at it. Mr. Seddon cross-examined by Mr. Gray, on behalf of Captain Jones. 48. Mr. Gray.] You have told the Commission, Mr. Seddon, that some considerable interest was being taken in Captain Jones's application for a service certificate ? —Yes. 44. You considered the matter yourself ?—I was between the Minister and Captain Jones. 45. I understand that you were seen by some of Captain Jones's friends, and you considered it again yourself anew? —I considered it, as the deputation came before me as Prime Minister. 46. A deputation waited upon you in connection with this matter ? —Yes. 47. And in consequence of the views put before you by the deputation, you referred the matter to Captain Allman ?—Yes; there has always been a doubt in my mind as to whether Captain Jones had the service qualification. 48. You still have that doubt ?—Yes. 49. You are not satisfied, Mr. Seddon, that Captain Jones was not entitled by reason of his service to a service certificate ? —That is the doubt that has always been in my mind. It is quite possible that the department might err on the right side, but the Minister is quite right in supporting the department. But if the service could be proved, then it was the duty of the department to do justice to Captain Jones. 50. Then you admit that if Captain Jones is right, he should get his certificate ?—-That is right. 50a. In point of fact, you telegraphed from Auckland that you thought Jones was entitled to what he wanted? —Yes. 51. That was your view when you telegraphed to Mr. Hall-Jones ? —That is the view I have always held, subject, of course, to proof of his qualifications. 52. As to qualification, Mr. Seddon, I think you had no doubt ?—I have no doubt whatever that Captain Jones is a much superior man to many others holding certificates. He has the practical knowledge, but technically he was barred on account of the regulation. 53. You told the Commission there are a great many captains holding masters' certificates who are less qualified than Captain Jones ?—Yes. We had to refuse one the other day—a man who is simply in charge of a fishing-vessel trading between Stewart's Island and Invercargill. According to a proviso in the Act of 1894 a man can claim a certificate if he has proved service in a 15-ton vessel for three years—the same certificate for which Captain Jones is applying. Compare the responsibilities of the two captains, and the comparison is all in favour of Captain Jones. The certificate referred to was refused, but if the applicant were to apply for a mandamus I believe we would be forced to give him the certificate. 54. The late Captain Fairchild expressed to you, Mr. Seddon, the opinion that Captain Jones was highly qualified ? —Yes, on more than one occasion. 55. And Captain Fairchild was an officer of very great experience, and upon whose opinion you would place great reliance ?—Yes. 56. Captain Allman had made the same statement to you ?—Yes, and reduced it to writing. 57. And, moreover, owing to your own knowledge of Captain Jones, and the opinions of your officers, Captains Fairchild and Allman, you are satisfied that he (Jones) was a competent seaman ?—Yes. 58. And you have seen nothing to alter your view?— No. 59. And he has seen considerable service?— Yes. A good many captains have spoken to me about him, and recommended him for a service certificate. At the same time, the regulations debarred me from giving the certificate. 60. You produced yesterday a statutory declaration made by Captain Jones ?—Yes. 60a. You know the circumstances of how that declaration came to be sent to the department? —No, I do not. 61. You know it came from Captain Allman, and that it was put in in support of Captain Allman's second statement? —Yes ; Captain Allman's letter says so in effect. The fact is, Captain Allman got himself into trouble in doing a favour for Captain Jones, and Captain Allman was called upon to explain his conduct. Captain Jones very naturally helped Captain Allman at his request. 62. You said, Mr. Seddon, that some of the statements in that declaration are, in point of fact, incorrect? —No doubt about it. 63. How about the trip to Day's Bay in the 'Duchess': do you remember it ?—Yes, certainly. 64. And the production of the stimulant ? —Yes. 65. Did you have any conversation with Captain Jones on that occasion ? —No. I might have made a jocular remark, such as " How are you getting on, old chap?" or something of that sort. 66. Did you know that he had the certificate at that time ?—No, I did not know.

H.—26

67. Had it passed out of your mind?—l cannot say that it had passed out of my mind, but it was not in my recollection. 68. You very kindly took some interest in Captain Jones before your departure for England. You had received a deputation, had seen him (Captain Jones), Captain Fairehild had reminded you about the matter on the way to Auckland, and you had telegraphed to your colleague, Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. 69. Now, had you forgotten about Captain Jones and the service certificate when you returned from England ? —lf Captain Jones had upbraided me because nothing had been done and come to see me about that certificate, I would have thought it was the service certificate. 70. Do you say that the question of his application had passed out of your mind ?—How could it pass out of my mind ? I had not forgotten all about it. 71. You made no inquiry on your return? You did not ask Jones how he was getting on in reference to his certificate ? —No, I did not. 72. You say that no reference was made to his certificate on that trip to Day's Bay ?—Yes; I am positive that no reference was made. 73. Then you say Captain Jones made a statutory declaration and said something that was false ? —Yes. In the first place, he is wrong about his coming there at all. My recollection is that somebody went for him and brought him to the cabin. In the other case, as regards my saying that I put my foot down and got what he asked me for in spite of the lot of them, I did not say anything like it. 74. Then Captain Jones invented it?—l said, "How are you, old chap? "or something of that sort. 75. He has not invented the trip to Day's Bay or the stimulant ? —No; I cannot say that. 76. You see on the face of it that the declaration was made before a solicitor of the Supreme Court ?—lf he had put the question to me, " Did you communicate with your colleague before you left for Home ? " 77. Judge Ward.} You did not say so ?—I did not say so. I might have said "Is everything going all right with you ? " " How are you getting on old chap ? " But no reference was made to the service certificate. There were four or five gentlemen present. Is it likely I would enter into departmental matters there ? 78. Mr. Gray.] However, I suppose the matter can be checked, as you know who were present ?—Yes, I hope so, as I do not wish to do any injustice to Captain Jones. 79. Mr. Travers.] When you had your first conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones with reference to Mr. Hutcheson's speech, was there anything in his manner to indicate surprise at the existence of a certificate ? —No, he was not surprised. 80. In point of fact, so far as his demeanour went, he appeared not to know of the existence of a certificate ?—No, I cannot say that he did or did not. 81. But there was no surprise or anything of that sort? —He was surprised, like myself, at Mr. Hutcheson's charges. 82. But that is not the point I ask. Did he express surprise, or did he say that it was the first time that he knew a certificate had been granted, or anything that would lead you to suppose that up to that time he was ignorant of its existence ?—Well, I have told you all that really occurred at the interview, and, of course, if he had said anything more to me I would have told the Commissioners. 83. Then we might assume that, as far as you were concerned, you are justified in assuming that he (Mr. Hall-Jones) knew of the existence of the certificate of which complaint was made ? — Yes, and it might have helped me with my colleague if he had hinted who had obtained the certificate. I was at a total loss to know who the person was who had been guilty of the irregularities. Had I known, my colleague would have been able to help me to follow the matter up. 84. But, at all events, nothing was said of his knowledge of the matter?— No. 85. Can you produce the official authority to the examiners to make the examination of Captain Jones? There seems to be some communication under which they were authorised to carry out the examination. Mr. Hanlon: Mr. Glasgow informs me there is no such authority. Mr Travers : Then this examination was undertaken without authority ? Mi Hanlon: Mr. Glasgow informs me that there is no written document from the Collector of Customs to the examiners. 86. Mr. Travers.] Can you point to anything that authorised the appointment of Chief Examiner as distinct from any other examiner in these cases, either in the Act or the regulations ? — No. 87. But Captain Allman was appointed Chief Examiner?— Nautical Adviser is the term, and Chief Examiner. 88. If Captain Allman be Chief Examiner, was not Captain Edwin practically in a subordinate position in that respect?—No ; I think as Examiners they both had their statutory application. 89. Then, what is the meaning of the word " Chief" ?—Well, there is no use in it; it cannot alter the law. 90. Then, as far as I understand from the evidence, you placed entire confidence in Captain Allman ?—Not only in Captain Allman, but in all the officers. I either trust my officers, or send them about their business. 91. If Captain Yon Schoen made a complaint to you in connection with the examination of Captain Jones, you would not have placed any reliance upon it as against your confidence in the officers ? —He would have to show me something very definite. He would have to proof.

H.—26

92. If he had not shown you any proof, you would not have called upon the officers to justify their conduct ?—lf he had told me what he told Mr. John Hutcheson, or had written to me saying that Mr. Allport was in possession of information that grave irregularities had occurred, I would have sent for Mr. Glasgow or Mr. Allport, or whatever officer was concerned. 93. But, no doubt, in respect to your feelings of trust in the officers, you would not have supposed there was any truth in it ?—-No ; Ido not think that. Ido not believe even now, that beyond giving way on the spur of the moment, any wrong was done by Captain Allman. Ido not believe there was any collusion between him and Captain Jones, or that there was any between Yon Schoen and Jones. Captain Allman made the blunder. 94. You treat Mr. Airport's reticence in regard to the information given him as a dereliction of duty, do you ? —Yes. I regret it very much. If there had been any corruption, this thing might have been going on for some time. It might have been going on from the beginning of the year and during the time the speech was made by Mr. John Hutcheson, and a number of incompetent persons might have obtained certificates ; and consequently lives and property were in danger. 95. You understand the position Mr. Allport was placed in in the first instance. The communication was made to him in confidence and under promise of secrecy. And do you hold that he ought at once to have communicated that to the department without having any proof whatever of its correctness or anything to verify the statement made by Yon Schoen ? —I have no doubt that it would have saved me a good deal of anxiety if he had taken the head of the department into his confidence, and said, " I cannot disclose the names ; the information was given to me in confidence. The position is so-and-so." If he had done that, my opinion is that we should not have had all this trouble, and the Commission would not have been sitting to-day. 96. Assuming he had done so, was there anything on the file of the department by which the suggestion made by Yon Schoen could be verified.? —There would have been evidence from which some irregularity could be detected without the production of Captain Yon Schoen's books. It would be a coincidence merely — that is to say, the similarity and the result of the calculations. Mr. Allport, who is well acquainted with Yon Schoen's handwriting and Captain Airman's, when he saw the papers, would not have taken long to detect the similarity. It might have raised a suspicion in his mind—l am alluding to the Jones papers. Any one looking at the papers, and who knew the handwriting of Yon Schoen and Captain Allman, would detect from looking at the papers that they had something to do with it. 97. Well, you say the charge was sheeted home without Mr. Allport's assistance ?—Yes, upon the confession of Captain Allman. The probabilities are that if the head of the department had had the information he would have deemed it his duty to call Allman and put the matter before him, and in all probability the statement that Allman made afterwards would have been made at once. I believe Captain Allman knew all about it when the suspicion was first cast upon the department. 98. But the statement was made by Mr. Allport to Mr. Glasgow immediately after Mr. Hutcheson's speech ? —Mr. Glasgow did not know of the information possessed by Mr. Allport until after Mr. Hutcheson's speech; but after the speech he communicated with Mr. Glasgow. 99. Three months afterwards ? —Yes. 100. No notice had been taken of Mr. Hutcheson's speech at that time by the Government, had it?—No, because the head of the department knew nothing about it. He is a very highminded man and would hold a very strong opinion of Captain Allman, and think him incapable of such conduct. 101. Mr. Glasgow was satisfied that he (Captain Allman) was incapable of doing what was done ? —Yes. 102. When Mr. Allport communicated the matter to Mr. Glasgow, did he communicate it before you interviewed Mr. Glasgow?—l saw Mr. Glasgow after Mr. Huteheson's speech, and he informed me that he could not believe there was anything in the charges. Very often statements are made in the House, and afterwards proved to be untrue. Mr. Glasgow, having confidence in the officers under him, came to the conclusion that there was nothing in the charges. After that Mr. Allport communicated with Mr. Glasgow, and then he (Mr. Glasgow) verified the matter by examining the papers. Upon this Mr. Glasgow communicated with me as to what had been said by Mr. Allport, and he was very much put out about it. 103. He had satisfied himself there was evidence of it ? —Yes, otherwise he would not have told me. 104. He found there was some truth in Mr. Hutcheson's statement after ail?— Yes. 105. But, without this information, he had previously treated Mr. Hutcheson's evidence as invented?— Yes, until we had this evidence. 106. But, until you had Mr. Allport's evidence ? —Mr. Glasgow had every confidence in his officers, and he came to the conclusion that there was no foundation for the charges. 107. Then Mr. Allport made a communication to Mr. Glasgow : is that not so? And after that you thought there was something more in it ?—Yes; but you forget that in between there were these complaints made, and strong feeling was formed against Sir Arthur Douglas, Captain Edwin, and Captain Allman. 108. Was your faith in Captain Allman shaken before this, or immediately after Mr. Glasgow had communicated to you the result of what Mr. Allport told you ?—Most decidedly. The moment the head of the department tells me that there have been grave irregularities, I believe him. 109. Then you took action ?—I sent for the papers, and examined them for myself. 110. And came to the conclusion that there had been irregularities?— Yes. 111. But it was not until after Mr. Allport had made his communication to Mr. Glasgow that you looked through the papers ?—Yes, that is so. 5—H. 26.

H.—26

112. Up to that time you did not think of looking at the papers at all ? —No. 113. And your confidence had remained unshaken in the officers? —Yes. 114. Mr. Hanlon (to Mr Seddon).] Could you have known what papers to look at at that time ?—No. 115. Mr. Hislop.] Can you tell us, Mr. Seddon, who was Minister of Marine at the time this application of Captain Jones's was first put in ?—I should think it was Mr. Ward. 116. Were you ever Minister of Marine yourself?— Well, I have held nearly every portfolio in the Ministry. lam inclined to think that I have had charge of that department. 117. Can you furnish a statement showing what Ministers acted during 1896 and 1897 ?— Yes. 118. Can you remember the first date upon which the matter of Captain Jones's servicecertificate was brought before you personally ?—There is nothing on the file to show when the matter was first brought up. Captain Jones might have spoken to a Minister about it. The first reply to the application was sent by Mr. Glasgow, but there is nothing on the file to show that it was done by Ministerial authority. 119. What date was that?— That is the 4th June, 1895. 120. Then it would be after that date that you received the papers upon which you put a memorandum to Captain Allman, "Can anything be done to get over this difficulty?" From the papers there is evidence of inquiry being made? —Evidently inquiries were made by the department before Mr. Glasgow sent his letter of the 4th June. 121. Eeference was made by you in that memorandum to an envelope, and from which you received a reply from Captain Allman. Have you made any inquiries as to where that envelope is ?—I cannot understand it. It has puzzled me altogether. 122. You do not know where it is ? Have you made inquiry? Was it you who gave it to Captain Jones ?—I cannot say. As I have said, my secretary in this little docket that is attached to the papers 123. Pardon me ! That is not the matter lam referring to. It is the envelope upon which was contained your question, " Can anything be done to get over this difficulty ? " to which Captain Allman replied, " I have carefully considered Captain Jones's case, and I regret to say there is no way of getting over the difficulty ? " —My recollection is that some envelope contained the letter which was referred to here, sent by the sea-captains. And, I see that Mr. Allport was asked by my secretary (Mr. Hamer) on the Bth December, 1896 : — Mr. Allport.— Captain Jcnes says he sent in a letter signed by a number of sea-captains. Letter does not appear to be attached.— T. H. Hamer. 8/12/96. 124. Then your theory is that your envelope contained this paper, and was returned to Captain Jones ?—Yes. The reference says,— Mr. Hamer. The document referred to was returned to Captain Jones along with his other testimonials when he was informed that the certificate could not be issued.—G. Allpobt. 8/12/96. Will Captain Jones kindly supply letter referred to ?-T. H. Hamer. 19/12/96. Captain Jones says papers have not been returned to him.—T. H. Hamee. 21/12/96. 125. You state that the records prior to 1890 were not obtainable as to service ? —lt is not for me to say. I was quoting from what appeared on the documents before me. I could not express an opinion as to the records before 1890 ; I was not a Minister, and knew nothing about it. 126. Have you compared the statement of service of Captain Jones relatively to the date, 1890 —that is to say, how much of the service is since 1890, and before 1890 ?—I have not made the comparison myself : I leave that to the departmental officers. No doubt it was considered by them at the time. 127. How has the time been reduced to under three years? —That is shown in the red ink marginal notes in the application. 128. It would reduce the time to under three years without respect to any deductions which would probably be made in respect to service before 1890 ?—That I cannot say from memory. Of course, I have not done it myself. 129. But, no doubt, you would discuss this question with your officers?—My officers felt satisfied that the service had not been rendered, but there were no records to show that the service had not been rendered at the time. 130. Then there is no doubt that the service had been rendered, in your mind ?—No, I do not say that. 131. Will you kindly give us some reason for believing that the service had been rendered? —Well, the Act, of course, says since 1884 to 1895 ; that is eleven years. And knowing the work that Captain Jones was performing, going in and out of the harbour, he would not always apply to the department, but go and do the work without a permit. It is a free and easy way of doing things. Mr. McKellar says there was no record kept by the department of these trips, and it raises a doubt in any honest man's mind as to whether the old chap might not have put in the full time. 132. But the time which he alleges as the basis of his application is the time from 1884?— Well, take 1884 to 1890, and 1890 to 1895—the statement is made up of both periods—take the deductions which the Customs people took in respect of the period after 1890: that alone taken from his alleged service does not reduce it below three years. Well, I have got that memorandum of the 19th February, 1896. Prior to 1890 he says,— " .... I have made inquiry at the office of Inspector of Steamers re any record there of permits to go outside harbour issued prior to June, 1890, but find none recorded there. It is suggested that at that time permits

H.-26

were issued direct from Marine Office, and that Jones possibly made use of them as authority; and as it was not then apparently the practice to require him to enter and clear each time, that this will account for there being no record for the full period since 1887. D. MoKellae, Collector. 19/2/96. 133. Would you allow me to look at the record?— Yes, certainly. 134. Now, you see, Mr. Seddon, if you look at this you will find that the service in respect of which he claims is the service practically from 1887 ? —Yes, but you have been pinning me to 1890, and you are three years out; that is what I complain of. 135. Are the records kept from 1890 ?—According to Mr. McKellar here we have only ten prior to 1890 out of the whole list. 136. Are the deductions in respect of the period since 1890 ?—Most decidedly, yes. 137. And you reduced it by deductions to something like eighteen months: is it not so?—I had come to this conclusion : that as Mr. Williams, the employer of Captain Jones, had put his name to a document, I was not justified, nor would any Minister of the Crown be justified, in coming to the conclusion that a person of good repute would be wilfully guilty of fraud. 138. But did you not come to the conclusion, and act upon that conclusion, that the application as certified was incorrect ?—Under the advice of my department and responsible Government officers I refused the application. 139. I suppose you would not have refused if you had thought the application was correct ?— I came to the conclusion that my officers were satisfied, and, that being the case, I thought I was justified in refusing. 140. You thought it was a hard case? —Yes, I did think it was at the time, and I think so still. 141. You have already admitted that deductions were made in respect to the period when they did keep the records ? —No ; there is even a doubt there. I stand by my department. 142. Was not some of the service alleged to be performed illegally ?—I am not here to express an opinion upon the law; that is a matter for other persons, not for me. Not being a lawyer, but simply a layman, my interpretations may not be correct. 143. Allow me to suggest to you that you have expressed opinions on the law, ethics, and everything else since you have been here ?—There are things so patent 144. From advice you have received, some service had been performed without a permit being given ?—I would not say that. If there had been laxity, and captains had been allowed to perform services, and had performed services, which had not been recorded, lam not aware of it. Of course, Captain Jones might have had to go to the assistance of a vessel in distress when both the Customhouse and the Government Buildings were closed. 145. I want to know whether any of these cases were proved to be cases of this kind ? I suppose you would not put such cases on the same level where his master employed him to go outside?— There are records of granting the permits. 146. Have you ascertained if there was any laxity in granting these permits ? —No; there was some difficulty in getting them. There might have been a signal for the tug after the Customhouse and Government Buildings had been closed, and if a permit had to be obtained it would entail great loss to the owners. 147. Do you suggest that either loss or inconvenience to the owners is any reason for permission being given to a person to break the law ? —No ; but it would appear to me that the department had not been over strict in regard to these permits. 148. In regard to permits up to this time ?—Yes. 149. Do you say, knowing the due sense of responsibility, that your officers have been lax with regard to granting or not granting permits?—l simply say this : that it is quite evident to me that service has been claimed for dates which are not recorded in the department. 150. If there had been no laxity the record must be there ? —Up to what date ? 151. Up to 1890?— We will eliminate 1890 altogether. 152. Has there been any laxity, so far as you know, since 1890; and. if so, will you kindly specify that upon which you base your opinion ?—Well, I will take this paper which is marked in red ink, " Steamship ' Mana' :No record, 3/6/90." Now, there were four cases in the year 1890. 153. Of what, Mr. Seddon?—Well, in the first place—call it what you like—there is no record in June, August, and October; and Jones is actually allowed to be in charge himself on the 30th December of the same year. Now, we come to 1891 and 1892 : —

The department had evidently allowed Jones to go on the 12th November, 1892, and there was no time shown as to how long be took. I know, of course, when I get hold of the file of papers

Ship's Name. Date of Commencement. Date of Termination. Time engaged. Where trading. Mana (Jones) 23/1/91 23/1/91 Months. Days. 0 1 Wellington, Ohau Bay, T-j Kamora, Cook Strait. Wellington,Terawhiti,Ofcer.insi,Cook Strait Wellington, Palliser Biy, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, French Pass. Wellington, Terawhiti. Wellington, Terawhiti. Wellington, Terawhiti, Mana Island. Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Cook Strait, Wairau. Otaki. Mana (no reoord) Mana (no record) Mana (no record) Mana (Jones) Mana (Jones) Mana (no record) Mana (no record) Mana (no record) Mana (Jones) 31/5/91 11/9/91 17/10/91 3/12/91 9/1/92 5/3/92 14/6/92 1/8/92 17/11/92 4/7/91 26/9/91 22/11/91 3/12/91 13/1/92 2/4/92 30/6/92 8/9/92 17/11/92 1 4 0 15 1 5 0 1 0 5 0 28 0 16 1 7 0 1

H.—26

that, whilst there was no record on the 1st August, 1892, they have a record of Jones being there on the 17th November, 1892.

There is the evidence. 154. I suppose you considered this application with your officers?— Yes. 155. You had the checked returns sent you by your officers?— Yes. 156. Did you at that time have any suspicion that your officers were misinforming you ? — No. 157. And you accepted their statement? —Yes, with the reluctance I have told you—that there was a doubt. 158. It amounts to this—that Mr. Williams alleged, or Captain Jones alleged, that he had performed service upon days in respect to which no permits had been issued. Is that not so? — It does not follow. 159. If there had been a permit granted by the department in respect of any of these days, would it not have been so recorded?—lt does not follow. 160. It amounts to this, that in order to back up Mr. Williams's statement you would have to assume first that the permit was granted, and that the officer committed a dereliction of duty in not recording it ?—lt does not follow at all. 161. Well, what does follow ?—lt follows that it was not considered of much importance at the time. 162. Was Mr. Williams asked to produce any permits in respect to those days where there was no record ?—That I cannot tell you. 163. Did you satisfy yourself on that point ?—I could only satisfy myself from' the information put before me by my officers. If the Marine Department had written to Mr. Williams to produce these, a copy of that communication would be upon the file. But there is nothing on the file to show me what was done. 164. But, no doubt, it was made perfectly clear to Captain Jones that there was no record with regard to the number of those days?—l do not know. lam not in a position to say. 165. Is it true that Captain Jones has been furnished with a copy of this ? —I cannot say whether he was or not. 166. You informed him yourself that the service had been reduced by more than half, did you not ? —I do not know on what authority you make that statement, Mr. Hislop. 167. Well, did you?—l told Captain Jones, and told his friends too, that what I required was proof that the time had been served. 168. Did you tell them anything else ? —I did not go into detail with them. 169. Did they not ask you ?—No ; I think the conversation was general. Ido not know that I went into detail. I should say that what occurred was this: that I told them that the departmental officers stated that Jones had not served the time. 170. You say that you had this first brought under your notice some time in 1895 ?—1895 or the beginning of 1896. 171. In 1895, was it not, Mr. Seddon ? You stated from the files that there was a letter there dated June, 1895 ?—I should say now, speaking from memory, that it was brought under my notice in 1895. 172. Then, after that letter was written to which you referred, who first brought it under your notice again?—l should think Captain Jones himself. ] 73. No one else ?—No. I think it was Captain Jones himself. 174. And was it that the occasion upon which you made the memorandum, " Can anything be done to get over this difficulty " ?—That would be towards the end of 1896. 175. lam informed that it was the 21st December, 1895? —I should think from the files, and from what Captain Allman has stated, that it would be in 1896. 176. What I want to know is this, you remember the occasion you wrote a memorandum " Can anything be done to get over this difficulty " —you remember the occasion ?—Yes. 177. Well, now, was it on the second occasion that the matter was brought before you, or was it on the third or fourth, can you remember ? —I cannot remember, Mr. Hislop. The only thing

Ship's Name. Date of Commencement. Date of Termination. Time engaged. Where trading. Mana (Jones) Mana (Jones) Mana (Jones) Mana Mana (Lawton and Bendall)' Mana (Leys) Mana (no record) Duco (Butt) Mana (Butt) 25/10/92 1/12/92 5/12/92 9/2/93 27/3/93 26/10/92 1/12/92 5/12/92 8/2/93 25/4/93 Months. Days. 0 1 0 1 0 16 0 11 0 29 Wellington, Otaki, Kapiti, Mana. Wellington to Terawhiti. Wellington to Terawhiti. Wellington, Picton, Cook Strait. Wellington, Opunake, Guard's Bay. 11/5/93 1/7/93 24/8/93 1/11/93 17/6/93 18/7/93 14/9/93 23/11/93 1 6 0 17 0 21 0 22 Wellington, Wanganui, Kapiti, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Oterangi, Terawhiti. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti, Brothers. Wellington, Palliser Bay, White Rock. Wellington, Port Underwood, Brothers. Wellington, Glenburn, Palliser Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Picton. Duco (Lawton) .. Duco (Bendall) .. Duco (Bendall) .. Duco (Butt) Duco (Butt) Duco Duco (no record) 19/12/93 20/1/94 25/3/94 6/7/94 31/8/94 1/9/94 11/10/94 29/12/93 12/2/94 14/4/94 18/7/94 4/9/94 25/9/94 30/10/94 0 10 0 23 0 20 0 12 0 24 0 19 Wellington, Cook Strait, Picton. Picton, Wellington, Cook Strait.

H.—26

that makes me think it was 1896 was that at this time I have some recollection of the papers referred to having gone astray, and it was in 1896 that my secretary was asked by Captain Jones about this envelope and papers; as shown in this memorandum it was at the end of 1896. It appears strange if I saw and minuted that envelope in 1895 that it was not until the end of 1896 that any inquiry was made about it. But if I was told that it was in 1895 I was seen about it, 1 should not dispute it. I have seen several deputations in respect to this matter. 178. You stated there were two deputations waited upon you, can you tell us who were on the deputations?— Well, I have got it in my mind that there were some foundry men of "Wellington. 179. Were there any ladies?— Not on that occasion. But I have got it in my mind that some of the foundry-masters or engineers of this town either waited on me as a deputation or spoke to me privately. 180. Can you tell us whether there were any ladies, forming part of the Nelson or Wellington Liberal Associations, who waited upon you. Ido not want the names? —As far as Nelson is concerned, there is no such association. No deputation from any organization has waited upon me in Wellington. Ladies have spoken to me on behalf of Captain Jones, but not as representatives of any organization. Probably Captain Jones has told some of the ladies of his difficulty, and they may have brought the matter before me. 181. Now, I suppose, from the fact of this matter being before you from the middle of 1895 to the middle of 1897, you regarded it as one of those things which could be finally settled in one way, and that was by granting the certificate?—Oh, no. 182. Could a case of this kind be finally settled in any way except one ?—Yes ; by proof being given of the service. It was not impossible; it is not impossible now. 183. Are they ever settled except by granting a certificate? —Yes, by putting your foot down and saying, No, they will have to comply with the regulations. 184. Is that reservation for further proof contained in any communication ?—No ; none except a verbal one given by myself as a Minister of the Crown. 185. To the deputation?— Yes; and not only to the deputation, but to other people. 186. When was the last letter sent to Captain Jones on the subject ? —The last letter, as shown by the file, is as follows : — 187. I only want the date ? —The letter to myself was dated the 21st February, 1896 : — Hon. Premier. I have had a further examination made of the service set forth by Captain Jones, of the " Mana" and "Duco." Up to June, 1890, there are no records in the Customhouse to enable the service to be checked. Subsequently, the trips are marked in red ink, with the result that it is found that if Jones took the " Mana" outside in many of the cases given in bis list, he did so without any authority or permit from this department. A permit to act as master outside the harbour was only given to him once, in the case of the " Mana " going to the " Weathersfield " at Waikanae. On other occasions he was not in charge as master. Permits were given only on condition that a certificated master was in command. The names of these masters are inserted in red ink on the document attached. In some cases the time is much exaggerated, as will be seen by the red ink corrections. I have no hesitation in saying that the required service has not been proved, and I could not recommend the issue of a certificate. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1896. Reply accordingly.—R. J. S. 26/2/96. Captain J. Jones, No. 754/85. 27/2/96. And I say, " Eeply accordingly." The last communication that was sent was one in which it was stated that the certificates had not been granted. This is as far as the file shows. But I know that it was reopened after that; I know that I saw my colleague, the Minister of Marine, about it, Mr. Hall-Jones. 188. The application, had been made again verbally, I suppose ?—Yes; they were dissatisfied with the decision arrived at. 189. Was that verbal application ever accompanied by further proof of service ?—There is nothing to show that it was. 190. And, so far as you know, until you left for Auckland nothing had been done in the way of further proof ?—No ; I had been told before I left for Auckland that Mr. Hall-Jones had been seen about it. 191. Who told you ?—I cannot tell you at this moment —some of these people asked me about it. 192. They told you they had obtained further proof of service?—No, simply that they had been to see my colleague about it. If I had had the information I should have told him to get the thing settled, either in the affirmative or in the negative. 193. Did you see Captain Jones prior to your going on board the steamer " Tutanekai" ?—I saw him before I went away. 194. Just immediately before?—l could not tell whether it was just immediately before or not. 195. Did he not come down to the wharf? —He may have done so. 196. Did he not, as you were going away, ask you to leave instructions to do something for him ?—lf I saw Captain Jones it would be the same as if I saw you. He was a man with a grievance—a man who deemed himself wrongfully dealt with—and I might have told him that I would look into the matter. 197. And you told him that you would communicate by telegram before you left New Zealand ?—I do not think so. 198. You will not say you did not ?—No, I could not say so. 199. You will neither say one thing nor the other?—l dare say, if Captain Jones said that to me, I would not say that I did not say so. If he asked me to speak to Mr. Hall-Jones, I might have said so. He may have spoken to Captain Pairchild, asking him to help him to get it settled.

H.—26

200. I suppose you would like your colleague to be possessed of all the knowledge which you could impart to him in support of the request which you were making to him?—l had every confidence in my colleague, Mr. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine. He had the file before him, and his officers to advise him, and I knew he would do nothing wrong. 201. Let me remind you that Captain Allman's recommendation was already on the file, yet you thought it was necessary to say something about Captain Allman ?—Captain Allman's minute was in reply to a minute of mine on those captains' letters, and when he replied he had not seen all the papers. Whether anything had transpired between that and the time I sent that telegram, and which had been put before the Minister of Marine, who was then dealing with it, I cannot say. 202. Could you not trust your colleague to get Captain Allman's recommendation and opinion without repeating it in your telegram ?—Most decidedly ; but how could my colleague know what Captain Allman had said to me? Captain Allman said to me distinctly that Captain Jones was well qualified. In his own words, he said, " I would rather trust myself with Jones than any other man in New Zealand." 203. Could you not have trusted him to get that information without any suggestion on your part ? —lt was simply a suggestion, and if it were to occur to-morrow I would repeat it. I have nothing to regret. It was a telegram to my colleague to get the matter settled one way or the other. 204. Your conviction was that he was entitled to get what he asked for?—My conviction was that he was a competent seaman. The word " qualified," of course, is there. 205. We will take the words of the telegram: "lam of opinion he is entitled to what he wants." Is that what you gave as your deliberate opinion?— With the proof I have said, Yes. 206. That is the qualification you have put?— Yes. 207. Why did you not put that in the telegram?—As I say, I relied on my colleague for that. 208. You are giving your colleague no hesitating opinion, but an absolute opinion on the matter as it stood. Is that not so ?—Yes ; but the document must speak for itself. You may put a construction on it that I never intended, and which it does not bear. 209. What did you intend?—l intended that Mr. Hall-Jones should get a matter settled which had been strung on from 1895 up to the time of the telegram. 210. And which, in the meantime, had been settled several times by the department ?— Without further proof there was a bar there, and I suggested to my colleague to look into it. 211. You did not suggest to your colleague that he should give further proof?—My colleague has sufficient intelligence without my telling him to do this. I took it that my colleague would use his common sense and feel his responsibility. 212. Might I ask if your colleague had not sufficient intelligence to deal with this matter without interference from the Premier? —Yes, my colleague had; but you must understand the responsibility of a Prime Minister. Constitutionally, the Prime Minister has a right to look into any matter concerning the departments, and I had been looking into the matter before my colleague was entrusted with that department. 213. Is it not a fact that no Minister, Premier or otherwise, should interfere with the administration of another Minister, except through Cabinet ? —lt is not. 214. It is not the course you pursue? —Certainly not. It is not the constitutional course either. 215. Can you show me any authority for a Minister, Premier, or otherwise, interfering with another Minister, except by reference to Cabinet?— Yes; if I said your Cabinet. Your Premier often violated constitutional principles. 216. Can you give me one single instance in which he did it ?-—I do not think the Commission is set up to try a constitutional question like this. I say that His Excellency has a right to see all papers in a department of the State, and the Premier has a right to ask for all papers in a department, and to go through them. 217. Are you not aware that Mr. Bryce retired because he would not allow the Premier to interfere with his department ?—I know he retired from the House because he was ashamed of himself for being ruled out of order by the House. I know that the responsible head is the Queen, or the Governor, her representative, and next to him is the Prime Minister; and I know the duty of a Prime Minister. If complaints are made, it is his duty to make himself acquainted with the facts, and all that I have done is to make myself acquainted with the facts ; and all questions on this matter have been referred to the Minister of Marine before going to Cabinet. 218. You'say that your duty has been to master the facts. Was your request to Captain Allman doing nothing else—" Can anything be done to get over this difficulty?"—No, I did not say that. 219. What did you say?—" Can anything be done for this man." 220. Is that not more than making yourself acquainted with the facts? —Yes ; every Minister does it. You will find memoranda of every character, and when lam away from Wellington and an emergency arises you will find a Minister doing what I did on that occasion. 221. Was the Minister of Marine absent on that occasion? —I cannot tell you. 222. W T as he absent from both deputations ? —Well, during the time, from 1895 to 1896, Mr. Ward was Minister, and was absent a good deal. I told you I had been Minister of Marine and had complete run of that department, and of other departments in the Buildings ; having been Minister of Marine I had the particulars with respect to this matter before me. I think the officers of the department will tell you that I keep a general supervision over the departments. 223. And the others are puppets to do what you tell them ?—No, and you have no right to insult my colleague. If you applied that to yourself and the Atkinson Government it would be. different, but you cannot apply that to my colleagues.

H.—26

224. Have they a separate being from you, or do they act according to your will?— They have a separate individuality, a separate responsibility, and that responsibility has, in my opinion, been discharged satisfactorily. That is my opinion of my colleagues. It suits other people for party purposes to run them down and to elevate me, in order to make out that it is a one-man Ministry, but it is nothing of the kind. 225. Your Minister of Marine is a man you trust, and you say he is not a puppet ?—You will find that out cost if you tackle him. 226. He did deal with this matter finally and refused it, did he not ?—I am on my oath and must speak from my own knowledge. Inferentially, according to Captain Allman's suggestion, he had gone into the question of the examination application. The proper answer would be that the application for a service certificate was abandoned. 227. That is after you left ?— Yes. 228. But before you left, had not the matter been finally dealt with and refused ?—lt had not been granted. It had. been refused in 1896, according to these papers. 229. Coming back to the question I asked you half an hour ago, when you digressed: Having left the colony and left the matter to the Minister, you were anxious that he should obtain the knowledge you had, expert or otherwise, of this particular application ?—My reply is that I had every confidence in Mr. Hall-Jones. He is not a rash man ; if he errs at all, it is in being careful. I had every confidence when I left for England that I should leave everything perfectly safe until I came back. T thought very little of the matter then, as I do now. It is simply a mountain being made out of a mole-hill for political purposes. It is not likely that I-'should trouble myself about Captain Jones and his certificate at a moment when I was bidding good-bye to my friends and the country for a long time. The whole thing is simply painful, that jl-should be here to-day over such a matter. 230. We know all about its being painful, and are very sorry?— You do not look as if you were sorry, but the public are disgusted with the whole thing. 231. I suppose we may assume that you were anxious to give all the information possible to your colleague ?—Well, I gave him a lead in respect to the other telegram I quoted. 232. The one in which you sent a blessing?—l told him to cut down; the/expenses, to look after the unemployed, and hoped I would find him well when I returned. You might say there was corruption in saying " Cut down expenses and keep down the unemployed." You have just as much right to say there was as with respect to this. 233. I notice in the evidence you gave in the Supreme Court, I think it was, that you were not very sure whether Captain Faircbild had spoken to you. At least it is so reported that itlwas doubtful. Is that so ?—No ; there could be no doubt about it in my mind. 234. You said, " I think on my way to Auckland that the late Captain Fairchild " Mr. Hanlon : He said, " I think it was on my way to Auckland." I have the official report: you have the newspaper report. 235. Mr. Hislop.} ' 0 ' I think on my way to Auckland the late Captain Fairchild asked me whether anything had been done in respect of the service certificate for Captain Jones?"—My evidence is not to be relied upon from what appears in the newspapers, because no one knows better than you do that where there is condensation—and the reporters have to condense in many instances—what is given is not what the witness has actually said. Judge Ward : The Commissioners are not disposed to take a newspaper report as verbatim evidence. Witness (to Mr. Hislop) : You asked me if I have any doubt as to what Captain Fairchild said. I say I have no doubt. My last recollection of speaking to Captain Fairchild was at the side of the boat. I have no doubt in my mind that he did speak to me, and I have told the Court that the telegram was dictated by me between Onehunga and Auckland. 236. Mr. Hislop.] Did you ever refer to Captain Fairchild as to whether Captain Jones had performed the service ?—Having a trip at one time with Captain Fairchild the question of the service came up, and the old Captain said he had known Captain Jones so long as doing the work in the harbour and at the Heads that his idea was that he must have the time. Whether it was from 1884 up to the time you are speaking of I cannot tell you. 237. All he said was in respect to Captain Jones' ability?— His ability and the length of time he had been going in and out of the harbour. 238. The technical question, whether Captain Jones had performed the three years or not, which was the only question you had to deal with, was that referred to by Captain Fairchild ? —Certainly not. He had only a general knowledge, and understood all about the technicalities. Captain Fairchild and Captain Jones were captains of the old school, and I would trust them to-morrow sooner than some of these new-fangled ones. 239. May I ask you when you first saw your telegram of the 17th April as received by Mr. Hall-Jones. —I believe the first time I saw it was in Court. 240. In the case of the Solicitor-General against Jones?— Yes, I was told by my colleague the purport of it, but the first time I saw it was in the Court. 241. Had you kept a copy of it ?—No. 242. Was it a memo. ?—Yes. 243. What became of your copy of the memo?—lt would be destroyed. They are all destroyed as between colleague and colleague. I was not to know that it would go before an official at all. It was lucky that I sent the second telegram, because he pinned the two together, otherwise Captain Aliman's contention as to the position might have been a matter of evidence, namely, to get this thing settled before I came back. Had it not been for that telegram, there would have been colour given to the contention, owing to the lapse of time and defective memories, and it would have been considered that I had told my colleague to pass Captain Jones.

H.—26

244. You meant it to be settled before you came back?—l simply said get it settled. The telegram will speak for itself. 1 left it to the common-seuse of my colleague to take the proper course. lam going to quote Mr. John Hutcheson, ex-M.H.E., to bear out what I say. 245. Mr. Hutcheson is not before the Commission ?—But I am, and I said the only application I had before me in reference to a certificate was that of Captain Jones. That is at the second interview, to which he said " I agree that that is so." If, therefore, I had known of a certificate being granted to Captain Jones, how could I, in August, 1898, be in a position to tell Mr. Hutcheson that the only application I knew of in respect of a certificate was that of Captain Jones ? 246. Am I to infer that it was at the second interview you had with Mr. Hutcheson that you referred to that application ? —lf he knew the name of the person he concealed it very well on the first occasion. On the second occasion, when we were puzzling ourselves as to the true circumstances, I said "I do not know of any one except Captain Jones." I should have said the only certificate I know of was that of Captain Jones. 247. What suggested Captain Jones's name to you at that time ?—Because that is the only one I knew about. 248. There is no crime in an application being made ?—No, and we both agreed that we could not tell where it came from. 249. You knew that Captain Jones had a certificate at that time ? —No, certainly not. 250. Mr. Hutchesou knew ?—I do not know. 251. Had you and Mr. Hall-Jones, prior to the second interview with Mr. Hutcheson, any conversation regarding Captain Jones? —The first man I sent for was my colleague, Mr. Hall-Jones. 252. What did he tell you ? —He had not the slightest conception. He was as much at sea and troubled and perplexed as I was. 253. Whether was it you or he who first suggested Captain Jones ?—Neither suggested him. 254. Did you say Captain Jones? —I say that on the second day—on the Saturday, that would be, —I said to Mr. Hutcheson that the only application I had any knowledge of was the application of Captain Jones, and Mr. Hutcheson bears that out. 255. What I asked you before was, whether you or Mr. Hall-Jones had any conversation before you saw Mr. Hutcheson with regard to Captain Jones's certificate ?—lmmediately after the speech I asked my colleague. With a thing like that —a statement on the floor of the House of such a serious moment —what would any Premier do but ask the Minister about any knowledge or conception he might have. 256. At this conversation was Captain Jones's name mentioned ? —No. 257. Was it mentioned between you and Mr. Hall-Jones before you saw Mr. Hutcheson the second time ?—No. 258. Then, the first person to whom you mentioned James Jones's name was Mr. Hutcheson in connection with this certificate ?—I think that is so—that is, the application. 259. Was Mr. Hall-Jones present at that time?— No. 260. Did you immediately afterwards ask Mr. Hall-Jones whether it*could be James Jones's matter ?—No. 261. Why did you not?— Why should I? 262. Why did you not suggest, as you did to Mr. Hutcheson, whether there was anything about James Jones? —Well, if you read Mr. Hutcheson's speech, how could there be anything about a service-certificate with one man holding another man's hand ? How could there be any examination ? 263. Are we to understand that is the only reason why you did not suggest to your colleague what you suggested to Mr. Hutcheson? —I had. no conception of it. I said the only application I had before me in respect of a certificate was that of Captain Jones, and that was for a servicecertificate, and there is no examination for that. 264. There might have been other applications ?—Of course, there might be. 265. Are we to understand that, although you were negotiating with James Jones for two years, and the last telegram you sent was with regard to James Jones, that you made no inquiry as to what had been done in pursuance of that telegram, and never asked your colleague could it be James Jones ?—No. I think I submitted it to Mr. Hutcheson at the time, and he will bear me out. I thought if anything of the kind had occurred, it was not possible to occur under our nose in the City of Wellington. Complaints had been made to me in years gone by as to the lax manner in which examinations had taken place in Dunedin and Auckland. I thought myself that if anything had happened at all in this respect, it was outside Wellington ; and Mr. Hutcheson has told me that he has knowledge that in 1889 or 1890 an expert was called into the room in Dunedin and, while the examiner was away at lunch, helped to do the candidates' papers. 266. This accusation made by Mr. Hutcheson was a specific accusation as to what had been done in Wellington? —No, it was not. 267. Was it not?— Certainly not. 268. Did you not understand it referred to some one in Wellington?— Certainly not. 269. Then, if it did not occur in Wellington, why should you puzzle your mind as to who it should be ? You would not if it had occurred elsewhere, I.suppose ?—" The honourable member for Palmerston alluded to a certain candidate who was examined in a writing examination. He scarcely quoted the full case, Sir. I am informed by a responsible citizen that there is at the present time a captain in command of a passenger-carrying coastal steamer who was allowed to fill in his examination papers in a private house. My informant also assured me on his word of honour that the candidate's hand was guided in the formation of every letter and figure in the examination-papers. If I were to give a vivid picture of this man engaged in the laborious task of holding the candidate's hand, I would require to be allowed the same privilege which was

H.—26

claimed by the Minister of Lands, and I should have to put in Hansard a sketch of the two men's hands doing the work. But, unfortunately, lam limited to the meagre resource of my tongue to depict the laborious process. And, Sir, this captain is in command of a vessel carrying living souls every day on the coast of New Zealand, and that is how he claimed his certificate of competency." If you will tell me where there is anything there to point to Wellington, I shall be pleased. 270. You will notice that Mr. Hutcheson says that he is informed by a citizen. Would you not suppose that that referred to a citizen of Wellington ?—No. 271. Although he is a citizen of Wellington?— Mr. Hutcheson having been an officer himself, and a seaman, and acquainted with captains and officers and those connected with the marine of the colony, I should not say there was the slightest indication to identify Wellington with it. The " Duchess " is not a coastal boat. 272. But Captain Allman held examinations nowhere but in Wellington ?—There is nothing there about Captain Allman holding examinations. He was the last man in Wellington I would suspect of giving way and doing what he did. 273. Did Captain Allman hold any examinations anywhere except in Wellington ? —I do not think so. 274. Then if Captain AUman held no examinations except in Wellington, could he inform you about examinations -held anywhere except in Wellington ?—Certainly not. 275. Why did you send for Captain Allman unless you thought it was a Wellington case?— Because he was the Head Examiner. 276. Was he the Head Examiner?—He was the Chief Examiner and Nautical Adviser. 277. You said there was no Chief Examiner—that it was only a phrase ?—The question put by Mr. Travers was, whether there was any law or regulation which entitled the Government to appoint or designate an officer as Chief Examiner, to which I replied that I did not know whether there was any law or not. 278. Can you tell me whether Captain Allman is informed about examinations anywhere except in Wellington?—-I should think that Captain Allman would draw up the papers, just as the Inspector of Schools or the Professors of the University would draw them up on certain subjects. 279. Your analogy is not correct, because Professors of a University also examine the candidates ?—I took it that Captain Allman, being the Chief Examiner or Nautical Adviser, would have the responsibility cast upon him. 280. Do you not know that if an examination is held in Dunedin the Examiner reports whether the candidates have passed or not, and the papers are sent to the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department? —But I am still of opinion that Captain Allman would draft the papers. 281. After drafting the papers, would they not pass out of his possession, never to return again ? —Yes ; but I take it that we have in this department all the papers, because the papers must come to it before it issues the certificate, and if you wantsd to-morrow to find out if the candidate had passed you would have to go to the Marine Department, and Captain Allman would have had control and access to those papers. 282. Who is in charge of the Department ?—Mr. Glasgow. 273, Who is next in charge ?—Mr. Allport; but Captain Allman had his own position there as Chief Nautical Adviser. 284. To put the matter on an equal footing, Captain Allman would have equal knowledge with Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Allport. Would he have anything to do with granting certificates in respect of examinations in Dunedin or Christchurch ? —Nothing further than that if the papers came to Wellington, and he went through them, if he saw anything on those papers which he considered necessary to bring before Mr. Glasgow, before the issue of the certificate, it would be his duty to do it. Whether that has been the course followed I cannot tell you. But I have here his appointment in the Gazette of 1884, signed " J. G. Ward," in which he is appointed Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner. 285. Then, you were wrong in your statement? —No, lam not. I said, when asked the question by Mr. Travers, that I could not say whether this was done according to law and the regulations. lam not a walking encyclopedia. I said I could not tell whether it was done by regulation or law. All I could say was that he was appointed Chief Examiner. 286. The point is this : whether the Examiners in Dunedin, Auckland, Christchurch, and Wellington are not all independent of one another, and have the right to grant, or refrain from granting certificates ?—No certificate can be granted except by Mr. Glasgow. 287. I want to know why you waited for information until you saw Captain Allman ? —Because if Captain Allman said he knew nothing about it, as he did, the next question would be, Have you any idea whether such a thing is possible ? Is there any officer under you who would be guilty of such an irregularity ? 288. Has not Mr. Glasgow longer experience of the office than Captain Allman ?—Yes. I had seen Mr. Glasgow, and he told me he had no conception of it. The first man I spoke to was Mr. Hall-Jones. I then sent for Captain Allman, and, finding that Captain Allman was not in Wellington, I saw Mr. Glasgow, and Mr. Glasgow said he had no conception of it. 289. You sent for Mr. Glasgow after you found that Captain Allman was out of town ?—The next day, I think it was. At all events, I saw Mr. Glasgow before I saw Captain Allman, and he said he had no conception that such a thing was possible : and there was so much friction—there had been so much jostling and hustling, and so much pressure had been brought to bear about Captain Edwin and Sir Arthur Douglas, and Mr. Hutcheson had told me about these men who had been hustled out of their examinations—that I took it from that this accusation was made owing to the feeling that had been created in consequence of these things, and it was only natural. A candidate had applied for examination, and Captain Edwin had made a 6-H. 26.

n.— 26

mistake—and all men are liable to make mistakes—and there was consequently so much feeling at the time that it might account to some extent for charges being made against responsible officers. 290. Captain Jones's matter came back to your mind on the second interview with Mr. Hutcheson. Did you ask Mr. Glasgow what had been done with regard to Captain Jones ?—I did not. 291. Nor any one else ? —No. As I say, Mr. Hutcheson's speech was not in respect to the service certificate, it was with respect to an examination, and one man's hand holding another man's hand, and that would put me off Captain Jones, because his case had reference to a service certificate. 292. Why not ?—Because I had no conception about him going up for examination. If I knew about it I would have said so. What was there for me to conceal ? I had nothing to conceal. 293. You referred yesterday to a communication you made to the Press?— Yes. 294. I suppose you saw that communication in writing the day after it was printed?— Probably I had seen it. 295. You had seen it commented on in the newspapers ?—Yes. 296. And up to yesterday, I understand, you had not made any correction in it ?—Yes, I had. 297. Where ?—Several times when I have spoken about it. 298. Throughout the country ?—Yes. 299. Can you refer me to any speech ? Have you any report of any speech ?—I have a report of all my speeches. You asked me whether I noticed anything wrong in it ? 300. Yes?—l did. 301. When?— After my return to Wellington. That report was perfectly correct with the exception of the words "that I did not know Captain Jones." I say that that was misreported. It was impossible for me to have said so. What I did say, and what I repeat, is, that I did not know anything about Captain Jones's examination. But if I had to correct newspaper reports I should be kept very busy, and as a rule I do not do it. 302. This is quite different. You yourself communicated to the Press Association this information, and they sent it all over the colony. Would it not have been as easy to correct the error as to give the communication ?—To tell you the truth, I do not see much in it now, and I did not think much of it then. It is on a par with, a great many other things sent out by the Press Association. It would be a sorry thing for any man in this country to be judged by what appears in the Press. 303. You do make that correction now?—l do not make any correction. I simply say that the portion of the paragraph which says I did not know Captain Jones—a man I have known for over twenty years—is wrong, and the whole thing is apparent on the face of it; but what Ido say is that I did not know about his examination, and I want to emphasise that. 304. There are two paragraphs in this statement: " I neither spoke to the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones about Captain Jones's examination, nor did I write to him. I went away to England in April, and the examination took place in July " ?—Yes. 305. In view of your having telegraphed to him, do you think that is a fair statement? —Most decidedly, and I would do it again. I had not communicated with him, or spoken or written to him, in respect of Captain Jones's examination. The irregularity and all the trouble is in respect of the examination. 306. Do you think that statement did not convey something quite different to the mere bare words you used ?—Certainly not; it is only men with twisted minds who would think so. What is in the writing speaks for itself. You take it to any sensible man, other than a lawyer, and he will tell you its meaning. 307. It goes on, " The first I knew of Captain Jones or his examination "?—That is wrong. It ought to have been, " The first I knew of Captain Jones's examination." 308. Do you say you did not make that statement to the Press Association? —Leave the words "or his" out, and say "The first I knew of Captain Jones's examination was after Mr. Hutcheson's speech." If you will fairly construe the first part of it the thing is all right. 309. I understood you to say yesterday that you had not" read Captain Airman's second report ?—I said I had not seen the original of Captain Allman's report until yesterday. 310. When did you see the original of Captain Jones's declaration ?—Shortly after it was made. I did not see the original then, but I saw a copy. 311. Did you also get a copy of Captain Allman's statement then?— No. 312. Can you explain why that was ?—I could not tell you about it. All I know is that I did not get it, and did not see it. If any one had asked me the other day in the House about the second statement, I should have said it was the one attached to the statement addressed to myself. 313. In reference to the interpretation which you put upon your own statement, I want to draw your attention to a telegram you are alleged to have received from Mr. Hall-Jones: " You were not in the country at the time, and we at no time had any conversation about Captain Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him, until some time after Mr. Hutcheson's speech." Now you see there the same words are used about Captain Jones, " his certificate, or anything concerning him " ?—That is quite true. 314. Do you tell me that before you went Home, and while Mr. Hall-Jones was acting as Minister of Marine, and while you were having to do with these deputations, you had never spoken to Mr. Hall-Jones on the subject ?—That is so. 315. You swear that positively ?—I do. 316. Although you were interfering ?—I was not interfering.

H.—26

317. Or over-ruling it?—l neither interfered, nor did I over-rule. It is just possible that in the absence of Mr. Hall-Jones I might have received a deputation, or he might have been here when the deputation came to me. I assure you that I have no recollection of speaking to Mr. Hall-Jones on the matter; and when I received that telegram of what appeared in the Press, he sent that voluntarily to me, and it bore out my statement that I had not spoken to him about it. 318. I understood you before to say that Mr. Hall-Jones knew all about the matter?—lt does not follow that I had spoken to him. 319. Then you spoke to Mr. Glasgow about it ? —Yes. 320. And you spoke to Captain Allman ?—lt was a long way back, and I think Mr. Glasgow will bear that out. It was early in the application that I spoke to Mr. Glasgow about it, and it was a result of that conversation that the thing was checked. And it was at my suggestion that the matter was put on record to show the grounds upon which the department disputed it. They had checked it before, and lam satisfied were correct when Mr. Glasgow sent his first letter, but there was nothing on the file. 321. But the one man that you had not spoken to on the matter was Mr. Hall-Jones?— If you asked if I had spoken to Mr. Ward about it—and" he was the Minister of Marine up to June—l should say, Yes. 322. Mr. Hall-Jones was Minister nine months before you left. During that nine months you were interviewed by ladies and gentlemen, friends of Captain Jones, and you gave ?—You have made a long statement, and I do not admit what you have said. 323. What part do you object to ? —I said, possibly I was interviewed. 324. You said you had been told, previously to going to Auckland, that a deputation had interviewed Mr. Hall-Jones?—l did not say a deputation had seen Mr. Hall-Jones. 325. You were informed ?—I said nothing of the kind. 326. What did you say ?—I said I knew that Mr. Hall-Jones had been dealing with the matter, and had been seen. 327. During the whole of the nine months during which the thing was being dealt with, before you went Home, you never spoke to Mr. Hall-Jones on the subject ? —No; I have no recollection of it. He bears that out. He was the first to communicate that to me. I tell the Commissioners that the matter was so trivial—that it was an application of a man who wanted to get employment, that the application was sent in, that it was barred, and the whole thing never bothered me at all. 328. Do you wish to convey to the Commission that, taking your own statement, even as corrected by you to-day, and the telegram sent by Mr. Hall-Jones, that was not a virtual suppression of the fact that a telegram had been sent by you at Auckland to Mr. Hall-Jones ?— Certainly it was not. 329. Do you think it was candid ? —I could say nothing else. 330. Do you think it is a candid expression of fact?— Decidedly. 331. That, knowing a telegram had been sent, you were justified in saying there had been no conversation about Captain Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him, until after Mr. Hutcheson's speech, and also that the first you knew of Captain Jones's examination was after Mr. Hutcheson's speech; do you think that is a candid statement ?—I repeat that what you have quoted is incorrect. There has never been a word said or an attack made on the Government about his service certificate. The only thing said was in respect to the examination. With regard to the examination I never spoke to Mr. Hall-Jones, nor he to me, up to the time I gave that statement to the Press. 332. Mr. Hall-Jones goes very much beyond that. Do you not recognise that ?—He was dealing with the question of the examination, and if a colleague were communicating with another colleague on any subject he would confine himself to the one thing. That is the question of the service certificate, which was suppressed by the Press. 333. Was not this communication which you made to the Press, and this telegram which was sent by Mr. Hall-Jones, done in pursuance of a statement which you made that you would telegraph to Mr. Hall-Jones for an explanation of his and your own connection with the matter?—l have got the Press notes here. The grand jury made an attack on the Government by bringing in their presentment on a prosecution —a most unprecedented course, because it was ex parte on the papers before them. They said that Ministers should not interfere with officers in the execution of their duty. Well, it was pretty rough, seeing that there had been no interference. I was speaking at Kaitangata at the time, and it was in reference to something I said which was sent to Wellington. A correspondent in Wellington sent the matter down South, and that gentleman has an imagination equal to that of Tom Pepper. It was owing to something being sent down from Wellington that I had to put the matter right with the Press. If you give a matter like that forty-eight hours' start, it grows, and people whose minds are sponge-like will absorb anything. If the telegram had been sent to me before being sent, I would have checked it, and altered the word about not knowing Captain Jones. 334. Was not this statement made intended to correct the communication from this gentleman you refer to : " With reference to the Premier's denial of my statements of yesterday, which were wired through the colony to-day, I repeat deliberately that the Premier wrote to the Hon. HallJones on the day that he (Mr. Seddon) left for England, asking him to do what he could for Captain Jones." Was it not in order to give denial to that statement that you got Mr. Hall-Jones to send the telegram ?—No. The general charge was that the Government were parties to the fraudulent examination. That is what you are trying to make out to-day. You are trying to fasten on the Government that my colleague has been a party to a fraudulent examination. 335. Is not that the one and specific statement to which you refer ? Was it not to correct that statement that the letter was sent to Mr. Hall-Jones and you put in this other communication

H.—26

of yours ? —No ; it was to put before the public of the colony the fact that the Premier knew nothing about the examination. 336. Were you limiting it to the examination, and were you leaving the other question entirely alone ?—I confined myself to the fact, and nothing but the fact. As to going into the history of Captain Jones and other people who applied to the Government, if I had given the Press such particulars they would have laughed at me. To confine myself to the fact solely in issue, was, in my opinion, the proper thing to do. 337. When did you give this communication in Dunedin ? —I think it was a Press Association telegram. It was when I was down South. 338. It was sent from Dunedin ?—lt might have been Dunedin. 339. Did you not, prior to sending or publishing that statement, read what I read a few minutes ago ?—I may have ; but I could not tell you whether one was before the other. I can tell you by reference. I spoke at Kaitangata on the 28th February, and that was published on the Ist March. 340. You would leave Dunedin on that day ? —I cannot remember. 341. You would see the Dunedin newspapers at all events that day. As a matter of fact, did you not communicate that to the Press by means of your own shorthand reporter ?—My reply is that I believe I did dictate it to my own shorthand reporter. , . 342. Did you see it in manuscript before it was sent ?—I do not think I did. If I had, I should have corrected that part about not knowing Captain Jones. 343. As a matter of fact, you cannot recollect whether you corrected it or not? —I do not think I did. 344. You are aware that shorthand writers make mistakes, and that one of your distinguishing features is to look after everything before sending it away ?—lt is not my distinguishing feature. After dictating anything, I let it go. I have not the time to do it. I should have saved a good deal of trouble if I had; but I thought so little of it, and it is so palpable that everyone knows that I know old Captain Jones. Why, every youngster, nearly, knows Captain Jones. I also said at Kaitangata, and mention it now for record: "As regards the Allman case, the law had been proved defective, and it had been found that no offence could have occurred under it. The Government could not prejudice the situation by taking any action until after the trial, but they were now taking action, and. he said that the certificate which had been issued ought at all hazards to be cancelled, and if it required a special Act of Parliament to cancel, he would bring in a Bill to cancel that certificate." That is from the report of the Otago Daily Times. 345. You, being Minister of Marine, knew the difference between the various certificates that could be granted ? —I have some slight knowledge. 346. When did you first ascertain that a certificate of any kind had been given to Captain Jones?— After Mr. Hutcheson's speech. 347. How long after? —Two or three days. The first man who told me about the examination was Captain Allman—on the Tuesday night, I think it was, when he came back. I have no wish to conceal anything from the Commission. I ought to have said the first I had a conversation with about it was Mr. Glasgow, because I saw Mr. Glasgow before Captain Allman. 348. What do you think Captain Jones had, when Captain Allman said, " Oh, it is probably about Captain Jones" ; what did you think had happened at that interview?— Mr. Glasgow had told me that he had no conception of this thing—he had no idea about it. The only thing I knew was when Captain Allman said that Captain Jones was under examination and had brought some papers in an envelope, which were destroyed. 349. Did you know at that time what examination that might be ?—I think Captain Allman said it was an examination for a certificate. 350. For what ? —I do not know whether he said a captain's, mate's, or anything else. I knew there could be no examination for a service certificate. 351. Did you make any inquiry, then, as to what happened to Captain Jones after you left ?— No; I had a conversation. 352. What was that?—To the effect that there was nothing in it. 353. Your mind had travelled to Captain Jones ? Captain Allman stated that the only thing they could be referring to was something that had happened to Captain Jones ?—No; when Captain Jones came up for examination. 354. Did you know at that time what the examination was? —No. 355. Did you ask ?—I do not know whether it was the first or second interview, but Captain Allman said what might have given rise to it was the envelope. 356. Did you know what examination that referred to? —No. 357. You did not know on what occasion those papers were destroyed ?—No, I have told you that time after time. 358. And you did not inquire ?—I inquired from Mr. Glasgow, and he did not know anything. Captain Allman denied that anything had taken place. What could Ido ? 259. Was Mr. Hall-Jones present ?—Yes. 360. Did he seem to know of the examination ?—No. 361. Did you ask him ?—He seemed to be as perplexed as myself. 362. Was he surprised that Captain Jones had gone up for some examination?—He did not seem to know anything about it. He seemed to be perplexed, as I was myself. 363. Mr, Hanlon.] You were asked by Mr. Hislop at the beginning as to the dates on which various Ministers were in charge of the Marine Department. That is the blue-book containing the statistics [" J " produced] ?—Yes. I find on reference to this my memory serves me in good stead again. I was Minister of Marine from the 3rd June, 1892, to the Ist May, 1893 ; Mr. Buckley, Ist May, 1893, to October, 1893; Mr. Ward, 13th October, 1893, to 16th June, 1896 ; Mr. HallJones, from 22nd June, 1896, to date. On my assuming the position of Prime Minister I relinquished that of Minister of Marine. 364. Were you in charge of the Marine Department at any other time—say, in the absence-of the Minister of Marine ?—Yes.

H.—26

365. Can you tell us when that was?— Mr. Glasgow could inform you better. It is constitutional, and was the case, that if Ministers are away and there are cases requiring attention, the heads of the departments go to the Minister in Wellington; and you will often find that papers are minuted by Mr. Walker, or Mr. Hall-Jones, or by myself. If you did not do that you would stop the working of the department. Sometimes when a Minister is leaving he tells the head of his department to take any papers coming to his department to a particular Minister. [Gazette notice of appointment of Captain Allman as Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner put in, and marked " K."J

Thuesday, 13th July, 1899. Alexandeb Robert Hislop, sworn and examined. 1. Mr. Ilanlon.] What are you ? —Commission agent. 2. And you reside in ?—Wellington. 3. Do you know Mr. Seddon, the Premier ?—Yes. 4. And Captain Jones of the " Duco " ? —Yes. 5. Do you remember on any occasion going to a picnic in Captain Jones's steamer?— Yes, I went on one occasion when the Premier was present, at the New Zealand Times picnic at Day's Bay. 6. In what steamer?— The " Duchess." 7. When was that ? —I cannot remember the exact date, but it was about eighteen or nineteen months ago. 8. We have been told it was in February, 1898? —I should think that would be about the time. I have no reason for recalling the exact date. 9. Do you remember having any whiskey there ? —Yes. 10. Will you tell us where that whiskey came from—who brought it?—l was on board the boat, and Mr. A. G. Johnson invited me to the cabin to have a taste of whiskey out of some he had provided himself. The Premier was there, and Mr. Plimmer and Mr. Plimmer's son, and Mr. Johnson. There were one or two other gentlemen present, but I cannot recollect who they were. It was just a small party. We were invited by Mr. Johnson to have a taste out of the bottle that he had. 11. Where did you go to?—lt was in the saloon, and while we were having the whiskey some one suggested that the skipper might be sent for. That is, Captain Jones. 12. Was he sent for?— Yes. He came in, and his health was drunk, and he went away. 13. Did you remain in the cabin any length of time ? —I should think not more than about two or three minutes. 14. Did you hear any conversation take place between Captain Jones and the Premier ?— There were some few common-place remarks passed, but nothing I can remember as being of a serious business nature. 15. Is it true that on that occasion Captain Jones asked Mr. Seddon and some other gentlemen who were present to have some whiskey ?—No ; it was Mr. Johnson invited us into the cabin. 16. Do you remember any remark being made about the size of the tumblers on that occasion? —No. 17. Did you hear Mr. Seddon say to Captain Jones: "I fixed that all right for you, old man. I put my foot down, as I was determined to accomplish what you asked me to do in spite of the lot of them"?— No. 18. Could that have been said on that occasion without you hearing it ? —No, it could not have been, because the room was small and we were close together. 19. Did you hear Captain Jones say to Mr. Seddon that he was very much obliged to him, but it was no use talking about that now ? —No. 20. Is it your recollection that no such conversation took place ?—I have no recollection of any such conversation ever taking place. In fact, Ido not think there could have been time for it. Captain Jones was only in for a minute or so. He had his ship and passengers to look after, and went to look after them. 21. After having a drink, of course ? —Yes. 22. Can you name the other people who were present ?■—l think there were one or two present that I cannot place ; but I remember Mr. Plimmer being there, and the principal part of the conversation that took place in the cabin was between Mr. Plimmer and the Premier. The Premier was saying something about " Noah's Ark," with which Mr. Plimmer is principally identified. I did not remain long in the cabin, but went out. 23. But you were there all the time Captain Jones was there ? —Yes. 24. Do you know a Mr. Hood ?—I know several Mr. Hoods. 25. A seafaring man ? —Yes, a second mate in the Union Company. 26. Have you got in your possession a letter addressed to him by Captain Yon Schoen.—-Yes. 27. Will you show it to me please ? [Produced and identified by Captain Yon Schoen.] This is the letter (marked "L ") referred to by Mr. Seddon. How do you come to have possession of this ?—I was speaking to Mr. Hood yesterday. He was in port, and mentioned this letter and showed it to me, so I asked him to let me have it. He consented to let me have it on condition that I returned it to him. 28. Mr. Gray.] The occasion you spoke of was, I understand, the New Zealand Times picnic held at Day's Bay ? —Yes. 29. I did not hear the beginning of the evidence. Did you mention all the parties present ?—- Yes, there was Mr. Johnson, Mr. Plimmer, senior, and his son. 30. That is, the chairman of directors, Mr. J. A. Plimmer?—Yes. I see Mr. Bannister's name is mentioned, but I do not quite recollect whether he was there. ' 31. Any one else?—l think there were one or two other gentlemen, but I cannot remember who they were. There were people going in and out of the cabin.

H.—26

32. You say there was whiskey produced on board ? —Yes. 33. By Mr. Johnson ?—Yes. 34. I think the boat was delayed while he went up to the Pier Hotel to get some ?—I think that was so. 35. And going across to Day's Bay the Premier was asked to have a drink ?—Well, I was invited. 36. Whose health was proposed first ? —I do not remember anybody's health being proposed except Captain Jones's. 37. There was only one toast ?—As far as I can recollect. 38. There was only one drink ?—Yes. 39. I suppose the supply was limited ? —Yes. 40. It was all consumed ?—Yes. 41. You say Captain Jones was called to the cabin?— Yes. Some one asked for the skipper, and I think it was Mr. Johnson who brought him in. 42. Do you say there was no sort of remark made by the Premier to Captain Jones, whether jocular or otherwise, such as Captain Jones declares ?—Certainly not in my hearing. 43. Will you swear that none was made at all ? —No; I will not swear that none was made. 44. All you say is that you did not hear it ? —I did not hear it. I was there the whole time while Captain Jones was in the cabin. 45. And there was at least half a dozen in the cabin?— Yes; about that. 46. And the talk was all good-humoured ?—Yes. 47. Do you say that it was not possible for the Premier to have made such a remark to Captain Jones without you hearing it?—l do not think it was. 48. That is all you can say ? —Yes. 49. Did Mr. Seddon say anything to Captain Jones ?—As far as I recollect, he said, " Well, skipper, how are you?" when he came into the cabin. 50. How long have you known Captain Jones ?—I have known him a matter of twenty odd years. 51. What character does he bear for truthfulness ?—He is a very straight man. 52. Not a man you would expect to tell a lie, especially on oath or by a statutory declaration ? —No. 53. Have you had a conversation with the Premier about this matter?— Yes. 54. When ? —I was up listening to a debate in the House, and I met him in the passage. He asked me if I remembered the picnic at Day's Bay. First of all he said, " You are in the Marine inquiry. Do you remember the New Zealand Times picnic? " 55. When was that ? —On Tuesday night, I think. 56. Did he ask you to attend and give evidence ? —No. 57. And you had no idea that you were going to be asked to attend Until you got the summons ? —I did not have a summons. 57a. Then how did you know ?—-I had a note last night asking me to attend. 58. Then you had a summons ?—lt was a private note. 59. Had you any conversation with Mr. Johnson about it ?—Only coming down this morning. 60. Were you in company with the Hon. Mr. Carroll and Mr. Johnson at the Post Office Hotel yesterday ? —Yes. 61. Discussing this matter?—lt cropped up in the course of conversation. 62. And you and Mr. Johnson compared notes? —Mr. Carroll asked me the circumstances, and I told him as far as I could recollect them. 63. And Mr. Johnson's recollection agreed with yours, I suppose ?—That I could not say. I do not think he expressed himself yesterday. 64. Was anything said of this kind by you or Mr. Johnson : " Whatever the old man has said we will stick to " ?—Certainly not. 65. And nothing like it ?—No. 66. You did not hear what Captain Jones has deposed to? —No. 67. Mr. A. B. Atkinson.] You said you happened to be speaking to Mr. Hood yesterday?— Yes. 68. Was it a casual conversation ?—Quite casually. 69. You had no idea he had that letter? —Not the slightest. 70. You received no instructions to get it from him?— No. 71. How did it occur to you to ask him?—l was on board the "Upolo," and was invited to lunch in the saloon, and, of course, the Marine scandal came up—it is the thing very much talked of in the seafaring community just now—and during the conversation, .while sitting at the table, he said he had the original letter he received from Captain Yon Schoen in connection with passing the examination. 72. Did you not introduce the subject of the letter?— No. 73. Did you not know about the letter ?—I knew of a letter some time ago—at the time it was being canvassed. 74. Did you not hear of the letter yesterday ?—No; this was prior. It was a few minutes after one when I got the letter. 75. It was in the morning when the letter was produced ? —I knew nothing of that until I saw the Post last night. 76. And you received no instructions from anybody to hunt up the letter ?—No. 77. Mr. Hanlon.] You were asked about a conversation between you and Mr. Seddon that you had up at the House ? —Yes. The Premier said, " You are in this Marine inquiry." I said, "In what way?" He said, "Do you remember the New Zealand Times picnic?" 1 said, "Yes."

H.—26

He said, " There is a certain bottle of whiskey used on that occasion coming into evidence, and it is quite likely you will be called." I said, " Very well, Sir, if I am called I can only say what I know about it, and nothing more." He was busy, and moved away, and nothing more was said. 78. That was all the conversation that took place between you and the Premier at the time ? —Yes. 79. And it was not in consequence of receiving any subpoena, but a memorandum from the Premier that you are here ?—-Yes, I got a memorandum from the Premier at my house last night. I have it here [memorandum produced.] Alfred Gbobgb Johnson, sworn and examined. 80. Mr. Hanlon.~\ What are you ?—Secretary to the Benevolent Institution. 81. You know Captain Jones ?—Yes, for many years. 82. And of course you know the Premier ?—Yes; and have known him for many years too. 83. Do you remember going to any picnic at Day's Bay in company with the Premier ?—Yes; I went to the New Zealand Times picnic on board the " Duchess." The Premier was there. 84. Do you know when that was ?—I do not know the date, it was a long time ago—perhaps eighteen months. I could not say. 85. Had you any refreshment on the " Duchess."—Yes ; a little whiskey. 86. Who provided it ?—I did. 87. And who partook of it, as far as you remember ?—Well, the Premier, Mr. Hislop, John Plimmer, sen., John Plimmer, jun., myself, Captain Jones, and there was another one came in, but I cannot remember who it was. 88. Where was this "I —In the after-cabin and off the saloon. It is a cabin at the end of the saloon on the starboard side. 89. Is it a large or small room ? —lt is a small room. I understood it was intended originally for a ladies' cabin. 90. At whose invitation was it that Captain Jones came in and had a tirink ?—I cannot swear positively who it was. I think I went in and asked Captain Jones to come in. Someone suggested it, but I cannot swear at this date who it was. There was nothing to impress the matter on my mind. 91. During the time Captain Jones was in the cabin did any conversation take place between him and the Premier?—l think just the ordinary greeting, as far as I can remember. 92. How long was Captain Jones in the cabin altogether ?—I am speaking entirely of the trip across from here. I should think he was about two or three minutes in the cabin. He had a drink. It was a very short time, and he went to look after his ship after he had had the drink. 93. Did Captain Jones ask you and Mr. Seddon and others to have some whiskey ?—On that occasion, no. 94. Was any remark made about the size of the glasses by the Premier?—l have no recollection about such a remark. It might have been made, but I did not hear it. 95. Did you hear Mr. Seddon say to Captain Jones, " I fixed that all right for you, old man. I put my foot down, as I was determined to accomplish what you asked me to do, in spite of the lot of them " ? —No, I did not hear that. 96. Can you say whether or not it was said ?—I cannot say. I did not hear it. I have no recollection of such a remark being made. 97. Could it have been said while Captain Jones was in the cabin without you hearing it ?— I should not think so. As the room was small, if such a remark was made, I think we should all have heard it. There was a certain amount of laughing and chaffing going on, but I did not hear any remark of that kind. 98. Did you hear Captain Jones tell Mr. Seddon that he was very much obliged to him, but it was no use talking about that now ?—No, I did not hear that. 99. Did this happen, did Captain Jones leave the whiskey at the time, saying " You can enjoy yourselves "?—No, the captain went out after he had a drink. Ido not know that he made any remark except that he had to go and look after the ship, or words to that effect. Ido not remember the words : there is nothing to fix it in my mind. 100. Mr. Gray] This was the New Zealand Times picnic?— Yes. 101. You have told us that you were to a certain extent the providore —you supplied the whiskey ? —Yes, I got a little and took it over. 102. Mr. Hislop has said the boat was detained while you went to the Pier Hotel ?—Not the Pier Hotel, the Post Office Hotel. 103. How much did you get ?—A bottle. 104. Did you have a drink coming back from Day's Bay ?—Yes. 105. Alone ?—No, with others. 106. Can you not say whether that performance was repeated coming back from Day's Bay?-r— I cannot say. 107. You are unable to say whether Captain Jones and the Premier were in the cabin going back? —I know they were there going back. 108. And that whiskey was produced ?—Yes, I had a whiskey myself. 109. You said in answer to Mr. Hanlon, that on the occasion of going across, Captain Jones did not ask the Premier and others to have a drink, but this may have occurred on the way back ?— I cannot say that. 110. As far as you know, the statement Captain Jones made, that the Premier said something to him on the " Duchess " that day, may have been made on the way back ?—lt may have been made. I was not in the cabin the whole of the time.

H.— 26.

111. All you can say is that it was not made going across?— Yes. 112. Captain Jones was commander of the " Duchess." Did he ask you to take charge ?—No ; I asked him to lend me the key of the cabin. 113. And then the Premier, the two Pliinmers, Mr. Hislop, and yourself established yourselves in the cabin?— Yes. I am not quite sure that Captain Jones came into the cabin, but, at any rate, I got the key. 114. You say there was some whiskey, and someone besides yourself provided whiskey ?—I presume so. I did not provide it coming back. 115. There was not a drought?—No; it was there when asked for. 115 a. And on each occasion there was a good deal of laughing and chaffing taking place ?— Yes. 116. And if the Premier did say something to Captain Jones, and did not speak in a loudtoned voice, it is possible you might not have heard it?—l told you I did not hear the remark. 117. It might have been uttered ?—lt might; but if spoken in an ordinary-toned voice I think I should have heard it. 118. Even although others were talking in an ordinary tone and laughing ?—They were not all talking. 119. Is it not possible that, with the hillarious laughing and chaffing, the Premier might have said something to Captain Jones that you did not catch ?—He might. 120. You would not expect that remark to be shouted or uttered in a loud tone ? Does it not appear to be something in the nature of a confidential remark ?—I did not hear it. lam not in a position to say whether it is confidential or otherwise. 121. Captain Jones says, " The first time I saw the Hon. the Premier after I got my hometrade master's certificate, on the 19th July, 1897, was after he had returned from England. He and some other gentlemen were on board the ' Duchess' one day. I did not know the other gentlemen, but I knew Mr. Seddon. I asked them to come and have a whiskey. Mr. Seddonand the other gentlemen came into the stern-cabin. I put down the glasses, and Mr. Seddon remarked about the size of the tumblers. Mr. Seddon said, ' I fixed that all right for you, old man. I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do in spite of the lot of them.' " Does not that savour somewhat of a confidential remark?— Possibly it may. 122. You do not mean to say that you were there the whole of the time the Premier was there on those two trips ?—No. 123. All you can say is that you did not hear this remark going across ?—Quite so. 124. Did you know at that time that Captain Jones had got the certificate?—-I did not know anything about it. I never knew a word about it until it was mentioned by one of the members in the House. I never knew there was any trouble about it till then. 125. Were you summoned hereto-day?— No. A man came to my house last night at halfpast eleven from the Premier with a note. 126. Like Mr. Hislop's?—l presume so. I have the note here. 127. Had you any conversation with the Premier about this matter?— Yes; some weeks ago. 128. How did it crop up ?—A friend of mine and myself were looking in McGregor Wright's window admiring the pictures, when suddenly I felt a touch on my shoulder. I turned round, and saw the Premier with two other gentlemen. 129. Who were they ?—The Hon. Mr. Carroll and the Hon. Mr. Walker. The Premier asked me if I remembered the little incident when doing the hundred yards sprint down to the " Duchess." 130. Was it a match between you and the Premier ? —No; there had been much talk about a sculling match. He asked me if I remembered the whiskey, and said I would be much surprised to know that the whiskey had been made a matter of an affidavit by Captain Jones. I said I knew nothing about it, except that I got it. I said I had been chaffed about being blown. 131. Did not Mr. Seddon say what Captain Jones had said in the declaration ?—No ; he said it had been made the subject of a declaration. 132. That was all ?—Yes; and I have not seen the Premier since. 133. When did you first hear Captain Jones had made the statement in the declaration?—! do not know exactly the date, but subsequently to the Premier speaking to me. 134. Who told you ?—I do not know. 135. Did you not see it in the newspapers ?—No. 136. Was"it Mr. Seddon ?—No. 137. Was it Mr. Carroll?—l think Mr. Carroll did say something about it. 138. So that the matter has been brought before your notice more than once?—l knew about the matter. 139. But it was discussed yesterday at the Post Office Hotel ?—lt was in this way. I said I saw that my name had been mentioned in the matter, and I felt annoyed. 140. Do not blame Captain Jones ?—I am not blaming Captain Jones, but I think I told Mr. Carroll that I was not very well pleased abotit it. 141. The matter Was talked about by Mr. Carroll and yourself?— There were two or three people there. 142. Were notes compared ? —No. 143. You knew Captain Jones for a long time? —Thirteen odd years. . 144. What character does he bear for truthfulness?— Well, I would trust him with anything and anywhere. That is my opinion of him. 145. He is an upright, straightforward man? —Yes, in every way. 146. And hardly likely to invent a lie I have never known him to be anything but a straightforward, truthful man. •

H.—26

147. Mr. Hanlon.] You said you did not remember the remark being made going over ?—Yes. 148. And you said you were in the cabin on the way back on one occasion with the Premier ?— Yes. 149. Was it in the same room on the way back ?—Yes. 150. Did you either on the road over or on the road back hear the remark made ? —No. Eobeet Edwin Bannister, 'Sworn and examined. 151. Mr. Hanlon.] What are you?—A newspaper manager. . 152. Eesident in Wellington ?—Yes. 153. Do you know the Premier and Captain Jones ?—I do. 154. Do you remember being on board the "Duchess" going to a picnic at any time when Captain Jones was there and the Premier also ? —Yes, the New Zealand Times picnic last year. 155. Do you know when that was ? —Yes, the 19th February, as far as I remember. 156. Did you have any refreshment in the cabin on that boat?—l did. 157. At whose invitation?—At the invitation of Mr. Johnson. 158. Do you know who provided the refreshment ?—No, I do not. 159. Were you in the cabin of the boat ?—Yes. 160. Can you tell us who were there at the time you got this refreshment ?—As far as I can remember, there was Mr. Johnson, Mr. Plimmer, the Premier, and I do not know who the other gentleman was. There was another gentleman. 161. Was it Mr. Hislop?—l do not remember Mr. Hislop. 162. Do you remember any of the conversation that took place at the time you were getting this whiskey?— Nothing in particular except in reference to the day's enjoyment. 163. Did any' conversation take place between the Premier and Captain Jones ?—I do not remember Captain Jones being in the room at any time. 164. You do not remember him being in the room at all ?—Not sufficiently long to have any conversation. 165. —Was he in the room at all ? —He was at the door, and there was some one standing at the door with him as I passed by them. 166. Did Captain Jones have any whiskey in your presence ? —No, I do not remember his having a whiskey. 167. Did you at any time on the boat on that day hear Mr. Seddon say to Captain Jones, " I fixed that all right for you, old man ; I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do, in spite of the lot of them " ?—No. 168. You did not hear that at any time or in any place ?—No. 169. Mr. Gray.] How often were you in the cabin that day ?—Only once. 170. Was that on the trip going over ?—Just before the return. 171. While the vessel was anchored at Day's Bay ?—Yes. 172. Then you were not one of the party that had a drink going across ?—No. 173. And this little function took place before the steamer started on the return journey in the afternoon? —Yes. 174. What took you all into the cabin?— Simply, I had an invitation to go. 175. Who asked you ? —Mr. Johnson. 176. You are sure of that ? —Yes, with Captain Jones. The two of them were together. 177. By themselves?— Yes, they were walking along the wharf. 178. It was a joint invitation ?—Yes. 179. You went into the cabin, and whom did you find there—those gentlemen you have named? —Those gentlemen I have named. 180. Mr. Seddon and Mr. Plimmer?—Yes. 181. You do not remember anybody else ?—There were two others there, but I do not remember their names. 182. Was anyone's health drunk ?—No, not anyone in particular. 183. And you went on the invitation of the captain of the ship and Mr. Johnson ?—Yes. 184. And it is quite clear that the Premier or Mr. Johnson could not have said, " Send for Captain Jones and bring him in " ?—I do not remember that. 185. Could it possibly have happened when you were going on board at Captain Jones's invitation ? —Yes, but I passed Captain Jones at the doorway of the cabin. 186. You were not among the crowd drinking when one said, " Let us send for the skipper " ?— No. 187. You told the Commissioners that you were not in the cabin going across and did not hear Mr. Seddon say to Captain Jones, " I fixed that, old man" ?—No. 188. You do not say it was not said: all you say is that you did not hear it? —No, I did not hear it. 189. You are an old resident of Wellington ?—Yes. 190. Have you known Captain Jones long ?—Some years. 191. What reputation does he bear for truthfulness ?—I cannot say. I have not had anything to do with him personally. I have known him as a man in the street, or to be connected with Mr. Williams's business. 192. Do you not know him generally ?—I have had no transaction with him. 193. As the police would say, " You know nothing against him " ? —Nothing whatever. 194. What newspaper are you manager of at present ?—None. 195. I understood you to say you were a newspaper manager? —Not just now. 196. You have retired from the profession ?—Yes. 7—H. 26.

F.—26

William Hall-Jones, sworn and examined. 197. Mr. Hanlon.] I understand you are Minister of Marine and Minister for Public Works ? —Minister of Marine, Minister for Public Works, Minister in Charge of the Printing Office, and Acting-Minister of Lands. 198. When did you assume the position of Minister of Marine ?—About the middle of June, 1896, on the resignation of the Hon. Mr. Ward. 199. Do you know Captain James Jones ?^—l know him now. I did not know him at that time. 200. Ho.w did you first come to know anything about him or any application of his to the Marine Department ?—I took charge of the department on the resignation of Mr. Ward, in June, 1896. About the latter end of that year, or the beginning of 1897, I had a visit from Captain Jones. That was the first time I met Captain Jones. He came to me complaining that he had applied for a service certificate to the Marine Department, and could not get it from them, that he had submitted a statement of services showing that he was entitled to the service certificate in accordance with the Act of 1894. The Act of 1894 provided that a man who had been in command of a vessel for three years subsequent to 1884 would be entitled to a service certificate —that is, without the necessity for going up for examination. The matter was entirely new to me, and Captain Jones I had never met before. I told him I would look into the matter, and he said he would call round later and ascertain the result of my inquiry. Some time after that I sent for the papers and looked into them, and I found that the department had recommended that, on account of some errors or misstatements as to his service, he was not entitled to the certificate. There was a list of trips said to have been performed by Captain Jones, and certified to by Mr. Williams, Captain Jones's employer. This is the statement of services I referred to. [Produced.] The department, in going through this statement of services, had partly, not wholly, checked them, to see if the actual service required was shown. The service required was three years, and in many cases shown here there is no record in the Customs Department of the vessel having been on the trips. For instance, there is one trip claimed of one month and four days between the 3rd June, 1896, and the 7th July, 1897, of which there was no record in the department. Then, there were others when Captain Jones had been in command where the statement of service was grossly exaggerated. There is one where he claimed two months and two days' service where the department only allowed one day. There is another case of eight days where the department only allowed one day. Seeing this—and I think I had a conversation with Mr. Glasgow on the subject —when Captain Jones came to see me again I told him what the position was, and that he could not be granted the service certificate which he had applied for; and which was the only certificate he applied for at that time: The next that occurred in connection with the matter was in April, 1897. lam not sure whether these two interviews took place at the end of 1896 or in the early part of 1897, but in April of 1897 I received a telegram from the Premier, which I think you have before the Commission. The Wellington date is 19th April. It had been sent away from Onehunga or Auckland a day or two before. The wires were down, and there was a delay of two days before it reached me. The telegram is as follows :—" Hon. Hall-Jones, Wellington.—l should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones, of '.Duco,' settled. From the papers presented to me I am of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than Captain. . . Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified. —E. J. Seddon, Onehunga." I see I underlined " Captain Allman thinks that he is highly .qualified." It is a practice of mine, when I see anything on which I want information, to underline that part. Within two or three days after I received this I sent for Captain Allman and showed him the telegram I had received, pointing out specially the portion I had underlined, and I asked him if there was anything fresh in connection with the matter. He said there was not, and I said we could do nothing ; and nothing was done. This is wholly in connection with the application for the service certificate. About three weeks after I had a third visit from Captain Jones, and it struck me that, coming after the receipt of this telegram and the interview with Captain Allman, perhaps Captain Allman might have met Captain Jones and mentioned to him that I had received the telegram ; at any rate, about three weeks after receipt of the telegram, I had another visit from Captain Jones, and the object of that visit was to ask me to reconsider my previous decision. I declined to do so. He then asked me if I had consulted my Nautical Adviser as to his right to have this certificate. I told him that I had consulted Captain Allman and Mr. Glasgow, and that Captain Allman was of the same opinion as the other officers of the department —that he was not entitled to this service certificate. He then said that he had met Captain Allman near the. Post Office a day or two before, and in conversation Captain Allman had told him that he was entitled to the service certificate. I remarked something to the effect that it was very strange, as Captain Allman had advised me to the contrary, and the impression on my mind was that perhaps Captain Allman was saying one thing to Captain Jones and another thing to myself; so I told Captain Jones that I would" bring them face to face, and asked him if he would come round the following day at 3 o'clock in the afternoon. I think he said he could not come that following afternoon, but believed he could come the next day. He'came on that day, and on his arrival I sent for Captain Allman, and I then put the question to Captain Allman as to whether Captain Jones, on the statement of services shown, was entitled to his service certificate, and Captain Allman said he was not. Then, for the first time, the question of an examination for a certificate of competency was mentioned. It was in this way : Captain Allman said, after having remarked that he was not entitled to a service certificate, that he could go up for examination as master. That struck me as the best solution of the matter—for him to go up for examination. Captain Jones still pressed, and continued to press his right to the service certificate, and mentioned that he did not know if he could do the work required for the examination. I then turned to Captain Allman and asked him what was the nature of the examination. He represented it as a very simple

H.—26

matter, and one expression of his, illustrating the nature of the examination, is well impressed on my mind. He said, "Oh, it is very simple: like two and two are four." Captain Jones still continued to press that he was entitled, on account of having been in command of vessels when there were what were represented as dummies on board, to his service certificate, and I again informed him that we could not grant that certificate. I told him that the only course for him, if he wished to gain a certificate, was that he should go up for the examination; that he should utilise his spare time and study up; that, if necessary, he should place himself under some teacher; and that, as represented by Captain Allman, the examination did not appear to be a difficult one. Captain Allman then remarked that probably a permit would be required, as Captain Jones had not a mate's certificate, and he made reference to his having been in command of the " Mana " and " Dueo," which were tug-boats, and as to there being some clause in the regulations which would allow that service to qualify him to sit for examination as a Home-trade master. Judge Ward : I would like to see the clause in the regulations. Mr. Hanlon : It is Eegulation 26 [produced]. Judge Ward : This has nothing to do with going up for a certificate of competency. Witness : When this suggestion of the permit was made, and the reference made to the tug service, I then did what was a common practice with me and made a note of it. I have a habit of making notes on envelopes. I suppose in the course of my Ministerial life I have used, I think I may say, hundreds of envelopes for making notes, and the note I made at that time is upon one of the envelopes I have in the cabinet in front of me on my table : "Jones, Duco," then a line, an "M " partially erased, " Permit Exam. Master," and then a line underneath. It is my practice to write notes on envelopes, which I may say are only intended for my own information, and as a reminder of something that I want to get either from my Private Secretary or an official in the department, and these are never to be used as an instruction. There is an "M" erased here. I was intending to write first " Master's examination," but I crossed the "M " out. I had no paper before me in connection with the matter at that time. 201. Mr. Hanlon.'] That date, "8/7/97," was not put on the envelope by you?—No, it was not put on by me. 201 a. Dr. Giles.'] Do you know if that date is correct ?—That is not the date on which the memorandum was written. 202. Mr. Hanlon.] You made that note on the envelope, as is your practice, as a reminder ?— Yes, as a reminder to me that I was to get certain information. I placed it on the desk in front of me so that I would get the information from my Secretary or one of the officials. Captain Allman said before leaving the room that he would look into the regulations to see if a permit was required or could be given. These were almost his last words before leaving the room. Having written this envelope, and so that the thing might be going on and relieve me of any further responsibility in the matter, I said, "Here, take this as a reminder," and he was to. remind me whether a permit was required or could be given. If a permit was required, I expected that that permit would be applied for in the ordinary official way. From that time until Mr. Huteheson's speech in the House, I heard no more of Captain Jones. Captain Allman said he would look into the regulalations, and I gave him the envelope and said, " Take this as a reminder." These are permits [produced] which are usually given by the department. "Permit" seems to me a name peculiar to Marine matters. There are many permits used, such as permits to steamers to carry passengers. 203. Judge Ward.] If Captain Jones went up for examination, under which regulation would that be required ? —That was the question to be looked into. 204. As I understand the Act, if a man has to go up for examination as master, he has to show that he holds a certificate as mate ?—That is so. 205. Well, no permit could alter the law ?—Quite so, no permit could alter the law, and no permit could alter the regulations. 206. Are permits usually granted to persons going up for examinations ?—I am not aware of having given any permit for any examination. 207. Mr. Hanlon.] Was " permit " the word used to you by Captain Allman in his conversation? —Undoubtedly. There is no question of that. These are the ordinary permits used by the Department, every one of them upon a printed form : some to be signed by the Minister, and others by Collectors, but even when signed by the Collector or the Secretary I have had them referred to me for my decision as to whether they should be granted or not. 208. Dr. Giles.] For what purpose ?—For various purposes, but not in connection with these examinations. 209. To go with a tug without a license ?—Yes, they are scheduled here [form produced.] Some have to be signed by the Minister, and others might be signed by the Collector in some cases, but although signed by the Collector they have been brought before me for my recommendation or concurrence, before being issued by the Collector. For instance, on the arrival of His Excellency the Governor, the question of boats being allowed to carry a larger number of passengers than usual —a very large number—they being in smooth water, was submitted, and although not within my province to grant that permit, the matter was laid before me for my information. 210. You made that memorandum, and you say that Captain Allman took that as a reminder ?— Yes. From that point I was done with the whole matter. Nothing was put before me in connection with it until the whole thing was revived by a speech in the House, I think on the 6th August, by the member for Palmerston, Mr. Pirani, and on the 26th by Mr. Hutcheson, the member for Wellington City. Certain allegations were made in their speeches, especially that of Mr. Hutcheson, who went more into detail. Among other allegations, it was stated that a man had obtained a certificate, supposed to be by examination, who could not write his own name. Of

H.—26

course, when I heard this, the absurdity struck me of any man passing an examination who could not write his own name, and I gave no credence—not the slightest—to it. I think Mr. Glasgow was in the House at the time this speech was made, and I have some recollection of Mr. Glasgow and myself, immediately on the conclusion of Mr. Hutcheson's speech, talking the matter over, and I asked him if he could give the information, or knew anything about it, or the possibility of it. 211. Mr. Gray.] It was not that the man could not write his own name ? —Oh, yes, it is in Hansard. This is from Mr. Hutcheson's speech. The Premier had remarked that it was almost impossible for it to be correct, and Mr. Hutcheson then said, " Well, I asked my informant if he were compelled by a superior authority to go and give his evidence, what would he say in the event of his being charged with the onus of proving the fact ? He said, " I would ask the man to write his name, and he could not; " and that was the first allegation I think made by Mr. Pirani, that the man could not write his name. Mr. Glasgow, the Secretary for Marine, and I had a conversation about it, and I think it was remarked how unfair it was to public officers that these statements should be made without some further information being supplied, but Mr. Glasgow could give me no indication as to whom it could possibly refer. I then inquired for Captain Allman, who was Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, and also Nautical Adviser. Captain Allman was a man in whom I had great confidence. He took great interest in his work, and as Minister of Marine I had a great deal to do with his reports, and so on, but Captain Allman, I was informed, was away, but I think he was expected back from Napier in the course of a day or two. Naturally, while I felt in my own mind that there was no truth in this statement, I wanted to go further ; I wanted to convince the House that there was no truth in the statement. Hence, I was anxious to see Captain Allman and ask him whether he could give us any information which would lead us to identify any case, if there was such a case, as that which had been referred to. I asked Mr. Hutcheson if he would give me any indication; but he declined to do so. I think I asked Mr. Pirani, and he said that if I gave him a Royal Commission he would give me the information. On more than one occasion I asked Mr. Hutcheson; but, at any rate, Captain Allman returned, and I sent my messenger to the train to meet him. I thought that, perhaps, coming from a long journey, he might go straight home, and I wished as early as possible to refute the statement that had been made—and I believed that I would be in a position to do so—as early as possible, and Captain Allman came straight from the train to the House. He was met, I believe, by my messenger, and we had a conversation in the Premier's room, and I think in the presence of the Premier, too. Captain Allman denied that there was anything in the allegation that had been made, and he too protested against these reflections on Government officers being made without any clue being given to the matter referred to. Captain Allman's first statement was that there was no truth in the allegation made by Mr. Hutcheson. A night or two afterwards I again pleaded with Mr. Hutcheson to give me some information or some indication as to the person referred to, pointing out how unfair it was to me, as the Minister in charge of the department, for him to make the statement he had done without going further into the matter or assisting me to find out the man who was said to have a certificate and could not write his own name. Mr. Hutcheson then gave me the first clue, or first direction in which to look, by saying, either " It is a man that you know," or ". It is a man that knows you." I am not quite sure which of those expressions was made use of. Well, I thought of who had been to see me in connection with certificates or examination, and there were only two persons who had been to me. The one was a man named Jamieson, who had been failed by Captain Allman in what is called the " vision test." He came to see me, and was very wroth at having been failed, and made accusations against the Examiner for failing him; but I declined to interfere with the Examiner's work. He then went to a firm of solicitors here, and we had several letters from that firm of solicitors, and again I declined to interfere with the Examiner's work. The other man who had been to see me was Captain Jones. When I had received this clue from Mr. Hutcheson I told Captain Allman what he had said, and that the only two men who had been to see me in connection with any certificate were Mr. Jamieson and Captain Jones. The first name I mentioned was Jamieson— " What about Jamieson?" and he made some remark that Mr. Jamieson was a scholar, or a fairly educated man. Then I said, "What about Captain Jones; did he go up for examination?" " Yes," he said; " and he passed." Then Captain Allman informed me that Captain Jones had brought papers into the examination-room which had been worked out for him, and that he had destroyed the whole of them. 212. Mr. Hanlon.] Can you fix the date of that conversation?—lt would be within, I think, a week of Mr. Hutcheson's speech in the House. 213. Was there any other person present?—l immediately took him into the Premier's room, and asked him to repeat in the Premier's presence what he told me, and this was done. I still believed Captain Allman, and had no suspicion in my mind of any wrong-doing. I said the whole of the allegations must be effectually disproved. With the sessional work going on, I had not the time to go into the matter then. What I wanted to do was to prove to the House and the country that there was no foundation for the statements made. Towards the close of the session I instructed my messenger to make extracts from Mr. Hutcheson's speech. These were pasted on foolscap, so that an official report could be obtained. The House rose on the 6th November, and on the 11th I went to my home for a few days and returned on the 20th. I think it was the following morning that Mr. Glasgow, Secretary for Marine, came to me and told me of some statement that had been made by Captain Yon Schoen to Mr. Allport, who is the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, referring to Captains Jones, Bendall and McLellan. He gave me an outline of what had been stated by Mr. Allport, and then left the office and brought Mr. Allport back with him, and Mr. Allport repeated his statement in my pre-

H.—26

sence, and it is substantially what you have on the file here in Mr. Allport's letter—that Captain Yon Schoen had been to him early in the year and had disclosed to him the method by which Captain Jones had been put through his examination, and also Captains Bendall and McLellan, who had been apparently referred to in Mr. Hutcheson's speech.- Mr. Allport was satisfied by the papers or books supplied to him by Captain Yon Schoen that these men had. had the use of papers to copy from. This was the first time I had the least idea or knowledge that there was any truth in what had been stated in the House. The Premier was away at the time. He came back the next day or the following day, and on his return the Premier, Mr. Glasgow, and myself talked the matter over, and we decided to forward on to Captain Allman copies of the statement made by Mr. Hutcheson and ask him to give a reply to this statement. It was very near the end of November when this letter was sent on to Captain Allman. Mr. Glasgow and myself left, I think, on the same or the following day for Nelson, and I returned about the 4th December. On the 9th December Captain Allman came to my room. He then told me substantially what is actually in his first admission. 214. That is the first statement put in here?— Yes. He told me that Captain Jones had brought those papers to the examination-room ; that he had destroyed some of them, which he had afterwards replaced ; and told me practically what he has said in his first statement. After making this statement, he asked me to keep it confidential. I told him I could not do so ; that if my colleagues had information of a similar character it was their duty to make me acquainted with it, and I should take the first opportunity of acquainting them with what he had told me ; and that he had been asked to reply to the statement made by Mr. Hutcheson in writing, and it was his duty to comply with that request. A few days afterwards Captain Allman came to me and handed me the written statement now in Court, and which is known as the " first statement," dated 13th December, 1898. It was addressed to the Premier, through me. The matter was then considered by us, referred to the Crown Law officers, and eventually it was decided, on the recommendation and advice we received, to prosecute under section 32 of the Shipping and Seamen's Act. The case, as is known, came before the Court, and eventually the Supreme Court, on technical grounds, held that there was no case against Captain Allman. Then we had the cancellation of Captain Jones's certificate, which came before the Supreme Court in April. These are shortly the circumstances. An attempt has been made, I think largely political, to cast the onus of what has occurred on the Premier. I say, unhesitatingly, that there is not the slightest foundation for this. Mr. Seddon sent me that telegram about the service certificate, but the question was settled by my saying again that nothing could be done by the department. But beyond that telegram Mr. Seddon had no communication with me in reference to the service or any certificate. There has been an attempt made to mix up the service certificate with the certificate of competency. The service certificate required no examination, but the attempt has been made to mix that up with what subsequently occurred in connection with the examination. The Premier was away in the Old Country at the time the suggestion was made by Captain Allman that Captain Jones should go up for examination, and the Premier could have known nothing about the suggestion. The matter was never mentioned by us, and he never mentioned Captain Jones's name or the examination to me at any time until after I had received the clue from Mr. John Hutcheson, and my opinion is that the Premier did not know until that time that Captain Jones had got his certificate. 215. What was the first occasion on which you heard of what had been communicated to Mr. Glasgow by Mr. Allport ? —On the 21st November. I returned from the South on the 20th, and 1 think it was the morning on the following day that Mr. Glasgow came to me and told me. 216. Had Mr. Allport on any occasion communicated direct to you that information? —No; certainly not. That was the first I heard of it. 217. I understand that this information was given to Mr. Glasgow a couple of days before the Prince of Wales's birthday, or a couple of days after? —So it is stated. 218. Were you in Wellington at that time ?—Yes; I was two days before and two days after. I left two days after. 219. Mr. Glasgow made no communication to you before you left Wellington ?—No. 220. While the Magisterial inquiry was going on, did you have any conversation or communication with Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. The case was before the Magistrate's Court on the 24th and 26th January—the Tuesday and the Thursday. On the previous Friday or Monday—l am not quite sure which—Mr. Glasgow came to me and said that he thought the other side would make a great deal of Captain Jones having been examined for a master's certificate without the qualification of a mate's certificate —that they would make a great deal out of the breach of the regulations, and it having been done by Ministerial authority. I said " Ministerial authority—where?" He then showed me this letter to the Collector, dated 12th July : — M. 97/1465. No. 787/91. Marine Department, 12th July, 1897. The Collector H.M. Customs, Wellington. I have to inform you that the Minister of Marine has directed that Captain James Jones, of the s.s. " Duoo," is to be permitted to go up for examination for a certificate of competency as master, home-trade, without the qualification of having in possession a mate's certificate for one year. If Captain Jones makes an application to be examined, it should therefore be accepted without production of a mate's certificate. Geoegis Allpobt, for Secretary. I wanted to know who had given the direction, and my first impression was that one of my colleagues, during my absence, might have given the direction. Mr. Glasgow said Mr. Allport would not write such a letter without Ministerial authority. I asked him to get the authority, and he returned with the envelope. I expressed my surprise that such a document should be used as a Ministerial authority. 221. When Mr. Glasgow brought the envelope, it-was pasted on a piece of paper as it is now. [Produced.] This sheet of paper with the envelope pasted to it was by itself. I expressed my surprise and alarm lest similar memoranda, of which I made so many, might have got on to other

H.—26

files and be used as Ministerial authority. The expression I made use of was, "It makes me tremble to think what might be done with other envelopes on which I have made rough notes." He told me that Mr. Allport informed him that he had received it from Captain Allman, and I wished to know the circumstances under which he received it. 222. Had you seen that envelope between the time you handed it to Captain Allman in your room and the time Mr. Glasgow brought it to you from the office on the occasion you are referring to?—I had not seen that envelope from the time I gave it to Captain Allman until Mr. Glasgow brought it to my room on the 20th or 23rd January. I was told it had been handed to Mr. Allport by Captain Allman, and I then asked the circumstances under which it was handed to him. I received the explanation from Mr. Allport on the 25th January, 1899. This was the date between the two days' proceedings in the Magistrate's Court. The proceedings were on the 24th and 26th, and this is dated the 25th :— Secretary, Marine Department. As regards the examination of James Jones for a master's certificate without his being required to show a year's service whilst in possession of a mate's certificate, tho attached note was given to me on the Bth July, 1897, by Captain Allman, who stated that the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones had instructed him to bring it and tell the department to give the necessary instructions for dispensing with the requirements as to mate's certificate. He said that he had suggested to the Minister that this might be done, as the certificate required was one which was only available in New Zealand and as Jones had for a long time been master of the " Mana " and " Duco." On the same day I inserted the date which appears on the note, brought it in and showed it to you and then gave it out for record. It was recorded, as you will see by the date on the top of the paper, on the 12th July, and instructions were written to the Collector of Customs on the same date. Geoege Allpoet. 25/1/99. Hon. Minister. Mr. Allport is now quite certain that the facts are as above stated. I have no very distinct recollection of having had the note in your handwriting put before me, but I cannot contradict the positive recollection of Mr. Allport on that point. W. T. Glasgow. 25/1/99. On receiving this from Mr. Glasgow I immediately wrote upon it this minute, underlining the statement that instructions had been given by me dispensing with the mate's certificate : —■ Mr. Glasgow. This statement is without the slightest foundation. I was not aware until the other day that the regulations had not been adhered to. It is astonishing to find that a rough note made upon an envelope signed by no one, addressed to no one, and undated has been deemed sufficient authority for a breach of the regulations. W.H.-J. 25/1/99. On the following day there is a further memorandum from Mr. Glasgow:— Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones. Department of Marine, Wellington, 26th January, 1899. Aptee endeavouring to recall the circumstances under which the envelope with your note on it came to be recorded, lam now able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport has stated. It is the case that he brought the envelope to me and told me that it came through Captain Allman, who had stated when handing it to Mr. Allport that the Minister had agreed to allow Jone3 to be examined. I remember commenting on the irregularity, but 1 concluded that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself with directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope. If, therefore, it is decided that Captain Allman's verbal statements and the note on the envelope are not sufficient Ministerial authority for the memo, whioh was written to the Collector, then I must accept the responsibility and submit to the censure implied in your minute on the 25th instant, which, without these further remarks from me, might hereafter be deemed to be directed against Mr. Allport. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. This reached me the day after, the 27th. I then wrote this minute upon it, and returned it to the department: — Mr. Glasgow. Even with Captain Allman's statement, it is surprising that no inquiry was made as to ihe intention or origin of the envelope with a rough note upon it, and which referred to such an important subject, and the fact of your having commented upon the irregularity without directing that my attention should be called to the meagre authority for such an important departure is painful to me. However, I am aware that your time is fully occupied with Customs and other work, and I cannot absolve Mr. Allport from the largest measure of responsibility in the matter. W. H.-J. 27/1/99. Judge Ward : Then the Commissioners are to understand that half a dozen words—five words—on the back on an envelope had been deemed sufficient by the officers of the department to justify them in violating an Act of Parliament ? Mr. Hanlon : That, together with some statement made by Captain Allman to Mr. Allport. Judge Ward: A statement that ought never to have been accepted. Witness : On the 27th February I sent the following minute to Mr. Glasgow: — Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 27th February, 1899. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. 1. Dueihg the recent Magisterial inquiry into the Allman case, Mr. Allport is reported to have said that an official letter was written by authority of the Minister allowing Captain Jones to be examined for a certificate as master in the home-trade, although he had not the necessary qualifications as provided by the regulations. I shall be glad to have any further explanation from Mr. Allport in reference to this statement made on oath. 2. Was the alleged permit referred to before the Supreme Court during the course of the proceedings ? and, if so, did Mr. Allport give any further explanation of what he had deemed sufficient authority for the breach of the : regulations ? 8. During the time I have been in charge of the Marine Department has either Mr. Allport or yourself received written instructions from me without either signature, date, or address, upon which you have taken action, even though there may have been verbal representations made by some other person ? Kindly let me have this information. Wμ. Hall-Jones. This is the reply from Mr. Allport:— Secretary, Marine Department. In reply to the memorandum of the Minister of Marine of this date, I beg to furnish the following explanation with regard to my evidence in the recent prosecutions in connection with Captain Jones's certificate. 1. During my evidence in Yon Schoen's case, in the Magistrate's Court, in reply to a question put by Mr. Skerrett in the course of cross-examination, I stated that an official letter had been written by the Minister's direction, giving permission for Jones to be examined for a master's certificate without oomplying with the regulations as to holding a mate's certificate. At that time I had no reason to think that such was not the case and could not, therefore, have answered otherwise than I did, as, if I had done so, I should not have said what I

H.—26

then believed to be true. It was not until after I had given my evidence that I learnt that the Minister denied that the unsigned note in his handwriting about Jones had been given by him to Oaptaia Allman, with instructions that it was to be taken by the department as his authority for dispensing with the requirements of the regulations as to mate's service, as stated to me by Captain Allman. Moreover, I knew that Captain AUman had, in his report of the 13th December last, referred to this permission, and in my memorandum of the 28th December I statad that Captain Yon Sohoen had told me that Jones had informed him that the Minister had, after consultation with Captain Allman, agreed to allow him to be examined for a home-trade master's certificate, without being in possession of a mate's certificate. I understood that the Minister had scan both these reports, and that he had not taken exception to the statements with regard to the permission for dispensing with the service. 2. When I was giving evidence before the grand jury, I was asked whether the Minister had authorised the examination of Jones without his complying with the regulation as to mate's service, and I replied that I had been informed since I gave my evidenoe in the Magistrate's Court that he denied having done so, and stated that he had not sent the document which the department had accepted as his authority. When giving evidence in the Supreme Court, in Captain Allman's case, I was asked by Sir Robert Stout whether Jones held a mate's certificate at the time of his examination for the master's certificate, and I replied that he did not. 3. The only case besides that of Jones, so far as I can recollect, in which the department has received and taken action on instructions from the Minister without signature, date, or address, was that in which Captain Adamson's name was noted for employment. This was recorded on the same day as the Jones paper. 27/2/99. George Allpobt. This is the reply from Mr. Glasgow : — Hon. Minister. The cases against AUman, Yon Schoen and Jones were heard in the Magistrate's Court on Tuesday and Wednesday, the 24th and 25th ultimo. [Thursday, 26th.—W. H-J.] It was not until the previous week that I saw clearly the important bearing on these cases of the letter from this department to the collector authorising Jones to be examined without possessing a mate's certificate. On Friday evening, the 20th ultimo, at about 5 p.m., I saw you on the subject, reminding you of Captain Allman's statement that the authority had emanated from you, and I showed you the envelope which Captain Allman handed to Mr. Allport. You expressed surprise that the envelope as it stood should have been accepted, but I pointed out that there was at that time no reason for doubting Captain Allman's representations, and the envelope was only regarded as confirmatory. I- was anxious to get from you some definite statement, so that any evidence which might be given might be qualified ; otherwise, if questioned, both Mr. Allport and myself could not do otherwise than state that the Minister had authorised, and we would probably have to produce the envelope, and I pointed out that you would probably have to give evidence yourself. You said you did not think the point would be raised at all. If a plain contradiction of Captain Allman's statement had been obtained, both Mr. Allport and myself would have seized any opportunity given in examination or in oross-examina-tion to let it be known. [This was only known to me on perusing Mr. Allport's statement of January 25th. —W. H-J. The day after the trial of Yon Schoen, when I told you what had been said by Mr. Allport and myself in crossexamination, you wished to have full details in writing as to what had occurred when Captain Allman brought the envelope to Mr. Allport. I accordingly got Mr. Allport to give a narrative of the whole facts, whioh he did in a memorandum, dated 25th January, 1899. On this memorandum you minuted on the same date, that the statement of Captain Allman with respect to your dispensing with the requirements as to mate's certificate, was " without the slightest foundation." This was the first positive assurance I had that you denied the truth of Captain Allman's statement, and accordingly, both Mr. Allport and myself when questioned by the Grand Jury were able to state that, although the Collector had been advised by the department in accordance with Captain Allman's statement, the Minister of Marine denied that he had ever given any authority for dispensing with the mate's certificate. [At this time the case in the Magistrate's Court was not finished, and was not until the following day.— W. H-J.] With reference to paragraph marked " 2," there was no opportunity to give further explanation. Sir Robert Stout did not refer to the matter when cross-examining me, and when cross-examining Mr. Allport he went no further than as stated by Mr. Allport. As regards paragraph " 3," Mr. Allport refers to another instance, but the matter was not one of much importance. The only other case so far as, at present, I can remember, in which an instruction of importance has reached me from you, in what I consider an unofficial and irregular way, was that relating to remission of duty on the Governor's private supplies. The memorandum was written by Mr. Horneman, and your name was signed to it by him. In the event of my acting on this authority, I might of course, in the course of time get into trouble, if Mr. Horneman had not correctly represented your intention, or if through lapse of time you were unable to recall exactly what you had said. 28th February, 1899. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary Marine Department. 223. Dr. Giles.] Who is Mr. Horneman? —He is my Private Secretary. This related to a matter which he had signed for me, but he omitted to put his initials as signing for me. 224. Mr. Hanlon.] Were inquiries made before they acted upon that ?—I think so. When I put on it 28th February, 1899, the day following the receipt of this, I wrote : — Mr. Glasgow. Is it not a fact that when you directed my attention to Mr. Allport's letter of the 12th July I at once emphatically denied giving any such authority ?—W. H.-J. 28/2/99. To this Mr. Glasgow replied as follows : — Hon. Minister. No ; I have no recollection of suoh denial. I left you after the interview on Friday in quite an uncertain state of mind as to what I would be able to say if cross-examined on Tuesday. I could not see that I could go further than to say that there was doubt as to whether authority had really been given. Had I understood you to give clear denial I would not have had any uncertainty about the matter. My impression was that you were endeavouring to recall what had passed at the interview between yourself, Jones, and Allman, and that at the time you were unable to give the positive denial which you afterwards gave. You certainly did not instruct me to say in Court that you had not given the authority. Even if I had received such instructions, it is obvious that my saying so would not have been evidence unless you went into the box. You did not propose to do this. Ist March, 1899. W. T. Glasgow. I returned it with this minute :— Mr. Glasgow. Will you kindly relate what led up to you going to your office, and returning with the envelope which has been referred to?—W. H.-J. 1/3/99. He replied:— Hon. Minister. I went for the note in order that you might see more clearly what it might be taken to mean. I wanted you to see what effect its production in Court and before jury might have. And I also referred to the possibility of either Jones or Allman (or both), who were present at the interview, giving evidenoe that authority had been given by you. W. T. Glasgow. 1/3/99.

H.—26

There are some further minutes on this, but they are simply*for the purpose of record. The evidence given in Court was that this letter had been written by my direction or authority. I was under the impression that Mr. Allport might have made this statement—the thing occurred so long ago—without the actual knowledge of the nature of the authority, or what he deemed to be the authority. Then, there was another point. Mr. Allport occupies a responsible position in the department, and I wanted to know if he considered an envelope such as that before the Court a Ministerial authority—that is, roughly written—abbreviated words, sufficient for any officer to make a departure from the regulations. On the 9th March I sent this memorandum to Mr. Glasgow:— I would like to know from Mr. Allport whether he still adheres to the statement made by him on oath in Court that the official letter sent by him to the Collector dispensing with the production of the mate's certificate was written by my authority or direction. Will you kindly obtain this from Mr. Allport ? Wμ. Hall-Jones. It goes on from Mr. Glasgow to Mr. Allport, asking him to send a reply, and the reply comes from Mr. Allport to the Secretary, who forwarded it on to me on the 9th March: — Secretary, Marine Department. I have already explained in my memorandum of the 27th ultimo my reasons for believing at the time my evidenoe was given that it was true that the Minister had given the direction that the qualification as to holding a mate's certificate was to be dispensed with in the case of Captain Jones, and I still think that if I had stated otherwise I should not have said what I believed to be true. Gkobge Allpoet. 9/3/99. I then wrote another memorandum to Mr. Glasgow on the 11th March, as follows: — Office of Minister Public Works, Wellington, 11th March, 1899. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Me. Allport's memorandum is not an answer to my question. Ido not for a moment suggest that, in stating in Court what he did, he was saying other than what he then believed to be true. The point is whether he still adheres to it as being the fact. Wμ. Hall-Jones. This was forwarded to Mr. Allport by Mr. Glasgow, and he replied as follows: — Secretary, Marine Department. I ebgeet that the Minister has deemed it necessary to ask whether I still believe it to be a fact that the official letter to the Collector dispensing with the production of the mate's certificate in the case of Captain Jones was written by his authority, as it .plaoes me in a very unfortunate position. However, as lam required to answer it, I can only say that I still believe it to be the fact. Geobge Allpobt. 13/3/99. 225. Do you know whether or not Mr. Glasgow has said that in July, 1897, he showed that envelope to you?—l heard him state that in Court. 226. It is correct, is it not, that, in that correspondence that took place at the end of 1897-98, Mr. Glasgow does not say he showed, you that envelope in 1897 ? —That was the whole ground of my complaint; and in my office he admitted to me that it should have been brought to me. 227. Do you know as a fact that Mr. Glasgow swore positively and specifically that he had shown that envelope to you in July, 1897, before it was acted upon ?—Yes ; I heard him state that in the course of the proceedings for the cancellation of Captain Jones's certificate. 228. I want to ask you to test your memory as closely as possible: did any such thing as that take place ?—Certainly not. Is it likely that if such a thing had occurred I should have put these minutes on these papers ? 229. The papers we have just put in?— Yes. The whole complaint was that the envelope had not been brought before me. Take the first minute :"It is astonishing to find' that a rough note made upon an envelope, signed by no one, addressed to no one, and undated, has been deemed sufficient authority for a breach of the regulations.—W. H.-J." First of all we have the statement from Mr. Allport. Mr. Glasgow on the same date says he has no distinct recollection of having had a note in my handwriting put before him, but he cannot contradict the positive recollection of Mr. Allport on that point. Then I expressed my astonishment that a rough note should have been used for the purpose. Then I received this letter of Mr. Glasgow's : " After endeavouring to recall the circumstances under which the envelope with your note on it came to be recorded, I am now able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport has stated." Now, what did Mr. Allport state? Mr. Allport states that he received this envelope on the Bth July, and that Captain Allman stated that Mr. Hall-Jones had instructed him to bring it as an instruction to the department. He says, "On the same day I inserted the date which appears on the note, brought it in and showed it to you, and then gave it out for record. It was recorded, as you will see by the date on the top of the paper, on the 12th July, and instructions were written to the Collector of Customs on the same date. —Gboege Allport. 25th January, 1899." Then Mr. Glasgow's memorandum of the 26th January corroborates all that Mr. Allport has said: "I am now able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport has stated. It is the case that he brought the envelope to me and told me that it came through Captain Allman, who had stated, when handing it to Mr. Allport, that the Minister had agreed to allow Jones to be examined. I remember commenting on the irregularity, but I concluded, that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself with directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope. If, therefore, it is decided that Captain Allman's verbal statement and the note on the envelope are not sufficient Ministerial authority for the memorandum which was written to the Collector, then I must accept the responsibility, and submit to the censure implied in your minute of the 25th instant, which, without these further remarks from me, might hereafter be deemed to be directed against Mr. Allport.—-W. T. Glasgow, Secretary." Then my minute on that would give any man the opportunity of saying if the envelope had been placed before me : " Mr. Glasgow.— Even with Captain Allman's statement, it is surprising that no inquiry was made as to the intention or origin of the envelope with a rough note upon it, and which referred to such an important subject; and the fact of your having commented upon the irregularity without directing that my attention should be called to the meagre authority for such an important departure is

H.—26

painful to me. However, I am aware that your time is fully occupied with Customs and other work, and I cannot absolve Mr. Allport from the largest measure of responsibility in the matter.— W. Hall-Jones. 27/1/99." 230. Then, did you direct Mr. Glasgow to take any action so far as Mr. Allport was concerned ?—Not in connection with Mr. Allport's action with regard to this matter; but I was very much pained and annoyed that an officer of my department, whose action I was to a large extent responsible for, had known, early in 1898, that a certificate had been obtained by fraud, and that two other captains had been allowed to be examined, or had somehow got through their examination to be licensed to act as adjusters of compasses. I was very much annoyed to think that an officer of my department, who had received this information, had not disclosed it either to Mr. Glasgow or to myself. The reason given was that it had been given to him confidentially. Well, as a public servant, I have no hesitation in saying that it was a mistake in the first place to take it as confidential, but, having the knowledge, it was his duty, without disclosing the name of his informant, to give the facts to the Secretary. I then, when suspending Captain Edwin from work as an Examiner, and Captain Allman from his work as Nautical Adviser, also told Mr. Glasgow to suspend Mr. Allport. Mr. Glasgow begged of me not to do so, saying that he could not do without him. I then let the matter remain for a time in deference to Mr. Glasgow's wishes. What I wish to do is to place the facts before the Commission. It is a fact that I told Mr. Glasgow to suspend Mr. Allport. It is a fact that Mr. Glasgow asked me not to do so, because he could not do without Mr. Allport, who has been identified with the department so long. He has been practically the head of the Marine Department for some time. Mr. Glasgow may shake his head, but that has been my impression. 231. Was that intimation given to Mr. Glasgow in writing?—No, not in writing. 232. Nor his reply ?—No. 233. That was by way of conversation ? —Yes. 234. As far as Captain Allman is concerned, there were certain charges sent to him ?—Yes. [Charges produced, identified, and marked " S."] 235. Do you know the date of the conversation with Mr. Glasgow in which you suggested that Mr. Allport should be suspended ?—lt would be, I think, some time in January—about the same time that we decided to suspend Captain Edwin and Captain Allman —about the middle of January. 236. Is there anything else in connection with the Jones case that you would like to give evi(_nce upon?— You have a declaration from Captain Jones—an affidavit [produced]—in which he says, under heading No. 2, " I was present at the office of the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones early in the month of July, 1897, having gone to his office to obtain from him an order authorising me to be examined for a master's certificate." I say that is untrue. It is untrue that he came to my office in the month of July, and it is untrue that he came to me at any time for an order authorising him to be examined for a master's certificate. He further says: "3. I stated to Mr. Hall-Jones that I understood that I could not go up for a master's certificate until I got a mate's certificate, and that I had not a . mate's certificate ; and Mr. Hall-Jones replied, ' I will fix that all right, and you will come back again in a week's time and get your ticket.'" When I first saw this I wondered what it meant; I concluded it meant the certificate. " I said, ' For the practical part I can do anything, but I'll be hanged if I can do the writing.' I then said to Mr. Hall-Jones, 'It will be no use for me to go to Captain Allman and tell him I have permission to sit unless you give me an order telling Captain Allman that he was to allow me to sit for a master's certificate.' Mr. Hall-Jones then rang his bell, and the messenger came in. He told his messenger to go for Captain Allman, and tell him he wanted to see him. The messenger did so, and Captain Allman came upstairs in a few minutes. I waited in the room. When Captain Allman came in Mr. Hall-Jones told him that he was to allow me to go up for my certificate, and that he (Mr. Hall-Jones) was going to dispense with my having a mate's certificate. He said to Captain Allman that he would give him an order, and Captain Allman said it must be an order to the department. Mr. Hall-Jones then said he would give an order to the department. I saw nothing handed by Mr. Hall-Jones to Captain Allman, but Mr. Hall-Jones wrote something upon a piece of paper there. I left the room, leaving Captain Allman with Mr. Hall-Jones." That statement No. 3 is, nearly in every particular, incorrect. I saw Captain Jones on four occasions. The first occasion was when he came to me and complained that he could not get his service certificate from the department. The second occasion was when he came to get my decision or reply as to the result of that interview, when I told him he was not entitled to the certificate. The third interview was after the Premier's telegram, when he came to ask me to reco*nsider my previous decision, and I declined to do so. Then he told me that Captain Allman had told him only a few days before that he was entitled to his certificate. The fourth and last interview was when I brought him and Captain Allman face to face. It was then that the question of the examination and the matter of the permit cropped up. He came along on that occasion so that I might face him with Captain Allman, and he might hear what Captain Allman had told me about the certificate. There was no question of an order at all. The position was that Captain Allman was to look into the regulations, and that is borne out by Captain Allman's statement. You will see that he says he was to hunt up the regulations. I think it was in reference to the tug-service. It is here. Captain Allman says, after coming up to the point where the Hon. Mr. Ward ceased to be Minister of Marine, that he did not hear anything about the matter for some time until he " received a message from Mr. Hall-Jones that he desired to see me in his office. I went to his office, and he mentioned this matter again, and said he had received a communication from the Premier on Captain Jones's behalf. The communication was a telegram from the Premier to Mr. Hall-Jones, and the latter handed the telegram to me to read. It was dated Auckland, and, so far as I recollect, it said, ' See that Jones gets his certificate before B—H. 26,

H.—26

I return.' " That would be the telegram which is before the Court. "If those were not his exact words, they were certainly its purport. The Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones and I then had a long conversation about the matter. I admitted that Jones was an excellent seaman and knew his duties, being a good practical man, but I pointed out to the Minister that the Act plainly prevented the granting of a certificate upon Jones's actual sea-service. He asked me if there was any other way of getting the certificate." Whatever occurred here, it will be seen that this was the interview when the telegram was under discussion. Then Captain Allman goes on to say, " I then explained to the Minister that the application of Captain Jones was for a home-trade-service certificate as master; that the conditions upon which such a certificate would be granted were entirely in the hands of the Government of the colony, since its effect was limited to the coastal waters of New Zealand, in my opinion. I then explained to the Minister that, under the existing law, in the absence of the necessary service, Captain Jones would have to pass an examination to be set by me." I wish to draw attention to this, because this is not a continuation, as one might imagine on reading this reply, of the interview when the telegram was referred to. This was at the interview when Captain Jones was present, and that was the first occasion when the examination was mentioned. The actual words were, "He can go up for examination." He goes on to say, " I then said I would hunt up the regulations and see if I could find any clause which would meet Captain Jones's case." This was in reference to the dispensation of a mate's certificate, and reference had been made to Jones having acted as master of a tug, and to some clause in the regulations which dealt with that point. Of course, with the number of regulations connected with the various departments, I cannot be expected to — and I do not think any Minister could—have a knowledge of the whole of the regulations. The marine regulations are very lengthy, and they require a technical knowledge to be thoroughly understood. I have not only marine but other regulations and departments under my control, and I think I am acting rightly in these matters when I rely for the construction of these regulations upon my responsible officers. Captain Allman says, " I then said I would hunt up the regulations, and see if I could find any clause which would meet Captain Jones's case." That had reference to tug-service. I had some idea that there was a clause referring to tug-service. This was the time I saw Captain Jones at my office, when the question was first mentioned by Captain Allman, at what I call the fourth interview with Captain Jones, and I never saw Captain Allman or Captain Jones after that time. I wish to emphasize this. I was done with the matter, and it can be understood that, with the immense amount of work a Minister has, and with correspondence coming in by every in dealing with a letter or with any matter, it is placed in the basket upon my table and taken away to the departmental officers who have to deal with it, or to whom the memorandum is sent, and the officers are relied upon to attend to the direction. When I receive a letter I make some minute upon it and send it to the department, and the chances "are that if that letter was lost the matter referred to would pass out of my mind: I know of no instance of negligence or loss of any letters, or any answer not being returned, in consequence of this practice. I mention this to show that we have to work like machinery, and to rely upon the officers of the department. Captain Allman goes on to say that at another interview he told me " that I was of opinion that Captain Jones might be permitted to sit for his examination under clause 26 of the 1895 regulations, which provides ' that service in a tug-boat employed partly withinj smooth and partly within rough waters would count as sea-service for a master or a mate in the coastal trade, and for the purpose of obtaining a coastal certificate.' " Although the clause was not quoted fully, that would be the clause referred to at the interview when Captain Jones's examination was first mentioned. There are certain things mentioned in Captain Allman's second statement of which I have no knowledge whatever. Captain Allman further says, "You are aware that the regulations do not provide that the Minister can dispense with a mate's certificate, but, as Captain Jones had been outside the Heads really in the position of captain for a long period and on many occasions, and had sometimes been as far as Picton, and as I believed the Minister was anxious that Captain Jones should be passed, I recommended Mr. Hall-Jones to dispense with the mate's certificate in this case. He consented to dispense with the certificate, and I then pointed out to him that he would have to give an order to the department authorising the department to permit Jones to sit for his examination for a coastal master's certificate." 237. Is that statement true?— No. I say the last interview I had with either Captain Jones or Captain Allman on this matter was at the time when I brought the two face to face, and when the question of the examination was first mentioned, and I handed to Captain Allman that envelope. 238. Is that all you wish to say with regard to that statement ? —Yes. 239. Are there any other matters or irregularities in connection with the conduct of the Marine Department of which you know anything and can throw any light upon ?—There have been complaints at various times, or irregularities; but I understand the object of the Commission is to inquire into examinations and the issue of certificates. The alleged irregularities I could refer to are in connection with the shipping-laws, but on inquiry or investigation it has been proved that there was little or nothing in them. So far as the examinations are concerned, the matters which have been brought forward in this instance have been mainly the cases Jones, Bendall, and McLellan. 240. Do you know anything about clause 4 of the Commission: "At whose instance or suggestion, and under what circumstances, the provisions of the Shipping and Seamen's Acts relating to the adjustment of compasses and the employment of apprentices and boys came to be initiated " ? —That was before my time. On looking through the files I find that it was originated by Mr. Pirani asking whether the Government proposed to appoint persons to act as licensed adjusters of compasses. lam only speaking from memory, as it was before my time. From the files it appears that at that time there was only one man qualified to act.

H.—26.

241. Dr. Findlay."] Can you fix approximately the date when you first saw Captain Allman about Captain Jones's application for a service certificate ?—The first time I saw Captain Jones was at the end of 1896 or the beginning of 1897, and I probably would see Captain Allman in connection with the matter at the time. 242. The first interview, from the papers you have read and what he will say, was the one when Captain Jones claimed the service certificate, when it was discussed between you and Captain Allman ; and I understand that Captain Allman pointed out to you that if Captain Jones had claimed the service certificate on the general ground of service for over three years he would have got that certificate granted to him. Do you remember that interview when Captain Allman put it to you that if Captain Jones had claimed the service certificate without giving the items of service he would have passed the application ?—I have no doubt he suggested it, but I have no recollection of it. 243. You remember that he pointed out to you that the records of sea-service prior to 1887 had been burned in the Post Office fire, and therefore that any claim could not be corrected ? ■ —It is the first I have heard with regard to the records being burned. 244. You cannot charge your recollection with Captain Allman's statement that if Captain Jones had claimed generally without going into any detailed service, his certificate would have been granted?—l think there must be some mistake there. 245. Do you recollect that at the first interview he said Captain Jones could not pass the service certificate ? —That is so. 246. And he had finally vetoed it ? —Yes. 247. The next interview, according to Captain Allman's recollection, is the interview when you produced to him the Premier's telegram?— Yes. 248. Were you aware at that interview that Captain Allman had told the Premier that he could not pass Captain Jones's claim for a service certificate ? —No. These interviews with the Premier were new to me. 249. Were you not aware that Captain Allman spoke to the Premier about the matter ? —No. 250. Were you not aware that the Premier had been told by Captain Allman on an envelope that nothing could be done for Captain Jones because he had not sufficient service ? —I only heard of that envelope recently. 251. Captain Allman having vetoed the application, when you showed him the Premier's telegram he was led to suppose that there was some other method of giving Jones his certificate, and having twice vetoed it did he not infer that the Premier's telegram referred to the service certificate, but to something else ? Do you recollect whether that had been put to you so that some other method might be found?— No. Our conversation after I handed in the telegram was wholly in connection with the service certificate, and the whole matter was put on one side. 252. I am referring to the first interview after Captain Allman vetoed the application, and said it could not be granted?— Yes. 253. It came up quite fresh when you received the telegram from the Premier ?—Yes. 254. I understand it is admitted by both you and Captain Allman that tug-service was a possible way out of the difficulty ?—Yes. 255. Do you recollect that Captain Allman pointed out to you that Captain Jones had already a river-service certificate ?—I believe I do. 256. Do you recollect that Captain Allman pointed out to you that, in order to get that riverservice certificate, Captain Jones must have passed an examination in reading, writing, and arithmetic, so that you would assume that some kind of qualification would have been necessary ?— Yes; I said he had a river certificate. 257. And that carried with it the proof that he had passed in reading, writing, and arithmetic ?—I do not know that there is any service required for a river certificate. 258. This was an examination certificate ? —Quite so. 259. It is an admitted fact that Captain Jones had passed a certain examination which required a certain amount of competency in reading, writing, and arithmetic. That was put to you when Captain Allman urged upon you that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for examination ? —lt was mentioned that he had a river certificate. 260. Do you recollect an interview following your showing him the telegram when the tugservice question was discussed further?—l remember the tug-service being discussed. 261. Do you recollect Allman pointing out to you that Eegulation 26 of 1895 —the tug-service in partly smooth and partly rough waters —was sufficient to justify a man getting a certificate ?— The question of the tug-service was referred to. 262. Do you recollect Captain Allman calling your attention to that, and pointing out that Captain Jones had been outside the Heads as master in charge of a tug-boat, and that under this Bule 26 he had sufficient service to entitle him to sit for a master's examination?— The tug-service was mentioned, and the fact of Captain Jones having gone outside as master ; but Captain Allman was to look into the regulation. 263. Did he not say after that, " I have looked at the regulation, and, in my opinion, the service he has performed on a tug-boat as master entitles him to sit for examination as master? —Not at the interview at which Captain Jones was present, when the examination was first suggested. lam not aware of any interview or any conversation on this question you are referring to in connection with Captain Jones's examination after the interview at which Captain Jones and Captain Allman were present together. 264. So far, Captain Allman agrees with you; but does it not suggest itself that there was another interview at which that was discussed ? Did he not inform you that Captain Jones could only sit .if there was this dispensation of a mate's certificate ?—There was only one occasion when Captain Jones was present. Then it was suggested about the examination. It was never suggested before.

H.—26

There was the receipt of the telegram, and the statement of Captain Jones that he had met Captain Allman down by the Post Office, who told him that he was entitled to the service certificate ; then, my saying that I would bring them face to face, and he should hear himself what Captain Allman had said to me. That was done, and after I had asked Captain Allman at that interview, in the presence of Captain Jones, whether Captain Jones was entitled to the service certificate, Captain Allman said, " No " ; and then he said, " But he can go up for his examination." 265. Did you ask him whether that was according to law? —He was Chief Examiner and Nautical Adviser. Then he referred to the tug service, and said a permit would be required, and he would look into the regulation and see if it applied. 266. You did not know at that time whether the permit could be legally given or not?— No. 267. Then you say he left you, undertaking to look into the matter? —That is so. 268. You say, further, that you handed him at that time the memorandum produced in Court to-day ? —Yes, the envelope. 269. He says the envelope was not handed to him. You are certain the memorandum was handed to him?— Yes, lam very certain. 270. He says that he was in Mr. Allport's office when the memorandum was handed to Mr. Allport, and that Mr. Allport said, "Oh, here's the authority in Jones's case." You are quite certain that it was handed to Captain Allman ?—I am quite certain. I could point out the position in which Captain Allman stood in my office when I handed him the envelope. The last words I said to him were, in connection with this matter, " Here, take this as a reminder." 271. Did Captain Allman leave the room then?— Yes. 272. That was the last you saw of Captain Allman in reference to the matter?—lt was the last interview I had with Captain Allman. 273. A long time elapses : how is it that no further inquiry was made by yourself from Captain Allman as to the reply to the question he left you to ascertain ?—The very reason I gave just now. Our work is so great. We have so much correspondence and departmental papers, that if this envelope had not been handed to Captain Allman it would probably have gone into the basket with a note to the Secretary to make inquiry of Mr. Glasgow, and I should never have seen it again unless it came back from the department with the information required. 274. You say that the matter went out of your mind?— Yes. If I were not to get a reply from the department to which anything has been forwarded, the chances are that I should not think of it again, because we have a continuous flow of correspondence going on all the year round. 275. Captain Allman says that he pointed out to you that a master's certificate could only be granted if you dispensed with the mate's certificate, and you could do so, as the matter was left to the discretion of the Government of the colony, because it only referred to coastal service ; therefore it was in your hands to dispense with the mate's certificate if you thought fit. Do you remember him putting it to you in that way? —No. The only impression on my mind is that the tug service might do away with the necessity for the qualification of a mate's certificate, subject to a permit. 276. But there is no power to make a permit.—No; but I was not aware of that at the time. 277. I understand that the memorandum was made by you for the purpose of a memoryaid ?—Yes. 278. Why then give that memory-aid to Captain Allman ?—Well, the object was to hand it on to some one to get the information for me. It might have gone to my private secretary, or I might have waited until Mr. Glasgow came to the office, but, by handing it to Captain Allman, the thing was off my mind, and I quite expected that, if a permit was required, it would come before me in the ordinary form, and there would be a permit drawn in the same way as the other permits issued by the department. 279. Well, your recollection and Captain Allman's recollection is apparently at complete variance about this interview. He says that he took it to be an order dispensing with the mate's certificate and permission for Captain Jones to sit as master ? —No; the impression on my mind were the words he uttered when he left the room —that he would look into the regulations, and my remark was, " Take this as a reminder "■—that he was to look into it. 280. You have never given a permit of any kind for any one to sit for examination ? —No. 281. Have no such permits been'given to your knowledge?—l am not aware of any. 282. Captain Allman suggests that the examination of Captain Pope was one ?—Captain Pope's certificate was suspended some years ago, and an application was made to the Government of the day—l think Mr. Fergus was Minister of Marine at the time—for the return of the certificate which had been suspended. When suspending it the Commissioners holding the inquiry recommended that a mate's certificate should be issued to him in lieu of the master's certificate. After the time elapsed Captain Pope applied for the return of his master's certificate, and he was told by the then Acting Minister of Marine —Mr. Fergus, I think it was—that, on producing satisfactory evidence of sobriety and good conduct, he would be allowed to go up for examination. But I understand that, although authority was given for the issue of a mate's certificate, there is some doubt whether he received it. That information you had better obtain from the Secretary. 283. But there was no permit given by you ?—No. The department recommended that he should be allowed to go up for examination, but there was no question as to the mate's certificate. The question was as to sobriety and good conduct. I was simply carrying out the promise made by Mr. Fergus, and acted on the recommendation of the department. 284. Had your order or direction to the department the effect of dispensing with the mate's certificate ? —Well, looking at the papers, it has that aspect. It is only by perusing the papers you can see what happened. The Secretary is the best person to ask about that. The question was

H.—26

whether he was to be allowed to go up for examination notwithstanding the fact that his certificate had been suspended. 285. As a matter of fact, had not his certificate been cancelled ? —Yes. 286. The facts were these : this was a man who years ago had a master's certificate and had lost his steamer, and had his certificate cancelled, and who, in the ordinary course, should have obtained a mate's certificate before sitting for the master's examination, but he was allowed to sit without acquiring the mate's certificate ? —I think so, but I cannot speak definitely on that point. 287. I suppose the papers will be produced if necessary ? —Yes, at any time. 288. Mr. Travers suggests to me that in this case Captain Pope was holding a mate's certificate under the order of your predecessor, Mr. Fergus?—l think he was. The Commission recommended the issue of a mate's certificate when they cancelled his master's, and it was only a matter of applying for it. 289. Do you recollect, when you spoke to Captain Allman on the 9th November, that you asked him to furnish you with a confidential report ?—I am very clear on that point, After he had given that information, when he stated what actually occurs in his first statement with regard to the examination of Captain Jones, he asked me to keep it confidential. 290. Did you not suggest that it would be prudent not to let Mr. Glasgow know ?—No. He sent it on to me, and said he would rather it came to me than go to the department. 291. You did not suggest that it would be prudent not to show it to Mr. Glasgow?— No. 292. You did not say, " Send me a confidential report " ?—I put it very clearly to him that I could not treat the matter confidentially. I told him I should take the first opportunity of communicating what he told me to my colleagues, and I did so. 293. To summarise, you say that his statement in his answer that he saw you and had your permission to go on with this examination and to dispense with the mate's certificate, and examine this man for a master's certificate, is incorrect ?—Yes. 294. Can you explain how it was that Captain Jcnes knew when to go up for examination ? He must have been communicated with and told that at a certain time he could sit for examination ?—Who told him that ? 295. Do you know ? —Captain Jones can better tell you that. 296. Is there no record in the office, or letter to Captain Jones, telling him that he would be examined if he presented himself at any time and place ?—Not that I am aware of. 297. If there is such a record, would you have it produced ? —Certainly. 298. Mr. Gray.] I understand you to say that the first you knew of this matter was Jones coming to you personally ?—Yes, for his service certificate. 299. No written application had been put before you prior to that ? —No. 300. And you were not aware that the Premier had been looking into the matter? —No. 301. Or had been seen by Captain Jones or his friends as a deputation ?—No. 302. When were you made aware that Mr. Seddon had any connection with it?—l think it came out in what transpired since Mr. Hutcheson's speech. 303. You did not know until late in 1898 that Mr. Seddon had been dabbling in this matter?— I saw his minute in 1896. 304. He did not tell you that he had been looking into the matter up to his departure in 1897 ? —No. 305. You got that telegram from him in 1897 ?—Yes. 306. Did it not strike you then as peculiar that Mr. Seddon should ask you to look into Captain Jones's matter?— Not at all. If I wanted to bring anything to his recollection I should not hesitate to do so, and it is quite a common thing among Ministers. 307. Up to the receipt of the telegram the matter had been disposed of by you telling Captain Jones that your officers were against him ?—That is so. 308. And then after the receipt of the telegram you sent for Captain Allman?—Yes. 309. And finally brought him and Captain Jones together at your office ? —Yes. 310. You had been Minister of Marine from 1896 ?—Yes. 311. About a year?— Yes. 312. And had some little experience by that time ?—Yes. 313. Were you not aware that it was the opinion, not only of shipping men but some of your own officers, that this clause 26 did relate to qualifying for a certificate of competency? —Yes. 314. At all events, you know that this clause was supposed to qualify as far as service went in the direction of getting a certificate of competency ?—1 know of no other case except that of Captain Jones where it was suggested it did apply. 315. But you said just now that you believed some mariners and some officers did think it applied to such a case ?—I say that Captain Allman thought it applied. It was suggested to me that it applied. 316. At all events, it was suggested to you that that regulation might meet Jones's case ? —That is so. 317. And then you wrote this memorandum intending it as a reminder only ?—Yes. 318. Was it intended first as a reminder to yourself, or as a reminder to Captain Allman ? —lt was first intended for myself, to be kept on my desk for my private secretary, or Mr. Glasgow, or for Captain Allman as Chief Examiner and Nautical Adviser ; but, as he remarked that he would look into the regulations, I handed it to him as a reminder. 319. You changed your mind and converted it into a reminder from yourself to Captain Allman ? —There was a certain thing to be looked into, and I kept that on my desk until Mr. Glasgow should come along; but when I got a man alongside me who had got the information as well as Mr. Glasgow, I gave it to him. 320. Captain Allman was on the business of Captain Jones, and you handed it to him and he took it away ? —Yes.

a.—26

321. That was the only matter referred to ?—There was a little~remark, I think, made about lighthouses—about some other matter—but I forget what it was. 322. I understood you to tell Dr. Findlay that when you handed the memorandum to Captain Allman he left the room? —Yes. 323. There was a very short interval of time ?—■ Yes, very short. He left the room immediately. 324. This was a special interview about this matter ? —Yes, but after discussing it in the presence of Captain Jones, and Captain Jones leaving, then we spoke for a couple of minutes upon some other subject, and Captain Allman turned to leave the room, saying he would look into the regulations. Then I gave him this envelope as a memory-aid, first intending it for myself. 325. Why did you give it as a reminder to him ? Did you expect him to forget all about it when he left the room ?—ln the first place I had made the note on the envelope for the purpose of getting information. I wanted to dispose of my part of the business by getting the information; but, instead of leaving it on my desk, I saw that I could get the information from Captain Allman. 326. It was advisable to give him this in case he might forget all about it?— Yes; as I had made the note, and he could supply the information, I handed it to him. 327. When did you next see Captain Allman ?—I could not tell you. 328. Did you remain in Wellington any length of time after the Bth of July?—l was away from Wellington from the end of June up to about the sth of July. 329. This memorandum is dated the Bth July ?—Then I left Wellington again on the 14th July. 330. So you were in Wellington six days after writing the memorandum ?—No, no, that memorandum had been written long before the Bth July. 331. When was it written then ?—Some weeks before. This memorandum was written when I saw Captain Allman and Captain Jones, and the question of the examination was mooted. That interview would be within a week, we will say, of the receipt of a telegram from Auckland—some time in April. Then the interview with Captain Jones occurred some three weeks after I received that telegram, when he came to ask me to reconsider my decision formerly given about the service certificate ; and then, within a day or two of that interview, was the interview with Captain Allman and Captain Jones, when they both came together. 332. How late would you put that ?—About the end of May. 333. Did you remain in Wellington till the end of June ?—-I left about the end. 334. About a month after writing the memo ? —Yes. 335. Did you see Captain Allman after that ?—Yes. 336. Did you mention Captain Jones's matter to him ?—No. 337. You never mentioned the matter? —No. 338. Had you forgotten it ?—lt was just one of those minor matters of departmental work. If anything had occurred to my mind I should have put the question to him. 339. At all events you did not do it?— No. 340. I understand you to say that if Captain Allman handed in this memorandum on the Bth July, he must have had it in his possession before that ?—I do not say anything about that. I say the envelope went from me about the latter end of May. 341. And if he did not hand it in to the office until the Bth July, he must have had it in his possession for something like six weeks ? —lt follows. 342. Then I suppose the matter passed out of your memory until Mr. Hutcheson's speech? —Yes. 343. Captain Jones never came to you again ? —No. 344. And you say you made no inquiry one way or the other about the case ?—Not until the speech. 345. You say it is your usual practice to make memoranda of this character?—l have made hundreds. 346. Before or since that memorandum ? —Both. 347. Unkind people say you have flooded your office with these things since then?—-No. You have to make notes. That note is harmless. 348. It has led to a great deal of trouble. You have made many hundreds of notes on envelopes ?—Yes. 349. Do you hand them out?— Yes. I have handed them to my secretary, or on some matters to the Under-Secretary, in conversation on any subject. I treat them in the same way, and hand them to them in the same way, as I did to Captain Allman, as a reminder. 350. And you say that you have never given anything in the nature of a permit for any other purpose which was similar to this memorandum ?—Not that I am aware of. 351. Will you say that you have not ?—Yes, not to my recollection. 352. You are aware, of course, that Captain Jones has made a statutory declaration that at the interview between him, Captain Allman, and yourself, you did say you would give the permit for him to have the examination. You say that statement is untrue?— Yes. 353. And you know, I suppose, that if it is untrue, being a statutory declaration, he could be prosecuted for perjury ?—I suppose he could. 354. Have any proceedings been taken against him for that ?—No. 355. You know that statement has also been made by Captain Allman ? —Not in quite the same terms. 356. But to the same effect; and you know there is an unfortunate contradiction between yourself and Mr. Glasgow, Mr. Glasgow having stated in the Supreme Court that after the receipt of the memorandum he took it to you and had a conversation with you about it ?—Yes,

Cape Maria van Diemen Lighthouse.

Moko Hinou Lighthouse.

Tiritiri Lighthouse.

Portland Island Lighthouse.

New Zealand WRECK CHART 1st April, 1898, to 31st March, 1899. Compiled from Official Records in the Marine Department

Cape Egmont Lighthouse.

Manukau Heads Lighthouse.

H.—26

357. I suppose you agree with Mr. Seddon's estimate of Mr. Glasgow, that he is a high-minded, high-principled, man ?—I have had experience with Mr. Glasgow. He has been Secretary of Marine since I have been in charge of the department, and I have found Mr. Glasgow a rather cautious officer. 358. I asked whether you agreed with Mr. Seddon's estimate of Mr. Glasgow, that he was a high-minded, high-principled officer?—l say I believe he is a very careful officer. 359. Then I take it that you do not agree with Mr. Seddon's estimate ?—I express no opinion. 360. You express no opinion to the contrary ?—I express no opinion to the contrary. I do not wish it to be understood that I make any reflection upon what Mr. Glasgow said in another place. Ido not for a moment believe that Mr. Glasgow would state other than what he believed to be correct, but I do say that he is mistaken as to what he believes in this matter. 361. You believe that Mr. Glasgow is mistaken in saying that he took the envelope to you, but you do say you believe him to be a man not capable of swearing to what is not true ?—Yes. 362. You pointed out to the Commission to-day that there was an apparent lapse of memory on Mr. Glasgow's part at one time ? —Tbe minutes show that. 363. You rely upon these minutes as showing that Mr. Glasgow, when this matter was first mentioned in the Magistrate's Court in January last, did not then say he had shown you the memorandum ?—I think it would be admitted, seeing the way I drew attention to the envelope not having been shown to me. That was the first time the so-called permit was in question, and my complaint is that the envelope had not been shown to me. It is remarkable. 361. You rely upon the absence of any memorandum or any statement of Mr. Glasgow's that he had shown this document to you in January, 1899 ?—I say that is very remarkable. 365. Mr. Travers.] The telegram from Mr. Seddon says to you—and it is a telegram sent immediately before his departure —"I should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones of ' Duco ' settled." Now, was it not in consequence of that telegram that you were desirous of getting that question settled in accordance with the Premier's wish?— I had no desire at all. It was simply a business to which my attention had been called—Captain Jones's application for a service certificate; and I inquired whether there had been any change in the position since I had decided it. 366. Did you inquire ?—Yes. 367. And you found that no service certificate could be issued to him, having regard to the records of the office ?—I was advised that there was no change in the circumstances. 368. But still the matter remained unsettled as to whether he could obtain another class of certificate? —If you mean to say " Was there any question raised as to any other class of certificate," I say, No. The only question before me was the service certificate. That had been decided by me some months previously, and I refused, after consultation with Captain Allman, to depart from my former decision. 369. And you communicated the receipt of this telegram to Captain Allman ?—Yes. 370. And you inquired whether any change had taken place in the circumstances respecting the service which would enable you to alter your mind?—As to whether there was anything fresh. 371. Then it was suggested to you by Captain Allman that there was another possible course? —Afterwards. 372. After you had expressed your definite and final opinion as regards the service certificate, Captain Allman suggested another course ?—At another interview. 373. How soon after the receipt of this telegram had you the first interview with Captain Allman?—l should say within three or four days. 374. Did you intimate to Captain Allman the receipt of the telegram ?—I told him I had received the telegram, handed the telegram to him, and asked him if there was anything fresh in the matter. 375. And he told you there were no new circumstances that would meet the case ? —He said there was nothing farther. Then so far as I was concerned the matter was dropped. 376. A few days after that you had some discussion as to the examination for a certificate of competency ?—Some three weeks afterwards I had a visit from Captain Jones. 377. And the result of that visit was that you sent for Captain Allman ?—No. There was an interview on the receipt of the telegram with Captain Allman, and my decision to do nothing with regard to the service certificate because it had been already decided. Then followed, about three weeks afterwards, an interview with Captain Jones, who came to ask me to reconsider my previous decision. I declined to do so. Then he asked me if I had consulted my Nautical Adviser. I told him " Yes," and he then said the Nautical Adviser had told him only a day or two before that he was entitled to the service certificate. I told Captain Jones to come along the following day and he should hear himself from Captain Allman what he advised me, and it was at this interview that the two were present when the certificate of competency was mentioned. 378. How long after the receipt of the telegram was it that that interview took place ?—With Captain Jones and Captain Allman, within a month. 379. So that the memo, on the envelope was written as the result of that interview with Captain Jones and Captain Allman ?—Yes. 380. I understand that Captain Jones left the room after you wrote that memorandum and gave it to Captain Allman ?—I wrote the memorandum as soon as the question of a permit was mentioned. 381. Of a permit for an examination ?—-A permit on account of Captain Jones not having the mate's certificate, which it was suggested the section of the regulations met; and, when it was mentioned, I then made this note on the envelope. 382. Did you make it in Captain Jones's presence ?—Yes.

H.—26

383. Were you satisfied at all with the interpretation put by Captain Allman on Regulation 26 ?—The same as when I get legal opinions from lawyers. I do not form my own opinions on such matters, I get them from those qualified to express them, and who are paid for them. It is the same with officers of the department, who are paid for doing so. 384. Then Captain Allman, being an officer of the department qualified to give an opinion, did you take his opinion on the subject as being sufficient ?—He did not express a decided opinion. He had suggested that there was a clause in the regulations which would meet the case of Captain Jones, who had not the mate's certificate. 385. You were content to accept Captain Allman's interpretation of the regulations because you considered him an expert—he was your officer, and was paid to inform you ? —Yes. 386. And Captain Allman had suggested that in his opinion the regulations would meet the case ?—Yes. 387. But still there was a certain difficulty?— There was a doubt whether that would meet the case. 388. Did you leave the solution of that doubt to him ?—He promised me that he would hunt up the information, as he states in his memo. 389. Then it was left to him to determine whether the examination could proceed as a matter of regulation, and, if he was satisfied that it could, he should permit it to proceed ?—No; he was to look into the regulation. My impression was that after he had looked into the regulation I should be advised as to the result of the inquiry. 390. And thereupon, that being the result of the interview between you, you wrote that memo, as a reminder?— The suggestion having been made that a clause in the regulations referred to tugservice being equal to a mate's certificate, but that a permit would be required, I made the note on the envelope. 391. Then you handed that to Captain Allman? —Yes. 392. Does it not strike you, when you look at the written document, that Captain Allman might, after looking into the regulations, treat that as sufficient authority to carry out the examination ? —Not without my signature or initials. 393. It is your handwriting?— Scrawl as it is, without signature, address, or date, no officer would be justified in so treating it. 394. Now the question is the emphasis on the word "permit." Does it not strike you, as the result of that interview, when you handed a document in that ambiguous form, that the word there written would be " per-mit," and not " permit " —that it would be a verb and not a noun ?— It is possible that it might be so treated; but when you consider how largely the word permit comes in in matters referring to the Marine Department, I cannot understand any officer making that mistake. If it had been brought to me to initial or sign we should not have heard anything about the Jones case. 395. But you admit to me the possibility of that construction ?—Yes. 396. You admit that in the ordinary course it might be the erroneous interpretation ?—Yes; but not in the Marine Department. 397. Now we find that Captain Allman is in possession of this document for a considerable time before it is actually used for the purpose of procuring the examination. Is it not so? —Yes; from the end of May until the Bth July. 398. In the meantime this document must have been in possession of the person to whom you gave it unless he parted with it ?• —That is so. 399. Then it was in the possession of Mr. Allport?—Yes. 400. And you have heard Mr. Allport state that it was delivered to him by Captain Allman ? —Yes. 401. And delivered, accompanied by words that he had received that authority from you? — Yes. 402. From Mr. Allport that document passed to Mr. Glasgow ? —So Mr. Allport says. 403. Mr. Glasgow, when examined in the Magistrate's Court, did not, as he said afterwards, recollect that he had taken that to you, after receiving it from Mr. Allport, to discuss the matter with you in some form or other; but he afterwards remembered, and I have no doubt that Mr. Glasgow can state the ground upon which he did remember, that he had taken it to you, but you state positively that that was not true ?—I say it was a false impression. 404. The whole thing proceeded upon this, at all events ? —Yes. 405. And notwithstanding the desire of the Premier that this matter should be settled, and his expression of opinion that Mr. Jones was qualified, and as well qualified for the service certificate as a great many other men, you heard nothing about it, and heard nothing about what was done by the department, until a fuss was made of it in the House ?—No. 406. Does it not strike you as very extraordinary that your department should act upon that authority and never communicate to you what the result was, or mention to you that Captain Jones had been sent up for examination ?—lt did strike me as very extraordinary that they should act upon the envelope. 407. But it did not strike you as extraordinary until this fuss in the Legislature?—l described the nature of our work and the flow of correspondence we have. 408. May I ask you if, in the first interview you had with Mr. Seddon after Mr. Hutcheson's speech in the House, you expressed surprise after you knew it referred to Captain Jones, that any such thing had been done as to send him up for examination ?—-No, because I had lost all recollection of this envelope.

H,— 9,6

Fbidat, 14th July, 1899. Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine, further examined. Mr. Travers : Yesterday Dr. Pindlay referred to an examination of Captain Jones, of the " Duco," which had taken place ten years ago. It is supposed that Mr. Jones can neither read, write, nor do a sum. Captain Edwin informs me that the whole of the answers, writing and arithmetic, were done by Captain Jones, of the " Duco," in his own handwriting, and I would ask that the papers in that case of examination should be brought before the Commissioners. Judge Ward : The case was this. I stated that apparently, from the evidence before us, Captain Jones, of the " Duco," could not write his own name. It appears he wrote his own name ; but you could not blame the Commissioners for not believing that he could write, after reading his own declaration. Mr. Travers : It is the wish of Captain Edwin that the papers should be produced in order to show that Mr. Jones, although not a very good writer, was able to fill a considerable number of sheets in a manner sufficient to satisfy the Examiners. Judge Ward : It is simply to combat the implication against them that you want the papers to be produced ? Mr. Travers : Yes. Mr. Hanlon : I will undertake to do that, your Honour. 1. Dr. Giles.] There is one question I should like to put to Mr. Hall-Jones before commencing the cross-examination, just to complete one part of his evidence. If Captain Allman had brought back your memorandum with a report to the effect that he had looked into the regulations, and that Captain Jones might be permitted to go up for examination, would you then have given a permit upon his report, or would you have examined the regulation yourself to see that it was right in your opinion?-—ln all probability I should have been guided by his recommendation, seeing the responsibility he had as Chief Examiner and as Nautical Adviser. lam inclined to think that had the matter come back to me with a proper recommendation that there was a provision in the regulations for Captain Jones to be examined, and recommending that he be allowed, in all probability I should have given the permit. 2. Judge Ward.] You would have trusted Captain Allman in the matter?— Well, a Chief Examiner occupies a very responsible position, and, apart from that, he is Nautical Adviser. 3. But Nautical Adviser hardly means adviser as to the meaning of regulations ? —Of course Ido exercise my discretion in these matters. I exercised my discretion the other day where evidence of service did not appear to be sufficient, and I did not approve of the recommendation of the department. 4. Mr. Hislop.] You did not ask Captain Allman to report in writing ?—No. 5. And are you prepared to swear that he did not report verbally?— Yes ; if he had reported his report would have been in writing. 6. Your words were, " Take this—this will be a reminder to consider the question " ?—No; it was, " Take this as a reminder." 7. Was there any agreement to report in writing?—No; but he would follow the usual practice of my officers and write the report. 8. You will notice that on the papers, although you had previously dealt with them, there is no memorandum of yours in writing?—No, no memorandum. 9. And you did deal with the papers without any recommendation in writing, and without having made any memorandum yourself ? Have you noticed that in the file there is no report from the officers?—l looked through the file and satisfied myself that he (Captain Jones) was not entitled to the service certificate, and when Captain Jones saw me I told him so. 10. You spoke to Captain Allman about it ?—Yes. 11. Whatever happened between you and Captain Allman was not in writing ?—There was no report. A report is one thing, and an officer's opinion is another. 12. You knew that the matter was before you for reconsideration, and you were satisfied with Captain Allman's statement that there was no alternative ?—That is so. 13. How many times did you deal with the question before the telegram came from the Premier ?—Once. 14. Was it reopened before the Premier left ? —I thought that I had made it clear in my opening that Captain Jones called on me and stated his grievance with the department, and I promised to look into the matter. I sent for the papers, and when he came for his reply I told him he was not entitled to the certificate. 15. You have already told us that you had settled the matter. After that and prior to receiving the telegram did you reopen the question?—l only had the matter before me once. 16. Then no deputation waited upon you?— No. 17. Then the Premier is wrong when he swears that a deputation waited upon you ?—No deputation waited upon me. 18. Then, if the Premier said that he knew a deputation had waited upon you, he was incorrect? —I can only support what I say. lam responsible for what I say. 19. And you are positive that no persons spoke to you in the interest of Captain Jones's certificate ?—-Certain. Judge Ward : You mean the service certificate ? Mr. Hislop : Yes, we are referring to the service certificate. 20. When you received this telegram of Mr. Seddon's, what question was to be settled ?— That is what I wanted to know. Probably the Premier would not be aware that the matter had been before me. 21. You see, he telegraphs as if you and he both knew that something was to be settled.— Well, apparently, he knew that Jones had an application in, and he knew I was Minister of 9—H, 26,

H.—26

Marine, that is all. There was not one word ever passed between the Premier and myself about Jones's service certificate, and not one word about Jones's examination, directly or indirectly, up to the time of Mr. John Hutcheson's speech. 22. And you were not aware that Mr. Seddon had been interviewed, and was being interviewed before he left, with regard to this certificate ?—No ; I have enough work of my own to attend to. Do not judge the work you had to do with my work. 23. Then you were not aware that Mr. Seddon had been interviewed?—l was not. 24. You would be astonished to hear that Mr. Seddon had been interviewed?— Yes. 25. Looking at the terms of the telegram, do you not think that it implies that some question known to both of you was in existence ?—No, I do not take it that way at all. 26. Was it a matter that seemed familiar to your mind when you got the telegram ?—I knew that Jones had applied for the service certificate ; I knew that the thing had been going on since 1896. 27. How did you know that ?—By reference to the files. I went through the whole file when I had a visit from him. 28. And, notwithstanding the overwhelming nature of your business, you remembered all that directly you got the telegram? —Oh, yes; it took some time to go through the file. 29. Now, you will notice that the Premier stated in his telegram, first, that he was of opinion that Mr. Jones should get his certificate ; and, secondly, that Captain Allman thought him highly qualified ?—Yes. 30. In view of Captain Allman's statement to you officially, do you not think there was a contradiction there? Was it explained?— No. I know that Captain Allman always was of the opinion that Captain Jones was highly qualified. 31. But, I mean to say, a contradiction between his report to you and the statement in the telegram ?—I think you will find that Captain Allman stated that he was qualified for the service certificate. He has told us since the telegram came. 32. Did it not strike you as contradictory : " Can anything be done ? " and that statement in the telegram?—No, it did not. 33. Do you not regard that statement of Mr. Seddon's as an argument in favour of granting the certificate ? —Certainly not. 34. Why was it put there?-—That is a question for himself. 35. Was not the statement, " Captain Allman thinks him highly qualified," put there to harden you up ?—-Certainly not. 36. Then for what purpose ?—To communicate to me that Captain Allman had a high opinion of his qualifications. 37. And, therefore, that the certificate might be granted in pursuance of the Premier's opinion —Notat all. We have the fact that it was not granted. 38. When you considered the papers had you any doubt that Captain Jones had not performed the service?—ln the first instance, after I had gone through the papers, I came to the conclusion that he was not entitled to the certificate. 39. That he had not performed the service?— There was a doubt about it. There was a recommendation from the department showing that he was not entitled to it. Captain Jones had stated that he had gone outside in his steamer when there was simply a dummy on board, and had claimed for that service. 40. Was it not simply a question of whether he had performed the service of three years ?— That is so. * 41. Were you not satisfied that he had not performed three years' service ? —There was such a doubt in my mind that I could not lend myself to the interpretation that he had performed the service in face of the recommendation of the department. 42. What did you do in order to clear the doubt up ? —The matter was settled by the department, which went fully into the question. I have a doubt yet. 43. You allowed this man to have another certificate without having this doubt solved ?— Yes. 44. Do you not think that is an injustice to the man ?—No, I do not. There was a doubt— whether there was a strong doubt is a different matter altogether ; but I think it very likely that Captain Jones has performed his three years' service outside. 45. And yet, when he called upon you, you did not ask for further proof ?—No, I did not. 46. When did this doubt first arise in your mind ? —ln the first instance. 47. And you did not give him an opportunity of getting further proof?—lt appears that while he was outside so much in this boat, from his own statement as the officer in command, other men were on board who were registered and had a license. 48. Would this service come within the meaning of the Act ?—Well, that is a question. Was he in command of the boat? That is the question. 49. Could he have been legally in charge of the boat?—No, he could not be. 50. If he was in command of the boat, would he not be liable to a penalty of £50 ?—Yes. 51. Do you mean to tell me, as Minister of Marine, that you would allow a man to credit himself with a service done illegally ?—I said no such thing. 52. Do you say Yes, or No? —No, I say I would not. 53. Very well, that solves that part of the question. Now, is there any other doubt ?—No, I think not. 54. Then, as a matter of fact, there could have been no doubt that he did not legally perform the service ?—There was a doubt as to whether he had performed the service. 55. You would not have credited him with the illegal service would not be justified in doing it.

H.—26

56. There was no doubt he performed the service necessary ?.—Not the legal service. 57. And that was known to you by a perusal of the papers?— That is so. 58. And these papers were shown to the Premier as well as to yourself, and had been perused by him ? —I presume so. 59. When Captain Jones came to see you, after you got that' telegram, did you tell him that both you and the Premier recognised his qualifications ?—No. 60. You did not use words to that effect ?—No. 61. You told him that the Premier had communicated with you? —No, I do not think I did ; in fact, I am sure of it. 62. Did he not ask you?—No; I am quite certain of that. 63. Then you sent for Captain Allman ?—Yes. 64. After Captain Allman's conversation with you, I understand, from your evidence whioh is here ?—I do not want these interviews to be mixed, please. We were referring to the last interview. 65. When Captain Allman left you, both you and he were under the impression that in order to have an examination for the master's certificate a permission was necessary by you?— Yes. 66. That is to say, whether it could be legally done or not, a permission was necessary by you ? —Oh, no ; that is not so. Permission was necessary for him because he had not got a mate's certificate; but he (Captain Allman) was under the impression that a clause in the regulations allowed permission to be given. 67. That is to say, permission was necessary in any event ?—Not necessarily from me. Some of the permits which I handed copies of in yesterday are issued by every officer of the department. 68. As a matter of fact, then, permission would not necessarily be signed by you?— Quite so. 69. All that was necessary was that you should authorise this being given ?—I do not even think that would be necessary, because some of the permits that are granted had been even given by the department. 70. But still, in a matter of this importance, they would not think of issuing it without your sanction ?—lt all depends on the provision made for issuing permits. 70a. I mean in this individual case ?—lf the regulations provided for their issuing these permits without reference to me, they could please themselves. 71. But, at all events, whether permission was deemed necessary or not in this case, it would be necessary for you to sanction it in some way ?—lf it was necessary by the regulations to be sanctioned. 72. You see you go back from the sequence of the question. You stated that, in your opinion, and in the opinion of Captain Allman, a permission would be necessary to be given by you before this examination took place ? —Yes. 73. Now, that permission, so far as the officers are concerned, need not be signed by you. You agree to that ?—Yes, quite so. 74. So that, on their obtaining satisfactory evidence of the permission, you would issue it ? —Yes. 75. Now, I want to know your opinion on this question : Supposing you had been asked to permit the examination, and to do it in writing, what more apposite words could you have used than the ones on that envelope, for the purpose of granting permission for it ? —Well, in the first instance I should have addressed it to Mr. Glasgow, and should have put it: "In accordance with clause so-and-so of the regulations, James Jones is authorised to sit for examination for certificate as master of home-trade, notwithstanding the fact that he does not possess a mate's certificate." I should sign it and date it—that is probably the way. 76. That is probably longer, but it is not so absolutely expressive ?—lt is not so easily misconstrued. I think that you will find that most of my instructions are couched in somewhat similar language. 77. This is "Jones 'Duco , permit examination master"? —It might be "John Smith" instead of " Jones Duco." 78. Do you think it is capable of misconstruction ?—Yes, I think it is. 79. Do you think your officers, having a knowledge of Jones, might have misconstrued it ?— That is another matter. 80. Do you mean to tell me that your officers could not misconstrue it?— Very likely not. Put it to any man outside the department and they would say not. 81. Supposing you had put, " Permit examination." Do you think it capable of misconstruction except in one way ? Can you put any construction upon it except the one they put on it ? — Well, what does it mean ? 82. Supposing it had been addressed to the Secretary and signed by you ? —I have told you what it means. I know the construction that some people are trying to put upon it. It means that inquiry might be made, as to the issue of permit in connection with the application of Captain Jones for examination. 83. Then why did you not add the question at the top, " Inquire " ? —Why did I not address it ? You see it is only a rough note. 84. In what respect is it rough?— Take the writing and the abbreviated words. 85. Well, that arises from your being so busy, does it not?—No, it does not. If that were given to a dozen men of ordinary intelligence there is not one of them who would understand it. I meant it as a reminder to myself. 86. If it was a reminder, is there not a better way of putting it?—lt is concise. 87. As a matter of fact, was it not referred to the Law Officers of the Crown? —It was not done so. 88. You never consulted any Law Officer of the Crown?—l never spoke to any Law Officer of the Crown about it.

H.—26

89. You did not speak to any Law Officer of the Crown on the subject of this memorandum?— Decidedly not. 90. Had you a conversation with the Law Officers of the Crown as to the meaning of the document ?—No, certainly not. 91. And he did not volunteer an interpretation of it ?—lam surprised at your asking such a question. No, I did not. 92. If it; were a mere reminder, could you not have put it " Bemind me re Jones ' Duco,' " or something of that kind ?—lt is a question of permit examination of master. 93. Tell me what it means —" permit examination " ?—The question of permit was required at the examination; you must put permit first and you must have the examination to follow that, because in connection with the examination a permit was required. Hence you require " Permit— exam. —master" here. Person referred to, "Jones." 94. Do you think your officers would take that meaning from it ?—I do not know. 95. There are two obvious meanings. There is one obvious meaning, " Permit examination master " ; the other one is " permit "as explained by you. Which of the two meanings do you think your officers would most likely take?—ln either case I say it ought to be " permit." 96. You will notice that in none of Captain Allman's reports is the word " permit " used ; it is always " permission." And so far as Captain Allman's disclosures and reports are concerned, the word " permit "is never used? —I am not sure of that. 97. Then allow me to remind you that you said before that no permit need have been signed by you ?—No, it need not necessarily be signed by me. 98. I suppose you have looked to see if there is any form of permit ? —I do not think there is. 99. Have you in a matter of this, or any other kind, gone to the same trouble in connection with any application for a master or mate's certificate ? —Yes, with regard to the case of the man Jamieson. I had a good deal of trouble over that; more than in connection with Jones. He got a certificate. 100. You said yesterday he had not ?—The difficulty was his failure in the vision test. I had several letters from a firm of lawyers in Wellington in connection with it. I have had no letters from lawyers in connection with Captain Jones. 101. You say Captain Jamieson got his certificate? —I feel pretty sure he did, although Ido not think I said so yesterday. 102. I understood you yesterday to say that he had been refused the certificate ?—No, I do not think so. Ido not think he failed in the examination, but in the vision test. He saw me, because he had been failed by Captain Allman in the vision test ; but I think he got the certificate eventually. 103. Through your intervention ?—Certainly not. 104. How did he get it then?—By passing the examination eventually. 105. You did not interfere with that examination? —I think I always agreed to allow him to be examined by a doctor with regard to his sight; but lam not sure whether that is the case or not. 106. I do not think you told us what became of this telegram from the Premier after you had shown it to Captain Allman ?—-Oh, I had another one from the Premier. 107. I ask you what you had done with this one?—l had another one at the same time; they were not in the same envelope, but both arrived about the same time. One was a telegram wishing me good-bye, which I wished to keep, and, without knowing it, I pinned the telegram referring to Jones to the one I wished to keep. That is how the telegram came to be kept. 108. What became of it ?—They were kept in my desk among my own private letters. 109. When did you first see it after putting it among your private letters ? —A long time afterwards. I should think it was the early part of this year when I next saw it. 110. What time this year ?—I can only say the early part of this year—possibly in January. 111. How did you come to hunt it up?—l was turning up some of my letters in connection with this case. It was almost providential that I came across the telegram. 112. Did it recur to your mind when Jones's papers came up, or afterwards, that you had a telegram from the Premier ?—No, it did not. 113. When did you first hear it mentioned that it was said outside that a telegram had been sent by the Premier to you ? How long afterwards?—A long time after John Hutcheson's speech —well, I stated about the beginning of this year, that would be from August to January. 114. Was it in consequence of something you heard outside, or in consequence of Captain Allman's report, that the matter came back to your memory about this telegram ? —-I tell you that I was not looking for this telegram, but I was looking through some private papers, and I came across this telegram. Then, some time afterwards, this telegram was mentioned in the paper or outside somewhere. 115. You remembered having seen it, through going through your private papers ?—Yes, I think so. 116. How long before this had you been turning over your papers previous to finding the telegram ?—lt was immediately after the new year. Some time within the month of January. 117. Did you mention it to the Premier when you saw the telegram there ?—No. 118. You saw that it had something to do with Jones when you looked it up ?—Of course; I saw that Jones's name was mentioned. 119. You previously knew that Jones's papers were the papers that had been referred to in the House ?—Yes. 120. And you did not mention this to the Premier ?—-Why should I mention it to the Premier ? The speech related to the examination, and the telegram to the service certificate. 121. But it had to do with Captain Jones, of the " Duco " ?—Yes.

H.—26

122. There is just one other matter with regard to Captain Allman. You state you gave this to him as a reminder ? —Yes. 123. I suppose the two matters telegraphed to you by the Premier were last requests, that this Jones affair should be considered?—No; the last request was "to be careful with the expenditure, and keep down the ' unemployed. ' " 124. I suppose you were desirous of complying with the Premier's request ?—I only did my duty in these matters. 125. It would have pleased you to have done his request in regard to Jones ?—lt would have pleased me to do my duty. 126. But it would have pleased you, while doing your duty, to have done the Premier's request? —He simply drew my attention to a matter that he thought should be settled. 127. But would it not have been a double pleasure to you?—lt is not a question of pleasure at all; it is a question of duty. It made no difference in the matter. 128. You had no desire to fall in with the wishes of the Premier?— Certainly not. 129. You allowed the matter to slip from your memory altogether, although you went to considerable trouble in asking Captain Allman to look it up ?—Yes. 130. After the conversation you had with Captain Allman it passed clean out of your memory ? —Yes. 131. And you never asked him for his report ? —No. 132. Did you interview the permanent head of the department about this conversation with Allman?—No. 133. Was he not responsible for any act of Captain Allman's ?—-I might have done it through Mr. Glasgow, or Captain Allman, as he was acting as Nautical Adviser. 134. Do not all such officers as Captain Allman is always report through the Under-Secretary ? —When a man occupies the position of Nautical Adviser it is different. The title indicates that he occupied an independent position. 135. Did not Captain Allman in other matters always report through the Secretary ?—I do not know. ] 36. Should not Captain Allman have reported through the head of the department ? —He might have spoken to him personally. 137. Can you tell us of any administrative act of Captain Allman's without reference to Mr. Glasgow ?—I cannot tell you from memory. Captain Allman is a man that took a very great interest in his work, and he was often suggesting improvements one way or the other. 138. Now, when you sent your messenger for Captain Allman after the speech made by Mr. John Hutcheson, what were the terms of the message ? —" Tell Allman I want to see him." 139. It was not in terms like this, " Tell Allman I wish to see him before he sees any one else " ?—No. Captain Allman had been away for some two or three days, and after Mr. John Hutcheson's speech I was anxious to see him immediately on his return, because I wanted to prove to the House and the people outside that the charges were unfounded. He, as Chief Examiner, could best give the information. 140. Was it in reference to Mr. Pirani's speech or Mr. John Hutcheson's speech that you sent for Captain Allman? —I think it was Mr. Hutcheson's. I did not pay much attention to Mr. Pirani's remarks, because I thought they were wide of the truth. 141. As a matter of fact, did not Captain Allman come back on the night of Mr. John Hutcheson's speech?—No, I think not—pretty sure not. I wanted to see Allman immediately on his return. 142. And the words were not " Before he sees any one else " ? —Certainly not. 143. Whom did he see first, you or the Premier?—l am not sure but that he saw us both together. He was either in the Secretaries' room or in the Premier's. 144. Was the Premier there when you saw him first ?—I believe the Premier was there. 145. I think you said that you took him into the Premier's room ?—No; that was in connection with the second interview. On the second interview I took him in to see the Premier. 146. As a matter of fact, was not Captain Allman sitting in the House of Eepresentatives when Mr. Hutcheson's speech was delivered?—No, he was not. 147. You say that without fear of contradiction?—l say that without fear of contradiction. 148. If Captain Allman says that he was standing within hearing at the door, as near in as he could get on account of the crush, would you be surprised ?—I should be very much surprised. As near as I can remember, Mr. Glasgow was in the House, and after talking over the matter with him I then inquired for Captain Allman, and was told he was away. He came down a night or two afterwards. 149. Well, if your memory is so defective as to swear that Captain Allman was not in the House and heard Mr. Hutcheson's speech, is it not likely that it would alter your opinion on other matters ?—I will back my memory. Judge Ward : Mr. Hall-Jones says that he did not see Captain Allman, Mr. Hislop. 150. Did you not see Captain Allman on the night of Mr. John Hutcheson's speech ?—No. 151. The occasion on which he spoke to you was immediately after the arrival of the train, a day or two after Mr. Hutcheson's speech?— Yes; I remember distinctly asking Mr. Glasgow where Captain Allman was, and he said that he was away, and would be back in a day or two. 152. Perhaps the Imprest Account will show when Captain Allman arrived?— Yes. 153. Will you have it looked up ?—Yes. 154. You will be astonished to know that Captain Allman was not only there when Mr. Hutcheson's speech was given, but that he was within the House, in the Under-Secretary's part of the House, until five o'clock that morning ?—I should be very much surprised.

H.—26

155. I suppose you looked up the examination-papers ?—"When ? 156. Immediately you knew that it was Jones's papers that were referred to?— No. 157. Do you mean to tell me that, as head of a department, and when there was such scandal likely to be opened up, you did not send for the papers to see what truth there was in it ?—I left it until after the session. I left that to the Chief Examiner. 158. Your mind was easy then that there was nothing in this scandal ?—Yes. 159. Then we have to understand that, notwithstanding'the information that Captain Allman had given you, you told your friends and others that there was nothing in the accusation ?—I did not tell my friends at all, as the thing was forgotten in other sessional work. 160. Was it not referred to in and out of the House?— Not to my knowledge. 161. And you made no representation whatever that there was anything in this scandal?—l told those who spoke to me about it that there was nothing in the charges. 162. Notwithstanding what Captain Allman had told you ? —Yes. I sent for the papers immediately after the rising of the House, and Captain Allman told me that they could not be found, and I think Mr. Grix told him that they were with the Minister. 163. What Minister ?—Myself, I presume. 164. They might have been with the Premier ?—I do not know. Mr. Glasgow brought them to me some time in November. 165. You sent Captain Allman for the papers ?—The examination-papers; he being the Chief Examiner, I thought they were in his custody. 166. You surely ought to know that all papers in the Marine Department are in charge of the Secretary ? —I did not know at the time. 167. It is the rule at all events ?—Yes. 168. Did you ask Mr. Glasgow for the papers ?—I was told that they had been separated from the others, and had been left with Mr. Glasgow. 169. Did you ask Mr. Glasgow to bring them?—l think Mr. Glasgow did bring them. 170. When ?—I think it was during November. 171. During the session you asked Captain Allman for them?—No ; I did not ask for them until after the rising of the House. 172. Did you examine all the papers on the file ?—Yes—not"closely perhaps. 173. Still lax ?—No ; not lax at all. 174. Do you mean to tell me that, when you sent for the papers in November, the matter had not assumed such proportions as to demand your most careful attention ? —There was not sufficient to satisfy me. 175. Did you not look through the whole of the papers?— Yes. 176. All the correspondence ? —All the correspondence. 177. Any correspondence that was on the papers?— The examination-papers were on a file by themselves. 178. You examined all the papers on that file ? —Yes. 179. It would have been impossible for you not to have seen all the papers on that file you examined ?—Yes. 180. And if anything had been on the papers, of which you did not approve, you would have noticed, no doubt? —What do you mean by approve? 181. Anything that had been done by the department: that would be there, would it not ?—Yes. 182. Was that on the papers when you looked -through them ? —I have no recollection of seeing this [Letter dated 25th July, 1897, to the Collector of Customs, " N."] 183. I asked you whether you had looked through all the papers on that file?— You said correspondence. I must confess I did not look through that. 184. And you sent for the papers and got them and looked through them by yourself ?—I think I had some one with me; I think it was Mr. Glasgow, or Mr. Allport—whoever brought them. 185. Then at that time you had not seen the telegram from the Premier ? —No. 186. Had you had the other papers with regard to the service certificate?— Yes. 187. During November?— No. I think the last I saw of the papers referring to the service certificate was long before the examination. 188. I suppose the various circumstances of Jones's affair were in your mind in November? —Well, I cannot say that the question of application for service certificate came up. There was one overbearing point in the whole thing—viz., a charge had been made that a man had passed an examination who could not write his own name, and that was the point which was overshadowing everything else. 189. And that implied, I suppose, to you, as it would to others, that that man could not fairly have had a mate's certificate ?—No, it did not imply that. There was nothing on the papers to imply that. 190. Was there anything in your recollection to imply that?—No, it did not occur to me. 191. Do you mean to tell me that, in view of what had taken place between you and Allman and with those papers in front of you, it did not occur to you about the mate's certificate?—lt never occurred to me. 192. And it did not bring it back to your mind that there was a man who did not have a mate's certificate ? —Yes. Mr. Travers : I think it is just to the Minister to state that those papers referred to were not on the file at the time. They were attached to another file in connection with the Collector of Customs' department. Mr. Hall-Jones : I said I had not seen the letter, and the reason is given that it was not on the file.

H.—26

193. Judge Ward.] What file was it you saw ?— I saw the file for the application for examination. Mr. Travers : Mr. Allport states that those papers were kept separate and not attached to any file until proceedings were taken, and then they were attached to this file simply because they were exhibits in the case. 194. Are we to understand that it did not come back to your memory that Jones was the man with regard to whom there was a discussion as to his going up for his examination?—l think I have explained already that when this matter came before me the question of the mate's certificate did not occur to me. 195. Did you ascertain from others that he had gone up? —I gathered that he had gone up for examination. 196. Well, did it not strike you as curious that he had gone up ?—lt did not strike me at all. 197. When were you first aware that Oaptain Jones had got a certificate?—lmmediately after the speech in the House ; I never knew it before. 198. You remember having a conversation with Mr. Storrier in Timaru?—l know a man named Storrier in Timaru. 199. Did you have a conversation with him in Timaru shortly after you made your speech there ?—-I had a conversation with Storrier, I know, in Timaru. 200. Did he ask you, " But did you not know that Captain Jones had received a certificate " ? — I do not remember, I am sure, what he asked me. 201. Do you remember that question ? —I do not. 202. And do you remember replying, " Oh, yes, I knew he had a certificate, because he was an applicant for a Government position" ?—No, decidedly not. 203. Do you remember that Mr. Storrier has written to Mr. Hutcheson, stating specifically the question which he put to you and the answer you gave ? —There was a letter sent to him from Mr. Storrier referred to in the House the other night. That is all I know about it. 204. Is Mr. Storrier an imaginative individual ?—Exceedingly so. 205. He is a citizen of Timaru, is he ?—Yes. 206. Have you seen a telegram, which has been put in, referring to the Premier's statement to the Press Agency in Dunedin?—l saw a telegram that was published in the papers—yes. 207. You telegraphed to the Premier?— Yes. 208. This is it: "Jones was examined on 13th and 19th July, 1897. My note on envelope with no signature, date, or address, would have been made probably in May. Allport says it was handed to him by Allman on Bth July, 1897. You were not in the country at the time, and we at no time had any conversation about Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him until some time after Hutcheson's speech. I never authorised a permit authorising his examination, and was not aware one was required, or had been given, until the eve of the Magisterial inquiry. In the nolle prosequi I told Mr. Gully what I wished, and he completely gave me away." Was this an answer to a telegram from the Premier ?—I think I received a telegram from the Premier asking me for the date. Mr. Travers: I am told that there was a copy of the letter, dated 25th July, 1897, to the Collector of Customs, and referred to previously, attached to the file ?—I was not aware of the existence of the copy. I did not notice the letter. Seeing the signature of Mr. Allport I may have passed it over without reading it. I was looking more particularly for the papers showing the fraud of a man who had some one guiding his hand in working out the problems. 209. Would you call that careful examination of the papers referring to such a matter as this ?—Yes. 210. And overlooking a letter indicating your own action ? —Yes. 211. You see your telegram is very specific, Mr. Hall-Jones: " You were not in the country at the time, and we at no time had any conversation about Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him." —Quite so. 212. Is that absolutely correct?—l think so. 213. What does this mean, " And we at no time had any conversation about Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him?"— That is so; that is, in connection with the examination. Examination governs the whole thing; the criticism was entirely in reference to the examination. 214. Does it not obviously mean that you intended people to believe that Mr. Seddon at no time had interested himself in Captain Jones's matters ?—lf you take the events of that time, it is only in connection with the examination. 215. The question is, Did it mean to convey that Mr. Seddon at no time interested himself in Captain Jones's matters? —No, Jones's examination. It is all controlled by the examination. You will see this by the telegram you have just read, and which appeared in the Otago Daily Times, of 25th February, 1899. 216. You see this telegram could only have referred to a time anterior to the Premier going Home. " And we at no time had any conversation about Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him " ?—" Examination" governs the whole thing. You cannot get away from that point. The telegram explained itself. 217. You first of all state that the Premier was not in the country at the time of the examination?— Yes; that is right. 218. Then you say, " You were not in the country at the time, and we at no time." The two are connected?—lf it was the service certificate, he was in the country. 219. " And we at no time had any conversation about Jones, his certificate, or anything concerning him " ?—Yes; that is so. 220. Now, is that correct?— Yes; that is correct. I take it that the word '-examination" governs the whole thing, " Jones's examination " —that was the question before the House, and

H.—26

that was the question being discussed in the country. "Examination" is the whole point, and that telegram was sent in connection with the examination. 221. Did the words, " You were not in the country at the time," refer to the service certificate ?—lt referred to the examination, and the subsequent words referred to the same thing. 222. And the subsequent words, " nothing concerning him " ?—Eeferred to the examination. 223. Were you aware that Mr. John Hutcheson wrote in November last asking for an inquiry ? —I only saw that letter recently. 224. To whom was it addressed ?—To the Premier. 225. Did it ask for an inquiry?—-Yes; it did ask for an inquiry. 226. Mr. Atkinson.] You say Captain Allman was your Nautical Adviser in technical matters? Yes. 227. He was a sort of lay-legal adviser as well?—No, I never used that expression. 228. Would you act upon his opinion in advising on points of law ?—No, I do not think so. If Captain Allman recommended a certain course I might have adopted it. 229. Do you recollect the question as to the interpretation of the regulations?— Yes, I should rely upon my officers in the interpretation of the regulations. 230. And yet you say he was not your legal adviser ? —You may construe it as you please. In the interpretation of regulations I take the advice of my responsible officers. 231. He would be more familiar with the regulations than you would be yourself?— Yes, that is so. 232. I think you took charge of the department in June, 1896 ?—-Yes. 233. And Captain Allman was appointed two years previously ?—I could not say; it was in 1894, I think. 234. Was he an efficient officer ?—Yes, a very good officer. 235. Is the verb " permit " known to the vocabulary of the department?—l cannot answer for the department. Judge Ward : It is known to the language, Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson: What I wish to get at, your Honour, is whether the word is used in a particular way, and if the word is used in a special technical sense. 236. (To witness): Is the use of the word " permit "as a verb familiar in the department ?— I can only answer for myself. 237. Is the use of the verb " permit " familiar in the Marine Department ? —I suppose they know the meaning of it. 238. Is every act of permit in the Marine Department known as permit ?— I call them "permits." 239. There was some form of official permits put in yesterday ? —Yes. 240. Are these all cases of permits recognised by the regulations and mentioned in them ?—I think some by regulations and some by Act. 241. Is the word "permission," as a substantive of permit, in use in the Marine Department ? —" Permission " may be on the face of documents, but " permit" would be the word used in speaking of the document. 242. You tell us that not every act of "permit" would necessarily be called "permit"?— That is so. 243. Would not the term "permit" applied to permission come within the vague term permit ?—Very likely. 244. There is no authority by statute or regulation for the supposed permit that has been granted in this case ?—Well, that was an open question at the time. 245. Well, we will take it now?—l think it is ambiguous yet. 246. Is the word " order " in use in the department in regard to a matter of that kind ?—lt is not so usual as the word " permit." 247. You are satisfied " permit," and not "permission" nor "order" would be the proper term for such an exercise of power?— The word " order" is not so familiar to me as the word "permit." 248. Was the word "order" used in your conversation with Captain Jones?—l have no recollection of it. 249. You are satisfied the word " permit " was used ?—Yes. '250. You have read, of course, Captain Allman's second statement, dated the Ist March ?—Yes. 251. Did you see the word " permit" mentioned in Captain Allman's second statement?—l could not tell you. 252. It is an official document written to the head of the department ?—Yes. 253. I will just call your attention to the use of the word spelt p-e-r-m-i-t. It occurs here no less than nine times. Five times it is used as a verb, three times there is the substantive " permission," and once—and once only—it is "permit," which you say is a substantive, but which Captain Allman took to be the same part of speech as the word "permit" on that document, " Jones, Duco, permit examination." That is obvious from the document. Five times it is averb, five times Captain Allman uses its substantive " permission," and you argue that he is wrong in the one other case—that it is still a noun. I put it to you, is Captain Allman more familiar with the use of the word than you yourself?— Yes. 254. You said it was made use of at Captain Allman's suggestion on the envelope?—He suggested "permit." 255. You are satisfied he did not suggest " order" ?—Yes. 256. Do you know he uses the word " order " six times in the course of this document?— No. 257. " It will be necessary for me as Minister of Marine to give an order to the department to grant a permit to Jones," An order to grant a permit—not a permit Then a little lower down ;

H.—26

" I then pointed out to him that he would have to give an order to the department authorising the department to permit Jones to sit for his examination!" Then, again, that "an order would be sent down to Mr. Hall-Jones giving him permission," and so on. It occurs six times altogether. You will not say that this is a technical misuse?—l am afraid that some lawyer has been at this. If it had been in Allman's own phraseology he would have put it in another way. 258. Even were lawyers to write the word permit, would it have been understood between yourself and your officers?—l say that " pevmit " would not apply. If I were told that a permit were required to be given I would think it was a noun that was referred to. 259. Would the verb "permit" not be understood by you and your officers as much as it would in ordinary speech ? —I cannot answer you. It would depend on the connecting circumstances. 260. Assuming that one of your officers used the word "permit" with the accent on the second syllable, would you go to the dictionary and see what it meant?— Not if I heard him use the word. 261. Do you suggest that it would be a strange thing for him to use such a word?—No, certainly not. If I heard him use the word " permit " I would know what it meant. 262. As to this ambiguous document before us. You say that ambiguous document was to be construed without reference to the context ? —Yes. 263. Would you say, other things being equal, the man who had the matter freshest in his memory would be most likely to be accurate as to the context and the circumstances ? —lt is a matter of opinion. 264. Well, is it a matter of opinion, other things being equal, would the man who had the matter freshest in his memory be most likely to know what the document meant ? —He probably would. 265. Would the man who had to take immediate action, and who had it in his mind frequently, be likely or not to have a clearer recollection of the circumstances than the man who, it seems, dismissed it from his mind for over a year ?—-Yes, probably. 266. And the man whose special business it was to attend to the subject-matter of that interview would, other things being equal, be more likely to have an accurate recollection than the man who was crushed with the weight of official business ?—No, I was not crushed ; lam not crushed yet. 267. Will you kindly answer that in the abstract?—lt is possible that the man might have had the better idea. 268. Does it not occur to you, as between yourself and Captain Allman, that he satisfies all those three conditions of accuracy with regard to this matter better than you ? Will you answer this, yes or no? —I shall give an answer, yes or no, as I think fit. You are speaking of that envelope; I know more in connection with that envelope than anybody else. What interpretation other men may put upon it, or whether he (Captain Allman) had better knowledge, is for others to say. 269. You told me, I must remind you, that it was an ambiguous document. Is it not probable that the context and circumstances would be freshest with the man whose special business it was to deal with this matter—would he not be more likely to be more accurate than the man who dismissed it from his mind and dropped it from his memory ?—I said it was possible that might be so. 270. You answered "Yes" to the first two questions, and "Probably yes" to the third?— Did I not say " Possibly yes ?" 271. Then I wish to ask you, Does not Captain Allman satisfy these three conditions better than you in this matter? —I do not think so. 272. Will you explain why not ?—Because I have special knowledge of the matter as well as Captain Allman. 273. Until you dismissed it from your mind from the date of that interview—until August of the following year?— Yes. 274. Then other things are not equal in this case ? —No, not in this case. 275. You stated that he was a thoroughly competent, efficient officer; then what is your ground for claiming greater accuracy in spite of those general principles on which we are agreed ? —Well, circumstances may have possibly occurred since. 276. He had taken action long before these circumstances which are referred to? —Yes. 277. These disclosures had not arisen then? —No, they had not. 278. You give us no ground for suggesting that these general conditions do not fit this case better than yours ; will you tell us why ? —I say I have an equally intimate knowledge of that matter as Captain Allman had. 279. Do you mean an intimate knowledge of what took place between you at that interview ? —You want to bear this in mind, that this statement you are quoting from was not written by Captain Allman; lam strongly of the opinion that a lawyer had something to do with it. This was written after a statement which appeared in the Press in Wellington, that Captain Allman was to be dismissed. 280. You know how Captain Allman acted at that interview —and his action showed what interpretation he put upon that document and the interview ?—Yes. 281. Well, how could that have anything to do with the statement which appeared in the Press two years afterwards? —In the first document of Captain Allman's, he opens by saying that Captain Jones ought to be allowed to go up for examination, and that permission was required. Well, permission means that a permit is necessary. It implies the necessity for a permit. 282. You look with some suspicion upon this last statement of Captain Allman's?—Yes. 283. I put it to you that he had shown his interpretation of this document immediately after your interview, by taking official action in regard to it. Is that not so? —I do not know what became of it. 10— H. 26.

H.—26

284. You do not know that Captain Allman did anything with regard to it ?—Only what I am told by others. Judge Ward : Well, that is not the question really. Witness : Now, the position is this. I have had two statements regarding what was done with that envelope. One statement is from Mr. Allport and the other is from Captain Allman, and I say the statement made by Mr. Allport is the correct one. 285. Mr. Atkinson: I wish to know simply whether Captain Allman did not show by his action that he put a certain construction upon that interview and that document, and which is not the construction which you put?—l decline to answer. Is it a fair question, your Honour ? Judge Ward : Certainly not. What Captain Allman infers in his statement has nothing to do with Mr. Hall-Jones. Mr. Atkinson: I cannot ask a question of opinion from my own witness, your Honour? Judge Ward : You are asking a question, in cross-examination of a witness, to draw a special inference from an act of another man. Well, he is not required to answer such a question as that. 286. Mr. Atkinson.] Then the Premier's telegram was before you at that interview? —Yes; at the interview where the permit was mentioned, no. It was at the prior interview with Captain Allman alone. 287. Then Captain Jones was not present when you discussed the telegram ?—No. 288. In that telegram Mr. Seddon said that he thought Jones was entitled to what he wants. " Captain Allman thinks he is highly qualified." Did that influence your mind?—lt induced me to send for Captain Allman, and ask if there was anything fresh on the matter. 289. Captain Allman was quite mistaken in stating that he took the telegram to mean, " See Jones, and get the certificate before I return "I —You know the telegram contains no such words. 290. I want to know whether there was anything that took place between you and Captain Allman to justify the meaning he put upon the telegram, " See that Jones gets a certificate before I return." Those are not the exact words ?—There is nothing in the telegram capable of the interpretation. 291. And did anything take place at the interview between you and Captain Allman to suggest that that was your interpretation at the time ?—The whole thing was disposed of and put on one side. 292. Did you express your own interest in the matter to Captain Allman ?—I had no interest —personal or otherwise. 293. Did you wish to carry out the Premier's almost-expressed desire ? —There is no almostexpressed desire. 294. You said nothing at this interview to justify this inference ?—No, nothing at all. 295. Did you discuss the telegram when Captain Jones was present, and insist upon his submitting himself for tuition?—l suggested that he should, at least as far as time would allow, work himself up for the examination, and, if necessary, place himself under a teacher. 296. It was understood that he was to do so when he left ? —He was advised that, as he could not get a service certificate, he should devote all his spare time to work himself up. I think I mentioned that other candidates had placed themselves under teachers, and it would be well for him to do the same. 297. Did Captain Jones get tuition?—l did not know at the time, but since I understand he had a peculiar form of tuition. 298. Captain Jones reported of that interview, " And he said to Captain Allman that he would give an order, and Captain Allman said, it must be an order to the department. Mr. HallJones said he would give an order to the department" ?■—The lawyer has been at work apparently. 299. You suggest that Captain Jones has committed perjury to oblige his lawyer?—l will say that that statement is not correct. 300. Do you know Captain Jones ?—I met him on four occasions. I never knew the man until he visited me at the end of 1896 or the beginning of 1897. I have been told since that he is my brother, but lam not aware of the relationship. Ido not think there is any likeness between us at all. 301. Then Captain Jones and Captain Allman are both wrong in this version of their interview ?—Yes. 302. Did you state yesterday that, in your opinion, Mr. Glasgow was an honourable and highminded man ? —I presume my evidence was taken down. He is a very careful man. I said as regarded the evidence given by him in the Supreme Court that I did not for one moment think he would state other than what he believed to be true. 303. You find him a good officer?—l have a great deal to do with Mr. Glasgow, and he is a man I respect. 304. Is Mr. Allport a good officer of the department ?—Yes, a very good officer. 305. Would you give him the same terms of praise you gave to Mr. Glasgow ?—Well, the trouble is that Mr. Allport did not advise the head of the department of the information supplied to him by Yon Schoen. Disasters might have happened, and lives may have been lost. If he had told what Yon Schoen had told him it would have saved a great deal of trouble. 306. At any rate, you say he is a careful officer?—l had a very high opinion of Mr. Allport up to that point. 307. Excepting on that one point, have you had any cause to doubt his capacity ?—No. 308. You wrote this memorandum to Mr. Glasgow on the 9th March: " Mr. Glasgow, I would like to know from Mr. Allport whether he still adheres to the statement made by him on oath in Court that the official letter sent by him to the Collector dispensing with the production of the

H.—26

mate's "certificate was written by my authority or direction. Will you kindly obtain this from Mr.»Allport ?—Wm. Hall-Jones " ?—Yes 309. Why was that memorandum written?—l wanted to ascertain whether Mr. Allport had known of the envelope when he gave the evidence in Court, and, knowing the nature of the authority on the envelope, whether he still held it to be Ministerial authority. 310. Why did you put that question to him ?—Being an officer of my department I wanted his opinion. 311. You asked him, did he consider that envelope sufficient authority for a breach of the regulations ? Do you think it was putting Mr. Allport in a fair position to ask him that question ? —I do not think it was unfair at all. 312. Would it affect his veracity as a witness, or his testimony in the Court ?—No. 313. For what purpose did you put the question ? —Mr. Allport practically stated in his first memorandum that at the time he gave his evidence he thought he was correct. 314. Was it a fair question for a Minister to put to his subordinate ? He might answer in the negative, as he has done, or he might have answered in the affirmative. Is it a fair dilemma to put a subordinate in ? —I think you will find that all the officers I have had to deal with have never been afraid to say, No. 315. Did you have any communication with Mr. Allport personally on the matter? —I do not think so. 316. Your subordinate had sworn in the Courts, I think, that Ministerial authority had been given for the permit, or whatever it may be called ?—Ministerial authority had been given for the letter to the Collector. 317. That meant he would have further information in the meanwhile in stating that Ministerial authority had been given. He stated that this Ministerial communication was a breach of the law. That was the inference. Is not that the inevitable inference ?—Yes ; you may take it that way. 318. Were you not, in submitting this memorandum to Mr. Allport, asking him to say whether or not it was still his opinion that you had connived at and instigated a breach of the law ?■—■Nβ; I was simply asking him, having a knowledge of all the facts and the nature of the alleged authority, whether he still adhered to the same statement he made in Court. 319. Could he still adhere to the statement made in Court without saying that he was still of the opinion that you had instigated a breach of the law?— Yes. How does the instigation come in ? 320. In the issuing of this memorandum upon which the department had taken action were you not asking Mr. Allport to say that, with the evidence before him, you had still instigated a breach of the law ? —He never made the suggestion. 321. I wanted to get at your motive, and the propriety of the question?—l have stated my motive. 322. Did you ask Mr. Allport whether or not, upon all the evidence before him on the 11th March, he believed you had authorised a breach of the law? —I asked Mr. Allport whether he adhered to the statement that the official authority to the Collector was written by my authority or permission. 323. Did I understand you to say the reason of your memorandum to Mr. Allport of the 11th March was to prevent the department acting on such informal authorities?—l had two reasons in view. First, to ascertain from Mr. Allport whether he was aware when he gave evidence as to the nature of the authority. The other object I had in view was to ascertain whether he considered an envelope without address or signature, and undated, sufficient Ministerial direction. 324. Is that why it was written?— Well, my impression was that it bore that interpretation. That is what the memorandum was written for. 325. There is no issue raised there as to the form of the authority ?—I take it, it is implied. 326. Supposing, for instance, that you had given instructions verbally to Captain Allman, and Mr. Allport had been satisfied that they had come from you, and that it was with your authority, he could not dispute the fact that it was by your authority, even though it were not in writing ? If it were a matter of minor importance I might have taken it, but, in a matter of importance like this, he ought to have obtained proper authority. 327. Do you believe this permit was no authority ?—Well, that is my impression of the meaning of the document and the reading of it, and that was my intention in writing it. 328. Mr. Allport up to that time repudiated that he knew the meaning of the permit ?—Yes ; that was before the Court proceedings. 329. You stated in your memorandum of the 25th January: "This statement—'that the undersigned had given the necessary instructions for dispensing with the requirements as to mate's certificate ' —is without the slightest foundation " ?—That is so. 330. Were you asking Mr. Allport to say that the statement still had foundation ?—No; I did not take it that way at all. It was not my intention in writing the memorandum, and, knowing my intention, I cannot take it to bear that construction. 331. You do not suggest any interest on the part of Mr. Glasgow or Mr. Allport in this matter? —I make no suggestion. 332. You do not believe there is any? —I make no suggestion. 333. Had you any reason to suspect Captain Allman of any interest in the matter at the time the envelope was handed to him '?—No, not the slightest. I had every confidence in Captain Allman at that time, and had up to the time I received information of the statement made by Yon Schoen to Mr. Allport. 334. Then, so far as you are aware, these three officers, Mes-srs. Glasgow and Allport and Captain Allman, all agree in believing that there was Ministerial authority, and you say they are all mistaken ? —Well, I think the facts speak for themselves.

H.—26

335. When was it that you called for the examination-papers ?—-1 should think it would be some time in November. I think it was just after the rising of the House. I cannot fix the date definitely. 336. Was not this document (the letter to the Collector of Customs, dated the 2nd July, 1897) on the file"?—lf there was a copy I did not know of it. My mind was on the question of the informal examination. I first looked at the writing and then at the figures. lam not in a position to say whether it was there or not. 337. Mr. Hanlon.] Are you perfectly clear that the Premier was out of the colony at the time that the suggestion was made about Jones going up for examination for a certificate of competency ? —He was supposed to be out of the colony. He was supposed to have gone in the steamer, and the steamer left the colony. I think there is no doubt about it. 338. And when the examination was held?— Yes. 339. On the Premier's return did you have any conversation with him with regard to Jones's examination for a certificate of competency ?—Not up to the time that the speech was made in the House by Mr. Hutcheson. 340. And did the telegram sent by the Premier to you from Auckland influence you in connection with Captain Jones's certificate ?—Not in the slightest degree. 341. Are you certain as to whether or not it was after Mr. Pirani's speech or after Mr. Hutcheson's speech that you saw Mr. Glasgow ? —Well, I think it was after Mr. Hutcheson's speech. Mr. Pirani's speech was on the 25th August, and Mr. Hutcheson's on the 26th. Mr. Glasgow was at the House on both occasions, both on the 25th and 26th, and my impression is that it was after Mr. John Hutcheson's speech that I was informed that Captain Allman was away. 342. Are you perfectly clear about that?—lt may have been after Mr. Pirani's speech; I am not certain. [Mr. Hanlon here handed in exhibits marked " T " (referring to Captain Jones's examination ten years previously), " D " (Captain Jones's examination papers) : " V," " W," " X," and " V"]. 343. Is there anything else, Mr. Hall-Jones, that you could throw any light upon?—No, I know of nothing further. 344. Dr. Giles.] Had you any conversation with Mr. Seddon prior to his going to England regarding Jones ?—No, Sir; Jones's name was not mentioned between Mr. Seddon and myself until after the speech in the House. 345. There was no communication?— There was no communication except on the service certificate. The matter was only brought up after the speech in the House. William Thompson Glasgow sworn and examined. 347. Mr. Hanlon.] You were duly appointed Secretary for Marine ?—Yes. 348. Do you know that Captains Allman and Edwin were Examiners duly appointed under the Shipping and Seamen's Act?— They were. 349. Were they the Examiners during 1897?— Yes. 350. And was it their duty to issue certificates of competency to persons who had passed a proper examination.—Yes. 251. Did you issue a certificate of competency to Captain James Jones ?—Yes. 352. Is that the certificate?— That is a copy of it. [Z.] 353. Before you issued the certificate, of which that is a copy, did you get a report from the Examiner? —1 did. Judge Ward: If this is a copy, how did it get into the Supreme Court ? Mr. Travers : It is a copy made for the Supreme Court. The original is in the Supreme Court. Mr. Hanlon : From whom did you get a report before issuing the certificate ?—The report was sent by Captains Allman and Edwin. 355. And forwarded to you by? —Captain Allman. 356. Will the report furnished by Captains Edwin and Allman to you be on the file ?—Yes. 357. What was done with the certificate when issued ? —lt would be forwarded to the Collector in order that Jones might obtain it. 358. Forwarded by the department to the Collector of Customs ?—Yes. 359. This is the report on which you issued the certificate ?—Yes. 360. Whose writing is it ?—Captain Allman's. 361. When this was sent to you by Captain Allman, were the examination papers sent too ? Yes ; to the department. 362. And did you see the examination papers ?—No, I did not see them. 363. Do you know that to be the signature of Captain James Jones?— Yes. 364. Do you recognise the writing or the figures in the body of the examination papers ?—No. 365. Do you recognise these figures in the questions ?—I recognise those as Captain Allman's figures. 366. The figures in the questions are Captain Allman's, and the figures in the answers you do not recognise ? —No. 367. Where are these examination forms kept—the skeleton forms?— They were kept in Captain Allman's office. Mr. Allport would tell you about that. lam not certain myself. 368. Now, Mr. Allport, to whom you refer, is the Chief Clerk in the Marine Department ?— 369. And had you confidence in Mr. Allport ?—Most entire confidence in him. 370. And had at that time, in 1897 ?—Yes. 371. How long have you known Jones?—l have not known him personally at all, only by sight.

H.—26

372. Have you known him by sight for some time ?—Yes, for some years. 373. When did you know him to speak to ?—I have only spoken to him on one occasion. 374. Did you know anything about him as far as his abilities are concerned ? —I always heard that he was a good river-master, quite capable of handling a boat. 375. Did you know he was capable of writing?—l did not know. I understand that his literary acquirements were limited. 376. When did you first hear that he wanted to get a master's certificate of service ?—The first I heard was in connection with the service certificate. 377. When did you first hear of that?—lt was before Mr. Seddon went to England—l think that was in 1897 —I do not remember what month exactly. I reported in the memorandum which has been read. I think Mr. Seddon saw him about it a day or two before he went away and asked me about it, and I told him that the Collector had reported against the issue of a service certificate, that the report of the service was not sufficient. But this written request from the Premier that I would report on the document was sent to me, and I reported accordingly. 378. And your report was against the issue of a certificate ?—Yes. 379. Did you get that back again from Mr. Seddon with a memorandum that you were to reply to that effect ?—No, I do not remember getting it back. 380. I think there was a note put on it by Mr. Seddon " Eeply accordingly " ? —I daresay if it was there I might have sent the letter, telling the Collector to inform Mr. Jones. 381. Well, what was the next you heard of it?—l do not remember hearing anything more about that matter at all. I think the next occasion on which the Jones matter came up, as far as I was concerned, was.Mr. Hutcheson's speech. I did not take Mr. Pirani's speech to refer to Jones, nor did I take Mr. Hutcheson's speech to refer to him. 382. What was done by the department in consequence of either the speech of Mr. Pirani or Mr. Hutcheson?—As far as I was concerned, the first step that I took was, after the House rose, to bring Mr. Hutcheson's speech to the Minister for Marine. That was, I think, on the 21st November, after he returned from the South. 383. But did the Minister for Marine, after delivery of either one of these speeches, speak to you?— Yes. I could not give him any information on the subject. 384. You did not know who was referred to ? —No. 385. Was Captain Allman sent for on that occasion ?—Yes; I think I was asked to hasten Allman's return to Wellington. He was inspecting lighthouses, and was at New Plymouth in the " Tutanekai." . I told him, I think, to come down by rail, and he was here on the night Mr. Hutcheson spoke. 386. When Captain Allman returned, did you have any conversation with him ?—-Yes. 387. Where and when?—l think it was in the House. I think on that night he said there was nothing in the statements that were made. I may say, really, that I had no conversation with him on the subject; he volunteered the remark that " there was nothing true in the statements made by Mr. Hutcheson." 388. Well, was it after the speech ?—Yes; the same night. I was not there until five in the morning, but I was there pretty late. 389. Captain Allman told you there was nothing in it ?—-Yes. 390. Was the name of any particular person suggested by you or Captain Allman ?—No ; I have no recollection of any name being mentioned. 391. Did you see Captain Allman and the Minister for Marine together ?—No, I do not think I did. 392. You left Captain Allman ? —I understand that Captain Allman saw the Premier and the Minister for Marine, but I was not present. 393. Will you tell us when the matter was next brought under your notice ?—I do not think I was concerned in the matter until the 21st November, when I brought Mr. Hutcheson's speech under the notice of the Minister, and stated I thought something ought to be done in connection with it. 394. Where did this conversation take place ?—-In Mr. Hall-Jones's office in the Government Buildings. 395. Was that all you told him ?—Yes ; I said that I thought we ought to take steps to find out all about the allegations made by Mr. Hutcheson. 396. Had you any other information at this time ? —Oh yes, I had, from Mr. Allport. After Mr. Hutcheson's speech I spoke to Mr. Allport, and that was what led to my putting the matter before the Minister. 397. First of all, when did Mr. Allport make the disclosures to you?—l think it was about the middle of November. 398. Was it after the House rose ?—Yes. 399. We have been told that it was a couple of days before or a couple of days after the 9th November? —Well, I think it was a couple of days after. At all events, it was after Mr. HallJones went South ; I had to wait until his return. 400. Mr. Hall-Jones said he went South on the 11th ; so it must be some day subsequent to that ? —I may have been unable to do anything before his departure. Generally I used to see Mr. Sail-Jones on matters in the forenoon. 401. Well, what did Mr. Allport tell you?—He told me that Mr. Yon Schoen had told him some time ago about the way in which the Jones examination had been conducted. He told me that it had been made in confidence. 402. What did Mr. Allport tell you? Give us the conversation if you can?—He showed me the papers, and we looked at the examination-papers together, and Mr. Allport said that, with reference to not only the Jones papers but those of Bendall and McLellan, he had reason to believe,

H.—26

from what Captain Yon Sohoen had told him, that part of the work in those papers was copied from material supplied by Yon Schoen; and also, with reference to the Jones papers, that they were not written in the examination-room. 403. That is what Mr. Allport said Captain Yon Schoen had told him?— Yes. 404. What did you say? —1 said that it seemed to me, with reference to the Jones papers, at all events, that from, their appearance it bore out that statement. For instance, the writing does not correspond with the signature. And with reference to the other statement, I could not very well say whether the statement was true without seeing the source from which Mr. Allport was satisfied, without Yon Schoen's own book. 405. There is nothing in the papers themselves to lead to that supposition ? Are the two sets of papers exactly the same ?—No ; I have examined those papers myself, and personally I am unable to see that they are copied from the same source. 406. After Mr. Allport had communicated this information to you, you say you had no opportunity of communicating the information to the Minister until the 21st November ?—No. 407. And upon that day you did communicate the information to him ?—Yes. 408. Was this in his room in the Government Buildings ?—Yes. 409. What did the Minister say? —He was under the impression that Captain Allman's statement to him, that there was nothing in these allegations, was true. He did not take such a serious view of the matter as I did. It was not until the 25th that I spoke to him again on the subject, and during the course of the conversation I telephoned to Mr. Allport to come up with the papers of the three candidates in order that Mr. Hall-Jones might see them. He was then quite convinced that there was something in the allegations, and said that some inquiry must be made. 410. He told you so ?—Yes. 411. And then what was done ?—The Premier was absent at that time, but as soon as he came back I was summoned to the Cabinet-room by the Premier, and Mr. Hall-Jones was there. This was the week following the conversation of the 21st November. I received directions to write to Captain Allman, drawing attention to Mr. Hutcheson's remarks, and requesting a report on them. 412. And you did that, and the letter has been put in?— Yes. 413. And then ?—Then Captain Allman's report was received on the 13th December by Mr. Seddon, and I think it was sent down to me by him, asking me to recommend what course should be followed. 414. Did you make any recommendation?—l made a recommendation in a minute which is before the Court. It was to the effect that there should be an inquiry under the Civil Service Act, and that Captain Allman should be suspended. 415. Was there anything said about Mr. Allport's suspension?— No. 416. Did the Premier express himself strongly about Mr. Allport having kept that infoi-mation so long ? —On more than one occasion the Premier expressed himself to that effect. 417. What was the next step ? —Mr. Seddon expressed approval of the course I recommended. He summoned me to his office, and handed me that document; but before I went away he called for the Solicitor-General and asked him about the matter, and, from what the Solicitor-General said to him, he altered his mind altogether and decided that there should be a prosecution of Captains Allman, Jones, and Yon Schoen. First of all, before that was done, that there should be an examination of all the papers of examinations supervised by Allman, in order to find out if there were any cases analogous to that of Jones's. I was asked to recommend who should undertake that examination. 418. Was that done ?—I could not recommend any one on the spot, but, after consideration, I recommended Captain Marciel. The papers were placed under his scrutiny, and it took him some time to go through the papers. There were ninety-six in all, I think. The whole thing was postponed until after his report was received. 419. Did he send in a report ?—Yes. 420. Who got Captain Marciel's report ? —It was handed in to me. I think it is with Mr. Hall-Jones just now. 421. What was your next connection with this matter ? —lt was decided to prosecute Allman, Jones, and Yon Schoen, and the Crown Solicitor's services were engaged to get this done. 422. And steps were also taken to cancel Jones's certificate?— Yes, that was some time after. There was a letter written to Captain Jones demanding that his certificate should be given up, and within a certain time. He came to see me about the matter, and finally decided not to accede to the demand. 423. When Jones applied to be examined for a certificate of competency, did his application come before you ? When did you first hear of it ?—Mr. Allport told me that Captain Allman had told him that Captain Jones was to be allowed to go up for examination for a master's certificate; he told me this was on the authority of the Minister for Marine. That was on the Bth July. I did not know that Jones had made the application. As a matter of fact, I suppose he had not made the application; he made the application after that. The applications do not come before me at all. 424. Well, Mr. Allport told you that ?—And he told me that Allman had brought the envelope which is before the Court, together with a verbal statement that the Minister had signed a written authority. 425" What did you do in consequence of what Mr. Allport told you ?—That was on Thursday the Bth. On Friday or Saturday morning I took the envelope out of my other papers. It was then pasted on to a sheet of foolscap, and kept as a record of the department. I took it up to Mr. Hall-Jones and told him what Mr. Allport had told me as to what Captain Allman had told him. I first of all placed the envelope before him and said, "Of course, you are aware that this is contrary to the regulations?" "Yes," he said, "I have had a conversation with Captain

H.—26.

Allman, and I think Captain Jones can be examined to show his competency," I think he said, " There is no doubt whatever that he is a thoroughly capable seaman, and if he shows that he has a competent knowledge of navigation, he ought to get his certificate." He made some reference to a clause of the regulations to the effect that tug-boat service in rough waters was equivalent to coastal service. In the office I got a copy of the regulations and looked up the clause, and I said I did not think it applied, to Captain Jones's case. It is true that service in a tug-boat in rough waters would count, but it was necessary to have a mate's certificate both in the coastal and tug-boat service. 426. "What did he say to that ?—He said he had discussed the matter thoroughly with Captain Allman. He had made up his mind. 427. Did he say that he had made up his mind?—No, but the matter was not pressed any further by me, and I understood that the Minister had given the authority that Captain Allman said he had. 428. How did you understand that?— Because he did not say he had not. 429. But he did not say that he had?—No, he did not say that he had. 430. Well, you put this envelope before him so that he could read it and see what was there ? —Yes. 431. Did he express any surprise?— No. He did not suggest on that occasion at all that the envelope meant permit and not "per-mit," as has been suggested since. 432. Did you ask him to sign it ? —No. 432 a. First of all, at that time did you intend to file that away as an authority —at the time you were holding the conversation ? —Yes. 433. You had made up your mind to file it—to record it ? —Yes. 434. Did it not strike you that it was advisable to get it signed ?—lt did. 435. Did you ask him to sign it ?—No. 436. Why not ?—I had a certain amount of delicacy that it should be necessary to get the authority absolutely in writing. 437. But is that not customary ?—Yes. 438. Surely a Minister can take no offence at your wishing to follow out the ordinary custom ? —However, I did not do it. 439. And you did not even ask him to initial it ?—No. 440. Did you make any memorandum or make any record then of the fact that you had shown it to the Minister ?—No. 441. Very well. Then you took the papers away. What did you do with this particular paper?—l gave it to Mr. Allport, and said I had seen the Minister about it and that he confirmed Captain Allman's statement—the statement that Captain Allman had made to Mr. Allport—and that he had better make a record of that sheet of paper. 442. Were you written to about the matter by the Minister ?—Yes, but not at that time. If you turn up the papers, you will see that there is some interchange of memoranda in January. 443. Did this correspondence between you and the Minister arise in consequence of what the Minister had noticed Mr. Allport had said in the Supreme Court ?—Yes. 444. Just tell us the purport of that : what did the Minister write to you for?— Mr. Allport's memorandum of the 25th January was written in order that Mr. Hall-Jones might see clearly what took place on the Bth July, when Captain Allman handed that envelope to him with the Minister's verbal statement. I do not call it a message. I had spoken to Mr. Hall-Jones on the Friday. The trial of Captain Allman, Captain Yon Schoen and Captain Jones began on Tuesday, the 24th, and I spoke to Mr. Hall-Jones on Friday, the 20th, as to the probability of this authority given by the Minister being made a good deal of in connection with the case, as it had not struck me before, and I said that if Captain Allman and Captain Jones gave evidence, the letter written by Mr. Allport to the Collector would have to be produced in Court, and the envelope also, and that both Mr. Allport and myself would have to say that the Minister had given the authority. The Minister asked me whether there was any written authority, and I mentioned the envelope and went down for it, and when he saw it he doubted first of all whether it was in his handwriting; but a scrutiny of it satisfied him that it was, and he then expressed his surprise that such an informal document should be accepted as an authority, and I said that it was not the envelope only, but Captain Allman's statement to Mr. Allport was deemed to be an authority. Mr. HallJones said he had no recollection of having given the authority, and that it was very unlikely that he could have given the authority. I reminded Mr. Hall-Jones that Captain Allman had made reference to the authority in his report of the 12th December, and Mr. Allport also, in a subsequent memorandum, had made a reference to it, and that I had not heard from him that this statement had no foundation. I told Mr. Hall-Jones also that I had spoken to Mr. Gully about it, and that he said he hoped to exclude all reference to this as irrelevant to the matter. But I said that, if evidence was given that involved the authority, most likely he (Mr. Hall-Jones) would have to give evidence himself. He said he did not think the matter would come up at all, and I left him very doubtful in my mind as to what I should say if I were examined; I did not ask Mr. Hall-Jones point-blank whether he had not given the authority. 445. Mr. Gray.] As to whether the Minister had given it ?—Yes. But my mind was in this state: that if I were asked or questioned on the matter in Court, I should say that the department believed at the time the authority had been given, but there was a doubt about it. 446. Mr. Hanlon.] But when you went to the Minister of Marine and told him that you thought a good deal would be made by the other side about Captain Jones having been examined without a mate's certificate, did he deny that he had given the authority ?—No, he did not deny it specifically. The first thing he said was "Oh, this is news to me," and subsequently he asked very soon in the interview whether there was any written authority.

H.—26

447. Did you show him the letter which had been -written by Mr. Allport to the Collector?— Ido not think I had the document with me at the time. No, I told him about it. 448. Are you sure you had not the letter with you and showed it to him ?—I do not think I had. 449. Did the Minister ask yqu to go to the office and get this ? —I think I went of my own accord. I wanted him to see exactly the effect the production of this envelope would have before the jury or the Court. 450. Where did you find the envelope ?—ln the Marine office. 451. Where?— Mr. Allport had it. 452. Was it recorded away on the file with the other papers in connection with Captain Jones's matter? —No, it was filed by itself. 453. Can you tell us why that was ?--There was nothing to connect it. The examination papers are all on a file by themselves, and this envelope would be one of the ordinary records of the department —the daily letters received. 454. Is there any reason for it not having been with the other documents ?—That is the reason. I would not expect to find it with the examination papers. 455. And then you went back with the envelope to see the Minister? —Yes. 456. And on the production of the envelope, what did he say ? —First of all he doubted the handwriting. He said afterwards that so informal a document should not have been taken as an authority. 457. Then you were to find out from Mr. Allport the particulars ?—That was on the day after the trial—that was on the 25th. I saw him again on the 25th after Mr. Allport had given evidence, and he referred to the matter again, and I said, " You ought to have the official letter from Mr. Allport stating exactly what occurred on the Bth July, and here it is." When I brought that up to him, after reading it, he underlined these words, " dispensing with the requirement as to mate's certificate," and wrote the memorandum saying that " this statement is without the slightest foundation." 458. Well, at this time, did you recollect the fact that you had shown him the envelope before it was acted upon?—No, I have no recollection of doing it. 459. Does that not seem strange to you ? —I cannot say that it does. There was a lapse between the time, and I had not thought about the matter at all. It had not been under my notice in any way, and I had forgotten that. 460: On the 26th January you wrote a memorandum to Mr. Hall-Jones, did you not?— Yes. 461. In that memorandum I think you say, " If, therefore, it is decided that Captain Allman's verbal statement and the note on the envelope are not sufficient Ministerial authority for the memorandum which was written to the Collector, then I must accept the responsibility and submit to the censure implied in your minute of the 25th instant, which, without these further remarks by me, might be deemed hereafter to be directed against Mr. Allport " ?—Yes. 462. Now, before you wrote that letter, did you try to recollect all the circumstances concerning these events ?—Yes, no doubt I did. 463. Backed your memory as much as possible? —Yes; I endeavoured to recollect. 464. And still it did not strike you that you had shown the envelope to Mr. Hall-Jones?—No; I did not remember it then. 465. And you tried hard to remember?—No doubt I did; certainly. 466. Of course, a public officer does not readily agree to accept censure if he can get out of it ? —Certainly. 467. And notwithstanding that you did not recollect ?—At that time I did not recollect. 468. Will you tell us, if you can, how this recollection gradually dawned upon you that you had shown this envelope to Mr. Hall-Jones?—lt came back to my mind about the middle of February. 469. Can you tell us what brought it back to your mind ?—No, I cannot. Of course, a great deal of attention was directed to the matter owing to Mr. Hall-Jones having sent the telegram to the southern newspapers denying having given that authority, and that turned my mind very strongly in the direction of endeavouring to recall the circumstances. The fact of Mr. Hall-Jones having made that denial produced an atmosphere in my mind hostile to the dawning recollection that I had shown him that memorandum ; and when I began to remember about it, I could not have sworn about it then, and I almost dismissed the matter from my thoughts. 470. Mr. Allport wrote his letter regarding the matter, and you wrote then saying that " after endeavouring to recall the circumstances under which the envelope with your note on it came to be recorded, I am now able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport has stated"; but, first of all, you had written that memorandum stating that you did not recollect Mr. Allport showing the envelope to you ?—Quite so. 471. But, after reconsideration, this much came back to your recollection, and you were able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport stated ? —That is so. 472. And you go on to say, " It is the case that he brought the envelope to me and told me that it came through Captain Allman, who had stated, when handing it to Mr. Allport, that the Minister had agreed to let Jones be examined. I remember commenting on the irregularity; but I concluded that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself with directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope " ?—That was my recollection at the time. 473. Although that was your recollection on the 26th January, that does not seem to have been the fact ?—No. It was a fact so far that Mr. Allport had brought it to me and we commented on the irregularity. I did not order the filing of it at the time, but I did after seeing Mr. HallJones.

H.—26

474. This is what I cannot understand, " I remember commenting on the irregularity, but I concluded that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself by directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope"?—On the 26th January, I believed that is what happened. 475. On the first occasion you did not even recollect that much ?—No. 476. But on the 26th January you recollected this much, and so wrote to the Minister ?— Yes. 477. Then you say it was about the middle of February that it dawned on you not only that you had seen the envelope, but that you had taken it away to the Minister ?—Yes. 478. Then this part is not correct, that Mr. Allport brought the envelope to you, and you were able to corroborate what he stated ?—Quite so. 479. Then in February did it come to you suddenly ?—No, very gradually. At first it was so indistinct that I could not have sworn to it at all, and did not venture to do so before the Minister made that denial. I made up my mind not to speak about it except to officials until I could swear to it as a positive fact. 480. You see your memory cannot be a particularly good one?—l cannot agree with that. I think I have a fairly good memory. 481. Do you think your memory on this point is quite as good as that of Mr. Hall-Jones?— ■ No, Ido not suppose I have so good a memory as Mr. Hall-Jones: he is a much younger man than I am. 482. But Mr. Hall-Jones has sworn emphatically that you had not shown him the envelope ? —Yes. 483. Do you contradict him ?—Yes, lam as positive of that as I can say. The importance of that matter did not occur to me until the 25th January, when the first Court proceedings were going on. 484. Did Mr. Allport assist your memory in the matter ?—No. I told him first that I thought I had shown Mr. Hall-Jones the envelope. 485. Let us deal with the first portion of the circumstances relating to the production of the envelope by Mr. Allport to yourself?— Yes. 486. What made you recollect that Mr. Allport had shown you that envelope ? —lt is stated that Mr. Allport said he had shown it to me. I did not remember it at first, but the next day I aid. 487. Was that in consequence of further conversation with Mr. Allport ?—Yes. 488. Did he narrate the circumstances ? —Yes. 489. And then it came back to you ?—Yes. 490. What did he tell you?— That he remembered having shown that. 491. On the 26th January, did Mr. Allport come and have a further conversation with you and try to find out whether you recollected it ?—Yes. 492. What did you say ?■ —He told me that he recollected, and after he had referred to it again I told him that it was so. 493. You have the greatest confidence in Mr. Allport ?—Yes. 494. And is it not a fact that although Mr. Allport is not nominally the head, he is virtually the head of the Marine Department ?—Most certainly not. lam glad to have the opportunity of contradicting Mr. Hall-Jones on that point. Mr. Allport should be asked himself. He is in no sense the head of the department. 495. Supposing documents have to be signed, does he sign them?—l sign all correspondence and write all minutes to the Minister. 496. If that is the case, why did you not write to the Collector of Customs saying that the Minister had dispensed with the qualification of a mate's certificate in Jones's case ? —Because I was ill in bed. 497. Is it understood that when you are away Mr. Allport signs the correspondence?— Yes, if lam away for a day or so, but if lam away for a week Mr. McKellar comes in my -absence. I was very unwell on the Saturday, and was absent until the Wednesday. 498. It was suggested that Mr. Allport should be suspended, was it not ?—Yes. 499. What did you do ? —I objected strongly, because I could not carry on the department without him. 500. Is that to say that Mr. Allport knows more about the department than anybody else ?— He knows more about the details and the past history of the department than I do. I only assumed the active duties in 1893. 501. Has Mr. Allport been there much longer? —Yes, he has been there over twenty years. 502. During which time he has passed as a barrister? —Yes. 503. With the assistance of Mr. Allport, this recollection came back to you about Mr. Allport shewing you the document ? —Yes. 504. Did Mr. Allport check your memory further with regard to taking that document up to Mr. Hall-Jones ?—No. 505. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Allport about that ?—No; I was the first to make it known to him. 506. In February ?—Yes. 507. Do you mean to say, Mr. Glasgow, that you and Mr. Allport have not discussed that question of the envelope frequently ? —Oh, yes. 508. Let us refer back. When you had taken it up on, say, the 9th or 10th, to Mr. HallJones, did you, on your return, acquaint Mr. Allport with the fact that you had shown the envelope to the Minister?— Yes, I did. 509. Well, when Mr. Allport said he had shown it to you, you had not remembered it ?—Yes, 11— H. 26,

H.—26

510. And did he remember you taking it to Mr. Hall-Jones? —No. 511. Then Mr. Allport's memory was as defective as yours on that point?— Yes. 512. When Mr. Allport made his statement to you in November, about what Captain Yon Schoen had told him what did you say to him, so far as his duty in the matter was concerned? —I did not take the serious view of his having suppressed the information as was taken by Ministers. 513. Did it not strike you as a very serious matter that Mr. Allport should have had this information from the early part of 1898 until November, 1898, and had not divulged it to his superior? —It did not. I think he should have mentioned it, without having mentioned the name. I told him at the time it was foolish to receive a statement of that kind under the promise of secrecy. 514. Did you tell Mr. Allport that this was not wise? —Not at the time. 515. The incident about the envelope came back to your memory, but you would not like to swear to it ?—At first I did. In fact, I could have sworn to it at first. 516. When, did you tell him that ? —I did not finally make up my mind about it until just before the Court case, Solicitor-General against Jones. 517. Then you seem to have had some impression on your mind that you had shown it to HallJones, and that impression afterwards turned into conviction ?—Yes, the memories of the details, concerned came back with great distinctness. 518. And did you tell Mr. Allport of that ?—Yes. 519. And you say that Mr. Allport did not assist your memory in any way ?—No. 520. Did Mr. Allport tell you that he remembered you coming back and telling him that you had shown the envelope to the Minister ?—No. It was after giving evidence in the last case that he remembered my having done so. 521. "When your memory improved so materially, did you go and tell the Minister?—-No. 522. Why not? —Well, I had not come to be very sure about it until well on in March, and I would not say anything about it; and I thought I wpuld not say anything about it until I was obliged to. 523. Why did you not go to the Minister, the head of your department, and tell him ?—Well, after the 26th February, I was banished from the Minister's office. 524. What do you mean by " banished " ?—Perhaps I ought not to have said banished, but the Minister said that all communication between him and myself must be in writing. 525.- Did you write and tell him of this ?—No. 526. Whom did you tell first?— Dr. Pitchett. 527. Was he the first ?—Except Mr. Allport. 528. What did you tell Dr. Ktchett ? —I told him I had heard that it was to be part of Mr. Hall-Jones's affidavit that he had not seen that envelope from the day he had written it till I had shown it to him just before the first Court case, and I said that if that were so I should be obliged to say that I had shown it to him a day or two after I had received it from Mr. Allport. 529. What else did you tell him ?—We had a general conversation on the subject, and Dr. Pitchett was good enough to say that I had a treacherous memory. 530. You did not agree with that ? —No. He told me it might be an hallucination of mine, that I had a treacherous memory in not being able to remember about it. 531. Well, you had hot been able to remember about it for a long time?— No. 532. In any other case had you received any document like that to act upon from the Minister ?—No. I mentioned in a memorandum I wrote that there were two cases in which there were two informal documents. 533. Will you tell us what those cases were ?—One case was that in which I think Captain Adamson was suggested for employment as a Nautical Assessor, and in the other case a memorandum was written by Mr. Horneman, the Minister's Private Secretary, stating that duty was to be remitted on certain goods. The document was signed by Mr. Horneman: "W. Hall-Jones," without his own initials. I would not act upon it, of course, and I reported that it was not possible to remit the duty, and that other steps would have to be taken if the course Mr. Hall-Jones wished had to be carried out. 534. That document was signed by the Private Secretary?— Yes. 535. And you would not act upon it without going to see the Minister?— Yes. 536. And did you get any authority in writing ? —Of course; Mr. Hall-Jones was acting as Commissioner of Customs, and you must understand that if a Minister suggests that certain things should be done, if I disagree with the suggestion, I express my opinion on the subject. 537. Ministers sometimes send down memoranda to have certain things done that you as head of the department think cannot be done?—-Yes. 538. And if you think they cannot be done you notify them to that effect ?—Yes. 539. Who was the next person you talked to about taking the envelope tc the Minister? —I did not tell any one else. 540. Did you tell Mr. Gray, who was counsel for Captain Jones in the- Supreme Court, before the Court sat ?—No. 541. Mr. Gray asked you that question, did he not?— Yes; but 1 did not tell him. Mr. Gray: It was a "prospect." I asked him the question, and I was astonished when he said he had shown it to the Minister. 542. Mr. Hanlon.] Did the Minister of Marine, or any other person, see you or speak to you about Captain Jones's examination before the envelope was handed into the department by Captain Allman ?—On the Bth July ? 543. Yes?-No. 544. Neither the Minister nor any other person spoke to you about the examination ? —No, not about the examination. The service certificate, of course.

H.—26

545. If any one had spoken to you about it, what intimation do you think you would have said that envelope conveyed ?—I read it in the way any one might have read it. I read it as "permit examination." 546. Do you mean that every qualification necessary was to be waived ?—No, we took it entirely with Captain Allman's verbal representations. 547. But there were other qualifications besides the mate's certificate necessary ? —Yes, I think he has to show twelve months' service with a mate's certificate. 548. That is all?—I could not say without looking up the regulations, but that is what I remember about it. 549. Did you take the envelope to mean that everything was to be waived in order to let Captain Jones be examined ?—No, I read the envelope with Captain Allman's statement, as communicated by Mr. Allport, that it had reference to the mate's certificate. 550. This is a copy of the letter of the 12th July, signed by Mr. Allport to the Collector. Can you tell me how that came to be taken off the file ?—No, I think it was taken off either during the Court proceedings in the Stipendiary Magistrate's Court or the Supreme Court. Mr. Gully did not require it. It was pinned to the other papers [" N "], and it remained in my drawer, where I had a large number of papers in connection with this case. 551. Do you know when they were shown to Mr. Hall-Jones and he examined them ?— On the 25th November. 552. Do you know whether that was on it then ?—Yes. 553. Are you quite sure, now —absolutely positive in your own mind—after this lapse of time that you showed that envelope to Mr. Hall-Jones?—Quite positive; quite certain of it. 554. Mr. Gray.} I understand you to say that the first you knew of this matter—-of Captain Jones's application for a service certificate—was the papers being referred to by Mr. Seddon, the Premier? —Mr. Seddon spoke to me about them. 555. He got you to examine the papers, and you wrote a memorandum to Mr. Seddon?—Yes. 556. Not to your own Minister, Mr. Hall-Jones ?—No. 557. Was Mr. Seddon acting as Minister of Marine at that time?—l think not. 558. Had you any further communication with Mr. Seddon after you had reported against Captain Jones's application?—-No, I think not. 559. Were you aware until Mr. Seddon gave evidence in the Supreme Court, in April/,in Captain Jones's case, that he had been interviewed by Captain Jones after that, and by Captain Jones's friends ?—No, I knew nothing of that. 560. So that matter had ended, so far as you were concerned, until the trouble in the House in August, 1898 ?—Quite. 561. And you were not suspecting any ground for trouble till about November? —No. 562. When Mr. Allport reported?— Yes. 563. And then you took an early opportunity of acquainting your Minister with what had occurred ?—Yes. 564. There was no delay on your part ?—No delay. 565. You said, in answer to my friend Mr. Hanlon, that you are quite positive that you showed the envelope, in July, 1897, to Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. 566. And received what amounted to a direction to let Captain Jones go up for the examination? —I understood that Mr. Hall-Jones confirmed what Captain Allman had stated. 567. You said you pointed out that it was against the regulations?— Yes. 568. Did the Minister combat that view ?—No. He seemed to place some reliance upon the clause in the regulations about the tug-service. 569. And told you he had discussed that matter with Captain Allman ?—Yes. 570. Did he give you to understand that he had handed that envelope to Captain Allman ?— No. 571. Or say what he did with it after he had written it ?—-No. 572. At all events, there was no suggestion of it having been abstracted or taken from his table ?—No. 573. And throughout the interview he treated it as you did ?—As a genuine document intended as a direction to some officer of the department to dispense with Captain Jones's qualification of a mate's certificate ?—Yes. 574. When the document was first shown to you, it was brought by Mr. Allport, who told you that Captain Allman had made a communication about it ?—Yes. 575. Did you see Captain Allman yourself at the time ?—No. I think it was on the Saturday after I had been to the Minister. 576. Will you tell the Commissioners what took place between you and Captain Allman ?— He told me that he had advised the Minister to dispense with the mate's certificate, and I told him I thought he had acted very foolishly. 577. Was that all?— Yes. 578. That was after you had seen the Minister?—l would not be very positive, but I think it was after. 579. After the conversation with the Minister, did you understand that the Minister would take the responsibility in the matter?—l understood so. 580. This conversation with Captain Allman was after you had seen the Minister in his own room ?—Well, I say I am doubtful about that. 581. It might have been before? —It might have been before. 582. At all events, it was some time after you had seen the envelope ?—Yes; I remember saying that I thought he had acted foolishly. 583. This would be shortly before or alter you had seen Mr. Hall-Jone3 ?—Yes,

H.—26.

584. You do not remember being informed by any one that Captain Jones had been to see the Minister ?—Not at that time, in July. 585. But cannot you recollect ever hearing that?—l cannot say I do. 586. As in the case of Mr. Hall-Jones, the matter passed out of your mind until it came up in 1898 ?—Yes, that is so. 587. I suppose you have as much departmental business as the Minister?—l have a great deal to do. 588. And you do not remember the details of every matter coming before you? —No. 589. When the Minister first denied, in January last, that he had given any Ministerial authority, you did not recollect the fact that you had shown him the envelope ?—That is so. 590. And a memorandum has been put in to show that ? —Yes. 591. And you say it came back to you gradually?— Yes. 592. Has anything transpired to confirm your view ?—Of course my recollection was confirmed by the second statement of Captain Allman and the affidavit of Captain Jones. When I read those I was entirely satisfied that what I stated was correct. 593. You believed, after a time, that you had shown this to the Minister, and reading Captain Allman's statement of the circumstances under which he got the envelope, and Captain Jones's affidavit, you were confirmed in your belief ? —Yes. 594. And now you are absolutely positive about it ?—Yes, I am absolutely positive. 595. Do you recollect when directing Mr. Allport to record the document as an official document, telling him that you had seen the Minister? —Yes. 596. And that the Minister had confirmed what Captain Allman told Mr. Allport ? —Yes. 597. You say the first person to whom you mentioned the fact that you had shown the document to the Minister was Dr. Fitchett, Crown Law Officer ? —Mr. Allport first. 598. And subsequently to Dr. Fitchett ?—Yes. 599. Dr. Fitchett was acting for the Minister in the matter of the proceedings against Captain Jones ?—Yes. 600. And certain affidavits were being prepared in support of the interim injunction ? —Yes. 601. Then you told Dr. Fitchett that you would be obliged to contradict the Minister if called upon to state what took place?— Yes. 602. When did you next mention the case to any one after talking to Dr. Fitchett? —I do not remember mentioning it to any one. I may have mentioned it to Mr. Larchin, of the Customs branch. 603. You gave evidence in the Supreme Court in answer to me on cross-examination.—Yes. 604. Had you any communication with me of any kind in reference to Captain Jones's matter? —Certainly not. 605. What you stated then, on the trial of the action, Solicitor-General against Jones, is, practically, what you stated to-day, although, of course, not at such length?— Yes. 606. You say also, when discussing this question with Mr. Hall-Jones as to the probable effect of the statement that the Minister had given authority, when the proceedings were pending in the Magistrate's Court, that Mr. Hall-Jones said he did not think the matter would come up?— Yes. 607. Did Mr. Hall-Jones then say anything to indicate to you that he had not given the authority ?—No. 608. At that interview, your recollection was that he did not explicitly deny having given the authority ? —I think I stated that he used the phrase that he did not remember, or that it was not likely that he could have done it; but he did not specifically state " I did not give that authority." He did that on the 25th, after Mr. Allport had given his evidence. 609. Was there any interview at which Dr. Fitchett, whom you have mentioned, was present? —No. 610. Between yourself and the Minister ?—No. 611. Or between yourself and the Crown Solicitor?— No. 612. The only occasion on which you discussed the matter with Dr. Fitchefct was on the day that you have told the Commission?— Yes. 613. You say, that after leaving the Minister in January, before the evidence was given in the Magistrate's Court, you determined to say, if asked, that the department thought that there was authority, but there was a doubt as to that ?—That is what I should have said, if I had been questioned in Court, because I think the general trend of Mr. Hall-Jones's remarks was that he did not think he had given the authority. That was the general tendency of his remarks, but I watched especially for the specific denial, because I felt I could not make the statement in Court unless I had that, and the result of the whole interview was that I had a doubt, and that I could not say that the Minister had denied it. 614. And you did not want to contradict the Minister ? —lf the Minister had denied it I could not have contradicted him at that time. I had the impression that the Minister was endeavouring to recall the circumstances, but at the time he could not give the explicit denial that he did give a day after. 615. The copy of the letter to the Collector giving the authority, you say, had formed part of the file ?—Yes. 616. And was detached in January ?—Either before the Magistrate's Court proceedings or the Supreme Court proceedings—l am not sure which. 617. Up to the time of the proceedings in January had it formed part of the file ? —Yes. 618. And would be before the Minister when he saw the file at any time ?—Yes. 619. Was it not detached, as a matter of fact, because the Crown Solicitor said he did not want to produce it ?—I cannot say. 620. You said Mr. Gully did not require it ?—Yes.

H.—,26

621. It is clear that the statement that Ministerial authority had been given and the letter to the Collector of Customs came out in Captain Yon Sehoen's case in the Magistrate's Court, in cross-examination, by accident? —Yes. I do not know that it was by accident. 622. The file was produced in Court, but without that copy-letter ?—-I cannot recollect whether it was then. I said before or after the Magistrate's Court proceedings. 623. Mr. Travers.] When you handed back the envelope to Mr. Allport did he ask any questions as to what had taken place between you and the Minister?—No ; I told him. 624. Did he ask you anything in particular in reference to the document? Did he ask you whether you had requested the Minister to sign it or not ? —No ; I have no recollection. 625. He made no remark?—l do not remember him making any remark. 626. And you both, I presume, treated the document as sufficient authority for proceeding with the examination ? —I have all along said that I did not think the envelope a sufficient authority, but coupled it with the statement of Captain Allman. 627. But you treated them together as constituting sufficient authority to proceed with the examination ? —Yes. 628. In point of fact, dispensing with the absence of the qualification, which was, as a fact, a bar?— Yes. 629. Mr. Hislop.'] You first saw the Minister, I understand, during the session, just after Mr. Hutcheson's speech, with regard to this accusation?—As regards the accusations at that time, we did not know whom they applied to. 630. Did the Minister tell you he did not know ?—As far as I remember, the Minister did not know. 631. Did he mention to you that he had any suspicion?—l do not remember him mentioning any name. 632. Did either the Minister or the Premier mention any one ?—I do not remember having any communication with Mr. Seddon at that time. 633. Did the Minister express himself as anxious that information should be obtained ?—No. He sent for Captain Allman, and after Captain Allman had seen him I really dropped out of the matter. 634. But both the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones state that they had seen you ?—I certainly saw Mr. Hall-Jones, and if the Premier stated he saw me I would certainly not contradict him. 635. I suppose Mr. Hall-Jones saw you more than once during the session ?—Yes. 636. And spoke to you on the subject ? He had the opportunity ? —Yes. 637. Did he suggest anything about Captain Jones?— No. 638. He did not tell you that Captain Allman had mentioned anything about Captain Jones's papers?—No; I do not remember. 639. During the time between August and the 25th January, the date of Mr. Allport's memorandum, did Mr. Hall-Jones ever question to you that he had given authority for this examination ?—No. 640. And I understand you to say that, from the 21st November until quite lately—until the proceedings in the Court —these papers, with that copy-letter of Mr. Allport's, were in his possession ?—No ; they were not in his possession all the time. They were in my possession for a considerable part of the time when the proceedings were under consideration in both Courts. 641. But that was after the 25th January ? —Yes. 642. So that, from the 21st November up to the 25th January, they were in the Minister's possession? —I would not like to say they were in his possession all the- time. As far as 1 remember, they remained in his possession until Mr. Seddon came back. 643. With that copy-letter of Mr. Allport's as the front paper?— Yes. 644. During that period, did he suggest to you that Mr. Allport was not authorised to send that letter ?- No. 645. Did he, during any conversation he had with you up to the time he gave his'evidence, suggest that that envelope was simply a reminder ?—He did suggest that to me at the eiid of February. 646. Not until the end of February ?—No. 647. That is about the time he gave his evidence ?—lt was in April he gave evidence. 648. You notice in his memorandum that he sent to you condemning Mr. Allport there is no suggestion of that sort ? —No. 649. The memorandum mentions this particular document. You notice that it does not suggest that it was only meant as a reminder. It says : —" It is astonishing to find that a rough note, made on an envelope, signed by no one, addressed to no one, and undated, is deemed sufficient authority," and so on, and then there is a further report afterwards. You notice that in none of these memoranda does he suggest that the document was a reminder ?—No. 650. Up to that time had he suggested that it should not be read in the ordinary way, that it was not to be read as " Permit examination " ?—No. 651. There was one other matter referred to in Mr. Seddon's telegram from Auckland in reference to the service certificate. Was there any impropriety in that?—As far as we could see, the evidence before the department against Captain Jones getting the certificate was held to be sufficient then and sufficient now. 652. Do you think there is any impropriety in that ?—I do not think so. 653. Mr. Atkinson.] Would you call that letter Mr. Allport wrote to the Collector of Customs waiving the production of a mate's certificate a " permit " ?—No. 654. When you interviewed Mr. Hall-Jones with the envelope in your possession, was the word " permit " passed between you at all ?—No. 655. Was the word " permit" used ? —No.

H.—26

656. Neither?— No. 657. It occurred to you then that the document ought to have been signed?— Yes, it occurred to me that I should have got something more definite. 658. You did not mention that to the Minister ?—No, I did not. 659. Do you mind telling us why ? —I could not say anything more than I have said to Mr. Hanlon, that I had a sort of delicacy in pinning the Minister down to a written statement. I thought of the matter. 660. Was it merely a delicacy in pointing out to him that he had omitted to put his name to a formal document ?—No. 661. What was the special delicacy you felt?—l can say nothing more than I have said. I thought it looked as if the Minister might think I doubted whether he. would adhere to the statement that Captain Allman had made without it being in black and white. 662. Why had you reason to suppose that he would ?—I had no reason to suppose that he would not. 663. Supposing there was an ordinary letter coming out of his office, or an ordinary minute which he had. failed to sign, would you have any delicacy in asking him to sign it ?—No, I would not. 664. It was owing to the special authority contained in this memorandum ?—As I have said, I did not look upon it as a special authority. The special authority was in the statement of Captain Allman. 665. You regarded it as an exceptional exercise of power ?—Yes, I did. 666. That was an element in your feeling of delicacy ? —Yes. 667. You said, I think, that since the 26th February you had had no communication with the Minister except in writing ?—Yes. 668. I think you used the phrase that you had been banished from the Minister's office? —I would rather put it the other way. I corrected it afterwards, and said that Mr. Hall-Jones had expressly desired to have all communications with me in writing. 669. That was a few days after your evidence in the Supreme Court ? —It was after the 26th February. 670. That communication was conveyed to you verbally? —-Yes, by Mr. Hall-Jones. 671. What led up to it in the interval ?—He was under the impression that I had misrepresented him in connection with Mr. Allport's evidence in the Magistrate's Court. 672. He gave that as his reason ?—Yes. 673. Can you recollect what it was ?—He had stated that he had denied having given that authority as soon as I showed him the envelope, and, as stated in these papers, I had not understood him at that interview in that sense; and he insisted that he had denied it, and that if I had told Mr. Allport that definitely, Mr. Allport would not have given that evidence in the Magistrate's Court. 674. Dr. Giles.] Was this before or after you had come to the conviction that you had shown him the envelope in July ?—lt was about the time that conviction was ripened in February. 675. Mr. Atkinson.] Did he suggest that you had misrepresented him intentionally ?—He suggested that I had been screening a fellow-officer from blame. 676. Did he say your fellow-officer had misrepresented him intentionally ?—No. 677. Is that all you can recollect of that interview ? How long did it last ?—A very short time. In consequence I have seen very little of Mr. Hall-Jones since. 678. You had to tell him, then, that you adhered to your recollection as against his ?—Yes. 679. And he followed that up by this request, that you should only communicate with him in writing? —Yes. 680. And you cannot remember any other circumstances in connection with the interview ?— Not that are at all relevant. 681. In whose custody should these examination papers have been since the date On which the examination was held?— The examination papers, as far as I believe, are kept in a cabinet in Mr. Allport's office, but I think he would be able to speak on that point. These matters are altogether under his charge. 682. Was that, say, the case in November, that these were in his custody ? —I really could not say with certainty. All matters in the office are in charge of Mr. Allport. 683. Mr. Hanlon.] Can you tell us whether you, on any other occasion, received instructions from a Minister relating to an examination of masters or mates in a form similar to the envelope ? —No. 684. Or that you ever received instructions from a Minister without signature, date, or address ? —No, except those two I referred to. • • 685. And one of those was signed by the private secretary ?—Yes. 686. What are known as permits in the Marine Department—are they upon printed forms ?— Yes. 687. And did you know that there was no provision in the regulations allowing a candidate who did not possess the qualification of a mate's certificate to sit for examination as a master?— That was my opinion. 688. Did you at any time admit to the Minister that you were wrong in not bringing that envelope before him or under his notice ?—lt is very likely I did say so. 689. Verbally ? —lt is really implied in this document. 690. Is it not a fact that you verbally ■ told the Minister that you were wrong in not having brought that envelope under his notice ?—I think it is very likely 1 did. 691. Then that envelope was of course a decidedly unusual direction?— Yes, taken by itself.

H.—26

692. And a direction got like that, being exceedingly unusual, can you account for forgetting the circumstances in the way you did ? Where things go through in the ordinary way, they pass out of one's mind readily, but when anything unusual happens, does it not impress itself upon one's mind ?—No doubt it would. 693. Can you account for forgetting this particular incident?—No, I cannot account for it, except that I would say this, that when something happens so long ago—eighteen months ago—and the necessity for remembering all the details arises, one thing brings another thing to memory. The details are not recalled all at once, but gradually, and the whole thing may be remembered some time afterwards. 694. And it was what Mr. Allport, Captain Allman and Captain Jones had either said or written that helped your memory ?—lf you mean by that that Mr. Allport suggested to me that I had taken that up to Mr. Hall-Jones, I say that is not so. 695. I mean the fact that they had stated these various things to you drew the matter to your recollection ?—My recollection was formed between Mr. Allport's last report and Captain Jones's affidavit—they confirmed it. 696. Had you directly or indirectly heard that a Commission was being set up before you made that statement to Dr. Fitchett ?—I heard nothing about the Commission until after Captain Jones's cancellation-certificate case. 697. Or that certain gentlemen were being asked to act as Commissioners? You did not know that ?—No. 698. When you took this envelope to the Minister and pointed out the irregularity, did you not express surprise at getting an instruction in that form?—No; I did not. I just laid it before him, and told him what Captain Allman had told Mr. Allport. 699. Can you profess now, having had your memory brushed up as much as it is possible to brush it up by any circumstances, to tell us the whole of the conversation which took place between you and the Minister?—l can only give you its purport. 700. Seeing that the matter has been brought .back to your memory in this way, can you not tell us the whole of the conversation?— That is what I have done. 701. But is that the whole of it ?—I believe that is the whole of it. 702. Are you not certain ? The Minister tells us his story, and tells us most emphatically. What I want to find out from you is whether your recollection of what took place will draw the whole of it from his ?—That is all that took place that I have said. 703. Did you go away quite satisfied in your own mind that Captain Jones was to be allowed to go up for his examination ?—Yes. 704. Did the Minister say so ?—He did not say so in so many words. 705. Why did you go away satisfied if the Minister did not say so ?—That was the impression I had. 706. You knew it was a breach of the regulations to allow Captain Jones to go up?—l have already stated that Mr. Hall-Jones said that he thought Capain Jones ought to be allowed to prove his competency as a navigator—his theoretical knowledge—and should be allowed to be examined. 707. But did you point out to him that the regulations would not permit him?—l certainly did. 708. What did he say in answer to your pointing dut to him that the regulations did not allow any such thing ?—lt was after I pointed out that it would be contrary to the regulations that he said what I have stated. 709. Are you sure of that ?—I am sure of that. 710. Did you go away perfectly confident in your own mind that you had sufficient authority to act upon ? —Yes. 711. That was on the 9th or 10th July ?—Yes. 712. When you went back, why did you not write the letter and sign it yourself and send it away?—lt was nearly time for leaving off. It was a Saturday afternoon. 713. Is that what you say—you remember it was a Saturday, and was near knocking-off time ? —Yes ; and there was no need to write that letter that day. It would come before me on Monday. 714. Was Mr. Allport in the office when you returned? —Yes. 715. Where did you have the conversation with him ?—ln his office. 716. Did you tell him all that the Minister had said ?—I simply told him that the Minister had confirmed what Captain Allman had told him, that Captain Jones was to be allowed to go up for his examination without the mate's certificate. 717. Did you tell him to write to that effect ?—No, I did not, because I knew it would follow as a matter of course, and that he would bring it before me on Monday. 718. And I understand that on Monday you were ill, and that that accounts for you not signing the letter ?—Yes.

Satueday, 15th July, 1899. Mr. Glasgow's examination continued. Witness : Before proceeding to my further examination, I wish to draw attention to the fact that in the New Zealand Times report this morning my unfortunate expression that I was banished from the Minister's office appears without the qualification I afterwards made. It did not convey what I meant, and I wish simply to say that Mr. Hall-Jones, in all written communications I have had with him since, and personal communications, has not shown any irritation whatever, but has treated me with all courtesy and consideration.

H.—26

1. Dr. Findlay.] Do you recollect, Mr. Glasgow, Captain Allman coming into your room, about the end of June, 1897, the year in which the examination took place, and telling you that he had been upstairs and seen the Minister of Marine, Mr. Hall-Jones, and had suggested to him dispensing with the mate's certificate in Captain Jones's case ? —I remember him stating that in my office, but Ido not remember the date. I think it was about the time of the receipt of that memorandum. 2. Captain Allman says that after his last interview with Mr. Hall-Jones, immediately afterwards, he came downstairs and went into your room and stated he had suggested that the Minister should dispense with the mate's certificate, that an order would be sent down later on, and that he (Captain Allman) had wanted the Minister to dispense with the mate's certificate; and he says you then replied, " I think you were very foolish " ? —Yes, I remember that, but I do not remember it as having taken place at the date you mention. 3. He says it was at the end of June, immediately after his interview with Mr. Hall-Jones. Do you recollect that your reply, in addition to the words " you are very foolish," was that, " If you knew these people as long as I have, you would not trust them " ? —No, I am sure I did not use those words. 4. Did you use any words equivalent to those?—No, I used no words equivalent to that. 5. You did not use those words, or words to that effect ? —No, I did not use words to that effect. 6. Do you remember that Captain Allman told you that the Minister was going to send down the order?— No,-1 do not remember that. I simply remember him saying that he had advised the Minister to dispense with the mate's certificate. 7. You do not remember that Captain Allman said anything to you about having the order at that time ?—No. 8. So that if Captain Allman says he advised Mr. Hall-Jones to dispense with the mate's certificate, that he left the room having received no order, but came down and saw you, that would be quite consistent with his statement ? There is nothing to suggest that at the time he spoke to you he had any written order from Mr. Hall-Jones ? —No. 9. Do you remember Captain Allman putting this to you in conclusion? "I told him the Minister was going to send the order down." You said it was very foolish, and then there was something like this said: "If you disagreed, it was not too late for you, as the official head of the department, to stop it " ?—I did not say that. I have no recollection of saying that at all. 10. What date was the examination ?—l9th July. 11. Does that help you to fix the date of this interview, of which you can remember something, with Captain Allman ? Can you say it was two or three weeks or more before the examination ? — My impression is that it was on the Saturday I saw the Minister, on the 10th July. In fact, I had been to the Minister. 12. His impression was that it was at the end of June, and he came to see you immediately after his interview, having no order, or at the early part of July; at any rate, some time during the examination. Do you recollect there having arisen some trouble in the office with regard to the interpretation of sea-service in connection with five candidates, with regard to one whose service was disputed, in the month of October in that year?—l remember one case in which Captain Allman and Mr. Allport disagreed. 13. There were five candidates, I believe, who had sent in their applications for examination ? —That I could not say without reference to the records. 14. Have you no records? —Not here. 15. You recollect there was more than one candidate?— There was only that one brought before me that I recollect. 15a. Do you recollect Captain Edwin and Captain Allman wrote to the department pointing out that the sea-service claimed by one of the candidates was insufficient ? —lf it was the case in which the regulation said that the sea-service was alternative, that is the one. 16. That is the one. You remember Captain Edwin and Captain Allman wrote that they thought the sea-service was insufficient ?—Yes. 17. Do you recollect that Mr. Allport maintained that their ruling was wrong ? —Yes. 18. Do you recollect that, after maintaining that their ruling was wrong, there was a meeting in your office between Captain Allman, Mr. Allport, and yourself ? Allman came into your room saying that he would not accept Mr. Allport's ruling, and the matter was discussed before you?— Yes. 19. Do you recollect that Mr. Allport desired to maintain that these alternatives in the regulations with regard to service of a mate, and so on, meant that the total might be held to be sufficient service ?—Yes. 20. Do you recollect that Captain"Allman maintained that it was not sufficient ?—Yes. 21. Do you remember that Mr. Allport said that had been done in the past, and that Captain Allman replied, " I do not care whether it has been done in the past or not, I refuse to examine this man" ?—Yes. 22. That was in your room ?—I cannot say. 23. Do you know that after Captain Allman refused to examine the man, Mr. Allport came to you and divulged the confidential statement he had got from Captain Yon Schoen ?—lt was after that. 24. Do you know that, as a matter of fact, the candidate in question Mr. Allport was supporting was a pupil of Captain Yon Schoen's ?—I do not know. 25. You do not sit in Mr. Allport's room ?—No. 26. Have you not heard complaints that Mr. Allport was allowing examination-papers to pass from his office into the hands of Captain Yon Schoen ?—I heard it stated.

H.—26

27. Do you know, as a matter of fact, that Captain Yon Schoen was repeatedly in Mr. Allport's office ?—Oh, yes. 28. Do you know, as a matter of fact, that he was oftentimes there when Mr. Allport was not present ?—No. 29. 1 think you drew up the report recommending the dismissal of Captain Allman ?—I recommended a Board of Inquiry. 30. But I understand he applied for leave to resign, and you recommended that he should not be allowed to resign ?—I did. 31. Did you recommend that a prosecution should be begun—l understand that is in your report —against Captain Allman ?—I did not recommend it: it was decided after my recommendation that there should be an inquiry. 32. Reverting for a moment to the interview that Captain Allman says he had with you after he left the Minister, do you recollect whether anything was mentioned then as to Captain Jones's scholarship—-his ability to write—his qualification as a penman ?—I cannot remember anything that he said. 33. Do you not remember Captain Allman having a conversation with you in which either you or he mentioned that Captain Jones could do no more than write his own name ?—No, I do not remember that. 34. Do you recollect any discussion not as to Captain Jones being able to write his own name, but generally ?—I do not remember anything particular about that, but it is most possible that, if Captain Jones was discussed, something might have been said about his want of literary acquirement. I had heard he was a very illiterate man. 35. When it was suggested that he should sit for examination as master, did it not occur to you that he would be unable to do the writing required for the questions?—l had no knowledge of the extent of his want of literary acquirement. 36. Have you ever heard of the papers in connection with the examination for master ? —I never heard until after this trouble occurred. 37. It did not occur to you that a man whom you had heard was illiterate would be incapable of answering the questions put to him as a candidate ?—I had no knowledge whether he could or not. I merely heard that he was an illiterate man. 38. In compiling the report which was prepared by you, and read by Mr. Hanlon, did you confer with Mr. Allport ?—Not specially. 39. Did you confer with him at all ?—During the whole of these matters I have been in communication with Mr. Allport, but I did not consult him as to what I should say. 40. Did he see your report before it was sent in ?—Yes. 41. Did you ask him whether his recollection agreed with yours upon the statements contained in that report ?—I did not. 42. lam told there was an order given for this examination—l do not refer to this envelope— an official order ?—-Yes. 43. Can you tell me how that order came to be taken off the file ?—I believe it was taken off in connection with the proceedings in the Court. Ido not know when it was taken off. 44. Do you know why it was taken off? —No, I do not. 45. Did you not say it was kept in your drawer ?—I found it in my drawer. 46. Mr. Hanlon.] I understand you had an interview on the 20th January with Mr. HallJones? —Yes. 47. That was shortly before the criminal charges against these three people, Captains Jones, Allman, and Yon Schoen, came on in the Magistrate's Court?— Yes. 48. And while those cases were going on in Court, did you have a further interview ?— Yes. 49. At that interview was the question of this envelope mentioned between you and the Minister ? —Yes. 50. Had it been mentioned before between you ?—Yes. 51. "When?—On the 20th January. 52. Are you sure about that?— There were some papers here yesterday, and I would like to see those which contain an account of what Mr. Allport said, with the Minister's minute on it [produced]. What is your question ? 53. My question was, whether the matter of this envelope was discussed at your interview on the 20th January ?—Yes, it was. It is stated there in that memorandum. 54. In the Supreme Court you were asked if you had any recollection that on the 21st the envelope had been mentioned by you, and you said, " No, not at the first interview " ?—Well, I was wrong there if I said that. 55. Would this be wrong also —it is a question and answer given by you then. It is that, at the interview on the 20th January, there was nothing to indicate that you had an interview with him on this particular matter, and you said, No ?—I had no interview with him about the envelope before the 20th January. 56. At the interview on the 20th January, was the matter of the envelope being produced treated by you as new matter, and also by the Minister ?—Yes. 57. It was?— Yes. 58. Is this a question asked in the Supreme Court: Was it treated by you as new matter— the question of the envelope having been given—and you said, " It was not treated by me as new matter, because I knew of it before " ?—That is so. 59. Is that consistent with the answer you have just given to me ?—When I saw the Minister on the 20th January, I had no knowledge that I had seen the envelope before me before; but when I gave evidence before the Supreme Court I remembered that it had been before me, 12— H. 26,

H.—26

60. Then at that interview were you satisfied, from what the Minister said, that he had any recollection of it having been produced to him before?—l am afraid I must get the assistance of counsel in this matter. Ido not know why I should be asked what was in Mr. Hall-Jones's mind. 61. But if Mr. Hall-Jones communicated that he'had not seen that before?— What is the question now ? 62. Whether Mr. Hall-Jones communicated to you that he had not seen that envelope since he had given it to Captain Allman?—Well, he did not deny that the envelope had been written by him, but he said it was new matter—that the statement of Captain Allman that the Minister had authorised the examination without the mate's certificate was new to him, and that he did not remember having given such authority. 63. You dismissed this matter of the envelope from your mind for some considerable time ? — Yes : not a considerable time. 64. When was your recollection in connection with it revived ?—ln January. 65. Did you say before that your memory was revived in connection with the Supreme Court inquiry ? Is not this so —that there was a strong statement made by the Grand Jury ?—Yes ; that is in February. 66. Is that right, that your memory was only revived by the Supreme Court inquiry and the strong statement made by the Grand Jury ?—No, I think it was subsequent to that that my recollection of having shown Mr. Hall-Jones the envelope came to my knowledge. 67. Dr. Giles.'] Was this envelope that you took up to Mr. Hall-Jones at that time pasted on to a sheet of paper as now? —Yes. 68. That was shown to be a direction, when ? —Probably on or about the Bth July, when it was received. 69. At the time when you saw Mr. Hall-Jones on that occasion, I should like to know the predominating element in your mind : whether it was the memorandum or the merits of the case that were discussed with Captain Allman ? —The predominating element has always been the statement of Captain Allman, and not the envelope. 70. Was anything said on that occasion specifically about the memorandum on the envelope ? —No. 71. You put it on your table ?—-Yes. 72. Were there any other papers attached to it ?—-No. 73. The letter written by Mr. Allporfc to Mr. McKellar was written because you were ill at the time ?—Yes. 74. Otherwise you would have written it?—l would have signed it on Monday. 75. You would have signed that particular letter ?—That introduces a new phase. Ido not know what I would have done on Monday. I might have decided to put my view of the case in writing, and I think it is not unlikely I would have done so. 76. Before sending the letter ? —Yes. 77. Judge Ward.] To whom would that writing have gone ?—To the Minister. 78. Dr. Giles.] As to the letter itself, would you have dictated the terms of it ?—No. 79. You see the letter expressly mentioned that the qualification of a mate's certificate was to be dispensed with ?—Yes. 80. No one pretends there was anything about that in the written memorandum by the Minister ?—No. 81. It was only an inference ?—-It was only through what Captain Allman said, and I repeated to the Minister what Mr. Allport had said. 82. You Were of opinion at the time that it was illegal ?—I had just a little doubt about the meaning of section 26 as to the tug service ; but, if I had been asked to report to the Minister, I should have reported against dispensing with the mate's certificate. 83. What I want to know is this, Would you, as head of the department, have written in those terms, putting the direction in writing to waive a legal regulation on merely the verbal statement that the Minister had authorised it ? —I would not have done so. 84. Then we may take it that if you had been performing your usual duties on that day, that letter would not have gone in that form ?—I could not state that positively; I think I would have hesitated or considered the matter before signing it. 85 You think there would have been good grounds for taking some other course ?—Yes; I may say plainly that I regret not doing so. Fbedebick Fitchbtt, sworn and examined. 86. Mr. Hanlon.]' You are a solicitor of the Supreme Court?— Yes. 87. And at present ?—Law Draftsman and Crown Law Officer. 88. You know Mr. Glasgow, of course, the last witness ? —Yes. 89. In the early part of this year, did you have any conversation with Mr. Glasgow in connection with the Jones matter ? —Yes. 90. When was that ?—lt was on St. Patrick's Day. That would be in March, I think. 91. Would you just state what that conversation was ?—Mr. Glasgow came to my house about half-past nine.in the morning, I think it was, and he said to me, " I presume you are in the Minister's confidence about this Marine matter? " and I said, " I do not know about being in his confidence precisely, but 1 have advised the proceedings, and had a good deal to do with them, and know all the facts." He said, "Is it true that the Minister is filing an affidavit saying that the first time he knew the envelope was used as an authority for waiving the mate's certificate in the case of Captain Jones was when the criminal proceedings in the Police Court were in progress, when I showed it to him then ? " I said, " Yes, that is so ;" and he said, " Well, I hope I shall not be pressed on the matter, because if I am I shall have to contradict him." I said

,H.—26

" What ? " He said, " I am afraid I shall have to contradict him, for I shall have to say that I showed it to him myself the day that it was brought down, or the day after." I said, " That is an extraordinary tale, Mr. Glasgow, at this time of day." "Well," he said, "I shall have to say it." " Well," I said, " your memory must be curiously treacherous." He said, " What do you mean—what are the facts'?" I said, " You go to the Minister about the evidence in the Magistrate's Court, and show him the letter from Mr. Allport to the Collector, referring to the Ministerial authority, and he asks you what that means, and you say you do not know. You say that Mr. Allport must have got it, because he is a careful officer, and you are satisfied that he would not do it without, and then the Minister tells you to go to Mr. Allport and get it." " Yes," he said, "my mind was a blank about it —I had forgotten it." I said that "Only treacherous conduct, or a treacherous memory would account for it." I said, "You had forgotten it." " Yes," he said, " I had forgotten I had seen it." " Well," I said, " the Minister then told you to get a report from Mr. Allport as to how he got it, and Mr. Allport writes a report and you put on a minute that you cannot contradict Mr. Allport. Your mind is a blank there," and he said, " Yes, it was a blank." I said, " You must have thought the matter over carefully before writing it." I said that it had not occurred to him then, although his attention had been explicitly called to it, that he had shown it to the Minister. "No," he said, "the matter was old; I have other things to attend to ; and it had escaped my memory." " And not only that," I said, " the Minister says, in writing, that he is astonished that the envelope was deemed sufficient authority, and you then put a minute on record accepting responsibility and the censure due." He said, "It is an unfortunate thing, but the fact remains." I said, "You could not have written that memorandum, saying that you would accept the censure, until you had exhausted your memory about it." He said, "I can only say that I am perfectly satisfied I did show it to him. " You do not suggest," he added, " that I am saying what Ido not believe to be true?" "No," I said, "I believe you are stating what you believe to be true, but lam pointing out to you the extreme improbability of it. When did the matter revive in your memory?" He answered, " Only recently; it has been growing upon me by degrees." Isaid,"Are there any circumstances that recall it to you ? Why do you remember ? You must surely have some tag to recall the fact—it did not grow up like a weed?" He said, "I can remember this, and it satisfies me : I am satisfied that I spoke to the Minister, because I remember distinctly saying to him that it did not matter, because Captain Jones could not pass the examination." I said, " Is that all you remember about it," and he answered, "That is all I remember about it." I said, "Have you spoken to Mr. Allport about it?" "Oh, yes," he said, "I have told Mr. Allport." I said, "Are you quite sure that Mr. Allport did not suggest it in the first place?" "Oh, no," he said, "I have perfect confidence in Mr. Allport." I said, "Well, Mr. Glasgow, it was Mr. Allport who, in the first instance, said he was satisfied he had shown it to you, and your mind was a perfect blank then, and it was your confidence in Mr. Allport that facilitated your memory in that case." He said, " No, I do not think so." I said, " When did you tell Mr. Allport?" He said, "Just recently." " Did you tell Mr. Allport that you could swear to it?" I said, and he answered, " I told Mr. Allport I could not swear to it," and, I said, " Now you say you can swear to it?" He said, " Yes, now I can swear to it." "Well," I said, "It is a very extraordinary thing, that is all I can say about it; but I will let the Minister know." That is all that occurred about the envelope, and we passed on to discuss other matters. Accordingly, I saw the Minister, and told him in substance what Mr. Glasgow had said. The Minister was very angry. He said it was a lie, and I told him I did not think so,-that I thought Mr. Glasgow was speaking what he conscientiously believed, but that I thought it was a graft on his mind caught in by subsequent events. A day or two after I saw Mr. Glasgow, and told him that I had told the Minister, and he asked me what the Minister had said. I said, " Well, Mr. Glasgow, it was not very complimentary." That is all. 92. Mr. Gray.] Practically, you are telling us in extenso what Mr. Glasgow has told us in brief ?—I was not here yesterday. 93. You read the report in the papers, I suppose, yesterday ?—Yes. 94. That he had told you that he would be obliged to contradict the Minister, and that you said he had a treacherous memory ?—-Yes. 95. Have you given us the whole of the conversation? —Yes. I may say that it was photographed on my mind because it came to me with such a shock. I was associated with the matter in the Supreme Court, and knew all the facts. 96. And you have given us the whole of the facts ?—I think so. 97. You have not a treacherous memory? —I do not think so. 98. Have you rehearsed it since ?—No ; the circumstances were so peculiar. 99. In what capacity were you acting at that time ? —Crown Law Officer. 100. Were you counsel for the Minister or Mr. Glasgow ?—-No; I was acting for the Crown. 101. And you were preparing an affidavit for Mr. Hall-Jones?—l do not know that it was sworn then, but, at all events, it was drawn. 102. Mr. Glasgow had heard before that date that the Minister was going to swear something, and he said that it would be his duty to contradict him ?—Practically to that effect. 103. Do you say positively that Mr. Glasgow told you that he recollected then having told the Minister that it did not matter, as Jones could not pass the examination ?—Undoubtedly, that was the only reason he gave for recording it. 104. Did he explain why Captain Jones could not pass? —No. He was merely quoting the remark he made to the Minister. 105. He did not express his meaning ?—No. 106. Did you make any remark on that ?—No. 107. And then you repeated this conversation afterwards to Mr. Hall-Jones ?—ln substance. I did not give all the details. I pointed out that I went through the memoranda with him.

H.—26.

108. Were you requested by Mr. Glasgow to see the Minister, and told to tell him what he had told you?—l told him I would do it. 109. You did not treat the matter as confidential ?—No. 110. You did not treat either of these matters between Mr. Hall-Jones and Mr. Glasgow as private ?—No. I do not think Mr. Glasgow will suggest that his conversation was confidential as between the Minister and me. I considered it was information given to me that I might communicate with Mr. Hall-Jones, and I did so. 111. It comes to this, that you have been called by the Minister to support his view as against Mr. Glasgow's?—l do not know that I have, by the Minister in particular. 112. By whom, then?—l told Mr. Hanlon. 113. "Who is acting for the Government ?—Yes. 114. And has been instructed by you?—No, he has not been instructed by me, but I have given him all the papers. I was told by the Government to do so, as I know all about them. 115. And your support of the Minister's view is based upon Mr. Glasgow's statement to you ? —I am not supporting the Minister's view. lam merely recounting a conversation which took place between Mr. Glasgow and myself. .. 116. It is obvious, the purpose of it?—-I came here to tell the truth. I did not come here to support anybody. 117. Mr. Travers.] As a resulb of this, I presume, the Minister did not make the affidavit? —He did make the affidavit. 118. With the knowledge of the contradiction?—l am not aware whether the affidavit was sworn at the time or not. 119. Mr. Hislop.] When did the matter first come into your hands?— What matter? 120. The issue of a permit and Jones's matter generally ?—Well, I had to advise as to what action should be taken when the criminal proceedings in the Supreme Court had failed. 121. Were you not consulted before ?—No, not before that. 122. Had you any memorandum of the circumstances when that came into your hands from Ministers as to their requisitions ?—No. 123. Did you take down any memoranda during the course of the proceedings ?—Not to my knowledge. I drafted Mr. Hall-Jones's affidavit from his statement of the facts. 124. Do you remember what Mr. Hall-Jones's statement was to you, in the first instance, as to that memorandum on the envelope ? —ln what way ? 125. As to how it came to be in existence ?—The statement he made to me was practically what I understood him to say here and in the Supreme Court: that it was a reminder to himself, but that when Captain Allman was leaving the room, he gave it to him to look into. That is what he told me, and that is what I think his affidavit says. 126. You notice in his memorandum to Mr. Glasgow he says that he is astonished to find that a rough note made on an envelope was deemed to be a sufficient authority. You see, there is no suggestion there that it was a mere reminder to Captain Allman or to himself ?—No, nor do I see why he should set out a whole narrative when he is making a minute. 127. Yet you think Mr. Glasgow ought to have done so ?—I do not say what Mr. Glasgow should have done. 128. You said that Mr. Glasgow's memory was treacherous ?—I said it was treacherous. 129. Mr. Glasgow says, " If, therefore, it is decided that Captain Allman's verbal statement and the note on the envelope are not sufficient Ministerial authority for the memorandum which was written to the Collector, then I must accept the responsibility." You will see that there is not a word about his not having shown it to the Minister in that ?—We will take the original minute. He says, " I remember commenting on the irregularity, but I concluded that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself with directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope." There is a clear indication there that he had not shown it to the Minister. 130. Is it not a clear indication that he considered that it was not a sufficient memorandum, and that he contented himself by putting it on record ?—lt is a clear indication that he did not show it to the Minister. 131. At the same thne, can you find any committal to this statement, that it was not put to the Minister by him ? —lt appears to me, if I am to give an opinion on these minutes, that the Minister clearly indicates that the envelope had never been shown to him, that it was not an authority, and that he wants to know how it came about. In this minute, he says : " Even with Captain Allman's statement, it is surprising that no inquiry was made as to the intention or origin of the envelope with the rough note upon it, and which referred to such an important subject; and the fact of your having commented upon the irregularity without directing that my attention should be called to the meagre authority for such an important departure is painful to me." 132. He has not committed himself to any further statement after the minute came to him by Mr. Glasgow?— But surely Mr. Glasgow could not receive a minute and be silent under it without accepting it! The Minister says, "Even with Captain Allman's statement, it is surprising that no inquiry was made." 133. You said in your evidence that Mr. Glasgow had practically stated that he had no recollection of this authority. I want to point out to you that Mr. Glasgow did not commit himself to that, whatever your inference may be ?—That is the inference I drew, and which any one must draw. 134. You see that the Minister does not state in either of these memoranda that the envelope was given to Captain Allman simply as a reminder ?—Why should he ? 135. But you notice that ?—Yes.

H.—26

136. Can you tell us when he first said so ?—When I was first getting instructions for the evidence generally, that is what the Minister said to me. 137. Had he stated so in any paper which was used in connection with the proceedings ?—I cannot say. 138. It was from the Minister's own mouth, and not from any memorandum he had made that you discovered this theory? —-I cannot say until I see the papers. 139. You did not come into the matter until the end of February ?—Just before the Supreme Court proceedings. 140. I have no doubt that the matter had been carefully considered at that time?—l do not think the proceedings for the cancellation had been considered. 141. But the proceedings for the prosecution ? —Yes, but I had nothing to do with them. 142. It had been previously alleged that Ministers had all to do with the issue of a certificate? —I do not know. I took no interest in the previous proceedings, because I had nothing to do with them. 143. Mr. Atkinson.] You do not represent Mr. Hall-Jones in this matter?— No. 144. You take a strictly official interest in this matter? —It is part of my official duties. 145. You were only anxious to get at the truth?—To what are you referring ? 146. To the subject-matter of your evidence. Was it a strictly judicial attitude you maintained in that interview with Mr. Glasgow?—l think so. 147. And you adopted exactly the same attitude when before Mr. Hall-Jones ?—No, the attitude of Mr. Hall-Jones was that it was untrue. I told him that I did not believe that, but that I believed that Mr. Glasgow was conscientiously believing what he said. 148. You said you told him that it was a curious tale?—No, I did not. 149. But you still maintain that you were holding the balance between the two in the interests of both? —I cannot see what you mean. 150. It should be a familiar phrase to a philosopher. The point is that you stated that you were representing the Crown and not the Minister, and, therefore, it was your duty to hold the balance as between any two subjects of the Crown?—lt is not a question of holding the balance, it was a question of eliciting the truth. 151. By the similar treatment of witnesses who came before you? —Yes. 152. And you admit that you did not adopt the same attitude between the two?— Because the circumstances were different. The impression left on my mind by Mr. Glasgow from what he told me was this : that while he was telling the truth according to his lights, it was a case of suggestion, either being self-sown or planted, and that by much brooding it had ripened into conviction, That is a common thing, as Mr. Hislop knows, psychologically. 153. Is it not a psychological fact that a man's memory may be blank to-morrow and yet perfectly clear at a later date ?—lt may be that a man's memory may be educated and grow by degrees. Where it immediately revives it is usually a complete revival. 154. You would not say that he was always most accurate ?—No. 155. Is it not a fact that you had really adopted the Minister's view at the time of your interview with Mr. Glasgow, and that you were unconsciously regarding his interest in the matter, and have maintained that attitude since?— Certainly not. I was so dumfounded by Mr. Glasgow's statement to me and the documentary evidence, that I was bound to say what I did to him. 156. You have been consulted on various matters arising out of this incident ?—What do you mean? 157. Was that envelope to which you have referred, submitted to you?—lt was shown to me. 158. you asked to give a legal opinion on it ?—-No, I was not. I could not read it, to tell jpu the truth. 159. By the time it had been read over to you, could you say what it meant ?—To tell the truth, I had to ask Mr. Hall-Jones to read it to me. I could not read his writing. 160. Was the word " permit" pronounced with the accent on the second syllable ?—-I think it was. 161. And you accepted the interpretation ? —I think so. 162. You cannot say how you would interpret it if you had not read it. If you had seen it in print and had been asked as a lawyer, would you have read it as " permit "or " per-mit" ? —I cannot really say. It was read to me as "per-mit," and I accepted it as such. It was only late in the proceedings that the word "permit" was urged. 163. With regard to the letter of the second assistant in the Marine Department, to the Collector of Customs, directing the examination to proceed, were you aware that that was taken off a file at the time ?—No. 164. Was it further discussed ?—No. 165. Mr. Glasgow.'] You know that I come in contact a good deal with official departments in the Government Buildings ?—Yes. 166. Have you ever heard from any other person that I have a treacherous memory ?—Well, in one instance I did. Ido not think it matters much. 167. It was an unimportant matter?— Yes, comparatively. 168. You have not heard that I have any difficulty in getting on with my official duties in consequence of that infirmity ?—Certainly not. 169. It was only in connection with this one particular matter? —Yes. Mr. Glasgow : I wish to state that I did use these words in conversation with Dr. Rtchett, in reference to the authority for Captain Jones's examination : "I stated that it would probably not matter, because it was not likely that Captain Jones would pass the examination." I admit that I spoke those words to the Minister.

H.— 26

Geokge Allpobt, sworn and examined. 170. Mr. Hanlon.] You are chief clerk in the Marine Department, Wellington ?—Yes. 171. Did you occupy that position in 1897 ?—I did. 172. Do you know Captain James Jones? —Yes. 173. And knew him in 1897 ?—I did. 174. On the 12th July, 1897, I think, you wrote a letter to the Collector of Customs concerning James Jones ? —I did. 175. Have you seen the letter—we have it produced here ?—Yes ; that is a copy of the letter. 176. Will you tell me under what circumstances you wrote that letter?—By the instructions of the Secretary, Mr. Glasgow. 177. Written or verbal?— Verbal. He handed me the Minister's memorandum on the envelope, and told me it was to be taken as the Minister's order that the requirement of a mate's certificate was to be dispensed with when he gave me the order to write the letter. I had seen it before. 178. You had seen it before ?—Yes. 179. When ?—On the Bth July, 1897. 180. Under what circumstances ? —'When it was handed to me by Captain' AUman. .181. Where?—ln my office. 182. Was that the first you had seen of it ?—Yes. 183. And are you quite sure that Captain Allman handed it to you ?—Yes. 184. Personally ?—Yes. 185. Would you contradict Captain Allman if he stated that it was handed to you by a messenger from the Minister ? —Yes, I should do so, because my recollection is clear that it was given to me by him. 186. Did you have a conversation with him when he handed it to you?—l did. 187. I want you to tell us the whole of that conversation, word for word, as near as you can give it ?—I cannot give you word for word. 188. Well, as near as you can ?—I had a conversation with Captain Allman about the matter before the envelope was brought to me. No reference was made to the previous matter. He said that, after fully discussing the matter with Mr. Hall-Jones, Mr. Hall-Jones had decided, on his suggestion, to dispense with the qualification of a mate's certificate and allow Jones to go up for a master's certificate, and that he had given him this authority to take to the department, and to tell the department that it was to be taken as an authority to dispense with the requirement. 189. That is what Captain Allman told you ?—Yes. 190. What did you say ?—I do not know that I said anything in particular about that, except that I put the date upon it, and after Captain Allman had gone I took it in to Mr. Glasgow, and told him how I had received it. 191. Did it not strike you that it was rather an irregular way to get instructions from the Minister?— Well, it struck me that the document was not signed, and I thought it very peculiar that the document should not be signed; so I took it in to Mr. Glasgow in order to get his instructions as to whether it should be acted upon or not. 192. Did you tell Captain Allman that you would make inquiries before acting upon it ?—I do not know that I did. I believe I told him I would take it in to Mr. Glasgow. 193. Did Captain Allman reply ?—-No ; I do not think he said anything more in reply to what I said, that I was going to take it in to the Secretary. 194. Did you ask Captain Allman why the Minister did not sign it ?—No, I did not do so. I remember saying the thing was not signed, because it was clearly the Minister's own handwriting, and I at once noted the date in order to show when I had received it. 195. Did you add the date in Captain Allman's presence?— Yes, as soon as I got it I put it down in front of me and added the date to.it. 196. Then did Captain Allman leave before you went in to see Mr. Glasgow ? —I think I went in at the same time when he was leaving the room. We both went out of my office together. 197. Then, on going to Mr. Glasgow, you had some conversation with him?— Yes, I told him how I had received it, and I believe I pointed out to him that it did not bear any signature; and he then told me, after some other remarks, that I had better paste it on to a sheet of paper, and he would see the Minister about it. I did that, and gave it back to him. 198. You are sure he said he would see the Minister about it ?—Yes. 199. Perfectly positive about that ? —Yes. 200. That was on the Bth July ?—Yes. 201. When did you next see Mr. Glasgow about it?—He came into my office with it just before 1 o'clock the following Saturday—-that was two days after, and I got it back from him. 202. Have you any knowledge of a conversation that took place between you and Mr. Glasgow at the time he handed you this envelope ?—No, I have not. 203. I want to know all about it ?—I would like to explain to the Commissioners that I did not remember for some time what I am going to say now. When this document first came up I did not remember about Mr. Glasgow having told me that he had seen the Minister. I could not remember at the time. When Mr. Glasgow remembered it, I told him I was sorry I could not remember. I had been racking my brains to try and recollect what had taken place, but I had a conviction that he had shown it to the Minister, because one of the officers of the department said to me that the Minister had seen it. But I told Mr. Glasgow that I could not confirm it, up to that time—at the time that he gave his evidence in the Supreme Court in the case SolicitorGeneral against Jones —but in the course of the proceedings in the Supreme Court a question was asked in someway, "Why did not Mr. Glasgow get the message signed?" and then the whole

H.—26

thing flashed instantly into my mind, and I said, " This is the very question I asked Mr. Glasgow when he came back to me." 204. Will you tell me if you remembered, when you had taken the envelope to Mr. Glasgow, that Mr. Glasgow had said he would see the Minister about it ?—Yes. 205. Did you remember that ?—Yes. 206. That had not been obliterated from your mind?— Yes ; it was this question asked in the Supreme Court that brought the matter back to my mind; and he said he had not done it because he did not like to throw a doubt on the Minister's word. But he said, " I do not think it will matter very much, because Jones will not pass." Mr. Glasgow said that when be brought the document back; but I could not remember that until the remark was made in the Supreme Court. 207. Are you quite clear that he said it did not matter?— Yes; lam quite clear that he had been talking to me before as to Jones's acquirements, and as to the probability of his passing. 208. Was that the whole of the conversation you had with.Mr. Glasgow?— Yes ; except that he told me to write the letter. 209. You wrote the letter? —I did not write it myself, but it was written in the office, and I signed it for Mr. Glasgow. There was no time to write it on the Saturday. 210. Do you remember at what time on Saturday Mr. Glasgow came back from the Minister's office?—lt was so close to one o'clock that there was no time to write it. The probability is that if it had been received at eleven o'clock it would not have been written, because it would have to be recorded, and letters are not usually written at once. 211. On the 12th you wrote this letter?— Yes. 212. Had you the envelope before you when you signed that letter?—l had. 213. What did you do with the envelope?—lt went out to the clerk to be filed as a record. 214. You put no note on it ?—No. 215. Did you make any note anywhere as to its having been shown to the Minister ?—I did not. 216. Was any person present with you and Captain Allman when the envelope was handed by Captain Allman to you ?—No. 217. Did you know at that time that an application had been put in by Captain Jones for examination for a certificate of competency ?—I did not. 218. Had Jones seen you?—He had, but not in connection with the examination. 219. What had he seen you about ? —About his application for a service certificate, some time before. He came into my office one day and said he believed I was the cause of his not obtaining a service certificate—that I had been objecting to it being granted, and he asked me if that was so. I told him it was, and pointed out that he was not entitled to get it. He asked me why, and to withdraw my opposition. I said I could not —he was not entitled. I said, " Why not go up for the mate's examination and get a certificate, and then go up for the master's certificate." Then he made some remark to the effect that he could not do it—he could not do the writing, or something of that kind. But this was some time after the service application had been before us. 220. Some months elapsed between the application for a service certificate and this application to you,?— Yes. 221. You wrote this letter, of the 25th January, to the Secretary of the Marine Department, the one in which you say the Minister gave the necessary instructions for dispensing with the requirement of a mate's certificate ? —Yes. 222. At the time you wrote that letter you knew that Mr. Glasgow had said he would produce the envelope to the Minister ; that had not been blotted from your memory ? Did you remind Mr. Glasgow of the fact that he had promised to see the Minister about the envelope ?—No. . 223. Why not ?—Because I was not very clear. 224. But did you tell him that was your recollection ? —I do not remember whether I mentioned that or not. 225. That was only in January of this year, and you are specifically giving us the conversation which took place in July, 1897 ? —I do not profess to give more than what I remember. 226. Mr. Glasgow would have a conversation with you before putting the minute on it ?—He asked me to give my recollection of what took place. 227. Then you wrote that letter?— Yes. 228. And Mr. Glasgow put a minute on the foot of it ? —Yes. 229. Did you see that ? —He showed me that; but Ido not know whether I was present when he wrote it. 230. And he said in that minute that he could not recollect having said so ?—Yes. 231. Did you remember to jog his memory on the subject ?—No. 232. You were not clear as to having shown it to him ?—I was quite clear about that. 233. Mr. Glasgow put that memorandum at the foot of that, but does not recollect what you put in that letter ?—Yes. 234. Did you remind him of your taking it to him and showing it to him?— Yes. 235. Does it not strike you that it would have been advisable to remind him of what he said ? —I was not clear at the time that he said he would show it to the Minister. 236. You know that the Minister put a minute on that letter and returned it ? —-Yes. 237. Did you have a further conversation with Mr. Glasgow upon the receipt of the minute from the Minister ?—Yes ; he showed me the minute. 239. What conversation took place?—l do not know of any in particular, except that he answered it, and showed me the answer he had made. 240. Did you help his memory at all ? —No. 241. What took place between you before that minute was written ?—He told me that the only thing he could say was what he stated in his minute. He told me before he wrote the second minute that he had remembered what I stated.

H.—26

242. The first day he had no recollection of it; and the next day he puts this minute on and states that he was able to corroborate what you had stated?— Yes. 243. Was that done in consequence of the conversation that took place between you and Mr. Glasgow ? —Certainly it was not. 244. You did have a conversation ? —Only as to what he was going to write and what be remembered. 245. Is that the only conversation that took place between you ?—Yes. 246. And then Mr. Glasgow told you he would put that minute upon it, and did so; and did he show it to you before sending it away?—-Yes. 247. At that time it is clear you did not remind him of his intention to take it up to the Minister ?—I tell you I was not clear at the time. 248. On that score your memory and Mr. Glasgow's memory had failed you ?—Yes. 249. When did it dawn upon you that Mr. Glasgow had promised to take that envelope to the Minister ?—Some time afterwards. I told you I was not positive, and could not positively record it, until after the case Solicitor-General against Jones. 250. That is, as to Mr. Glasgow coming back from the Minister and telling you to act upon it ?—I tell you I was not positive of that either. I was not quite positive of it until that time. 251. You were not quite positive of that part of it, as to Mr. Glasgow having seen the Minister, either?—lt was so indistinct in my memory. 252. Was it so indistinct that you did not remember it at all ? —I had a dim recollection of it. 253. And it was when the question was asked in the Supreme Court that the matter came back to you like a flash?— Yes, it did. 254. Did you at once communicate that fact to Mr. Glasgow ? —The next day, I think—very shortly after—l went to Mr. Glasgow and told him. 255. Will you tell us what you said to Mr. Glasgow, and what he said in reply?—l told him what I have told you : how I remembered it, and felt quite certain of it. 256. What did he say?— Nothing in particular, except that it confirmed his recollection. 257. Judge Ward.] How soon was this after the Supreme Court proceedings ? —lt must have been within a day or two after the case Solicitor-General v. Jones that I told Mr. Glasgow. 258. Mr. Hanlon.] When Mr. Glasgow recollected the matter did he ask you to corroborate it ?—He told me he remembered it, but Ido not know that he asked me to remember it. I told him I could not. 259. When he told you his memory had revived, you still had no recollection of it ?—I told him I had no recollection of it, and I was sorry that I could not remember it. 260. Had you any conversation with Captain Allman from the time the examination took place right on up to the time you remembered what took place with regard to the envelope ?—The only conversation I had was after the Supreme Court proceedings, when I think he rang me up and said he hoped I had not any feeling against him owing to what had taken place ; and I replied that I had not, and that I was sorry that I had had to take the part I did. Then he said something about his first report, and made some remarks about why he had written it and how the Minister had induced him to write it; and I said I could not understand how he could write such a report. That is all the conversation I had, through the telephone. 261. Is it usual in the department to act on memoranda such as the one produced?—l act under instructions from my superior officer, who told me to do so. 262. What is the usual practice ?—Upon any instructions, whether verbal or written, I act upon them if they come from the head of the department. 263. Do you not sometimes receive instructions from the Minister ? —He may sometimes send down for a paper, or something of that kind; but nothing more important than that. 264. Captain Yon Schoen, I understand, communicated some information to you about examinations ?—-Yes. 265. When was that ?—Some time early in last year. Ido not remember the date, but I think it was somewhere about February. 266. What was the information he communicated?—He came to my office and stated that the examinations were getting worse, instead of better, in Wellington, and on my asking how he meant, he said he would tell me if I would accept the information confidentially and treat it as confidential. Then he told me what had taken place with regard to Jones's examination, and also expressed the opinion that there had been irregularities with regard to two other examinations. 267. Did he tell you whose they were?— Yes; Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan's. I did not think much of it then. I rather ridiculed it, and he said he would bring the books to prove it, and I said, " Very well, bring them," and he brought these books and left them. Afterwards I got out the papers and looked at them, and there seemed to me to be truth in what he said. 268. Dr. Giles.] Could you explain shortly the nature of what was discovered, or what was wrong ?— In the Jones case it appeared that the work on the papers coming from the examiners was a copy of what Captain Yon Schoen had shown to me, or that his work was a copy of it. They were practically the same. And in the case of Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan the questions were certainly the same as those which he gave me, and it seemed to me that the working was the same. 269. Were the questions he gave you in writing or in a book ?—The questions in Captain Bendall's case were in a book of his own, and in the case of Captain Jones they were copies of the papers; and in giving them to me he pointed out certain things in the Bendall and McLellan cases— that part, the compass deviation, contained errors—and he said he had given Captain Allman copies of those papers before he had corrected the errors, and that probably the errors would be found in the working of Captain Bendall and Captain MeLellan's papers if they had used his work. Well, of course it was a very technical matter, which I did not thoroughly understand; but as far

H.—26

as I could see some of these errors were in Captain Bendall's and Captain McLellan's papers ; and I felt quite satisfied that in the Jones case the papers handed in were copies or originals of what he had given me. 270. Does that mean that Captain Yon Schoen had given to Captain Allman, previous to the examination, the questions, with the answers worked out, that were to be used in the examination? —Yes. 271. And there being errors in the working out, he expected the same errors to be in the examination-papers ?—Yes. 272. Judge Ward.] And the papers he showed you subsequently had those errors corrected ? —Yes. 273. Mr. Hanlon.] He told you about the irregularities in the case of Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan, and you compared them with the book, and he left that with you ?—Yes. Then he called a day or two afterwards and asked if I was satisfied now, and I said I was sorry to say I was, and then gave him back his book and papers. At the same time I said I thought it was rather unfair that I should have to keep this confidential, and that I should be allowed to tell the Secretary. He said, "Well, you have given your word of honour," and he would not release me at the time, especially as he said he would not do anything to injure Jones, who had been taught by him. 274. And you did not communicate that to the Secretary ?—I did not. 275. Nor the fact that if the papers were searched the irregularities would be found ?—I was most anxious to do it, but I had given ray word of honour, and I felt that I could not without discredit mention it. I saw him afterwards and tried to get his permission. 276. When Mr. Hutcheson made his speech in the House, did it strike you then that Captain Yon Schoen must have disclosed this information to Mr. Hutcheson?—lt did. 277. Did you consider yourself released then, when he made it public ?—I saw Captain Yon Schoen, and said I thought he must either now release me from that confidence, or else he should give the information to the Government, and he said he would see Mr. Hutcheson about the matter. A day or two afterwards he told me he had seen Mr. Hutcheson, and Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, who had agreed to see Captain Yon Schoen about the matter, and was going to send for him. That being the case,.l considered I should hold it still as confidential, as he was going to give it to the Government in his own way as soon as the Premier saw him. 278. That was about August, 1898 ?—Yes. 279. When was it that this conversation took place between you and Captain Yon Schoen ?— It was shortly after Mr. Hutcheson's speech. It was after I had read the report of it, but lam not quite sure whether it was the report in the newspapers or the full report in Hansard of the speech. 280. Did you find out whether the Premier had seen Captain Yon Schoen ?—No ; I saw him afterwards and urged him to go, and he told me that Mr. Hutcheson had told him that the Premier would see him, but was very busy then and could not at that time. 281. Did you tell him it was improper on your part not to report the matter? —Yes. I was expecting every day to hear that the Premier had seen him. 282. It went on for a couple of months ? —lt went on to November. 283. And during that time you did not give the information to the department ?—I was not released at the time, and he told me that he would see the Premier. I felt, under the circumstances, that he should have the right to tell the Premier, as he would not agree that I should do so. 284. To whom did you communicate this information? —Mr. Glasgow. 285. Just after the House rose? —It rose on the Saturday night, and it was during the following week, but I am not sure of the date. It was just some time about the Prince of Wales's birthday.

Monday, 17th July, 1899. Examination of Mr. Allpobt, continued. 1. Mr. Hanlon.] Did you hear Mr. Glasgow give his evidence in the Supreme Court?— Yes. 2. You heard that question about " Why did you not get the Minister to sign the memorandum "?—Yes; I heard that question asked. Ido not know whether it was asked by counsel. 3. Did you divulge the fact then ? —I think it was—not the next day, but the following day after, that I felt quite certain. 4. To whom did you divulge it ?—To Mr. Glasgow. 5. Did you know at that time that the Minister had denied that it had ever been shown to him?—l did. 6. Did you take the opportunity to inform the Minister that the whole thing had come back to your recollection ?—I had no communication with the Minister. 7. Did you not think it was part of your duty to set things right ? —lt did not strike me. 8. Did you ask Mr. Glasgow to tell the Minister ? —No. 9. Did he say he would tell the Minister ?—No ; he did not say so. 10. Then, you have kept this, from this time until now, to yourself?— Except that I told Mr. Glasgow. I may have mentioned it to some one else. 11. Is there any one else to whom you mentioned it?—l mentioned it to my wife. 12. To any business persons?— Yes; I think I told one or two officers in the Government Buildings. 13. Shortly after you heard that question in the Supreme Court ?—'Shortly after I told Mr. Glasgow. 18— H. 26.

H.—26

14. Did the whole of the particulars come back to your mind, or had they gradually floated back? —No, they came back all at once. 15. You did not ask to be recalled in the Supreme Court ?—No, I did not. 16. Nor did you point it out to the Grown Solicitor? —No. 17. Now, you said just now that it was not until a couple of days after you heard that question in the Supreme Court that you remembered the particulars?— Yes. 18. And were all these particulars in your mind at the time you wrote that minute? —No, I had forgotten the particulars when I wrote that memorandum. That memorandum was written in January, some considerable time before. I told Mr. Glasgow before he gave his evidence that I could not corroborate him. 19. You did not, after finding out the whole of the particulars, supplement that minute by sending a further memorandum to the Minister informing him of your recollection in the matter ?— No, I did not. 20. Can you give any reason for not doing so?—I told the Secretary, and I thought that was all that was required. 21. You could see that the Secretary had not sent any communication to the Minister?—l did not know that he did not. 22. But all minutes in connection with the Jones affair seem to have gone through you ? — No. 23. When Mr. Glasgow sent those minutes on your report? —Oh, yes. But minutes of that kind do not always go through me. 24. Did not Mr. Glasgow tell you before St. Patrick's Day that he had shown the envelope to the Minister?— Yes, I think he told me that he had, before St. Patrick's Day. 25. Had he already informed you? —He informed me that he recollected it. 26. Did not that bring the matter back to your mind ?—No. 27. Can you account for that?—No, I cannot. 28. Will you tell us what conversation you had with Mr. Glasgow at the time he so informed you ? —All that I told him was that I could not recollect it. 29. I want the whole conversation. What did he say ?—He told me that he had remembered showing the document to the Minister, and that was" about all. He said that he remembered that he was certain he had shown it. He said some little time before that he believed he had, and after he became positive. Still, I could not recollect that he had, and I told him so. 30. Did he tell you that you had brought the envelope to him and that he had promised you to take it to the Minister ? —Yes. 31. Do you mean to tell the Commissioners that, after Mr. Glasgow had narrated the exact circumstances of the case, it did not draw it back to your recollection?—No, it did not. 32. You tell us, then, that a chance question asked in the Supreme Cpurfc did bring the recollection of the whole circumstances?—l remembered that I asked that very question when he brought it back. 33. And the details explained by Mr. Glasgow did not freshen your memory one iota ?—No, they did not. 34. Did you know that a statement was made in the House to the effect that you went to Mr. Glasgow to get him to look at the examination-papers ?—Yes, I saw it in Hansard. 35. Was that true? —I took the papers to Mr. Glasgow and asked him to keep them—the Jones, Bendall, and McLellan examination-papers. 36. You took them to Mr. Glasgow and asked him to keep them ? —Yes, it was understood that he was to look at them. 37. Where were they kept ?—ln my drawer, locked up. 38. Were they quite safe in your drawer ?—I wanted Mr. Glasgow to keep them to show them to the Minister. 39. What was your object in taking them to Mr. Glasgow ? —To show him the thing had been done, and I asked him to keep them. 40. You explained to him, really, what Yon Schoen had explained to you ?—Yes. 41. And then asked him to keep them ?—Yes. 42. Was it suggested that anybody had tried to get these papers? —Captain Allman had been asking for the Jones papers that morning. 43. Who did he ask for them ? —Mr. Grix, a clerk in the office. 44. Is he in the office now ?—Yes. 45. It was after Captain Allman had asked for these papers that you went and gave them to Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. 46. Had not the fact of Captain Allman asking for them induced you to take them to Mr. Glasgow? —It had, because I was in a nervous state over the matter, and I had not heard that Captain Yon Schoen had seen the Premier, and I think it was only an assumption of mine that Captain Allman wanted to make away with the papers, and, without considering, I went straight in to Mr. Glasgow and told him what I knew. 47. Is this not clear, Mr. Allport, that it was for the better custody of the documents that you handed them over to Mr. Glasgow ?—No, Ido not think it was for the better custody. I knew he would require to take them to the Minister. 48. You say that Captain Allman asked for these papers, and you suspected he might have wanted to do away with them—that influenced you to take them to Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. 49. And had you any reason to suspect that Allman wanted to do away with these papers ? — Only that I knew what had been done, and what had been said in the House, and I knew the papers contained proof of what had been done.

H.—26

50. What date do you say you gave these papers to Mr. Glasgow ?—I could not fix the date. It might have been a little after the 9th November, but it was long after the speech in the House. 51. Where were these papers kept between the time the speech was made in the House and the time you handed them to Mr. Glasgow ? —They were locked in my drawer. 52. The whole of that time? —Yes. 53. Do all examination-papers go to you ?—Yes. 54. And are they kept by you?—ln the office. 55. In your drawer ?—No. 56. Where ? —ln cupboards in the office. 57. Why were these examination-papers separated from the ordinary examination-papers and put in the drawer? —Because of what Captain Yon Schoen had told me. 58. Are you consulted in connection with all Marine matters ? Do you really do the work of the Marine Department ? —I am Chief Clerk in the department, and I do chief clerk's work under Mr. Glasgow. 59. Do you consult Mr. Glasgow on matters of importance ?—Yes, certainly. In regard to all matters I take his directions. 60. You know Captain Yon Schoen pretty well, do you ? —Yes. 61. How long?—A great many years—l do not know exactly. 62. Was he in the habit of coming about your office?—He used to come to the office every now and again. 63. Was he frequently there ?—I do not know how often. He might come in at a week's interval, and then he might not come in for a month, or three months. 64. When he wanted to find out something ? —He generally had some complaint in regard to his men—his candidates; or he wanted information in regard to regulations, and sometimes he came about the business of Nautical Assessor. 65. Were any examination-papers produced by you to him and discussed ?—No, they were never produced. I swear that positively. I know that statement has been made, but Captain Yon Schoen never saw the examination-papers from me or any other official. 66. Have you discussed, without the production of any papers, the matters of examinations with him, and the results ? —Not the results. He sometimes complained that his men had been wrongly failed, and wanted to say that they had done this, and had been treated in that way, and suchlike, but never in regard to how they failed ; he never knew from the department of the matter in which they failed in any way. He never found that out from me. 67. Did you and Yon Schoen have any conversation with regard to adjusters of compasses ?— He had often spoken to me of adjusters of compasses ; he held a license as adjuster from the office. 68. Did he discuss regulations with you and you with him ?—He did not discuss them. I do not think he ever objected or said much about the regulations. I had not much to do with these ; they were prepared by Captain Allman., He might have discussed them with him, but not with me. 69. He was the man who was really entitled to do the work?— Not necessarily so. The regulations provided that adjusters at any port could get the work in turn, and the Collector of Customs notified the men in turn when an application was made for adjustment. 70. How many were qualified here ?—I think originally there was only Yon Schoen when the thin" was started, and then the Government allowed Captains Bendall and Strang, I think, to act without licenses for a certain time, to allow them to qualify. Afterwards a Mr. Gifford came, who ■was qualified and got a license. Some time after, the regulations were altered. 71. Did you know that at first the regulations had the effect of making Yon Schoen the only person capable of doing the work ? —That was so originally ; but the Government allowed Captain Bendall and Captain Strang to go on adjusting for a certain time to allow them to qualify for their licenses, and they ultimately obtained licenses. 72. Did you hear that letter read on Saturday which was sent by Mr. Yon Schoen to a Mr. Hood?—I did. 73. Did you know anything about that before ? —I knew there had been a deputation to the Minister about it. There is a file of papers about the matter in the department. I only saw the letter in the newspaper. 74. Did you see the letter before ?—No ; the original, never. I saw a copy. 75. Referring again to the information which was given to you by Yon Schoen, you divulged that in November ? —Yes. 76. And would it be correct to say that you would not have divulged it at all had it not been for the fact that Yon Schoen had divulged the matter ? —No ; I do not think it would be correct. I think I would have insisted upon him releasing me in some way. 77. You held the information for about ten months?—No ; for about eight. 78. And you would have insisted upon Yon Schoen allowing you to give the information ?— Yes ; I should have insisted. I was worried about it, and did not know what to do. 79-. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Grix in connection with Yon Schoen being at the office on one occasion while you were away ? —I do not remember. 80. Do you not remember that on your return Mr. Grix complained to you about Yon Schoen calling so often ? —I do not remember the conversation. 81. Did you ever hear complaints from any one ?—No. 82. Prom Captain Allman? —Well, Allman began to get very much annoyed with Yon Schoen somewhere about the time this matter came out in the House, and he very often made uncomplimentary remarks with regard to him after that. 83. Do you remember Mr. Grix telling you that you, as Chief Clerk, should not allow such familiarity on the part of Yon Schoen, and that you upheld the position Mr. Grix suggested ?— No, he never said anything of the kind.

H.—26

100

84. Dr. FinAlay.] Will you fix approximately how long you have known Captain Yon Schoen? —I think it must be nearly twenty years since I first knew him. 85. Did you come to know him first through official relations ?—I really cannot remember. I think it was, because I just knew him to speak to for years. 86. At that time he had no official position in the Government service ?—He was in the Government Life Insurance Department for a great many years. 87. He had no official relation with you at that cime ?—No. 88. For some years you knew him in that way ?—Yes. 89. Do you recollect when he had first any official position in connection with the Marine Department ?—When he began to be a Nautical Assessor on Marine inquiries ; I do not think he had any official position before that. 90. When was that ? —I think it was about 1895. 91. Then, the next position he got was that of Adjuster of Compasses? —He was not an officer of the department. He had a license as adjuster. 92. As Nautical Assessor, or as a licensed Adjuster of Compasses, there was no particular need for his calling regularly at the Marine Department ? —No, not regularly. 93. Then, I suppose, his visits to your office were largely out of friendship to yourself ? —No, they were never out of friendship to myself. He had either some complaint to make about a candidate or he wanted some information, or came about the Assessorship at a wreck inquiry. 94. His duties as Assessor were very few?— Yes. 95. And the number of cases on which he would come to see you with regard to compass licenses were very limited ? —Yes, very limited. 96. Dp to the end of 1897 Captain Allman swears that Captain Yon Schoen was repeatedly in the office ?—He was in a good many times, both in my office and Captain Airman's. Judge Ward : Where does Captain Allman swear that ? Dr. Findlay : Tn the declaration, your Honour, which is before the Commissioners. 97. When you say he was frequently at the office in 1897, is it true that he was there as much as two or three times a week ?—No, never. Perhaps there was a week in which he might have come in twice, but never as a rule. 98. During the time he was visiting you most frequently his complaints must have been with regard to candidates and the way they were treated ?—That was one of the causes ; on some occasions regarding regulations. 99. I take it from you that he frequently complained as to the manner in which his candidates were treated ?—He has been complaining for years that his candidates had been wrongly failed. 100. Did you ever tell him that he had no business to address complaints of that kind to you in the way in which he was doing?—No, I do not think I did. 101. Then you did not make any attempt to stop these repeated visits, or complaints about candidates not having passed?—He was coming always, even before Captain Allman was in the office at all. 102. You know Captain Yon Schoen's handwriting?— Yes. 103. And I suppose I may assume you have known his handwriting for some years past ?— Yes. 104. If I show you some sample of his handwriting you will be able to say whether it is his handwriting or not ?—I think so. 105. When did you first hear that Captain Jones had applied for a service certificate ?—When he first made his application, about 1895. 106. You had occasion to examine the declaration which he sent in support of that certificate ? —Yes. 107. And I think you told the Commissioners that you learned, or suggested yourself, that the declaration was not accurate : that it declared service that had not been performed ?—Yes, that is so. 108. You had reason to believe that the declaration was false? —Yes, I had. 109. Do you know in whose handwriting this application for a service certificate was ?—lt was in Yon Schoen's handwriting. 110. This declaration in support of a certificate of service: you see it is on the back of the application?—lt is a wrong statement of sea-service that Mr. Williams sent in. 111. What part of it is in Yon Schoen's handwriting? —The application. 112. And what appears on the back of the declaration ?—A statement of service. 113. Are these services correct ? —No, I do not think so. 114. You know that the statement of sea-service is incorrect ?—Yes; it was found on examination to be incorrect. 115. Well, you tell me that that was in Yon Schoen's handwriting. He came to the office repeatedly. Did you ever ask him how he came to write this false statement of sea-service ?—No. I think he asked me once if Jones was going to get his service certificate, and I told him that the statement was not correct. 116. That is hardly an answer to my question ?—Well, no, I did not ask him. 117. Had you any conversation with Captain Allman with regard to this application of Captain Jones for a service certificate? —Yes, I had. 118. Frequently ? —More than once, at any rate. 119. Do you know of the envelope which the Premier sent down to Captain Allman upon which the words were written, " Can anything be done for this man " ?—Captain Allman told me of it; lam not sure whether he showed it to me. 120. Did Captain Allman tell you of the interview he had with the Premier about the matter? —Yes, he told me he had seen the Premier.

101

H.—26

121. Did he tell you that he had seen Mr. Hall-Jones ? —Yes. 122. On more than one occasion?—l think he said on more than one occasion, but I am not certain. 123. He told you that the Minister, he thought, desired that Captain Jones should get his master's certificate ?—Oh, yes. 124. Did he tell you that, for that purpose, they were going to dispense with the mate's certificate? —Well, he told me that the Minister had decided to dispense with it, because Captain Jones could not get the service certificate, and he suggested that he should be allowed to go up for examination, and get over the difficulty in that way. 125. Captain Allman told you that he knew the Ministers desired Captain Jones to get his certificate ?—He told me that he believed that. I think he said that "he had reason to believe." 126. He told you that he had had an interview with the Premier, and he told you that he had seen Mr. Hall-Jones on more occasions than one? —I am not positive whether it was "on more occasions than one." 127. Did you share his belief that the Ministers desired Captain Jones to get his master's certificate ?—Well, I think they desired that if he could get the certificate he should get it. 128. Then, you knew from Captain Allman that the Minister had dispensed with the mate's certificate ?—For the competency certificate, yes. But Captain Allman never, of course, told me that the Minister wanted him to get the certificate improperly. 129. You knew from Allman that the Minister was going to dispense with the mate's certificate, and you heard from him that the Minister desired Captain Jones to get the master's certificate?-—That was his opinion. 130. Did you, through Captain Allman, believe that the Minister desired Captain Jones to get his master's certificate ?—I do not know whether he did or not. I had never seen the Minister to form an opinion. 131. You had the information just mentioned; you had the fact that the mate's certificate was to be dispensed with; you had Captain Allman's statement that he believed the Minister desired Captain Jones to get a master's certificate : can you give me your answer whether you do not or do believe that the Minister desired Jones to get the master's certificate?— Yes, if he could get it properly, I think the Minister desired him to get it. I had no reason to believe that the. Minister desired the examination to be a bogus one. 132. You told us, Mr. Allport, that you had a conversation with Mr. Glasgow, in which Captain Jones's ability to pass the examination was discussed? —Yes. 188. And you have told us the opinion expressed to Mr. Glasgow by you about the matter?— Yes. 134. In any conversation with Mr. Glasgow did you tell him that Captain Allman had told you that he believed the Minister of Marine desired Captain Jones to get a master's certificate?— Ido not know that I did. 1 may have said so; I may have told Mr. Glasgow what Allman had told me, but I do not remember. 135. Whether there were conversations with Mr. Glasgow or not, you both assumed that the Minister desired that Jones should get his certificate if he could get it properly?— Yes, I assumed that was the Minister's desire. 136. Had you any reason to doubt that Mr. Glasgow had not the same belief about the matter? —No, I do not know that he had. 137. You knew it was illegal to dispense with the mate's certificate ?—I believed that it was irregular. 138. You had the advantage of having some study of law, and you have the qualification of solicitor, have you not ? —Yes. 139. You knew the dispensing of the mate's certificate was illegal ? —1 thought there was no authority to do it. 140. You told us Mr. Glasgow said, "I do not think it will matter very much, as Jones will not pass" ?—Yes. 141. You knew that Jones was an illiterate man?—l knew, at all events, that he was not a very well educated man. 142. And Mr. Glasgow was of the opinion that Captain Jones could not pass ?—I did not think he could. 143. I suppose you conceive it to be your duty as Chief Clerk of the Marine Office to do nothing which is in your opinion illegal ?—Well, I do not do anything illegal if I can avoid it. 144. As an officer of that standing, you do nothing illegal if you can help it ? —Yes. 145. Was the reason why you raised no objection, or offered no resistance, to the dispensing of this mate's certificate, the fact that you knew the Minister was anxious that Captain Jones should have an opportunity of sitting for his master's certificate ?—I told you before, that I took Mr. Glasgow's orders. I had no right to raise the question then by taking it to him after taking his instruction. Mr. Glasgow knew the position. 146. The matter was evidently discussed by you and Mr. Glasgow, and you told the Commissioners one of Mr. Glasgow's expressions. Did you say to Mr. Glasgow, " I think it is improper to dispense with this certificate " ?—I do not know whether'l said it in those words, but, no doubt, I pointed out that I did not think the regulations provided for it. 147. If you knew of the application that Captain Jones had made to the Minister, and of what Captain Allman had told you what Ministers wished, would you have allowed this matter of the dispensing of the mate's certificate to pass?—lf I had been told by my Secretary, I should have been bound to do so. 148. You do not think any part you took in the matter was a dereliction of your duty ? —No; I do not.

H.—26

102

149. Can you tell me whether the reason given by Mr. Glasgow, " It did not matter very much since Jones would not pass," was the main reason for this mate's certificate being disoensed with ?—I do not know what was in the Minister's mind. 150. In this conversation with Mr. Glasgow, was that the main reason for dispensing with the mate's certificate ?—I do not kuow whether it was the main reason in his mind. 151. Can you give any other reason besides the fact that the Minister told you to do it—l take it that both you and Mr. Glasgow thought there was no harm in this man being allowed to sit for his master's certificate, because he was very unlikely to pass ?—I did not think there was any harm. I did not think the man would pass at all. 152. You thought there would be very little harm in allowing him to sit, because there was very little likelihood of his passing? —Yes. 153. I want to have a distinct answer if I can get it to my question. Did you not think, after this conversation took place between you and Mr. Glasgow, that it did not matter very much if Jones were allowed to sit ? —Well, I did not think he would pass. 154. You thought Captain Allman would do his duty?— Yes. 155. Did the Minister wish him to pass this candidate?—No, I did not say that. The Minister would be glad if he got his certificate, but not that the Minister wished him to pass. 156. Did you expect, if Captain Allman, as Examiner, did his duty in this matter, that the candidate would not pass ?—That was my impression. 157. If this mate's certificate had not been dispensed with, the fraudulent examination could not have taken place ?—The mate's might have taken place, but not the master's examination. 158. If it had not been that this mate's certificate was dispensed with, the master's fraudulent examination could not have taken place ? —No, in could not. 159. Now, you admit that the dispensing of that mate's certificate was illegal?— Yes. 160. You say it was done in deference to what you thought were the wishes of the Minister? —Yes. 161. You told us you knew of Captain Jones's application for a service certificate ? —Yes. 162. You told us of the interview between the Minister and Allman, and you told the Commissioners that Captain Jones himself came to see you, and told you that you were blocking his service certificate ?—Yes. 163. You told him to get his mate's certificate, and then sit for the master's certificate? —Yes. 164. You had a conversation with Mr. Glasgow, in which Mr. Glasgow, you told us, had been talking to you about Jones's ability to pass. He said, "It did not matter, because he could not pass," and you told the Commissioners that you shared that opinion ?—Yes. 165. Then, you sent a letter to the Collector of Customs?— Yes. 166. And in that letter you stated that the mate's certificate had been dispensed with? —Yes. 167. Dr: Giles.] Did you draft that letter yourself? —I am not quite sure, but I think it is very likely I did. 168. Br. Findlay.} Did you know anything of the work which candidates for master's certificates have to pass in? —I know the nature of the work. 169. Do you know what time is usually allowed candidates to do that work?—No; I cannot without reference to the regulations. There is a limited time. 170. And you did say that you receive the examinees' papers after they have answered them ? —Yes. IVI. You had occasion to see a great number of candidates' papers for masters' certificates? —Yes. 172. Now, you know that the answers to questions put are in words and figures : both are often in the answers ?—Yes. 173. So that it requires some degree of penmanship to answer these questions?— Yes. 174. You told the Magistrate, I understand, in the lower Court, when Captain Allman was on his trial, that after the papers had been answered by Captain Jones they were handed to you by Captain Allman ?—They were handed in to the office. Ido not know whether they were handed to me personally, but I knew I had the papers. 175. You looked through the papers after they were handed to you?— Yes, I looked through them. I did not pay much attention to the wording of them. 176. You had considerable reason to suppose, you told us, that Captain Jones could not pass his examination ?—I did not think he could. 177. Then, when the papers were handed to you, you would know that he had passed?— Yes. 178. You would therefore have some curiosity to see whether he had passed ?—Yes. 179. Then you looked at the papers with the suspicion that Captain Jones had passed in some funny way ?—I looked at the papers to see how he passed. 180. That was immediately after they were handed in to the office ?—Yes ; before the certificate was issued. 181. You had had Captain Jones's application for a service certificate before you, and you knew his handwriting, I suppose ?—Yes. 182. Had you any other samples of Captain Jones's handwriting?—l do not remember that I had, other than I knew he had passed for a river certificate some years before. 183. You know Yon Schoen's handwriting very well?— Yes. . 184. When you looked through these examination-papers, as you say, to see how he had passed, were you struck by the fact that the handwriting in which the answers were given was exceedingly like that of Yon Schoen's ?—No ; I do not think I was. 185. Are these the examination-papers [produced]?— Yes. 186. This is Captain Jones's signature ?—Yes.

103

H.—26

187. You had a previous illustration of Captain Jones's signature when he applied for a service certificate ?—Yes. 188. Did it not occur to you that the handwriting at the foot of that paper was wholly unlike the handwriting in the body of it?—No ; I thought the man was trying to learn to write. The signatures of seamen are not at all like their handwriting. I have seen a seaman pass an examination one year, and the; next year he will pass another and his handwriting in his papers will be quite different. 189. Here is the handwriting of James Jones on the 12th July, 1897? —Yes. 190. You have the application for a service certificate before you ; did you know that the two signatures are almost identically the same?—-No ; I did not compare them. 191. You will admit that the handwriting in the body of it is quite unlike that signature ? — Yes. I had no suspicion that it was not his handwriting. I had not the least reason to suspect that it was some one else's handwriting. 192. You had not the least suspicion that the writing in the body of the paper was not the same handwriting as at the foot ? —No, I did not. 193. You were examining these papers with suspicion?—l do not think I said "suspicion." 194. Dr. Giles.] I understand you to mean that you thought he had practised more in writing his own name ?—I thought, your Honour, he had been coached up to do the special writing for this work. 195. Dr. Findlay.] You made the inference from the papers? —I think Captain Allman told me that he was under instruction, and I think he told me that he had gone to Yon Schoen, but lam not sure. In fact, he told me that the Minister had suggested that he should go to a " coach." 196. Did you believe, when you went through those papers and read the report of the examiners, that this examination was an honest one ?—Yes, I did. 197. Did you ever ask Captain Allman as to how Jones had passed his examination ? —When he brought the papers in he told me that Jones had got on pretty well, and that he had not been too hard on him. 198. Early in February, 1898, you told us, you knew from Allman that Captain Jones was a pupil of Yon Schoen's at the time of the examination ?—Yes. 199. Early in February, 1898, Yon Schoen made these disclosures to you ? —Yes. 200. I will give you the words that you gave on Saturday : " He told me what had taken place with regard to Jones's examination." What did he tell you?—He told me he had held Captain Jones's hand while he wrote the paper. And that he had given him the papers with the questions on and another set of papers to take with him to the examination-room, and that he had good reason to believe that they had been accepted in the examination-room. 201. Did you ask him then whether he did this to pass his pupil or to catch the examiner ?— No, I did not. I assumed that he had done it to pass his pupil. 202. Now, you told the Commissioners that he asked you before he made these disclosures to treat it as confidential ? —Yes. 203. Did you assume that it was some ordinary departmental matter in which there would be no harm in your keeping it secret? —Yes. 204. When made aware of this disgraceful thing you felt yourself bound by the confidence you had promised ?—Yes. 205. Now, did you speak to Captain Allman after you got this information—-you saw him daily, I suppose ? —Yes, I saw him daily when he was in Wellington. 206. Did you ask him anything about Jones's examination after that?— No. 207. Did you tell him that there was complaint of any kind as to the manner in which he was carrying on examinations ?—No. 208. Then, you did not know whether this method of smuggling candidates through was being done in other cases ?—I examined papers to.see whether anything was wrong with them. 209. You were not particular with Jones's papers? —No. 210. Supposing the papers were given you now, and you had suspicion, do you think you would be able to detect fraud from the papers ?—No, because I believe the papers are correct. 211. Well, if that be so, there was nothing to prevent some fraud being perpetrated with other examinees who sat?—l tried to be as careful as 1 could. 212. You know that Captain Yon Schoen was a candidate for the position which Captain Allman got?— Yes. 213. When did you first become acquainted with Captain Allman?—After he got the appointment. 214. At that time you had been a friend of Yon Schoen's for fifteen years ?—I knew him ; he was no more a friend than other people who called at the office. 215. You did not know Allman until after his appointment ? —No, I did not. 216. Did Yon Schoen ever express to you his opinion of Allman's competency?— Not in direct words ; but I am afraid, from many things he said, he had not a high opinion of him. 217. Can you tell us any of the things he said? —Well, I do not know any special thing other than that he did not think he had very high attainments. 218. Is that all ? —Yes, I think that was about all. 219. The Premier told us that he looked upon Yon Schoen as a man with a grievance, because he did not obtain this position : did Yon Schoen tell you that he ought to have been appointed ?— No. 220. Did he ever discuss the appointment with you? —No, except that he brought his application to the office ; but I do not remember any discussion about his getting it after the appointment

104

H.—26

was settled. Before the appointment was settled, he brought his application to me and gave me all the reasons he could in his own favour. I think he also saw Mr. Glasgow about the matter. 221. Did he solicit your help?—No; he did not ask me to help him. He impressed upon me his qualifications and attainments for the position. 222. Were you of the opinion that he was a competent man?— Yes. 223. Well, now, do you believe that this dishonesty in the preparation of these papers was for the purpose of merely getting his candidate through, or was it out of animosity to Captain Allman ? —I cannot say ;he told me it was to get him through. 224. When he came to see you and told you about this matter, I suppose you assumed that he was animated by a zeal for public safety ?—No, I did not. 225. Did you ask him why he had kept his speech so long about the matter ?—He said the examinations were getting bad, and the pupils were not properly treated. 226. Getting bad since when ? —He did not say. 227. Could anything have been worse than the business of Jones?—l am only telling you what he gave me as his own reasons. 228. Did you point out to him that they could not get much worse ?—I do not know that I did. 229. Mr. Gray.] This man Yon Schoen coached Jones—he is a teacher of navigation in Wellington ?—Yes. 230. I suppose he charges ordinary fees?—l do not know. 231. I suppose he charged for the tuition of Jones?—l do not know. 232. Captain Jones got the certificate in the way suggested ? —Yes; Captain Jones got the certificate. 233. On that, Captain Yon Schoen came to you and told you—first, that he coached this man Captain Jones, and he had probably Captain Jones's fee in his pocket?—l suppose so. 234. Some months afterwards he discloses the method by which Captain Jones passed through the examination. What motive did you assume he had in coming to you?—l told you the motive he gave me was that the examinations were getting worse. It was not mere assumption. 235. Up to that time what was your opinion of Yon Schoen in point of honesty?—l had no reason to doubt his honesty. 236. And after that ?—I did not think it was the proper thing to do. 237. Supposing a man comes to you as Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, and says, " Mr. Allport, by fraud (the particulars of which I shall give you) I got a man smuggled through an examination." He gives you all the particulars of that examination, and he previously gets from you a promise that " you will not reveal what lam about to tell you." Do you consider that you are bound to keep the confidence of that man ?—I do. 238. Do you still ? —I do. It would have been a dishonourable thing if I had broken my promise. 239. You did not know whether the public safety was being endangered in some way; you thought you were barred by the promise you gave Yon Schoen ? —Yes. I very much regret it. 241. You still commend the action you took?— Yes ; otherwise I should have done a dishonourable thing. 242. Would you do the same again? —I would certainly not take such confidence again. 243. You told Mr. Hanlon that you would have insisted ultimately on divulging this information ?—I said I might have done so. 244. And if you had failed, what then?—l really do not know what I would have done. 245. You know the speech was delivered in August, and when you told Captain Yon Schoen that he must have disclosed it, he did not deny it ?—No. 246. At that stage the disclosures of Mr. John Hutcheson on the matter had reached the public, and you still felt bound by the promise, did you ? —He agreed to let the Government know what had been done. 247. You agreed to let matters rest as they were?— Until I had an opportunity of doing it. 248. You told the Commissioners that you did not think the man could pass—you had suspicion ; yet when Captain Yon Schoen told you about this matter you stated, " I did not think anything of it, I ridiculed it ? " —I did not think it was true. I did not think Captain Allman had done it. 249. Although you confessed to have had suspicions about the man's ability to write, you tell us now that you ridiculed it ?—Yes. 250. Mr. Hanlon spoke to you about Hood's letter : you saw a copy of this letter ? —Yes. 251. In that letter Captain Yon Schoen says that—or in words to that effect—he is getting official information from the department ? —I do not think he said he was getting information from the department; I think he said he was officially informed. 252. This is part of the letter : "I have received official information, upon which I will not enlarge ; suffice it for me to say " —and then comes in, " that I think you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House, Hill Street, to-morrow." You have seen this letter, I think?— I have seen a copy of it. 253. When did you see a copy of that first ?—The Minister sent it down to the department about the 18th September, 1897. 254. You saw Yon Schoen after that? —Yes. 255. Shortly after that, I may assume ? —I do not know whether it was shortly after or not. 256. Up to the end of that year, 1897, he had some official position—l think you admitted that he was in the habit of calling pretty often at the office?— Yes. 257. Did you ask him what he meant by that letter?— Yes, I did. I asked him what he meant by that official communication. He laughed, and said, " Cannot I have official communications? " That is the answer I got, and I could not get any more.

105

H.—26

258. And this is the man you treated, up to the time of the revelations, as an honourable man ?—Yes. 259. And you thought it was honest ?-—No, I did not think it was honest; I thought it was pretty smart. 260. All that time you knew, Mr. Allport, that there were two rival schools in Wellington— Mr. Gifford's and Captain Yon Schoen's ?—Yes. 261. You knew that letter had been written to a pupil of the opposition school ? —I did not know; I believed that it had. 262. And you asked this man what was the official information he had, and the answer you got was a smile ? —Yes. 263. And you thought that a pretty smart thing ? —Yes. 264. Were you not told by Captain Allman that Captain Yon Schoen had actually offered to bribe him to pass his candidates ?—I was never told so. 265. Do you swear that Captain Allman did not tell you this?— Yes, I do. The first I heard of it was when I read it in the confidential statement of Allman's. 266. In the office in which you are there is a desk, is there not, at which to stand to write ?— No, there is not. There is a desk in the other office. 267. Where were the examination-papers kept prior to and since 1898?— Prior to 1898 in the clerk's room, and since in my room. 268. Do you remember some trouble with regard to a candidate named Mclntyre ?—Yes. 269. What was the trouble?— That he was failed by Captain Edwin, and complaint was made that he had been improperly failed. 270. Do you remember Captain Allman coming into your room when you and Yon Schoen were together at the table, immediately after this Mclntyre affair happened ?—No, I do not recollect Captain Allman coming into the room more than once when Yon Schoen was there. 271. Captain Allman said, "on more than one occasion." After the trouble with Mclntyre he said he found you and Yon Schoen standing at the table, and Mclntyre's examination-papers were between you ?■—No, that is incorrect, because Yon Schoen never saw any examination-papers in my room. 272. Will you swear that at no time there were examination-papers on your table when Captain Yon Schoen was sitting at it ?—I will not swear it. There might have been some lying on the table, because all sorts of papers lie on my table. I do not think he could see them; at any rate, he could only see the top sheet. 273. Is there not a possibility of his having seen those papers while you were there ?—While I was there he could certainly not have seen more than the top sheet. Ido not think there was a possibility of him seeing the examination-papers at all, and I have no recollection of any exami-nation-papers being there. 274. If Captain Yon Schoen swears that they were there ?—lt is possible that he might have seen the top sheet. 275. Can you swear that when Captain Yon Schoen came into the room the top sheet was not turned over ?—I do not think that he could see more than the top sheet. 276. How could you swear that Yon Schoen could not have seen the papers when he came into the room ?—lt is possible that if I had been examining them one of the bottom sheets might have been turned up ; but I do not think that Yon Schoen ever saw the papers. 277. Where did he sit? —He generally sat in a chair at the side of me. 278. You will not deny that there were examination-papers on the table ? —I do not remember any being on the table wiien Yon Schoen was in the room. All sorts of papers are lying there, and there may have been examination-papers amongst others. 279. You do not deem it your duty to see that the examination-papers are covered up when people come into the room ? —I generally put them on one side when anybody comes in. 280. Did you ask Yon Schoen whether he had got any information from you or "from other people with respect to Hood's letter ?—No, I did not. 281. Did you ask him whether he got any information from you at all on the matter?—No, I did not; I knew that he had not. 282. You yourself had seen Jones about his service certificate ? —Yes. 283. Did he tell you that he had been seeing the Premier about it ?—-I do not think he told me that he had seen the Premier. I was aware that he had been to see the Premier. 284. Did he tell you that the Premier thought him (Jones) entitled to what he wanted ?— I do not remember that. 285. Or that Mr. Seddon looked favourably on his application ? —I do not remember his saying that. 286. Your own view was that, if he could prove the service, he could have his service certificate ?—Yes, three years' service. 287. I think you said the statement of service referred to was incorrect? —Yes. 288. Was there any question raised about the loss of records in the Post Office fire ? — Yes. 289. So that part of Jones's records could not be checked ?—We knew that permits had been given to him by the Customs Department to allow him to go out, other than times that have been checked. 290. Do you know that on many occasions he went, out with another captain nominally in charge?— Yes; I knew he had received permission to go out with another captain in charge. 291. Do you know on how many occasions, with a captain nominally in charge, Captain Jones was actually in charge ?—I do not know from my own knowledge. 292. Did he tell you of them ?—Yes, I think so. 14-H. 26,

H.—26

106

293. Did what he tell you raise a doubt in your mind as to whether or not he could prove his sea-service?—l do not think I had very much doubt about it. 294. You see, the Premier looked into the matter and said that he had a doubt, and still has a doubt about it ? —I do not remember having a doubt about it. 295. Did not the lost records create some doubt in your mind ?—I do not think so, because otherwise the Customs Department would have been giving authority without instructions from our office. 296. Cannot the Collector give permits without reference to the head office ?—That is the rule. 297. Do you know anything about Jones's capacity —his general reputation as a seaman?— His general reputation is very good, so far as seamanship is concerned. 298. And you agree with Mr. Seddon, then, that Captain Jones is as highly qualified as the other captains he mentioned ?—I do not know who the captains were Mr. Seddon referred to. I would rather go with Captain Jones than many others who have certificates. 299. There are many captains who have service certificates ?—There are some hundreds of them. 300. And who are really not in a better position than Captain Jones is ?—Well, they had the service. 301. I suppose some of them are not more highly qualified even in literary matters?—-No. 302. He is as qualified, then, as many of them in seamanship and literary attainments?— Yes ; there are some who cannot write so well as he can. I have known applicants for service certificates to make a cross for their names. 303. Are you aware, Mr. Allport, that clause 26 of these regulations that are before the Commission had been construed by Captain Allman as assisting to qualify for a certificate of competency ? —Yes, I know that Captain Allman thought at one time that they might come in. He asked my opinion at the time he was in communication with the Minister. 304. Has that ever arisen in any other case ?—I do not remember any other case. 305. It was Captain Allman's opinion that it would meet Captain Jones's case?— Yes, he seemed to think it would, because he asked my opinion. 306. Was your opinion adverse ?—My opinion was that he should hold a mate's certificate at the time he was serving in the " Duco." 307. Was the question referred to the Law Officers to advise upon ?—No, Ido not think it was. 308. Did Captain Allman assist in drawing up the regulations ?—They were adopted from the Board of Trade regulations. We are bound, under the recognition of our certificates in England, to follow the Board of Trade rules. Clause 26 is part of the Board of Trade regulations. 309. The question of dispensing with the mate's certificate had never cropped up before ?—No, I do not think it had. 310. This was an extreme occasion ?—Yes. 311. You know, of course, that there are in your department permits given by the Minister or some other person in authority ? —Not many permits have been given by the Minister ; they have been given by the Secretary, or some person in authority. 312. You never heard of a permit dispensing with a mate's certificate to enable a candidate to go up for examination as a master?— No. 313. Would not the word " permit "be applicable in that sense? —I never use it. I think I used the word " allowed " in my letter to the Collector. 314. Well, I suppose " order," or " authority," or "application," or " instruction " —any of those words would be more suitable than " permit " ?—Oh, yes ; I think " permit " is generally used in a special sense. 315. Your own view, Mr. Allport, is that there was no power to waive the necessity of a mate's certificate ? —Yes. 316. And, from what Mr. Glasgow told you, you understood that the Minister thought otherwise ?—I understood it was to be done. 317. And was it only because Mr. Glasgow instructed you, and told you what the Minister had stated, that the matter was done?— Yes, that is so. 318. You had no personal interest in the matter?— None whatever. 319. And you thought it amounted to Ministerial direction?— Yes. 320. You told Dr. Findlay that when the examination-papers came in you looked through them: did you look through them for any reason ? —I only looked for curiosity. I did not look through the actual working of the figures, but more to see whether the service was shown. 321. You had no reason to suspect Captain Allman of doing anything improper ?—None whatever. 322. I think that to every set of examination-papers that comes in there is attached a report by the Examiner as to whether the candidate has passed or not?— Yes. 323. Was there such a certificate attached to Jones's examination-papers ?—Yes. 324. Does the Secretary for Marine issue the certificate of competency on the report ? Yes. 325. So far as you know, does the Secretary ever act upon anything except the Examiner's report ?—No. 326. The method and manner of the examination is left entirely to the Examiners ?—Yes. 327. And if they report to the department that the candidate has passed, the department issue the certificate ? —Yes. 328. Mr. Travers.] You say you have known Yon Schoen nearly twenty years ?—Yes. 329. During the whole of your intercourse with him up to recent developments, had you any reason at all to suppose or suspect that Yon Schoen would have been guilty of any impropriety in connection with official matters? —No, not at all.

107

H.—26

330. You assumed that he was an honourable man ?—Yes. 331. Were you intimate with him?—He was only an acquaintance. 332. Arising out of your official position ? —Yes. 333. Did you hesitate to give him information with reference to regulations and matters of that kind?— No. 334. You gave the same class of information to anybody interested in that particular department ? —Yes. 335. Did you at any time give to Yon Schoen any information respecting official matters which might not have been equally extended to other persons ?—No, I never did. 336. Did he ever ask for anything of the kind?—No, I have no recollection of his ever asking for that which I should have been justified in refusing. 337. You knew the position at the time, that he was a teacher of navigation ?—Yes. 338. And the information you gave him was as much as might be necessary in his particular vocation ?—Yes. 339. And up to the time of this affair you assumed him to be perfectly honourable and straightforward—anxious no doubt for the success of his pupils, and nothing beyond?— Yes. 340. And his complaints went no further?— No. 341. Did Yon Schoen during the time of your acquaintance with him ever occupy an official position by authority from the Government ?—He held a position in the Government Insurance Department. 342. And nothing else in connection with the department?— Yes, he was a nautical assessor on several wreck inquiries. 343. And he could only have that position or authority from the Minister?— Yes. 344. Was there anything, so far as you know, in his relations with the Government itself which could justify any suspicion as to his character ?—No, I knew of nothing. 345. At all events, you know of nothing which was calculated to shake your confidence in Captain Yon Schoen, as he seemed to be an honourable man until these recent matters? —Yes. 346. Have you any knowledge at all of Yon Schoen's relations with Allman in respect to acquaintanceship or intimacy, or anything of that kind?—No, other than that I was told he had been to him as a pupil after he got the appointment of Examiner. 347. Have you seen them often together?—l knew that Yon Schoen used to be in his office several times. Captain Allman told me so himself. 348. Did Captain Allman ever express any opinion adverse to his (Yon Schoen's) character, or otherwise? —I do not think he did until after Mr. Hutcheson's speech. I do not think he did before the developments. 349. So far as you could see, he appeared to be on friendly terms ?■ —Yes. 350. Did Captain Allman ever express to you aay suspicion, or make any suggestion, that Yon Schoen was untrustworthy in any respect ?—No, not until after the speech. 351. You treated both of these gentlemen in their several capacities as honourable, trustworthy men ? —Yes. 352. And, although you looked at these papers for curiosity to see how Captain Jones had passed, you were not struck with any circumstance which would justify a suggestion in your mind that there had been some wrongdoing ?—None at all. 353. You said that Jones was obtaining instruction from Yon Schoen, which had been suggested by the Minister?— Yes; that is what I understood. 354. Therefore you were only curious, and you did not look at the papers with any suspicion that there was impropriety?— Not at all. 355. To have done so would have been to suspect the Examiners, and you had no suspicion of the Examiners at all ? —No. 356. During the whole time prior to this, when Captains Allman and Edwin had been acting as Examiners, had any suspicion been aroused in your mind as to the illegality or anything in con* nection with the conduct of their duties?—No, other than that Yon Schoen had complained of his candidates not getting the proper treatment at examinations. 357. Did you see anything in the records which justified any suspicion that such was the case? No, except in one case—that of Mclntyre, I think, that Dr. Findlay referred to, where a mistake made was detected. 358. You had no suspicion that the mistake was made in any way other than accidental?— No. 359. You did not look for any impropriety?— No. 360. You thought that the officials connected with your department were strict and honest in the performance of their duties ?—Yes. 361. From what took place before the examination, with reference to Mr. Jones going up for examination, had you any impression that the Minister would be willing to stretch a point, if possible, to allow him to pass, not to an extent that would really amount to impropriety ?—I understood that he was willing to dispense with the qualification of a mate's certificate. 362. The examination of a mate is a very perfunctory one, is it not ?—There is not very much in it. 364. The total extent of his examination for the river-master certificate is that he is called upon to put down in figures 22,604, and then he is called upon to do a sum in addition, which probably any schoolboy of eight years of age could do with great facility; is that so ?—Yes. 365. And then he is required to do a sum in subtraction—he is asked to subtract 53,091 from 74,104, and he succeeds in doing it, giving a difference of 21,013. Then there is a sum in multiplication,' 4,165 x 710. And that is the whole examination ? —Yes, with the exception of the colourtest

it.—26

108

366. So that the navigation of a river, which may be very difficult, is committed to a person ■who can do four sums which could be done by any boy of eight years of age ?—There is, in addition, an oral examination as to the rule of the road, &c. 367. Now, as to the examination for a mate's certificate of competency foi a home-trade steamer, is it anything at all analogous to that ? —lt is little more than that. 368. Nothing that a schoolboy could not do?—A schoolboy might want a little special instruction. 369. But still it is a very perfunctory examination?— There is not much in it. 370. And therefore to dispense with this certificate in reality amounts to very little, if he is able to pass the senior examination for a master's certificate?—At one time the regulations did not require a man to hold a mate's certificate. 371. Involved in the certificate of competency as master, is there everything that would be required for a man to know as a mate ?—Oh, yes. 372. So that in dispensing with that examination the Ministers were not risking people's lives and fortunes ?—Not at all. 373. If he succeeded in passing the examination for a certificate of competency he would be quite qualified to do all that was necessary as a master and as a mate ? —Yes. 374. The regulations, however, are strict, and do not allow it to be dispensed with?— Yes. .375. So that, in point of fact, if the Ministers were desirous of dispensing with the examination as mate they were dispensing with very little ?—Yes, except the one year's service as a mate. 376. And I suppose the master would know what the duties of a mate were perfectly well ?— Yes. 377. And this irregularity had been pointed out to the Minister, and he knew it perfectly well? —I did not point it out myself; I had no communication with the Minister. 378. We are told that it was late in the month of May, 1897, that the Minister wrote this memorandum on the envelope ? —Yes; it was stated so. 379. So that an interval of five weeks, at all events, must have elapsed between the date on which it was written and the date on which it came to you—it came to you on the Bth July?— Yes. ' . .;. ,-s 380. An interval of five weeks ?—Yes. 381. Have you any theory of what became of it in the meantime?— No. 382. So far as we know, the Minister parted with it to somebody, to Captain Allman, immediately after it was written ?—Yes. 383. And therefore it was floating about somewhere or other, unless it was in Captain Allman's pocket, between the date on which it was written and the date it came to you ?—- Yes. « 384. Did it not strike you that the interval would be covered by Captain Jones in endeavouring to get instruction of some kind or other? — I thought, if he wanted instruction, he would go at once. 385. And, if Captain Allman was interested in getting through the examination, this document would remain in Captain Allman's pocket until he felt that Captain Jones had reached a pitch of instruction sufficient to justify his going up for examination ?—No ; I am not saying that. 386. Is it not a reasonable idea to assume that the envelope was withheld for some purpose ? [Dr. Findlay objected to the evidence on the ground that it was not fair against Captain Allman, and so far as the questions affected Captain Allman he objected to some of them.] 387. You know of no reason, or was it ever explained, why the envelope was not brought direct from the Minister to you ?—I did not know until the Minister's evidence was given that there was any assertion that it had been written before it came to me. 388. It must have been written, the Minister says, at a certain interview, but it did not reach you until five weeks after?— Until the Bth July. I understood it then came straight from the Minister. 389. By whom was it presented to you?—By Captain Allman. 390. Are you positive about that ?—Yes. 391. There is some evidence of Allman's in which he denies it?—lt is my clear recollection that it was brought by Captain Allman. 392. If it had been brought by anybody else, do you think you would have received it as an authority ? —No, I should not have taken it as an authority. The message with it was the confirmation of it. 393. You say a message was given by Allman?—Yes. 394. Did he in that message treat the envelope as having been given by the Minister as a distinct authority?— Yes, certainly. 395. And you accepted his statements ?—-Yes. 396. And you then produced it to Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. . 397. A question was asked yesterday of Mr. Glasgow by Dr. Findlay : " Eeferring to other cases, witness said there had been one instance in which Captain Allman had expressed a doubt as to service qualifications of an applicant. He (Mr. Airport) expressed the opinion that they were sufficient, and Captain Allman refused to examine the man that Mr. Allport had been backing up, when the latter came and told him what Yon Schoen had divulged." Now, do you know to whom that had relation ?—I believe it had relation to a man named Walley, who had applied to be examined. I think it was for a first mate's certificate. . 398. You differed from Captain Allman on the interpretation of the regulations ?—Yes ; I was of the opinion that the man was qualified, and Allman had a different opinion.

109

H.—26

399. Was not the matter referred to the Grown Law Officers, and they advised that Captain Allman's view was right ? —Yes. 400. Had you any connection with it ?—The Government decided to refer it to the Board of Trade, which is the ultimate appeal, and the Board of Trade agreed that the view I had taken was correct, and in consequence Examiners were directed to follow that view. 401. The man did not renew his application here, did he?—■Hβ did come and say that he thought he would have to withdraw, and asked to be allowed to have his fee back. . This was granted, and I think he went to New South Wales. 402. Did he pass in New South Wales? —I do not know. 403. Did that produce any unpleasant feeling or change in your relations with Captain Allman ?—None at all. It is a matter on which Government officers often differ. 404. There was nothing which disturbed the relations upon which you stood with Captain Allman ? —Not so far as I was concerned. 405. And as far as you observed his conduct towards you ?—No, I do not think it did. 406. Now, with regard to that letter to which your attention was directed, the letter of the man Hood, can you explain that matter at all ?—No, I cannot explain the matter more than I did this morning, other than this: So far as I was concerned, I could not have been instrumental in any way in the man's passing, as I had nothing to do with the examinations. It was a matter for the Examiners only; I had nothing to do with the case. 407. So far as you are concerned, we are told that you did not think that Captain Jones would be able to go through the examination ?—No, I did not think so. 408. And that opinion seems to have been concurred in by Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. 409. So that, in fact, you were both of opinion that no great harm would be done in allowing Jones to go up for examination?— That was our opinion. 410. At the same time, do I understand that you treated the course taken by the Minister, assuming that to be an authority, as irregular ?—Yes. 411. Now, was that an irregularity, assuming Jones to have actually passed properly—was that a matter likely to have affected the lives and property of people ?—I do not think so at all, especially in Captain Jones's case. I think that the service he had in steamers showed that he was well qualified. 412. So that he might have been qualified as a seaman without being entitled, looking at the regulations, to pass the examination ?—Yes. 413. You know of Captains Bendall and McLellan's cases : did you think there was any such violation of the law as would lead to bad consequences ?—I knew that both of these men had been adjusters under the new rules. , - 414. You thought their efficiency was in no degree affearted ?—They had been adjusters for many years. 415. It is highly technical knowledge and called " swinging a ship," is it not? —Yes. There was a waiving of the regulations in the cases of Captains Bendall and Strang without any strictly legal authority. In order not to impose a hardship upon them, they were allowed to go on for six months adjusting. 416. And by authority ?—Yes. 417. Mr. Hanlon.] Was this by suspension of the Act?— Yes; by the Act and regulations under the authority of Ministers. It only related to these two particular men. 418. Mr. Travers.] You say that you looked at the examination-papers out of curiosity. Did anything strike you particularly as to the handwriting?—No, it did not strike me particularly, except that the man, being illiterate, had been able to write. 419. A careful scrutiny would show a degree of ease in the making of some of the letters which you probably would overlook, but, generally speaking, you characterized it as rather a roughish scrawl ?—Yes. 420. This envelope was written at the end of May, and it was on the 19th July, I think, that the examination took place ?—Yes. 421. The authority having been presented to you on the Bth ?—Yes. 422. So that a very short interval elapsed between the date of the authority coming to your hands and the examination-papers coming also?—I think the application was sent in on the same day that the letter was written. 423. The application was put in on the 12th; the letter was written by you to the Collector of Customs on the 12th : is there anything here to show when the Collector of Customs notified the Examiners?— Yes : on the copy of my letter there is the Collector's stamp—the 13th July. 424. Then, only six days elapsed altogether between that date and the examination ?—Yes. 425. You see, the examination-papers signed by Mr. Jones were sent in on the 13th?— Yes. 426. On the very day on which the authority from the Collector was sent forward ?—Yes. 427. Pretty smart, was it not ? —Yes; there was no delay. 428. Of course, it is patent on the documents that the irregularities, so far as dispensing with the mate's certificate, were known to the Minister?— Yes. 429. And the interviews took place between Mr. Glasgow and the Minister, and the whole thing was done between the Bth July and the 13th, when the examination took place ?—Yes. 430. Then, I presume, you would say that the irregularity, even so far as the Government are concerned, would practically have amounted to nothing, looked at from the public point of view, had the examination been regular and proper?—No, except that it was technically wrong; but no evil consequences would have followed if Captain Jones had passed a proper examination. 431. There would have been no injury to the public at all, to the passengers, the crew, or property in the home trade ?—I do not think so.

H—26

110

432. I suppose you assume also that when the Minister did give this authority, as it was called, he would naturally also assume that the examination would be regular and proper ?—Yes, I think so. 433. It was nothing to quarrel about at all but for the subsequent events ?—^Yes. 434. You afterwards became possessed of knowledge which satisfied you that the thing was altogether wrong? —Yes. 435. And that knowledge came to you, I presume, as a matter of surprise, did it ?—Very much so. 436. You gathered nothing from looking at the papers when first you saw them?— No. 437. When Captain Yon Schoen had told you of these irregularities you even then, I presume, were not quite satisfied? —I was not at all satisfied. 438. And then he proceeded to give you proof of it ?—Yes. 439. Having produced his books, and so forth, you came to the conclusion that the thing was quite wrong?— Yes. 440. Had you apprised the Minister of the information you would have been making grave charges against Captain Allman, Captain Yon Schoen, and Captain Jones ?—Yes, and thus broken my confidence. And had Yon Schoen not seen his way to confirm what I stated I could not have proved it. I did not think that Allman would deny it, as he afterwards did to the Government. 441. You had no means of proving what you knew if the charges had been denied by Captain Allman ?—No, I had not. 442. You would have been in direct antagonism to three or four gentlemen?—l certainly would. 443. Captain Edwin would also have been involved?— Yes. 444. He had signed the examination-papers ?—Yes. 445. You would have had to depend entirely on Yon Schoen ?—Yes, and his producing the documents. 446. You did not actually have it in your power to prove it without calling on Yon Sehoen to prove it ? —I had nothing to enable me to prove it. 447. It would have involved also the original difficulty as regards whether the Minister had authorised the examination at all ?—Yes, that difficulty would have arisen. 448. You thought, on the whole, looking to the position that you held as regards Yon Schoen of confidence, that it would be wiser not to speak?—l did not see my way to break the confidence. 449. When Captain Yon Schoen came to you and told you that, did he give any reason why he should divulge a fraud in which he had been a prominent party ?—Well, he wanted to sljow that the examinations were so bad that something should be done to make them better, and that some.steps should be taken by the department. 450. Surely the only step that could be taken was to dismiss the Examiners?— Yes, that is so. 451. Would you not be justified in assuming that he wished to displace these examiners ?—He said he would not produce the documents to injure Jones. 452. You were asked whether you were informed by Captain Allman that Yon Schoen offered to bribe him ? —Yes, I was never informed of that. 453. Did you ever hear of it?—l never heard of it until I read his first statement. I never heard of such a thing. 454. When Captain Yon Schoen came to your office I suppose your papers were mostly in the position in which you had been immediately using them? —Yes. 455. Did you consider it necessary when he came to your table to cover your papers up ?— No. I never did so. 456. They were never in such a position that a prying eye could master the facts in the papers ?—They were lying on the table precisely then as in other cases. 457. Where did he sit as a rale?—He sat at the end of the table, and I sat in the middle. 458. The papers were not put, as it were, in such a position that the position itself would convey a hint to look at them ?—They were just lying in the ordinary course. 459. And you had no suspicion that any one would surreptitiously glance at them ?—Not the least. Ido not think any one could have got much from them—they might have seen the top sheet, that is all. 460. You took the ordinary course that one does to prevent any one prying into matters ?— One does not expect to gather up all the papers when any one comes in. 461. It was suggested that Yon Schoen had a sort of run of the office, as he pleased?—No ; he had no more run of the office than the other members of the public. He might have come in more often than other persons of the public did. 462. His vocation rendered it necessary that he should have information?— Yes. 463. Of a class which it was not a breach of duty to communicate? —Yes. 464. And nothing, so far as you know, has ever arisen in the department of such a character as this?—No ; nothing at all. 465. Not a suspicion of it ?—No. . 466. Have you gone through any of the examination-papers of the last few years to ascertain if any suspicion is well founded?— Yes, I was asked to look through some of them. 467. Did you find anything? —No; but before I had gone very far through them Captain Marciel was brought up by the Government, and he went thoroughly into the matter. 468. Has he found any irregularities?— Very few. 469. Were they matters of any consequence ?—There was very little that was not perfectly regular. I have not had his report. [Mr. Hanlon promised to get the report and put it before the Commissioners.] 470. I suppose this matter of Captain Yon Schoen's communication came upon you rather like a thunder-clap ?—lt did, indeed.

111

H.—26

471. It is entirely at variance with everything that has gone on before in the office? —Yes. 472. Mr. Hislop.] Assuming that information was given on the subject of Mr. Hood's examination, from whom could that information come ? "Who was officially connected with the examination ?—Captains Edwin and Allman were the examiners. 473. And in the natural course, I see, it was not referred to the Secretary but to Captain Allman ?—Yes. 474. You knew that Captain Allman denied that anything could have happened?— Yes. 475. And you yourself knew that nothing had happened ?—Yes. 476. And, so far as you know, did Captain Allman at any time make any suggestion until he himself got into trouble that this information could have come from you ?—No ; I have never heard anybody make the suggestion, nor have I ever given such information. 477. Up to what time was Captain Yon Schoen employed by the department as Nautical Assessor ?—Up to July, 1897. 478. And after that was he employed in any capacity?—He still held a license. 479. Was he ever sent away from Wellington ?—Not after July, 1897, on Marine business. 480. Up to that time he had been ? —Yes. 481. Before you saw that memorandum of Mr. Hall-Jones, and" the permission, had Captain Allman informed you that the Minister had ever given, or was going to give, any authority ?—He told me that the Minister had been discussing it, and intended to give a permission. 482. But I thought he had given it?— Not until it was brought down. 483. Was that between the end of May to the Bth July?—lt was some little time before he gave me the permission ; I do not remember exactly how long. 484. Mr. Atkinson.] For a good many years Yon Schoen had the only nautical school in Wellington had he not ? —Until the last few years. 485. And he would be constantly sending up candidates for examination?—-Yes. 486. For how many years within your knowledge ?—I think it must be about twenty years. 487. Of course, you have business in connection with various applications from him?— Yes. 488. It has been mentioned as remarkable by Dr. Findlay that there was something unusual in Jones's case in his application being in Yon Schoen's handwriting. Was it the invariable practice of the candidates to fill in the applications themselves ?—The application sometimes came in the handwriting of the candidate, but it did not matter who sent it in. 489. For some time there were no adjusters of compasses other than Yon Schoen ?—Yes. 490. Can you form an opinion of his qualifications in regard to that matter ?—Well, I have heard him spoken very highly of by masters of vessels as being a first-rate adjuster, and Captain Allman has expressed himself highly as to Captain Yon Schoen's qualifications as adjuster of compasses. 491. Had Captain Fairchild a very high opinion of his qualifications?— Yes; Captain Fairchild had > very high opinion of him, and I know that Captain Post, of the " Tutanekai," also has. 492. Then you say that Yon Schoen was frequently, but irregularly, in your office ?—Yes. 493. I think you said be was also in the habit of visiting Captain Allman's office frequently?— Well, I did not say frequently. Captain Allman has told me that he was in several times to see him. 494. You have heard the statement that Yon Schoen was a man with a grievance. Are you aware how long he has been recommending changes in your department ?—He began many years ago to recommend changes as regards the examinations. It must be seven or eight years ago, probably longer. 495. When was Captain Allman appointed to the position he lately held? —At the end of 1894. 496. Then, Captain VonSchoen had started his complaints some time previous to that ?—Yes. 497. I gave Mr. Hanlon notice to produce some letters written by Yon Schoen to the department. Are those here ?— [Papers produced] —Was Mr. John McKenzie the Minister of Marine in November, 1891 ?—I think he was, about that time. 498. Is there a letter dated the 31st November, 1891 ?—Yes. 499. Will you give us the purport of it?—[Letter produced, dated 31st November, 1891, signed by Yon Schoen.] 500. The next letter is dated Ist February, 1892, and the next the 29th February. There is also one written by Yon Schoen, on the 16th March? —[Letters of Ist and 29th February, and 16th March, 1892, produced.] 501. With regard to the letter you have just read, was the matter investigated that is complained of? —I forget the circumstances without looking at them. Yes, a communication was sent by Captain Gleadow, who was referred to, and his reply was attached. 502. Do you know what action was taken on account of these inquiries. Do you remember whether Alison was sent for by the department ?—I do not remember whether he was or not. 503. Do you remember whether the Examiner was dismissed ? —Yes ; he was dispensed with afterwards. The reply is here. [4th April, 1892.] 504. The next letter is dated the 30th May, to the Hon. E. J. Seddon, Minister of Marine ? — [30th May, 1892, from Yon Schoen.] 505. Do you remember particulars of the Dunedin matter referred to here—it was mentioned by the Premier, I think?— There were frequent complaints as to the way in which examinations were conducted in Dunedin at one time. 506. Was any action taken on receipt of this letter?— Nothing appears to have been done, but apparently the Examiner at Napier did not forward his resignation. 507. So far as you know, that was the only step taken on Yon Schoen's representations?— Nothing was done as regards Lyttelton or Dunedin, on the ground that the statements were, not supported by the evidence.

H.—26

112

508. Then, the next letter is dated 30th January, 1893. Before you read that letter do you remember any of the circumstances subsequent to the date of that last letter, between then and January, 1893 ?—I do not remember the circumstances now. [Letter of 9th August, 1892, from the Premier, produced.] 509. The matter had attracted the attention of Parliament at that time ?—Yes ; I remember now there was something about that deputation waiting on the Government. 510. Do you know whether that was in consequence of Captain Yon Schoen's representations? —Well, there is a letter here from Mr. Houston, to which that was a reply. [22nd July, 1892.] There is a letter also from the Examiners, Dunedin, denying they had given any instruction. 511. The department dismissed the Napier Examiner because he had given instructions to pupils?— Yes. ■ 512. Was it made a general instruction from the department that that was to be required ?— It was against all regulations, 513. Will you turn to the letter of 30th January, 1893, to Captain Yon Schoen ?— [Letter dated 30th January, 1893, produced.] 514. That was the reply : — Sir—, Marine Department, Wellington, Ist February, 1893. I have the honour by direction of the Minister having charge of this department to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo, on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, and in reply, to state that the matter has received the attention of the Government and that steps are being taken to appoint competent Examiners.—l have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, (Assist.) Secretary. G. Yon Schoen, Esq., Wellington. 515. I put that letter in. Can you tell us what steps were taken in pursuance of that letter? This advertisement attached to it was issued notifying applications for the positions of masters and mates. 516. That is a copy of the advertisement [marked " 4 "] ?—Yes. 517. Is that the advertisement which was gazetted?— Yes. 518. Were appointments made in pursuance of that ?—No. Applications were received, but the appointment was never made. Applications came in, but the Government for some reason or other—l forget the circumstances now—did not make the appointment. 519. Did Captain Yon Schoen pretty steadily make complaints and bring them regularly before the department's notice ?—I think that statement shows it. 520. They do not date from the period 1894-95, the date of Captain Allman's appointment ? —No. 521. With regard to this letter of Captain Yon Schoen's to Mr. Hood. You say you are quite unaware of the official information in it. As an official of the Marine Department, you of course assume that it must be information of that department ?—When I read it I thought it purported to be from information of the department in some way. 522. You say it purported to be official information from the Marine Department?—lt does not state so, but that is the idea it gives. 523. There is mention of navigation schools, but no mention of the Marine Department ?— There is no mention of the department. 524. Assuming the recipient of the letter was, or had been, an employe of the Harbour Board, and the affair depended upon negotiations as to appointment, and so on, which Captain Yon Schoen had to make, there would be no ambiguity as to the official information ? —Yes, an employe of the Harbour Board, as relating to his employer. 525. You do not suggest there is any necessary application?— J! do not suggest that. 526. Say arrangements had been made with the Union Company, and the information had been obtained from the Manager ? —I may be wrong, but I do not look upon a communication to a private firm as official. 527. With regard to the Bendall and McLellan examination papers, you say you did not show those papers either before or after the examination to Captain Yon Schoen ?—No, I did not. 528. Nor did you give him any information through which he could have got at the contents of them ?—No ; nothing at all. 529. How did he introduce the matter to you?—As I have already stated, he introduced the matter by making complaint in regard to the way the examinations were carried out, and stated that things were getting worse instead of better. 530. And you had documents from him which you yourself compared with the examination papers? —Yes, afterwards. 531. And you satisfied yourself that there had been fraud?— Yes. 532. What was the nature of the proof you had ?—ln the Jones's case copies of the paper. 533. And in Captain Bendall's case ?—A book working out the questions. 534. I suppose if there had been mathematical problems in Jones's papers, anybody would know that two and two make four? —Captain Yon Schoen had not the arithmetic papers. They were not the same as the arithmetic papers. I think it was the first three papers. 535. Was there anything of a special nature in the working to satisfy you? If they were mathematical problems, and both had right answers, they must be the same?— Take the dictation papers, for instance ; that, I think, was printed, and the other papers had exactly the same working. 536. Do you know anything about Captain Bendall's qualification ? —No, other than that he has acted as a compass-adjuster for many years. 537. Had he a service certificate, or a certificate of competency? —He had a service certificate. 538. In Captain Allman's first statement, addressed to the Premier, did you notice with regard to that examination that he says : —" I was conversant with the sea method which is generally accepted for examinations, as shown on Captains Strang and Bendall's examination papers, but I

113

H.—26

was not very well acquainted at that time with the scientific or long method, so I asked Captain Yon Schoen to work me a set of papers for my own use?"— Yes. 539. Assuming that Captain Allman had then taken those papers and shown them to both candidates, it is clear enough that the working out would have presented an exact copy of Captain Yon Schoen's working out ?—-Yes, if they had copied from them. 540. Do you know what age Captain Bendall is? —I think somewhere about sixty. 541. You do not know whether he has a competent certificate or not ?—I said he had a service certificate. 542. He is not what you would take to be a scholar?—l think as far as scholarship goes he is above the ordinary run of sea captains. 543. Assuming Captain Yon Schoen's qualifications to be nearly as low as Captain Jones's, and he had found that a man had passed, he might have conjectured that an improper use had been made of answers in working out questions to Captain Allman ? —Yes. 544. He did not tell you about the working out of the papers ?—No. 545. All you can say is that he had shown you the papers?— Yes. 546. There was a case referred to on Saturday in which your opinion and Captain Allman , s differed with regard to one of Captain Yon Schoen's pupils whom he had failed to pass?— Yes. 547. Was that the case of Walley?—Yes. 548. And was that the case in which the Board of Trade accepted his opinion against yours and the department ?—Yes. 549. And held that Captain Yon Schoen's complaint was well founded ?—They were not told the names. They agreed. 550. What was the point ?—The regulations allowed so much service in the foreign trade to qualify for a mate's certificate, or so much service in the coastal trade. This man had part of his service in the foreign trade and part in the coastal. Those two parts added together equalled more than the requirements. Captain Allman , s contention was that each must stand by itself. 551. You said that they must accumulate ? —Yes. 552. Do you know if any other application had been treated in a different way in the construction of that regulation ?—How do you mean —a different way ? 553. The candidate had been allowed to pass ? —As far as I knew, in the department it had been the understood rule that that was the reading up to then. 554. Until Captain Allman rejected Walley? —Yes, as far as I know. 555 Can you tell us any one of those cases—a recent one —before then : say Pender's ?—Yes, Pender was in the same position. Ido not know exactly as to the time of service, but it turned on the same construction. 556. What date did he come up for examination ? —-That I cannot remember. It was before Walley's case, but I do not think it was very long before. 557. About August, 1898?— That I cannot say. 558. He passed as a master?— Yes, he passed at all events. 559. Was he Captain Yon Schoen's pupil ?—I think he was; lam not certain. 560. If Captain Yon Schoen says he was not, you would not contradict him?— Not without referring to the papers. 561. Do you remember the case of Mclntyre ?—Yes, that was the case of a man who had been allowed to go up for examination after failure. 562. What are the particulars?—l think that is the case in which an incorrect question had been given to the man, and he was allowed to continue the examination from that point. 563. Did he tell the Examiners that the question was wrong at the time ?—He told me that he did when he complained about it. 564. Who were examining him? —I think Captain Edwin was one, but I do not remember whether Captain Allman was the other. I know he complained of Captain Edwin giving him the wrong question. [Papers produced.] These are the papers. Captain Edwin examined apparently the first time on the failure, and then Captain Allman examined him, when he passed, because Captain Edwin's name is struck out on the passing, and Captain Allman signed it. 565. Do you remember Captain Tinney ? —Yes. 566. Was there a similar thing there ?—There was something, but I forget the circumstances in his case. I know that he did complain about something, but I forget what it was now. 567. Jamieson's case has been referred to. Will you give us the particulars of that. He was second mate of the " Mawhera," coming up for a coastal certificate?—l almost forget, without the papers. I may remember the case if it is brought to my attention. Was it the case of a man in connection with colour-blindness ? 568. No ; it was the case of a service certificate ?—Matheson's was the colour-blind case. 569. Jamieson passed as a master in the home-trade a few years ago ?—I cannot remember without looking at the papers. 570. He was allowed to proceed to examination a few months ago. There was some further trouble and some correspondence between Dr. Findlay's firm and the department about it ? —I remember the last case, but not the first. 571. You remember about Matheson's case?—He failed in the colour test, and protested against it. 572. Who failed him ?—Captains Allman and Edwin, I think it was. I am not positive about the Examiners, but I know the case was in Wellington, and the result of it was that we brought Captain Marciel up from Lyttelton to examine him, and he passed, as far as I can remember. 573. What test was it he failed on? —I think it was the form vision. 15— H. 26.

H.—26

114

574. And there was a great deal of correspondence between his solicitors and the department about it?— Yes. 575. Did the papers come before you ?—Yes. 576. Do you remember whether there had been any test applied outside ? —Yes; ho forwarded a certificate from Dr. Mackin, certifying that he could pass the test. 577. Was he tried again ? —Yes. I am not sure whether Sir Arthur Douglas had something to do with the examination ; but I think he was finally passed by Captain Marciel, of Lyttelton. 578. He came up for that purpose ?—-I think so. 579. Did the department not have confidence in its officers here with regard to an appeal to them? —I believe Captain Marciel and Captain Allman finally passed him. I think that was it. 580. Do you know whether all these men were pupils of Captain Yon Sehoen?—l do not remember whether they were or not. 581. You do not remember whether Matheson was ?—I think Matheson was, because lie told me about his case. 582. Were not Captain Yon Sohoen's visits frequent to the department in connection with that case ?—Yes, he came two or three times about that case. 583. You knew that Captain Allman had been coached by Captain Yon Schoen ?—I heard that he had. 584. You say that so far as you knew they had been on good terms?— They had been on very good terms for some time, as far as I could see. 585. You have heard this statement about Captain Airman's examination in Sydney?—l have heard statements made. 586. Had you heard any man high up in the service doubt his qualifications from Sydney ?—No. 587. Do you know whether Mr. Martin expressed an opinion about it? —No, he never expressed an opinion to me. 588. I suppose you have seen a good deal of Captain Allman's work ? —Yes. 589. Have you had occasion to form an opinion as to his competency ?—I have not as regards examination work. I have no means of checking it. 590. When applications were taken for these positions, had the papers to come before you as part of your official work ?—They came for record before being dealt with. 591. Do you remember any circumstance in connection with Captain Allman's appointment arising out of those papers? —I remember that he put in an application, and that the matter stood over for some time. 592. Can you say why it stood over ?—No. It was before Cabinet, an 1 was held over. 593. Do you know that they were pursuing inquiries?— Not so far as I know. 594. You have no information upon the matter at all ?— No. 595. There was some name mentioned in the Premier's telegram—Captain Johnston, was it not ? —That is the name, I believe. 596. Do you know how he obtained his certificate ?—He obtained a service certificate. 597. Do you know what his qualifications were ? —-It was for service on a little steamer, the " Karamea," running between Westport and Karamea. 598. Did you examine into that matter yourself ? —Yes, it was referred to Captain Allinan as to whether he was qualified or not. 599. Was there any doubt about the case ?—No. He advised what the service was, and treated it as coastal service, and said the man was entitled to his certificate. 600. Had you formed any opinion yourself?—l thought, myself, that as the man was compelled to hold a coastal certificate, it was fair. 601. Do you know Carpenter, of Auckland? He passed for master?—l do not remember it. 602. You cannot recall whether there was any dispensing with a condition?—l cannot remember. 603. Dispensing with service on a sailing-vessel during the last five years ?—I remember something of it, but not the circumstances. 604. You do not remember him coming from Auckland? —Yes, there was a man who came from Auckland—l believe it was Carpenter—with regard to his service, but without the papers I cannot remember what was done. 605. You cannot say whether there was a suspension of the regulations?— No. I do not remember the circumstances. [File of letters to the department put in marked " 2."] 606. Mr. Hanlon.] Was this letter submitted to you [produced] ? —Mr. Glasgow showed it to me. 607. The intimation to the Minister was quite correct?— Yes. It is a letter to Mr. Glasgow dated the 11th March, 1899, from Mr. Hall-Jones, in which he states, "Captain Allman, in his letter of Ist March, states that, 'To yourself, the Collector,of Customs, my co-examiner Captain Edwin, the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, the fact was well known that there was no regulation in existence authorizing the dispensation of a mate's certificate.' Kindly let me know if this is correct. —Wμ. Hall-Jones." Also Mr. Glasgow's minute: " Hon. Minister.—Quite correct.—W. T. Glasgow. 11/3/99." 608. You say that minute was shown to you before-?— Yes ; it was shown to me. 609. However, the information is correct ?—Yes. 610. You spoke about the book Captain Yon Schoen had shown you? —Yes. 611. Was that book printed, or was it a private book of Yon Schoen's?—lt was a private book of his. 612. In his handwriting?— The working was in his handwriting. 613. The whole of it ?—The whole of the working that related to those two papers he spoke about. I did not look through the book to see what other work was in it.

115

H.—26

614. These things he referred you to were in his own handwriting?— Yes. 615. Do you remember the Premier directing that Yon Schoen was not to get all the compass adjustments?—l do not remember. I never saw any such direction as that from the Premier. 616. Where are the examination-paper forms, which you have had before you, kept ?—They are kept in the department, in a cupboard. 617. In your office? —The older forms were kept in one of the cupboards in the passage —in the corridor, there being no room inside. 618. Who has control of them?— The clerks in the department. The keys are kept in the clerks' room. 619. Can anybody who likes to go there get these forms delivered to him ?—No. There has been no objection to giving a set of blank forms to any one who wanted them since I have been in the department. I think all the teachers in New Zealand have had blank forms. There is practically nothing in them. 620. Can these navigation teachers get these forms ?—Not the application forms, but there has been no objection to give them the blank forms without anything in them. 621. They can always be got on application ?—The teachers are the only ones who ask for them, and I never knew them to be refused. 622. It would be a simple matter for Captain Yon Schoen to get two sets of papers, so that the questions could be put on one and the answers on the other ?—They would, not be given at the same time, because they are only given as specimens; but there is nothing to prevent one getting them at different times. 623. So as to give one to one person and another to another person ?—Yes. 624. And they could get them from you or from one of the clerks in the department ? —Only the forms with no work in them. 625. They are printed in the Government Printing Office ?—Yes, and they come over addressed to the Marine Department. They go into the clerks' room, and are put away. Since 1898, it has been a rule that all parts of the questions come to Wellington and are locked up. They are sent away to different parts of the colony in sealed envelopes, which the Examiners ought not to open till the day of examination. The questions are set in them. 626. Have you given copies of these forms to Captain Yon Schoen?—l may have done, but I do not think I have within the last two years. I think it is much longer than that. They are not very important. 627. Did you give Captain Jones any ? —No. 628. Could others distribute these forms ?—Yes, they could get them. 629. Dr. Giles.'] These papers would only show the nature of the examination ?—Yes, there are no figures whatever in them. 630. As far as the printing is concerned, everybody might know what the questions are ?— Yes, but they do not know which of those questions will be given. 631. They are not all given?— No. With regard to the compass deviation, there are ninety different questions, of which forty are to be given. 632. If Captain Yon Schoen came to you about one of his candidates who had failed, would there be any harm in telling him in what particular branch, the candidate had failed ?—The department would refuse to tell him, but the Examiner can now point out to the candidate the error he has made. That is a recent instruction. Until lately that was not so. There was not even an indication of the error. 638. When Captain Allman brought you this memorandum of the Minister's, and told you the Minister wished Captain Jones to be admitted to examination, did anything pass between you about the probability or improbability of Captain Jones being able to pass the examination? —No. I think Captain Allman said the Minister had advised Captain Jones to go to a teacher. 634. You said nothing about an opinion that he would not be able to pass ?—No. 635. Judge Ward.] Tell us on what date Captain Allman brought the envelope to you ?—The Bth July. I put the date on it as soon as I received it. 636. Dr. Giles.] What is the effect of a permit to go out with another captain in a vessel in nominal charge ?—ln the case where the permission was required, the steamer's ordinary certificate only allowed her to run within Wellington harbour, and if she wanted to run down on a special trip to, say Terawhiti, a special permission was given by the Collector, provided she had a coasting master in charge. 637. Would that count as service ?—Not for the man who had been a master in the harbour, because he is not a master outside. For the master who goes outside it would not matter, because he has got a certificate. 638. The only effect would be that he is allowed to go outside: it does not add to his service ? —No. Hugh Gully sworn and examined. 639. Mr. Hanlon.] You are a solicitor of the Supreme Court practising in Wellington ?—That is so. 640. And Crown Solicitor in Wellington ?—Yes. 641. You were acting in the matter of the prosecution against Captains Allman, Yon Schoen, and Jones ? —Yes, I had in hand the proceedings both in the Magistrate's Court and, after the committal, in the Supreme Court. 642. At or about the time the Magistrate's Court proceedings were going on, had you any conversation with Mr. Glasgow?—l had a number, of course, before the case came into the Magistrate's Court, and before the information was laid I was constantly referring to the evidence on the file both with Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Allport. Practically, I had to gather all the threads of the case from the department through Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Allport.

H.—26

116

643. After the first day's proceedings were over had you a conversation with Mr. Glasgow?— Yes, I had. The first day in the Magistrate's Court was occupied chiefly by the case against Captain Allman, and after the proceedings closed in the afternoon I went across —at, I think, Mr. Glasgow's suggestion —and had an interview with Mr. Hall-Jones in his room, at which Mr. Glasgow was present. Mr. Glasgow had gone across before me, and was in the room when I got there. 644. What took place at that interview ?—ln reference to what ? 645. There was something said in regard to a Ministerial authority having been given ? —Yes. The way in which that conversation arose was this : Mr. Allport had given evidence in the course of the proceedings stating that a permit or authority had been given by the Minister to Captain Jones to sit for his examination. When I came into the room Mr. Glasgow, as I say, was already there, and obviously some conversation had taken place before I arrived. When I arrived the Minister began by saying the words to start with, " I have a grievance against some of my officers." And he then went on to state that his grievance was that they had acted upon an alleged Ministerial authority such as the one produced, and the memorandum which has been discussed here, on the envelope, was produced by him. 646. What further took place regarding that?— Mr. Hall-Jones referred to Mr. Allport's evidence, which he had given on the question of the Ministerial authority to give the permit, and he expressed his desire to be called as a witness in the proceedings. The question, generally, was discussed as to whether any further reference should be made to it, and whether Mr. Allport should be recalled ; also as to whether Mr. Hall-Jones himself should be called as a witness. With regard to calling him as a witness, I advised that for several reasons he was not a competent witness to call at that stage. There was a considerable discussion on the matter. The reasons expressed, of course, were quite obvious to a lawyer. First of all, that the question of an antecedent permit was not relevant to the prosecution. The prosecution was founded, entirely on the fraud under section 32 of the Shipping and Seamen's Act, and the question as to whether there was any antecedent irregularity as to the right of the candidate to sit, seemed to me to have nothing at all to do with the case before the Magistrate's Court; and I also thought, and still think, that supposing the Minister had waived the authority, it could not have had anything to do with the criminal proceedings. It was quite unconnected with the criminal proceedings, and I thought it was improper that he should be called to give evidence ; and I said so quite decisively. 647. And you did not call the Minister?—l did not. I made a very short explanation to the Bench in the morning when the Court sat. I forget the exact words I used, but I said I was instructed that Mr. Allport's statement was not correct, and that an explanation would bear on the words as to the matter of this particular question. I think I added that it was my opinion that it was quite irrelevant to the inquiry at that stage. 648. At that interview between you, Mr. Glasgow, and the Minister, did the Minister appear calm over the matter, or annoyed ?—I do not know. I have not had much experience of him to say whether he was bad-tempered or not. When I first came into the room, he said he had a grievance, and I thought, when my attention was drawn to it, that he had a grievance against me, but he went on to say that he had a grievance against the officers of his department. 649. Mr. Gray.] You were acting, at this time, for the Crown ?—Yes, for the Crown before the Magistrate in ordinary criminal proceedings. 650. From whom did you get your instructions ?—ln the first instance, in an interview with Mr. Glasgow. I cannot distinguish between Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Allport, because sometimes I saw them together and sometimes apart. 651. I think you conferred with or saw Dr. Fitchett several times?—At that stage, I do not think so. 652. You did subsequently, in the civil action against Captain Jones?— Yes, that is a later stage in the transaction. 653. Was that the only occasion on which you saw the Minister about the envelope, and he denied having given the authority ?—No; it was the first occasion on which the question of the envelope was mentioned in ray presence by the Minister. I had several other conversations about the case. I was first of all asked to advise on the position, and there was a number of conversations before any information was laid; but this was the first time I had heard Mr. Hall-Jones say anything about this particular envelope. 654. Had you heard of it from anybody else ?—Yes ; I had made some inquiries about Captain Jones's qualifications, and I was told before the information was laid that there was a defect, or something of that kind. 655. And then, I suppose, you were shown the envelope ? —I was shown it, but I think only a very short time before the proceedings. 656. Were you told that was the basis of the Ministerial authority ?—No. I think the memorandum was shown to me by Mr. Allport. It was shown to me to explain the position with regard to the alleged absence of the qualification, and the supposed waiver of it. 657. Were you not informed that by the instructions of the Minister the qualification was waived? —I cannot recollect that. 658. Then, why was the envelope produced to you?—To indicate what was done. 659. Surely, whoever produced the envelope would connect it with something?— Probably. 660. You were informed it was in the Minister's handwriting ?—I suppose I was. 661. You do not know, of course, what conversation took place between Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Hall-Jones before you arrived at Mr. Hall-Jones's office that day? —No ; I cannot tell. I suppose Mr. Glasgow arrived there five or ten minutes before I did. 662. And no reference was made by either to what had transpired before you arrived?— No. I told you it was after something had been said, because he started the conversation when I got in by saying that he had a grievance.

117

H.—26

663. Did he distinctly affirm that he had not given authority to dispense with the qualification in Jones's case ?—I do not remember what he said. I know he said very distinctly that he was surprised at his officers having acted upon a document like that. 664. Was that practically all he had to say about it?—l cannot say that. I suppose the interview lasted about half an hour. 665. You are called here to support Mr. Hall-Jones's view? —I do not know anything about that. I do not adopt that. I suppose I am called here to state to the Court what is my recollection of the matter. 666. Between yourself and your client ?—1 prefer to put it between the Minister, Mr. Glasgow, and myself, relative to the matter I was then conducting in Court. 667. Put it in the plural—yourself and clients. I suppose it has not been a frequent experience of yours to go into Court and say what transpired between you and your clients ? —lt is a question of recollection. I was called here to recount what I remember of this particular interview. I have nothing to do with any suggestion you may make. 668. You did say that the Minister at that time said he had a grievance against the officers of his department, and expressed surprise that his officers should act upon that envelope ?—Yes. 669. Although you cannot recollect that he distinctly denied giving any authority to dispense with the mate's qualification ? —Well, I recollect that he contradicted the statements of Mr. Airport which appeared either in examination or cross-examination. I know he wanted to go into the box to contradict what had been said. That was his suggested object in going into the box—to make an explanation contradicting what Mr. Allport had slated. 670. You had a subsequent conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones about this matter?— About this particular envelope ? 671. Yes? —Yes, I had, because the same question arose in the Supreme Court. 672. In the civil case ? —No, on the trial of Captains Allnian, Yon Schoen, and Jones. 673. You did not call him, because he was not a competent witness ?—I refused to call him on the same ground; but it was a very different matter, because the case was taken against Captain Allman, and then this matter of the envelope did not come up at all; it was in no way relevant. 674. You did not think Mr. Hall-Jones was a competent witness in that case?—No; no one could suggest that he was. 675. Except Mr. Hall-Jones ?—He was anxious to be called. On the second case he again expressed his desire to be called. By some means he had been subpoenaed by Mr. Skerrett in that case, but the case did not go on, and he was not called. 676. Mr. Glasgow gave evidence in the civil action against Captain Jones before Mr. Justice Denniston, in April? An action was brought asking for the cancellation of the certificate. You recollect that Mr. Glasgow told the Court that, after receiving the envelope, he had taken it to and had a conversation with the Minister about it ?—Yes, I recollect that subsequently ; but you have a note of the evidence. 677. Did you not forward a type-written report of the trial to the Marine Department ?—No, I did not forward it to the Marine Department. The explanation is this : Probably Mr. Gray is referring to this, that the shorthand notes were left with me, and I went through them shortly after the proceedings and made verbal alterations : but I venture to say that none of them are substantial, and I say that report was correct. It was sent to me by the department, and I sent it back. But I say the corrections made by me are not of a substantial character. 678. I was asking about Mr. Glasgow's evidence. Did he say at the trial that he had shown the envelope to the Minister, and that the Minister had directed the waiving of Jones's qualification? —Yes, at the action. 679. Had Mr. Glasgow told you before the trial that he was going to say that ?—-I cannot say. I should think it was quite possible. 680. Had he told you before the trial ? —I am not quite certain that I had a further interview with him as to the special evidence besides what I had before the trial. 681. Had you heard before the trial that he had seen the Minister at the time of its receipt? —I cannot say. 682. Did Mr. Glasgow say he would have to contradict the Minister if he swore he had not ? —I am not sure. I cannot recollect going through definitely Mr. Glasgow's evidence immediately before this trial. 683. Are you not prepared to say whether you heard that from Mr. Glasgow or Dr. Fitchett ? —I think probably I had. I cannot say more than that. 684. You have told the Commission that after having seen Mr. Hall-Jones, and he had said that he had a grievance, you informed the Magistrate the next day that you were instructed that Mr. Allport's statement made the day before was not correct ? —Yes. 685. You did not father the instruction at all, but said that the Minister had stated so ? I did not make the statement from my own knowledge, but said that my instruction on the case was that that was the fact. 686. I presume you informed the Bench that you were instructed by the Minister?—."Very likely I said I was instructed by the Minister, but I know I said I was instructed. 687. Mr. Hislop.] Was this the first time you saw the envelope, when Mr. Allport showed it to you?— Yes. I recollect quite well the first time the envelope was produced to me in Mr. Glasgow's office. I wasasked a question in respect to the effect on Captain Jones's qualification, and the envelope was shown to me in reference to that. 688. The effect of the memorandum on the envelope ?—No doubt. 689. First of all, what its meaning was, and, secondly, if it was a permit, and what that evidenced? —Yes. You will understand there were several discussions on this point, whether it was relevant evidence. I always said it was not, on those proceedings.

H.—26

118

690. On what ground?—On the first ground, that it was irrelevant because the prosecution had nothing to do with the candidate's qualification. There was another ground too. Of course a Magistrate does not try collateral issues in a case like that. It was suggested that the Magistrate was asked to try him collaterally, which might be raised by the defence, and evidence was to be given on that in the prosecution. 691. You were proceeding to state, when Mr. Gray interrupted you before, that it was produced obviously for showing something ?—I was asking questions, no doubt, and discussing this question of the absent qualification, and this envelope was produced to me in connection with that subject. 692. To show you what had been done ?—On the question as to whether the disqualification had been waived. It must have been that. 693. That is to say, as to whether permission had been granted?—As to whether the absence of qualification had been waived. I understood him to mean that. Any one could see that without my telling them. 694. Had you any doubt in your mind as to the meaning of these words on the envelope ?— Am I asked to decide that question ? I should not call it a very elaborate memorandum. 695. A terse memorandum ?—Very. 696. At the interview between yourself, Mr. Glasgow, and Mr. Hall-Jones, was not Mr.' Hall-Jones's complaint merely that his officers had allowed so informal a document to be taken as an authority?— That was part of the subject of complaint, but I have already said that he denied the truth or accuracy of Mr. Airport's statement. Mr. Aliport's statement did not refer to the memorandum at all, but to the general question about whether there had been a general authority to permit Captain Jones to go up for examination. It was in reference to that evidence that Mr. Hall-Jones complained. Substantially, it was a special authority. 697. Did you not think he was treating this document as a document from which they inferred he had given authority ?—I suppose so. 698. And was not this complaint confined to the roughness or informality of the document ? —His main complaint was as to the envelope ; but he also denied that any authority was given at all. 699. Did he offer you, or Mr. Glasgow in your presence, any further explanation as to the existence of this document at this time—as to how it came to be in existence ?—How it originally came into existence ? 700. Yes ?—I think not—l cannot recollect it. He said in a general way that he was in the habit of making rough memoranda in that way, just to jot down anything coming into the office, it not being the subject of a formal memorandum. He said something, but Ido not think he gave any specific reason as to how it came into existence. 701. Or as to how he wrote it ?—I do not think so. The conversation was of a general character. 702. It was stated by the Premier that you had entered an alternative—a nolle prosequi —■ without authority—l think those are the words. Is that correct ? —lf you look at the section of the code that will tell you. 703. Before entering the nolle prosequi, did you discuss the matter with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—I did. 704. Did he concur ?—No ;he desired me to go on with the case of Captain Yon Schoen, which came on the second day in the Supreme Court. The previous afternoon the Chief Justice had ruled that there was no case. The case against Captain Allman failed after trial, owing to the ruling of the Chief Justice that no offence existed under section 32 of the Shipping and Seamen's Act, under which the information was laid. On the following morning the second case against Captain Yon Schoen was down for hearing. That case was governed by exactly the same considerations, as far as I understood, and it appeared to me that the Chief Justice's ruling was against that going on. That was the case in which Mr. Hall-Jones was subpoenaed by the defence, and it was in reference to that that he spoke to me on the morning of the second day, the day on which Captain Yon Schoen's case came on. 705. On account of legal considerations you determined that a nolle prosequi should be entered?—l determined after the Chief Justice's definite ruling that there was no case, that I could not possibly go on. 706. You informed Mr. Hall-Jones of that ? —I saw the then Chief Justice before he went into Court in the morning, and asked him whether there was any difference in the cases, and he said he would see and form some opinion. I informed Mr. Hall-Jones, and before going into Court the Chief Justice ruled in that .way. 707. I understand that for a great many years you have had the conduct of eases in Mr. Glasgow's department ?—Yes. 708. And have had a good deal to do with him ?—Yes. 709. Have you found him methodical, careful, and reliable ?—I think I should say his work is most conscientious. 710. And his memory ?—Well, if you will allow me to exclude this particular case, where he has admitted that his memory grew, I should have thought his memory was a good one. I could not suggest anything to the contrary. 711. Dr. Findlay.] You say at the interview at which you, Mr. Glasgow, and Mr. Hall-Jones were present, some mention was made of the use for which he intended this memorandum ? —I said, as far as I recollect, that he did not explain what the memorandum was intended for, but he did in a general way say he was in the habit of jotting down rough notes on his table as reminders. 712. Was that intended as an explanation of how this came into existence?— The memorandum was under discussion, and he did make that remark, in a general way.

119

H.—26

713. Is that your inference ? He said this memorandum was intended as a memorandum— that it was according to his custom?—He said nothing, about this paper —as to this memorandum. 714. lam asking you what inference you formed ?—I cannot give any inference. 715. I want to know whether you cannot give me the exact words—l am entitled to have the inference ?—Well, the inference is this : " I am in the habit of making scrawls as a reminder, and I did not suppose that any one would be made use of as a special document." That was the general purport of what he said. 716. Was there any suggestion at that time, or anything said, as to how the memorandum had left the Minister's office and got into the hands of his officers'? —I cannot recollect. 717. May I then suggest that the memorandum had been abstracted from the Minister's table in some way?—l do not know what Mr. Glasgow's recollection is, but I cannot remember anything specific on that point. 718. Do you remember whether the Minister said he had given it to Captain Allman ?—I cannot remember. Ido not think he said that, but lam not at all certain. I do not think at that interview he said anything specific as to the matter of his own recollection, as to how this particular envelope got out, except in a general way, that it was according to his own practice to write memoranda of this kind. 719. He said he would contradict what Mr. Allport stated in the Court ? —Yes, that was in reference to the evidence already given by Mr. Allport, to the effect that Ministerial authority had been given in a general way, not that the envelope had been given. 720. At the time, had not Mr. Allport's evidence been connected with this memo. ? —I suppose it had —I am drawing an inference because the envelope was there, and I had come across for the purpose of discussing the question. 721. Did Mr. Glasgow during the interview profess in any way that the authority had been given, or that he had shown the envelope to the Minister?—No, not at that interview —not that I recollect. In fact, my recollection is that he did not. 722. He did not object to the statement made by the Minister in your presence?—No, as far as my recollection goes. I think he says so himself. 723. You do not recollect that Mr. Hall-Jones explained how the envelope had left his hands? —My recollection is that he did not refer to the origin of this particular envelope. 724. Mr. Atkinson.] These interviews of which you speak have all occurred within the last six months?— The first interview I was asked specifically about was on the 23rd or 24th January, but there were a number of interviews before in reference to the matter generally. 725. You do not profess to remember with perfect accuracy all the details ?—Of course not. 726. In your professional experience, have you found that the witness who is the most pat and most confident is always the most veracious ?—I have had a great deal to do with all classes of witnesses, and do not recollect two witnesses giving their evidence in the same way. 727. You would not think the witness who is the most pat and confident, was the best ?—I leave it to the Bench. 728. Suppose you were on the Bench, you would not invariably decide in favour of the most pat and most confident witness ? —I do not know. I cannot carry my imagination to that extent. 729. I wish you to consider the question quite as an expert—quite in the abstract ?—I will try to. 730. Will you say it is your invariable experience, that the witness who is the most pat and most confident, is always the most accurate? —I should not say that was my experience. 731. You spoke of Mr Glasgow as a conscientious officer. The Premier stated last week that he was a high-minded, honourable man. I do not wish to ask you your opinion of the Premier, but your opinion of that statement. Would you confirm that statement? —I should say so; as far as my knowledge goes, I should say, decidedly, yes. 732. Have you had dealings with him for some years ?—Dealings with that class of case I have already been asked about. I have had a good deal to do with his department on particular matters. 733. How long have you been Crown Solicitor? —Some eight or ten years. 734. You had some experience before with the department?— Yes. I do not recollect him at that time. 735. You confirm that opinion ?—I have always had the highest opinion of him. 736. You are not a politician ?—No. 737. You are only a lawyer at present ?—Yes. 738. You know something of political pressure in a general way—not as an expert. Do you know that there is such a thing?—l should say that it is not unknown. 739. And also what I may call personal pressure in these matters ? —lf you give me an instance I should not be prepared to deny it. 740. If you can stretch your imagination so far, suppose you were desiring to bring political or personal pressure to bear, would you approach the permanent officials of any department or its political head. ? —If I wanted to do a corrupt act Ido not know exactly how I should go about it. It might be want of experience on my part. 741. lam not suggesting corruption?—l thought you were. 742. I am not suggesting a breach of the law : I am putting a question, say, of getting an appointment for, say, a person you thought deserving. Would you say it was advisable in the case of political or personal pressure being necessary, to bring it to bear on the political head of a department or on its permanent officials?—Do you mean supposing I wanted to get a competent man in ? If so, I should go to the man who knew of his ability to perform the work; but if he were an incompetent man I should go to the man who had a motive. 743. Would you say, as a man of the world, speaking in the abstract, that it would be the political head or the permanent officials you would approach?—l should think, as a'general rule, that a political head of a department is superior to the permanent head.

H.—26

120

744. And the peculiarities of our constitution are that it is more open to that kind of pressure ? A Minister has duties to perform in Parliament as well as in his department'?—l believe so. 745. And Parliament is polities, is it not ?— Part" of it. 746. Constitutional law has not come within your study, then '?—Not in connection with New Zealand politics. 747. Would you not say, generally, that a political head was more susceptible to political pressure than the man who is under him in permanent official charge ?—Yes, I should say so. 748. Would such a department in which such a man as Mr. Glasgow was the permanent official head, from your knowledge of Mr. Glasgow, form an exception to this general principle ? —■ I have told you that, so far as my experience goes, Mr. Glasgow 749. Cannot you say Yes, or No? That is the first duty of a witness. Would a department, of which such a man as Mr. Glasgow was the permanent official head, constitute an exception to , the general rule you have laid down ? —I have assented to the proposition that the political head of a department has more to do with politics than its permanent officers. I could not give evidence of the slightest use on that point, because I know nothing about it. 750. You are just asked to answer that simple question. You have laid down the general rule, and I ask you whether Mr. Glasgow's office would be an exception ?—I cannot say whether Mr. Glasgow's department is an exception to any general rule. 751. I am asking you in the abstract with regard to a department over which a man of the character of Mr. Glasgow is permanent head—l am saying, in general?—l cannot say. 752. You would say, in general, that the Secretary was not the best man to approach in a matter of political pressure ?—i have assented to your proposition that the political head has more influence over his department. 753. Do you think Mr. Glasgow would be more susceptible to this kind of pressure than an ordinary official ? —I should not think he was susceptible at all. Bdwaed Hornkman, sworn and examined. 754. Mr. Banlon : You are private secretary to Mr. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine ?—Yes. 755. Plow long have you occupied that position ?—Since he has held the portfolio of Minister of Marine. 756. Can you tell us what the Minister's practice is with regard to making memoranda ? — I presume you mean memoranda similar to the envelope produced ? 757. Yes?—lt is his practice, and always has been, since he has been Minister, to make memoranda. 758. On envelopes or paper?—On envelopes or anything on his desk. 759. Do you know any instances in which memoranda made on envelopes or small pieces of paper have been used as authority for official acts by the Minister?—No; I do not know of any such case. 760. Do you remember, on the night of the 25th August, 1898, Mr. Pirani making a speech in the House of Eepresentatives ?—Yes. 761. Do you know if Captain Allman was in town at that time ? —No ; he was out of town. 762. We have been told that a messenger was sent to him at the rail way-station by Mr. HallJones. Do you know if that is so?—I believe that is correct. 763. Who was the messenger?— Samuel Burgess is Mr. Hall-Jones's messenger. 764. Then did you see Captain Allman come to the House that night ? —I saw him after he arrived. 765. Where?—ln the private secretaries' room. 766. Is that where all the private secretaries " most do congregate " ?—lt is the general room when the House is sitting. 767. Where was Mr. Hall-Jones ?—At the time Captain Allman arrived I think he was speaking in the House. It was about 10 p.m. 768. And what happened after he had done speaking?— Well, he was speaking when Captain Allman arrived, and I was on the floor of-the House in a seat there set apart for the secretaries; and the messenger, when he brought Captain Allmau in, beckoned me out of the House. He told me that Captain Allman was here, and that Mr. Hall-Jones wanted to see him. I asked the messenger where he was, and he said he was in the secretaries' room. I went in and saw the Captain and shook hands with him, and told him that Mr. Hall-Jones was speaking, but that he would be out in a few minutes. I waited a minute or two, and as soon as Mr. Hall-Jones was finished I told him that Captain Allman wished to see him, and he took Captain Allman with him into the Premier's room, which is the next room to the secretaries' room. 769. Is the Premier's room what is known as the Cabinet-room ? —The lower Cabinet-room. 770. And is that a room in which all the Ministers go at times ? —Yes. 771. In and out?— Yes. 772. Then Mr. Hall-Jones took him into the Premier's room, not up to his own room in the Building ? —No. 773. Dr. Findlay.] You are dealing now with the day or night on which Mr. Pirani spoke?— Mr Hanlon asked me whether I remembered that night. 774. You say when Captain Allman arrived that was' the day on which Mr. Pirani spoke ? —No, the day after. 775. Do you know whether Mr. Pirani spoke in the day or in the evening?—l think it was in the evening. 776. Captain Allman was not in town that night? —No. 777. He arrived by train next evening ? —Yes. 778. Do you know where he came from ? —New Plymouth, I think.

121

H.—26

779. Captain Allman was brought into the room downstairs?—ln the general secretaries' room. 780. Do you recollect when you first saw this rough memorandum ?—lt was after it was shown to the Minister by Mr. Glasgow. 781. It would be in January ? —Yes, it was about the time, I think, the Court ease was on against Captain Voq Schoen and Captain Allman. 782. Did you make an examination of it?—No, I did not scrutinise it. 783. Did you recollect when you saw it in January that you had probably seen it before, or may have seen it before ?—I did not trouble to remember whether I had. seen it before. 784. Captain Allman suggests that it was you who brought it down from the Minister to Mr. Allport ?—He is quite incorrect. 785. Are you quite sure of that.—Yes. 786. You are quite certain that you took no message, or any message to that effect, from the Minister to Mr. Allport at any time ? —Absolutely certain. 787. Mr. Grayi\ You say it has been the practice of Mr. Hall-Jones, since you have been his private secretary, to make rough memoranda such as this ? —Yes. 788. For what purpose ?—For various purposes. If he wanted me to find out a certain thing he would probably the night before—or, say on Sunday, when he was going through his work— make certain memoranda. 789. Do you say these memoranda were only for you ?—As far as I know. 790. Do you not know of any memoranda which he has handed on to some one else?— I cannot recall it. 791. Then, when you heard he had handed this to Captain Allman you were surprised?— I was not surprised. 792. You did not know that it had been handed to him ?—Not at that time. 793. Is it a fact that the Minister's desk is littered with these memoranda?—l have seen some fifteen or twenty envelopes like that. 794. Since this matter cropped up ?—No. Since this matter has cropped up he has been rather chary in using them. 795. Since this matter cropped up they have not been found on the staircase or on the reclaimed land ?—No. Prior to this event I think there were more used. 796. He has not given up this practice ?—No, he does it still. 797. In spite of this solemn warning?— Yes. 798. Have you been any other Minister's secretary, private or otherwise ?—I have done a little work for Mr. Seddon, temporary work. 799. For any other Minister ?—No. 800. Do you know any other Minister who indulges in this practice ?—No. 801. Have you heard from any of your co-private secretaries that other Ministers do the same thing ?—That is a matter we would not discuss—the practice of Ministers. 802. Not when Mr. Hall-Jones has sworn that he indulged in this practice to a large extent ?— No; Ido not think I have mentioned it to the other secretaries. 803. You have not heard that other Ministers do the same thing?—l have not heard to the contrary either. 804. Do you ever take papers from Mr. Hall-Jones to the Marine Department ?—Yes. 805. What sort of papers? —Official records. 806. Can you say you did not take this memorandum down ? —I can say that positively. 807. Can you say positively that you have not taken any similar memoranda down ?—Not memoranda. 808. What takes place with memoranda ?—-I always destroyed them when I had inquired into the matter. 809. Do you think you never saw this particular memorandum until the correspondence was going on this year?—l did not remember seeing it before. 810. Will you swear that you did not see it in July, 1897 ?—I will not say that, and I will not say I did ; I cannot remember. 811. Did you ever hear, in the early part of this year, that it had been suggested that this memorandum had been taken out of Mr. Hall-Jones's room improperly ?—I did not hear it until to-day. You mean abstracted from his table ? 812. Yes ; did you never hear that suggestion until to-day ? —No. 813. Mr. Travers.] Were you in the Supreme Court when Mr. Hall-Jones was examined as a witness in the proceedings against Captain Jones for the cancellation of his certificate ?—No. 814. Mr. Hislop.] What did you say became of the different memoranda put on the table ?— Those handed to me I usually tore up. 815. What became of the others ?—They remained on the table, as far as I know. 816. Usually these fifteen too ? —I will not say fifteen : fifteen to twenty. 816 a. They may have been the accumulation of years ? —No ; they might be for one evening. 817. Can you tell us what became of those you did not get ?—Probably he tore them up himself. 818. And will you take upon yourself to swear you did not take any of these memoranda to any of the departments ?—I do not know that he sent any on as official instructions. 819. And you did not know that he did not ?—No, I do not know that he did not. 820. Do you know of a memorandum in the case of Mr. Adamson which was sent on to the department ?—Yes, that was by myself. 821. Where the Minister did not sign the instructions?— The Minister did not sign it either. It was never intended for him to sign. It was meant as a reminder to myself. 16— H. 26.

H.—26

122

822. Then, you changed your mind and sent it on as an instruction? —No; I had it on my table as a reminder to myself, and the first opportunity I had I went downstairs and saw Mr. Allport, and told him that the Minister desired this man's name noted as an applicant for employment as Assessor at Auckland, should occasion arise. At that time I think they had considerable trouble in obtaining Assessors. 823. Did you tell them it was meant as a record when you left the document there ? —No ; I left it there believing that the officers would know the signature upon it, and that it was not meant as an official record, because everything intended as an official record is signed and addressed. I might mention that when I took it down it was a long address, and as I did not believe Mr. Allport could carry it in his memory, I took it to him. I was under the impression then that applicants for assessorships were noted in a book the same as applicants for lighthouse work, else I would not have put it in. 824. Do you know whether Mr. Seddon was in the Cabinet-room when Mr. Hall-Jones took Captain Allman there? —That I could not say. It is a room occupied by the Premier in which he does his work. 825. Is it not a room upstairs, where the Premier goes for the half-hour adjournment ?—No ; they adjourn to the lower Cabinet-room. 826. Are you aware whether Mr. Hall-Jones took Captain Allman upstairs afterwards? —The last I saw of Captain Allman that night was when Mr. Hall-Jones took him into the Cabinetroom. 827. Are you aware whether he took him up afterwards? —I do not know that he did. 828. Mr. Atkinson.] Is it part of your official duties to take the correspondence and memoranda that are on the table ? —No. 829. Whose duty is it? —The messenger's. 830. Has he been negligent in this respect ?—I have not noted any complaint. 831. You seem to think Mr. Hall-Jones has a preference for envelopes for the purpose of these memoranda : not to go out of the office, but to give out in the office ?—They are the most convenient, I suppose. 832. When did you see these fifteen to twenty envelopes on his table?— There has always been a considerable number. 833. How long has your experience lasted ?—Since he has been a Cabinet Minister. 834. Then you have seen as many as fifteen or twenty since July?— Yes. 835. And often since ?—I think he made more then than he does now. 836. This is a marked peculiarity of his ?—I do not know that it is a peculiarity. 837. Does he make memoranda on anything else?— Sometimes on note-paper. 838. Have you seen as many as fifteen or twenty ?—The majority are envelopes. 839. Are they always written in ink ?—Yes. They are very seldom written in lead pencil. 840. Have you taken steps now to cure him of that habit ?—No, I let him please himself. 841. You have not provided a tabulated memorandum form ?—No.

Tuesday, 18th July, 1899. Samuel Buegess, sworn and examined. 1. Mr. Hanlon. ] I understand you are messenger to Mr. Hall-Jones at the Government Buildings?— Yes-, the Minister of Marine. 2. Do you remember August of last year?— Yes. 3. We have been told that you were sent to the Eailway Station to meet Captain Allman one evening ?—That is quite correct. 4. Who asked you to go ?—The Minister of Marine. I saw him. 5. What was your message ?—My message was to go and meet Captain Allman by the quarter to ten Manawatu train, and to tell him Mr. Hall-Jones wanted to see him at once. 6. Do you know the date?—lt was the latter end of August. It was the only time I ever did meet Captain Allman. 7. When you met him at the train what did you say ?—I saw him get out of the carriage with his luggage. I approached him and told him that the Minister wanted to see him at once. 8. And then ?—We immediately got a cab and drove up to the House, and when we arrived at the House Captain Allman instructed the cabman to take his luggage to his house, and to tell his wife that he was engaged at the House, and would be home later. 9. On arriving at the House, to what room did Captain Allman go?—We both went in together to the Secretaries' Room, and I called Mr. Horneman's (Secretary to the Minister of Marine) attention to the fact that Captain Allman had arrived, and I handed him over to him. 10. At the time you handed him over to Mr. Horneman, was Captain Allman in the Secretaries' Eoom ?—Captain Allman was in the House at the time, and I left him at the Secretaries' Boom door. There is only 6 ft. between the two doors—directly opposite to each other. I beckoned to Mr. Horneman, and he came out immediately. 11. Did you tell Captain Allman that you wanted him to see the Minister of Marine before he saw the Premier ?—Most decidedly not. The Premier's name was never mentioned. 12. Mr. Gray.] Was any other Government messenger down at the station ?—I did not see anyone. 13. You came up in the cab with Captain Allman ? —Yes. 13a. Did any other man come up with you ?—There was no one else but the Captain and myself. 14. Mr. Hislop.] You know the Premier's messenger?— Very well.

123

H.—26

15. Was he there ?—I did not see any one. 16. Was he likely to be there without you seeing him?—l cannot say. I never saw him. 17. You cannot speak positively ?—I never saw him there. Jambs Jones, sworn and examined. 18. Mr. Hanlon.] You are the master of the " Duco " ?—Yes. 19. Long in Wellington Harbour?—l used to be. lam in the " Duchess " now. 20. Did you hear Mr. Seddon give his evidence here ?—Yes. 21. Did you hear the part of that evidence relating to yourself ? —I heard it all. 22. In so far as that evidence related to you, will you say whether it was correct or not as to his conversations with you? If it is not correct, will you tell me what part? —I suppose it is correct. 23. You know the conversation that Mr. Seddon spoke of as having taken place on the " Duchess " ? —Yes. 24. What do you say with regard to the truth or otherwise of that story ?—Well, you have got it down before you. 25. Where?—lt is on the paper I saw. 26. What Mr. Seddon said ? —I say so. 27. You know that what Mr. Seddon said does not quite agree with what you put in your declaration ?—I do not know. 28. You do not know that ? You know what you put in your declaration? —Yes. 29. And you know what Mr. Seddon said ? —Yes. 30. You know what Mr. Seddon said here about that ? —Yes. 31. And you know also what you have said in your own declaration ?—-Yes. 32. Do you not know that those stories disagree ? —lt appears so. 33. Will you tell me, now, whether what Mr. Seddon said or what you said in your declaration is correct ?—I say it is correct what I said in my declaration. 34. Every word of it? —I think so. 35. Well, you say in the declaration : " The first time I saw the Hon. the Premier after I got my home-trade master's certificate on the 19th July, 1897, was after he had returned from England. He and some other gentlemen were on board the ' Duchess ' one day. I did not know the other gentlemen, but I knew Mr. Seddon. I asked them to come and have a whiskey. Mr. Seddon and the other gentlemen came into the stern cabin." Will you tell me if that was on the road to Day's Bay or on the road back ?—On the road over. 36. Did you not know any of the other gentlemen ?—I know some of them. 37. Who were those who went into the stern cabin along with Mr. Seddon and yourself?— They were here. Mr. Johnson was one, Mr. Hislop was another, and there was a gentleman there named Wilson. Ido not know the whole lot of them. There were six or seven altogether. 38. Was Mr. Bannister there ? —Yes. 39. Did they have some of your whiskey or some of Mr. Johnson's at that time?—lt was not my whiskey. 40. Did you ask them to go into the cabin and to have some whiskey ?—I did not ask them to go into the cabin. I was asked to let them in the cabin, because I keep that door. 41. You said you asked them to go and have a whiskey? —That is a mistake there I was asked to go and have a whiskey. 42. Did you put down the glasses ? —I think so. I have got some glasses. 43. And then did you all have a whiskey together ?—I do not know whether all had a whiskey or not. 44. How many had whiskey? —I do not know how many had whiskey. 45. Was it while you were having this glass of whiskey that Mr. Seddon made this remark you have stated in your declaration? —After; yes, I think so. 46. Were these other gentlemen present ?—They were there. 47. Were they in the cabin or on the steamer? —They were in the cabin. It is only a small place, not very big, about 10 ft. square. 48. Do you think they could have heard what Mr. Seddon said ?—1 think so. 49. What did Mr. Seddon say ?—You have got it there. 50. Will you tell me, please, what he said? —You have got it before you, Mr. Hanlon. 51. It is a question of memory which is involved, and I want to see if your memory is right on this subject ?—I do not know that my memory is so wonderfully good as that. 52. You made this declaration on the 6th March ? —Yes. 53. That is a little over four months ago ? —Yes. 54. You say you remember pretty well what he said up to March ?—Yes. 55. Will you tell us now if you remember what Mr. Seddon said ?—You have got it there before you. 56. I want just to see what your memory is. Ido not want to trap you? —He said something about how I was getting on. 57. What else? —He said something, that he had done what I asked him to. 58. Anything more ? —I do not know that there was anything more in particular. 59. Then, did you go away and attend to your ship after that ?—I was not there more than three or four minutes altogether, I suppose. 60. Did you go out leaving them in the cabin?—l went out myself and left them there sitting. 61. When did you tell this to anybody? —To who ? 62. Anybody ?—I did not tell it to anybody.

H.—26

124

63. You did not tell that to anybody ?—No. 64. Never since that date ? —No, certainly not. 65. Did you give the particulars of this conversation to anybody who was interested inthis declaration?— Yes. 66. To whom did you give the particulars ?—Captain Allman or Dr. Findlay; Ido not know which. 67. Did Captain Allman ask you about it?— Yes. 68. What did he say ?—Oh, he just asked me if I knew anything about it, and I told him. 69. Knew anything about what?— That is what I want to know—about what. 70. You say that Captain Allman asked you if you knew anything about it. When Captain Allman came to you what did he say to you ? —I forget what he said to me. 71. How did the matter of what took place on board the " Duchess" that day with the Premier come to be discussed at all by you and Captain Allman ? —I do not know. 72. Did you open out to him, or did Captain Allman come seeking information?— Very likely. 73. What did Captain Allman come to see you about? —About this. 74. About what took place between you and the Premier on the boat? —Yes. 75. Have you any idea how he came to know how anything took place between you and the Premier on the boat?—l do not know that he knew anything about it. 76. Will you tell me what he said about it ?—Oh, I did this just to help Captain Allman. 77. Did he ask you to help him ?—Not particularly. . 78. And did Captain Allman write down what you told him ?■—No, he did not write it down. 79. Then, when did you next have anything to do with this declaration after you had seen Captain Allman? —I had no more to do with it. 80. You must have had something more to do with it, because you signed it?— They wrote it down in Dr. Findlay's office. 81. Then did Captain Allman take you up to see Dr. Findlay?—Yes. 82. And then it was written in Dr. Findlay's office ?—lt was written down in Dr. Findlay's office. 83. Where did you sign it? —Oh, across the street, in some other lawyer's office. 84. In Skerrett and Wylie's. Was it read over to you?— Yes, they read it over pretty quick. 85. Did you understand it?—l think so. 86. Are you sure ?—Oh, yes. 87. Did Captain Allman tell you that you would be doing him a great favour if you would make this declaration ? —I think so. 88. Was the expression he used, that you would be getting him out of a hole?—I do not know if he made any expression like that. 89. You do not mind me asking this : were you perfectly sober when you made this declaration?— What do mean ? I was perfectly sober. Whether I was drunk? 90. Ido not know where I can draw the line. I have not had any experience ?—Well, Mr. Hanlon, I am not in the habit of getting drunk. 91. Will you swear that at the time you made that declaration you were perfectly sober?— Yes. 92. Had you any drink that day ? —I was sober. 93. That is to say, you had not taken enough drink to make you drunk ?—That is so. Do I look like a man who is in the habit of getting drunk? 94. No, I admit that quite frankly, but I want to get the whole truth out. I wanted to get that question out. Do you remember having any conversation with Mr. John Hutcheson down at the wharf?— Yes. Mr. Gray : Is this evidence ? Judge Ward : If Mr. Hutcheson intends to give evidence, it will be better to get this. 95. Mr. Hanlon (to witness).] Have you said within the last day or two that you heard Mr. Seddon give his evidence, and that what he said about you was Gospel-truth ?■ —Yes. 96. You said it to two or three people ? —I say it now. I have said so much about this thing lately that I do not know what I have said about it. 97. You went up for examination for a certificate of competency, did you not ?■—Yes. 98. Now, do you feel disposed to tell us the whole of the circumstances surrounding that examination ?—I will tell you everything about it, as far as I know. Ido not want to keep anything from you. 99. Judge Ward: If there is any protection needed, your counsel will claim it for you. 100. Mr. Hanlon.] Did you send in your application in the ordinary way ?—Yes. 101. Who wrote the application out ?—Captain Yon Sehoen. 102. Were you getting any tuition from him—any teaching?— Yes. 103. And did Yon Sehoen urge you to go up for the examination ?—He did. 104. Did he arrange to pay you anything when you got your certificate of competency ?—No; I paid him. 105. lam asking you if you arranged to pay him anything? —He did not agree to pay me. I paid him. 106. You paid him ? —Certainly I did. 107. How much did you pay him ?—I paid him £17. 108. How long had he been teaching you for that £17 ?—He did not teach me anything. 109. W T hat did you pay him £17 for? —Because he pretended to teach me. 110. How long did he pretend to teach you for that money ?—Two or three weeks, perhaps. 111. A lesson every day ?—Oh, no. I used to go up to his house occasionally, at any time.

125

H.—26

112. How many hours' teaching did you get altogether?—l cannot remember. 113. Just roughly?—lt might be about thirty or forty hours altogether. 114. Did you pay him in advance, or after you had got the certificate?— After I got it. 115. You actually paid him the £17 ?—I did. 116. Did that include the license ? Who paid the Government fees ?—I paid it. 117. Then you presented yourself for examination—-do you remember the date ?—No; I do not remember the date. 118. Who were the Examiners? —Captain Allman and Captain Edwin. 119. Then, when you went to the examination-room, did you do the work required of you ? ■—I did all I was asked to do. 120. In the room ?—Yes. 121. Who asked you to do the particular work you refer to? —I went through the rule of the road and colour test, and the two Examiners were in the room. 122. And what was the next part ?—He gave me some papers to work out. 123. Who ?—Captain Allman. 124. Was Captain Edwin there then ?—No. 125. Had he gone out?— Yes. 126. You did that work for Captain Allman in the room ?—Yes. 127. Did you give Captain Allman any papers before Captain Edwin went out of the room?— Yes. 128. Where did you get those ? —Prom Captain Yon Schoen. 129. Can you tell us who prepared the papers?—Von Schoen. 130. Did you have to sign those papers ?—I think so. 131. Where were they signed, at Captain Yon Schoen's or in the examination-room?—At Yon Schoen's. 132. Did you see Yon Schoen prepare those papers ? —Yes. 133. Are they in his handwricing?—l think so. 134. Or is it true that he guided your hand ?—No, he did them himself. 135. When did he give them to you. We are told you went up on the 13th and 19th July for examination?—l think he gave them to me on a Sunday. Ido not know what date it might be. 136. Was it shortly before the examination ?—Yes. 137. What were you to do with those papers?—l was to give them to the Examiners. 138. Did Captain Yon Schoen tell you so ?—He told me so. 139. Did you raise any question as to whether the Examiner would receive them ?—Yes, I asked him if it was a right thing that I should give them to the Examiner, and he said that would be all right. Of course, I did not know that it was anything out of the ordinary. 140. Were the preparation papers included in that £17 you paid Yon Schoen, or had you to pay him more for preparing those papers ? —Have I to pay him more ? 141. What was the bargain made between you and Yon Schoen ? —I was to give him another £3—£2o. He had guaranteed that he would see I goo the certificate if I gave him £20. I told him I never wanted the certificate. It has never been any good to me, and I would not have gone up unless Captain Yon Schoen wanted me to. He never left me alone. He worried the life out of me. 142. To do what ? —To go up for the certificate. 143. You wanted to get a service certificate ? —Just so. 144. And it was Yon Schoen who persuaded you to go up for examination ?—Yes ; I did not dream of any other certificate but a service certificate, which I was entitled to. 145. Then you took those papers, I understand, to the examination-room, that Yon Schoen had prepared ? —Yes, didn't I say so before ? 146. To whom did you hand them ?—To Captain Allman. 147. Is it correct that Captain Edwin was in the room at that time? —-Yes, I think so. 148. Will you tell us what took place when you handed them to Captain Allman?—l think he tore some of them up—Captain Allman. 149. What happened then ? Something happened: Did you raise any protest against his tearing up your papers ?—-I told him I had done them myself, and not to tear them up. 150. What did he say ?—He made no reply. 151. Then what did you do? —I did nothing else. He gave me some papers to work out. 352. Did you work them out?— Yes. 153. And handed them back, I suppose, to be examined ? —Yes, I handed them back. 154. Did Captain Edwin do anything when you handed those papers to Captain Allman ?— Not that I know of. 155. Did he say anything ?—-I did not hear him say anything. 156. Is it a big room you were in ?—A room half as big again as this one. It was a good long room. 157. When Captain Allman tore up those papers, did you say anything further to him ?—No, I did not say anything to him, nor he to me. He just asked me to work the questions out. 158. Did you say anything about your wife and family?—No, I did not. 159. What became of the papers that were torn up ?—I think he threw them down on the floor. 160. Were those papers not picked Up and recopied ?—No. 161. Were those the only papers you took into the examination-room that day?— That is all. 162. The questions which Captain Allman gave you to work out—had you the answers already in your possession ? —I had not.

H.—26

126

163. That is to say, you faithfully worked out the answers to the questions set by Captain Alhnan ?—Yes. 164. Did you appear on two occasions for examination ? Did you go up on separate days ? — No, I do not think so. 165. Some of your papers put in are dated the 13th and some the 19th?—I think it was only the one day. 166. Can you explain how they come to be dated some the 13th and some the 19th ?—I cannot say. 167. Well, were you in that room on the 13th and 19th ?—I was only in the room once. 168. Was that the day after you signed your application to be examined, or was it two days after?—l could not say how long it was after—whether it was the next day or not. It is a good while ago now. 169. Was any intimation given to you as to whether or not you had passed the examination ? —No. 170. When did you first find out you had passed ?—The next day, I think, or a day or two after. 171. From whom did you ascertain that?— Well, I got a note certifying that I did pass. 172. And the certificate was issued to you ?—Some time after that. 173. We have been told that that certificate was cancelled by the Supreme Court. That is right, is it not ? —Yes ; that is so. 174. Was there any arrangement between you and Captain Allman that he was to pass you for the master's examination ?—Any arrangement between us? 175. Yes ?—I do not suppose I spoke to Captain Allman half-a-dozen times in my life. 176. Then, there was no arrangement ?—No, certainly not. In fact, I never knew Captain Allman except to see him going past. 177. When Captain Allman refused to accept the papers you brought into the room, did you make an appeal to him ?—No, I made no appeal. I asked him not to tear them up. 178. lam looking at your declaration. He says that you made an appeal to him. Did you tell him you knew very well that he had got orders to pass you?— No. 179. You did not tell him that ?—No. 180. This declaration cannot be quite right then ?—I did not tell him about any orders to pass me. I did not tell him he had got any orders. 181. Can you write, Captain Jones?—Oh, I can write middling. I can write enough for myself. 182. Did you tell Mr. Hall-Jones that you could do the practical part of the examination, but you would be hanged if you could do the writing ?—I said I was backward in writing. 183. You remember a conversation you had with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—I went up to Mr. HallJones in regard to the service certificate. 184. What took place ? —Well, he said something about that I would have to go up for an examination. 185. Dr. Giles.] Was anybody else present?—No, not at that time. 186. Mr. Hanlon.] What did you say to that?—l told him I did not think I was capable of going through the examination, so he suggested that I should see Captain Yon Schoen. 187. What for —did he say?- —To instruct me, I suppose. 188. Did he name Yon Schoen, or tell you to go and see a teacher? —I think he did name Yon Schoen. 189. What did you say ?—I told him I did not think it was any use ; and another thing in the way, of course, was that we have to pass as mate first before we are allowed to go up for the other. I pointed out to him that I would not be entitled to go up. 190. What was said to that ?—I think he sent for Captain Allman. 191. Did you wait until Captain Allman arrived? —Ye 3. 192. Then, what took place? —Captain Allman pointed out to him about the same thing— that I would have to get an order to allow me to go up to dispense with the mate's certificate. 193. What next?— Mr. Hall-Jones said he would see into that, and Captain Allman said he would have to give him an order to that effect, or something. That is all. 194. Then, did you go away, or did Captain Allman go away ? —I went away and left Captain Allman there. 195. Did Mr. Hall-Jones do any writing while you were there?— Yes, he did some writing. Ido not know what he was writing. He was writing when I went in there. 196. Now, in connection with the preparation of this declaration and the particulars in it, did Mr. Pirani or Mr. Hutcheson have anything to do with it, or have anything to say to you about it ?—I never saw Mr. Pirani. 197. Did Mr. Hutcheson have anything to do with it?— No. 198. Are you quite sure?—He had nothing to do with it. 199. Did they have any conversation with you about what you were to put in this ?—No. 200. Nothing at all ?—No. 201. Is this correct, that you have said outside that you signed this declaration without knowing what was in the thing ? —No. 202. Ido not say now, but have you said that outside?—l do not think so. To Mr Pirani? 203. No ; to any one outside ? —1 do not think I spoke to Mr. Pirani. 204. Did you tell Mr. Collins or Mr. Carmiehael that " You did not know what was in this thing"? —You cannot take everything you hear about the street as evidence against me. There was a member who picked me up in the street on Saturday night, but I am not going to tell no name —I was a little bit surprised myself —to try and pick out things. I came here to tell

127

H.—26

the truth as far as I know it, and Ido not want to be balked in any way to put me into a trap. Of course, they are all around here like flies on a piece of meat. 205. Will you tell us whether you would" contradict those two people, if they said you told them that you made a statement that you had signed this declaration without knowing what was in it?— Would I contradict them? 206. Yes ?—Yes, I would. 207. Dr. Findlay.] Do you recollect whether it was in the morning or the afternoon that you first called at my office for the purpose of my taking this declaration?—l think it was in the afternoon. 208. Do you recollect that Captain Allman came to see you first about it ?—Yes. 209. When was that ?—-It was in the morning. 210. What hour would it be? —I do not know. 211. Some time before midday, I think?— About that. 212. I think you told Mr. Hanlon that Captain Allman wanted you to help him ?—Yes, something of that. 213. Had you at that time, when he went to see you first, said anything to him about this meeting of the Premier on the " Duchess " ?—I might have said so. 214. Down there ?—Yes. 215. If you said so, would that be the first occasion on which you mentioned the incident to Captain Allman?—l do not know. 216. You may have mentioned it earlier still ? —I might. 217. After you had some conversation with him, you came along with him to my office ?— I think so. 218. Do you recollect stating there what you knew about the matter ?—Yes. 219. Is your memory sufficiently fresh to enable you to say that was in the morning ?—I cannot tell what time of the day it was. 220. You came back again later ?—I think so. 221. You did not make the declaration on the first visit to my office ?—I think so. 222. That was in the afternoon? —I think so. 223. Is your memory sufficiently fresh now for you to say that the first visit was in the morning?— Yes, in the morning. 224. Well, in the afternoon you came in again. Do you remember whether the declaration was read over to you ?—I think so. 225. And you went over to Mr. Skerrett's office, and it was sworn there ?—-Yes, Skerrett and Wylie's. 226. I read it over to think it was you. 227. Do you remember whether Captain Allman was there then ?—Yes. 228. You knew at that time that Captain Allman had received a notice from the Government threatening him with dismissal ?—He was dismissed, was he not ? 229. No. Do you recollect a conversation in which he explained to you that he was answering certain charges made in an official letter he had received from the Government ?—Yes. 230. Do you recollect that he was called upon to answer the charges by a certain hour on the next day ?—Yes. 231. And that this declaration was to assist those answers he made to those charges?—l think so. 232. Do you recollect explaining that when you were in the examination-room you told Captain Allman that if you did not get the certificate by the time the new boat came out, you would lose your billet ?—I might have said that. 233. I will take you back to your first interview with Captain Yon Schoen. You have a river master's certificate? —Yes. 234. And have had it for some years ?—Yes, that is all I wanted. 235. Then you proposed to get a service certificate ? — Yes. 236. That was your wish? —Yes. 237. And you thought then, and still think, you were entitled to that certificate?—l do. 238. You saw the Premier some time in 1895 ?—I saw the Premier, yes. 239. And you told him you thought you were entitled to the certificate ? —I did not tell him anything. I just merely went up there because I knew I had not got justice, and I thought he was the only man I should go to and seek justice from, and that is the reason I went to see the Premier. I saw him on two or three occasions. Of course they have said there was a great deal of influence and weight brought to bear upon the Premier on my behalf. Ido not think I gave any authority to wait on the Premier on my behalf. As I said before, I do not want any favour from anybody, and Ido not think the Premier gave me any favour. He only did it from justice. 240. You resent the inference that any political influence was brought to bear ?—Yes. 241. You saw the Premier then ?—Yes. 242. The declaration in support of your sea-service had been sent in ?—I think so. 243. That was prepared by Captain Yon Schoen ? —Yes. 244. Alterations were made in that statement as to the days on which you were outside the Heads. Take as an illustration : a figure 2 would be altered into 12 ?—Yes. 245. Who made those alterations in the statement of service ? Did you make them ?—No, I did not make them. I was not aware there were any alterations in them. 246. This is the statement prepared by Captain Yon Schoen (produced). Do you recognise it ? —Yes. 247. Where did Captain Yon Schoen get the facts contained in this statement?—He got them from Mr-. Williams's books.

H.—26

128

248. You had not supplied the information yourself ?—No. 249. Do you know that in this statement the dates on which you were outside the Heads are inaccurate or wrong ? —They are right, I think. In fact, I got more time than there is down there, and at times I have been outside the Heads perhaps two or three times a week. 250. 30th January, 1888, from 2nd April, I think it is claimed you were two months and twenty-one days outside the Heads. You were going in and out of the Heads ?—Yes. 251. You do not say it is correct —two months and twenty-one days? —No. 252. On another occasion, on the 14th November, 1888, to the 2nd February, 1889, you claim to have been two months and eighteen days outside the Heads ?—No, not at one time. 253. That, you say, was compiled by Captain Yon Schoen ?—Yes. 254. When did he first come to you and suggest you should sit for the master's certificate?— I do not remember. 255. You said he came to you several times about it Mr. Gray : What I suggest with regard to the statement of service is that, whoever compiled it, meant that he was engaged in that particular trade, not necessarily outside the Heads, on that trip. He included the time in dodging in and out of the harbour. 256. Dr. Findlay.] You cannot recollect when Captain Yon Schoen first came to see you about your sitting for the master's certificate ?—Not very long before I was examined. 257. Would ie be about a month before ?—lt might be about that. 258. At this time, was this bargain made, or was it made later? Can you recollect what he said to you first ?— I told Captain Yon Schoen that I did not want to go up for any examination whatever, and, of course, when ie came to the bargain business he wanted £25. I told him that the thing was no good for me, supposing I got it. I did not want it. I said, "I am quite satisfied as lam. I have got a certificate that is quite sufficient for what I want." He said, " Sometimes you go across the Strait" ; and I said, " That is not very often." At last he bothered me for some time, and I said roughly, "Look here, I will give you £20 if you will guarantee to get me the certificate." 259. It was no cure no pay; if he did not get you the certificate you were to give him nothing ?—Yes. 260. Did you explain to him that you did not think you could pass the examination in writing and figuring, and so on?— Yes, I did. I told him I did not think I would be able to get through. 261. Did he tell you that he had any special means of getting candidates through? —He said he would see all about that. Ido not know that he had anything special or anything else. 262. Did he tell you he had any special friends in the department?— No. He said he knew them all in there, or something. 263. Did he mention any names ?—No, he mentioned no names. 264. You told Mr. Hanlon you thought he was teaching you about a fortnight off and on?— Two or three weeks—something like that. 265. Not every day ?—Just occasionally. 266. And you think about thirty or forty hours altogether ?—Just about that. 267. What did you do when you went up to Yon Schoen's?—l did not do anything much. 268. Did you tell sea stories or study mathematics ? Was it not a farce you going up ? Did you do anything at all at Yon Schoen's house?— Very little. 269. How was the time usually occupied ?—Oh, just talking about politics, and so on. 270. That occupied the chief time when you went up to Yon Schoen's ? —Yes. 271. Did you try seriously to learn anything from him ?—No, I have no patience to learn from anybody. 272 He was to charge you £20?— I paid him £17. 273. Did you ask him, when chatting about politics, how he was going to manage to get you through the examination? —No. I was not much interested. I applied for the service certificate, and if they did not grant me that I did not want to go up. The thing was shoved under me. 274. By whom?—By Yon Schoen,.of course. 275. You got the papers on the Sunday ? —I think so. 276. Up to that time had he explained to you what you were to do when you got into the examination-room ?—He told me to give those papers to Captain Allman. 277. And to say anything ?—No ; just merely to give them in the envelope to Captain Allman. 278. You told Captain Allman, did you not, that you had done the work yourself ?—I did. 279. Did Yon Schoen tell you to tell Captain Allman that?—l think he did. 280. On the Sunday you got those papers from Yon Schoen, did you see Yon Schoen writing any of them ?—Yes. 281. Did you notice in what hand he held the pen? —No. 282. You are quite sure you did not write them ?—Yes. 283. You are quite sure he did not hold your hand while you wrote them?— Quite sure. 284. Then the statement that Captain Yon Schoen made to Captain Allman, that he held your hand while you wrote them, is untrue ? —Yes. 285. You are quite sure about that ?—Quite sure. He did the whole thing himself. 286. You took them down to the examination-room?—I did. 287. Had you any idea what you would be examined in when you took them down to the exammation-room ? —No, I had not. 288. You had not been coached in any way by Captain Yon Schoen ?—No. 289. When you got to the examination-room Captain Edwin and Captain Allman were there ? —Yes. 290. Did both Examiners pass you in the rule of the road and the colour test ?—Yes.

129

H.—26

291. How long would that occupy? —I do not know. 292. Would it be half an hour?— More than that, I expect. 293. During all that time Captain Edwin was present along with Captain Allman ? —Yes. 294. Was it after you had been examined in these two branches that you pulled out those papers ?—Yes, I think it was. 295. Was the envelope in which the papers were addressed ?—I think it was a blank envelope. 296. In the presence of Captain Edwin you handed the papers to whom ?—Captain Allman. 297. Did you pull the papers out of the envelope yourself first ? —No, I did not. 298. You handed the envelope to him ? —I handed the envelope. I think it was sealed up, but I had never seen the papers in the envelope at all. 299. You told me that you saw Captain Yon Schoen write some of them ?—After they were in the envelope I saw no more of them. 300. You took down the envelope, you were examined in the branches you mention, and then you handed the envelope to Captain Allman in the presence of Captain Edwin ? —Yes. I am not clear that Captain Edwin was in just at that time—he might have gone out. I cannot say. 301. Was he there when you were examined in the colour test?— Yes. 302. You are sure of that ?—Yes. 303. You do not remember his having left the room before you handed the papers to Captain Allman ?—No, I do not. 304. When you handed the papers to Captain Allman, did he open the envelope?— Yes. 305. He looked at the papers? —Yes. 306. What was his first question—what did he ask you?' —I forget what he asked me. 307. Did you say anything at that time to Captain Allman?—l told him I had done them. 308. Was that the first thing you said? —I think so. 309. You do not remember whether that was in answer to a question put to you by Captain Allman ?—I do not recollect that. 310. Captain Allman looked at the papers, did he not? —Yes. 311. Then you told Mr. Hanlon that he tore up some of them ?—He tore up some of them. 312. Do you recollect whether Captain Edwin was present then? —I think he was. lam not clear whether he was or not. 313. At any rate you did not go into the examination-room with any desire to keep these papers from Captain Edwin, did you?—No, certainly not. 314. You did not care whether he was present or not when you handed them to Captain Allman ?—No, I did not. 315. Had you any special reason for handing them to Captain Allman instead of Captain Edwin ?—I was told to give them to Captain Allman. 316. That is your reason? —Yes. 317. When Captain Allman proceeded to tear some of them up, what did you say ?—I asked him not to tear them up, because I had done them myself, and I did not think I would have the time to do them all over again. 318. Was that original or like the other statement—a prompting from Captain Yon Schoen? When you went into the examination-room you say you told Captain Allman you had done them yourself, and you also told him when he was tearing them up that you did not think you would have time to do them again. Did any one tell you to say that ?—Captain Yon Schoen told me to tell Captain Allman. 319. Did Captain Yon Schoen tell you to tell Captain Allman that you would not have time to do them all over again ? —I do not think so. 320. Did you also tell Captain Allman this : " You know the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones want me to get my ticket " ?—No, I do not remember telling Captain Allman that. 321. Did you say anything to that effect ? —No, I do not think I mentioned any one. 322. There is something said in your declaration about the Premier wanting to pass you? — know the Premier knew nothing about any ticket except the service certificate. 323. Do you not recollect whether you said anything to Captain Allman in the examinationroom to the effect that the Ministers wanted Captain Allman to get you your ticket ? —I do not remember. 324. Do you recollect that you said you would lose your billet when the new boat came out if you did not get your certificate ?—I might have said that. 325. That was in the examination-room ?—I might have said so. 326. Dr. Giles.} Was the new boat the " Duchess "?—Yes. I do not know what induced me to say it. lam not clear about it whether I said it or not. 327. Dr. Findlay.] Would you have got command of the " Duchess " if you had not got that master's ticket ?—Yes, of course I would, just the same. 328. It made no difference to you ?—No, it made no difference. I did not want the ticket. 329. You did some work in the examination-room, and you handed in those papers ? —Yes. 330. Do you recollect that some of the papers you handed in were signed in the examinationroom ? —All were signed in the examination-room. 331. Did you not sign some at Captain Yon Schoen's ? —I signed some up at Captain Yon Schoen's. 332. And you signed some in the examination-room ?—All I did in the examination-room I signed in the examination-room, and the others I signed up at Captain Yon Schoen's house. 333. You got your ticket and paid £17 to Captain Yon Schoen ?—I paid him £17. 334. Have you been paid any back?— No. 335. You have not got a penny back?—No, certainly not. I am not likely to get it back either ; and am not likely to get back from the Government what I paid them, I suppose. 17— H. 26.

H.—26

130

336. You paid them some fees ? —Yes. 337. There was another £3 to be paid to Captain Yon Schoen?—Yes, of course. I always pay whatever I owe. I used to pay just as I could, and if this had not come out as it has I should have paid him, because if I make any agreement with any one I do it. 338. He has not applied to you for the £3 ?— I never spoke to him since. 339. Did Captain Yon Schoen see you personally after you got your master's certificate ?—Yes. 340. Did he ask how you got on in the examination-room ? —Yes. 341. Did you tell him you had given the papers to Captain Allman ? —Yes. 342. Did you tell him, in fact, 'all that took place in the examination-room ?—I told him that I gave Captain Allman the papers, that Captain Allman tore some of them up, and that he gave me some papers to work. That was some time after I got the certificate. 343. How long after?— Not very long ; a few days. 344. Did he, some time after that, come and tell you that he was going to explain how he had worked this examination —that he was going to tell any one how it was done ?—No. 345. Never asked your permission to do it, I suppose ?—No. 346. You are quite sure that he never, at any time, told you that he had any understanding with any one in the department as to passing candidates?—No; he did not tell me of any understanding or any thing else particularly. I thought Captain Yon Schoen had been a nautical assessor, and all those things ; in fact, he told me he could do pretty well as he liked. 347. With the examinations? —Not with the examinations. He told me he would see that I would get the certificate. 348. He told you that he could do pretty well as he liked ?—Yes; that he knew how to work it. 349. Did he say anything to you about Captain Allman, as to whether he was fit for his place or not?—l know he called Captain Allman a " c,a,d." Ido not know what that means. 350. Was this before you sat for the examination ?—Some time. 351. Do you recollect whether it was before or after you sat for the examination ?—I think it was before. 352. How did he come to be called a "cad"?—l do not know the meaning of the word " cad." Do you? 353. It is not a term of praise. You did not understand it?— No. 354. You would not like to be called a " cad " ? —No. 355. Why did he call him a "cad"?— Because he was one, I suppose. That is what he thought. 356. Did he give you any reason for that ?—Only that he thought that he ought not to be there. 357. This was before the examination ? —Yes. 358. There was no great friendship between Captain Allman and Captain Yon Schoen, so far as you could see?—l never had any conversation with Captain Allman. 459. But such an eminent authority as Captain Yon Schoen thought he was a cad. You say that before the examination you saw Captain Allman?—No; I told him a day or two before that I was going up. I think the only time I saw Captain Allman to speak to was when I had the interview with Mr. Hall-Jones. 360. Had you any conversation with Captain Allman as to sitting for the examination before you sat ? —No. 361. Was there any arrangement whatever of any kind between you and Captain Allman as to his passing you in the examination ?—None whatever. Ido not know Captain Allman any more than anybody else in the street. Some of you say that I bribed Captain Allman. 362. I did not say so? —I did not say you. I said some of you. 363. You told Mr. Hanlon about an interview you had with Mr. Hall-Jones?—Yes. 364. You remembered the interview, because Captain Allman was sent for, and came up afterwards ?—He was sent for. Mr. Hall-Jones said, I will send for Captain Allman. 365. Do you remember whether that was in the forenoon ? —I think it was in the forenoon. 366. Do you remember waiting for some time before the Minister came down ?—Yes, it was in the morning. 367. Then the Minister came down and you went in to see him ?—Yes. 368. The Minister told you that you would have to sit for an examination?— Yes. 369. And you told Mr. Hanlon that you told him you did not think you could do the work?— Yes. 370. Did you tell the Minister that you had met Captain Allman in the street a few days before, and that Captain Allman said you were entitled to your certificate ?—I might have said that. 371. Had you, as a matter of fact, seen Captain Allman a few days before?—l think I told the Minister that. 372. Was it true? —I think so. Yes. He said something about tug-boat service. Captain Allman did say that I told the Minister that. 373. You told the Minister that you would have to sit for a mate's certificate ?—I did. 374. Did you tell him that you could not do the work for a mate's certificate?— Yes. 375. What did he say in reply to that ?—He said I would have to go to school—l would have to go to Yon Schoen and get coached up. 376. Did he say to you at that time that he would do away with the mate's certificate ?—I think he said he would see Captain Allman and see if he could get over that difficulty. 377. Then he sent for Captain Allman and Captain Allman came upstairs?— Yes,

131

H.—26

378. Did he ask whether they could get over the difficulty?— Yes, something of that kind. 379. What was the substance of the conversation between Captain Allman and the Minister ? —They were talking about doing away with the mate's certificate. 380. What did Captain Allman say?—He asked the Minister, and he said, " You will have to give me an order to that effect." 381. What did the Minister say ?—Well, he said he would see into it. 382. Did he say he would give an order ?—I think he said he would give an order to that effect. 383. Do you remember Captain Allman saying anything about an order having to be given to the department ?—I think he mentioned that it would have to be given to the department. 384. Who mentioned that ? —Captain Allman mentioned to the Minister that he would have to give an order to the department. 385. And do you remember what the Minister's reply was?—No, I do not remember the wording of it. 386. Do you recollect whether he made any reply ?—He made some reply, but I do not remember what it was now. 387. Do you recollect whether his reply amounted to yes or no ?—I think it did. 388. I put the question to you whether you think it was yes or no ? —I think it was, yes. 389. Are you quite sure about it ?—No, I am not quite clear about it, but I think he said, yes. 390. That is the last interview you had with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes, I do not think I ever saw Mr. Hall-Jones before ; I saw him twice altogether. 391. Do you recollect that you had two previous interviews with Mr. Hall-Jones?—l saw Mr. Hall-Jones about twice altogether. 392. Not three times?—l think about twice; lam not clear about it. I would not like to swear I did not see him any more. 393. We will take twice. Where was the previous interview ?—lt was in his room ; I never saw him anywhere else but in his office. 394. How long before when Captain Allman saw you was the previous interview ? —I cannot tell. 395. Was it six months ?—lt was not very long. 396. What was the reason for going on that occasion to see the Minister ?—About the service certificate, I think. 397. Was anything said at that previous interview about your sitting for an examination ?—I do not remember that. 398. Was any one with you, or were you alone?—l was alone. 399. You do not recollect whether anything was said about your sitting for examination ?—I do not remember. 400. Do you recollect going to Mr. Allport some time before you sat for your examination and telling him that he was blocking your service certificate ?—Yes. 401. How did you know he was blocking your service certificate ?—Well, I had reason to think he was blocking it, because I knew that I had my time put in, and that I was entitled to it. In fact, Mr. Allport acknowledged himself that there were some records that they could not account for. 402. You were not told by any one —by Captain Yon Schoen—that he was blocking your certificate ?—No. 403. No one told you that ? —No. 404. How did you know when to go up for this examination ? How did you know the day ? Who told you ? —I think I asked Captain Allman or Captain Edwin about it —on what day I would go up. I think they appointed a day on which I was to go up. 405. Do you recollect whether, at the interview between you and the Minister and Captain Allman, the day was mentioned ?—There was no day mentioned then that I was to go up. Ido not think so. 406. Do you recollect that before you left the room you were told you could sit for examination as master ? —Yes, I think the Minister said so. 407. Are you sure that some one said so before you left the room that day ?—Yes, I am pretty well sure. 408. I will read you what Captain Allman says took place when you were in the examinationroom. You can listen and say whether you agree with him :" A little after 9 a.m. next day," the morning of the examination, " I made out the necessary examination-papers in the examinationroom. Captain Edwin came in soon afterwards, and Jones arrived at 10 a.m., the appointed time. Both Captain Edwin and I conducted the sight-tests, after which Jones took his seat, and we gave him Examination 9e papers to work. I took my seat at another table, and Captain Edwin was preparing to leave the room, when Jones gave me over an envelope (whether it was open or not I cannot remember). The envelope contained examination-papers. I showed them to Captain Edwin, and he said, ' Destroy them.' " Is that correct ?—Yes, I think that is correct. 409. " I was destroying them, and had destroyed part of them, when Captain Edwin left the room in a hurry. Just at that moment Jones interposed and said, ' For God's sake, Captain, don't destroy them —I did them myself, so help me God !'' Is that correct ?—No ; take that out. 410. That is not correct ?—No. 411. You mean the phrase, " For God's sake, Captain, don't destroy them. I did them myself, so help me God " ? —I asked him not to destroy them. 412. Did you say anything about losing your billet? —No. 413. You are not quite certain you said when the new steamer came out you would lose your billet ?—I did not say that.

H.—26

132

414. You did not say that either? —No. 415. I think you said this morning that you might have used the expression in the examina-tion-room that when the new steamer came out you would lose your billet unless you had your ticket ?—No, I did not say that. 416. You say you never said anything about your wife and family ?—I never said my wife and family. 417. Mr. Travers.] You have heard what was read out to you by Dr. Findlay as having been stated by Captain Allman as to what took place in the examination-room?— Yes. 418. And you say you confirm that, except that you did not use the expression, "For God's sake, Captain, don't destroy them," and that you said nothing about your wife and family or losing your billet ?—Yes. 419. Did Captain Edwin leave the room? —Yes. 420. How soon after you handed the envelope to Captain Allman ? Had Captain Allman, in fact, destroyed all the papers before Captain Edwin left ?—I could not say how many he destroyed, but he did destroy some of them. 421. Before Captain Edwin left?— Yes. 422. And then Captain Edwin left the room ?—Yes. 423. Did he ever come back into the room during the examination ?—I cannot say. There is a door there at one end, and I was sitting right at the end of the room. ■ 424. You never saw him come back?— No. 425. And Captain Allman was present during the whole of the time you were filling in the papers ?—Yes. 426. Captain Edwin, so far as you know, took no part whatsoever in the examination beyond the sight and colour test and the rule of the road ? —No. 427. Those parts were by word of mouth—there was nothing written about it in the papers?— No. 428. That was the preliminary part of the examination ?—That is so. 429. And Captain Allman conducted the remainder of the examination after he had apparently destroyed some of the papers ?—Yes. 430. When you went to Mr. Allport and spoke to him about blocking your way, why did you suppose that Mr. Allport was the person who did it ?—I suppose he is the man who has all to do with these records. 431. And you assumed that the obstruction was on the part of Mr. Allport—that is what you thought ?—Yes, that is what I thought. 432. You went to see him about it, and he said he was practically only doing what he believed to be right ?—Yes, that is so. 433. Mr. Hislop.'] How many interviews had you with Mr. Seddon on that matter of yours?— Ido not think I saw Mr. Seddon more than three times altogether. You go up and cannot always see him, I suppose. 434. Had you seen him just before he went Home ?—No. 435. How long before he went Home ? —About a week, I suppose. 436. Did he promise to do anything for you?—He did not promise to do anything for me. He promised to see whether it was right or not, but he never promised to do anything. 437. Except to look into it and see whether this service certificate could be given or not ?—Yes, the service certificate. That is the only certificate, so far as I know, that the Premier was dealing with. I know nothing about any other one. 438. You have a good many friends about Wellington and other places ?—I reckon I am friendly with everybody. I have no particular friends more than you have. I like to be friendly with everybody, so far as I am concerned. 439. I suppose some of these friends were anxious for you to get the certificate ?—There were no friends anxious on my part whatever. 440. You do not wish to discredit Mr. Seddon's evidence when he said a number of persons spoke to him on the subject?— Not to my knowledge. 441. You were here when he said there were some ladies and gentlemen waited on him ? —I do not know whether there were any ladies or not —not as far as lam concerned. Ladies ? 442. I suppose you are friendly with some ladies ?—I am friendly with my wife. lam not particularly friendly with any ladies. 443. You do not mind friendliness, do you?—l daresay I have many friends in Wellington. I do not know that I have made any enemies with anybody. 444. Do you say you are not aware whether any deputation waited on Mr. Seddon ?—I am not aware —certainly not. 445. They were seeking to do you good secretly ? —No, not secretly. I went to the Premier to see that the thing was right. He is the one I think you should go to. He is the head of the firm. If there is a captain on board a ship there is no good in going to the cook if you want to get a remedy, and that was the line I took, as he was the head of the firm. 446. Do you remember him writing on an envelope " Can anything be done to get over this difficulty ? " and Captain Allman's reply ? —I do not know. 447. Did you ever see that envelope ?—Yes. 448. What became of it, do you know ? —I do not know. 449. Had you it in your possession ?—I think I had it in my possession some time or other. 450. Could you see from that envelope that Captain Allman reported against your certificate ? —He said there was nothing to be done with what he saw before him at that time. I think that was the answer, or something to that effect.

133

H.— M

451. Did Mr. Seddon give you the envelope ?—No. 452. Where did you see it?—lt was sent to me, or sent down to Mr. Williams's'office, and I got it. Ido not know who gave it to me particularly. 453. Do you remember whether it was a big envelope ?—lt was an envelope. 454. And did that envelope contain some of your certificates ?—Some papers belonging to me, I believe. 455. I suppose you saw Mr. Seddon again after that ? —I do not know; I might have seen him some time after that. Ido not think I made it my business to go and see Mr. Seddon. 456. You remember the occasion of Mr. Seddon going Home ?—I remember that he went Home. 457. Were you on the wharf at the time ?—No. 458. How soon after was it that you saw Mr. Hall-Jones ?—I could not tell you. 459. Was it within a week or two?—lt might be a week or a fortnight, and it might be three weeks. 460. You remember Mr. Hall-Jones advising you to go to Captain Yon Schoen for the purpose of being tutored?— Yes. 461. Did you go?—I did. 462. Immediately afterwards?—l did not go what you call immediately. 463. Within a few days ?—I think so. 464. Then you remained with him about two or three weeks ?—That is so. 465. Then you saw Mr. Hall-Jones after that again?—No, I do not think so. 466. When did you see him the second time ?—1 do not chink I saw him after that at all. 467. You have told us you saw him twice at least ?—Yes, I think I did. 468. Did you see Mr. Hall-Jones before Mr. Seddon went Home ?—No. 469. Then you saw him the first time a week or two after Mr. Seddon went Home ?—Yes.. , 470. Was it not on that occasion that he advised you to go to Captain Yon Schoen?—Yes. 471. The first time that you saw him?—l do not know whether that is the first time or the second time. I know he advised me to go. 472. Do you not remember seeing Mr. Hall-Jones after you had completed your tuition with Captain Yon Schoen ? —No ; I did not see him. 473. Was it during the first occasion you saw him that the discussion took place as to the mate's certificate ?—No; I think it was on the second. , 474. But it was the occasion of the first time that he advised you to go to Captain Yon Schoen ? —No ; I think on the second time. 475. What took place during the first time?—l think he was dealing with this service certificate at the first. 476. What did he say then ?—I forget what he said. He did not say very much. 477. Why did you go back to him the second time ?—To see if there was anything further to be done. 478. Before you went back the second time had you discussed with any person the question of a mate's certificate ?—No. 479. According to your conversation, you seemed to open the subject of the mate's certificate to Mr. Hall-Jones. You said another thing in the way was " I hadn't a mate's certificate " ?—I got the rules and the regulations, and I read them, and I could see by the regulations that that was in the way. 480. Before you went to see Mr. Hall-Jones the second time, had the question of a certificate of competency for the purpose of being examined as a master been discussed between you and any other person ?—I do not think so. 481. Who first suggested the certificate of competency instead of the service certificate? Captain Yon Schoen. 482. When? —I do not know when. 483. Before you went to see the Minister or after?—l do not know whether it was before or after, I am sure. 484. Had he not told you that the only thing that would be in the way would be the mate's certificate ? —I do not think Captain Yon Schoen mentioned that. 485. You had not discussed that matter between you ?—No. 486. You say in your declaration that the Minister told you to come back in a week's time ? —I don't think so. He said if I went back in a week's time I could get the certificate. 487. And go up at once for your examination ? —Not to go up at once :togo to the school to go to Yon Schoen and get coached up. 488. You say that you met Captain Allman and told him you wanted to go up?— Yes. 489. Did he tell you then that he would get a time fixed ?—He did not say anything about getting a time fixed. He said something about that afterwards. I asked him what time would suit, or on what days they were doing these things. I did not know what day it was. I might have asked him what day would be fixed. 490. Did he say anything about permission to go up without the mate's certificate at that time? —I do not think so. 491. Did he say he had got the permission?—No, I don't remember that. 492. Was it your recollection that the Minister at that time had solved that question—had agreed that he should do so ?—I thought there was something done in the matter. 493. After you left the Minister and went to Captain Yon Schoen's for tuition, you understood you could go up for the master's examination at once, I understand?—No, not at once. 494. I mean so soon as you had the tuition? Is that so ?—Yes. 495. That is to say, you would not have to wait for the mate's certificate?— That is so.

H.—26

134

496. Mr. Atkinson.'] When was the question of pay first mentioned between you and Captain Yon Schoen ? —Before I consented to go up. 497. What for ? Does that mean the examination for your competency certificate ? Was it before or after you went up for examination ?—Before. 498. When did you first go to him about a certificate at all ?—I never went to him—he came to me. 499. He has been shoving you all along ?•—Put it a little plainer. 500. Well, pushing you. Had he been urging you in the matter ?—Yes. 501. It was his business all along, and not yours? —Just so. 502. When did he first interest himself in the matter ?—A good while ago. 503. What year would it be in ? —Before this came up—before I got this certificate. 504. What was the year, 1897 ?—I think so. 505. How long before then did he come to you and interest himself in the matter ?—He came three or four months, and was always at me, before the thing was granted. 506. Had you not seen him about the matter at all before?—He always came to me about the matter. 507. I suppose you saw him when he came?—l suppose I did. 508. Had you not seen him about it more than three or four months before the examination ? —I do not know ; I might. 509. Did you see him in the year 1896 ?—I might. 510. Did you see him in the year 1895 ?—I might. I always used to see him. 511. Do you swear you did not first go to him in the year 1895 about it ?—I would swear that I did not go to him about it at any time. He always came to me. 512. Do you remember whether other people were getting service certificates under the new Act in 1895 ?—I do not know what they were getting. 513. You do not think that had any effect on your mind ?—Not the least. 514. The examination was in July, 1897 ; that is two years ago. Had he busied himself about you ? —I think he made himself pretty busy with me. 515. Was he at all busy with the Premier ?—I do not know at all. 516. You do not even know whether he waited on the Premier about it ?—No. I know he was in there one day. 517. You know that he was with the Premier ? —He waited on the Premier on that occasion. 518. Did you give him money in 1895 ?—Yes. It might be 1894, 1895, or 1896. Ido not know when it was. I gave him some money. 519. Do you know how much ?—£lo. I gave him £17 altogether. I gave him £10, £5, and £2. 520. Can you say how much of that was given in 1895?— No; I will not say when it was given. 521. Nor 1896 nor 1897 —you cannot say ?—No, it does not matter when it was given. It was given. 522. When was the question of the examination first mentioned? —I think after I had the interview with Mr. Hall-Jones. 523. Was it not mentioned by the Minister?— Yes. 524. That was at the end of May, 1897 ? —I do not know when it was. 525. If Mr. Hall-Jones has said so, you would not contradict him?— No. 926. That was the first occasion on which it was mentioned about your sitting for examination ? —I think so. 527. Had Captain Yon Schoen insisted on your going to see Mr. Hall-Jones?—Well, yes, he insisted on my going. 528. He pushed you into that ?—Yes, 529. You were very obedient when he asked you to do anything?— Not very obedient, but he was always bothering me to get the matter fixed up. 530. For the sake of peace you always did what he told you?—No, not exactly for the sake of peace. 531. Then you went to Mr. Hall-Jones to discuss the question of a service certificate?—l told you I went before to discuss the question of a service certificate. 532. You went to him in May, 1897?— Yes. 533. Then the Minister said that you should see Captain Yon Schoen ?—Yes. 534. You saw Mr. Hall-Jones, you could not say how often?—No, I could not say how often. I never saw Mr. Hall-Jones before. 535. And on each occasion it was simply to oblige Captain Yon Schoen that you went to see him ?—Not to oblige Yon Schoen. He directed me to go there. 536. You consented to sit for examination ?—Yes ; I would not have gone unless I had consented. 537. And you went to the Premier to oblige Captain Yon Schoen?—No, not to oblige him. 538. Did you go because you wanted the certificate ? —I went to him because I had my time put in, and I was entitled to it. I thought he was the only one I could see about it, to see if there was anything in it to remedy. That was what I wanted to see Mr. Seddon for. 538 a. You wanted the certificate ?—I was not very particular. I wanted to get the service certificate. 539. But more to oblige Captain Yon Schoen than for any other reason ?—No; why should I want to oblige Captain Yon Schoen ? 540. You have said over and over again that it was to oblige him ? —I said Captain Yon Schoen was always worrying me about it, and asking me why I did not go and get the matter fixed up.

135

H.—26

541. Captain "Yon Schoen had been asking you for these two years—from May, 1895, to May, 1897 —and it was left to Mr. Hall-Jones to say that you should sit for examination ?—I do not know how long he had been asking me. 542. At any rate, it was Mr. Hall-Jones who first made this suggestion ?—Yes; I think it was. 543. You said that you took these papers in the envelope to the examination-room, that the papers were given to you, and that you do not think it was anything out of the ordinary ?— Yes. 544. You did not know that the form you were going through was showing you how to answer certain questions ?—I thought when Captain Yon Schoen made these things out there was nothing wrong in them. 545. You did not know, in fact, what the form was you were going through—you did not know what it meant ? —I knew what it meant, all right. 546. What did you think it meant?— That you had to pass your examination as well as anything else. 547. Did you not tell the Minister you were not able to pass the examination ?—I told him I thought I not be able to get through. 548. And if no one had done the work for you, you would not have been able to get through ? —Yes. 549. Did it not occur to you to be extraordinary that somebody else should be doing the work ?—No. 550. Had you ever passed an examination before?— Yes. 551. Did you get anyone to do the work then ?—No. 552. You did it yourself ?—Yes. 553 Then you did understand what the examination was?— Yes. 554. Did you think you ought to pretend that the work was yours ?—I was told to do it, and I was told it would be all right. 555. Why did you say the work was yours ? —I did so, and I say I did so. Captain Yon Schoen said " Give the envelope to the Examiners and tell them that you did it all yourself." 556. Even after the examination you did not know that it was to be all in your own work ?— I did not know. 557. Some of these papers were torn up? —That is so. 558. After Captain Edwin left the room there were other papers set you in place of those which had been torn up ? —Yes. 559. And you worked out the answers?— Yes. 560. You had not brought the answers with you for those ?—No. 561. You worked out the answers there?— Yes. 562. Can you show us in this file of papers [produced] which are those you worked out yourself ?—I worked out these (addition and subtraction papers). 563. The first three after the dictation paper?—l did the papers in exhibit " N," marked 2, 3, and 4. 564. The examination-paper marked 4, from the words 1892 : would you need any apparatus for that?—l did not come here to do any of those questions. lam not going to do any of them. 565. Can you tell us whether you need any apparatus to work that question out ? [By direction of the Commissioners, witness fiere copied some figures on a piece of paper.] 566. Do you commonly write your figures the same one day as on another?—l do not know that I do. 567. Do you sometimes write them in pencil first ?—I do not do much with figures. I sometimes write them in pencil. 568. And sometimes write with ink over the pencil ?—You can always rub pencil marks out, and you cannot with ink. 569. You forgot to rub the pencil marks out in one of the papers. How was that?—l do not know. 570. Do you remember putting it in pencil ? —Yes. 571. How many of the papers did you do in pencil ?—I think I did the lot that I did do. 572. Did you ink them all over afterwards ? —Yes. 573. Why did you do them in pencil?— Because you can rub the figures out when you are wrong. 574. Was Captain Allman in the room when you did this pencil work first ?—He was in the room all the time. 575. Did he interfere at all when you did the pencil work ? —No. 576. He did not tell you that it was contrary to the regulations?— No. In fact, I did the papers, and he came to me after they were done, and I gave them to him. Ido not think he watched me doing them. 577. He did not give you any help in the working of those questions?— No. 578. Did you rub the pencil marks out in the paper afterwards ?—I might. 579. Did you have any books to copy from in the room? —No. 580. You did not copy from anything?— No. 581. Did you have any books to help you ?—There were lots of paper and stuff about the table, but I did not copy them. 582. Had you any books to assist you at all ? —No. 583. No apparatus at all ?—No. 584. Are you quite sure of it ?—Quite sure of it. 585. You did not open or read any book at all when calculating these questions ? —No.

H.—26.

136

'■' - 586. Either written or printed ?—No, nor any other thing. : 587. Did you have a " Nautical Almanac " to assist you ?—No. 588. Did you have an " Epitome " ?—I tell you I had no books. 589. You answered the question on the fourth paper, the question I read out to you—as you did in the sums of addition and subtraction, without any help whatever?— Yes. 590. Do you swear that Captain Allman did not help you in the answers?—He never helped me with those answers. 591. Did he help you with any answers at all ?—■Hβ never helped me with those answers, I am telling you. 591 a. Did he help you with any others ?—With what others ? 592. Judge Ward.] With any other answers on these examination-papers ?—No. Those are the papers I did. 593. Mr. Atkinson.'] You did them all, and Captain Allman did not help you with those three papers or any other ?—I told you what I did, and Captain Allman did not help me with them. Is that not plain enough ? 594. Do you remember that these papers went out some dated one day and some another ?— No. 595. You could not remember this morning whether you sat for two days or not ?—I told the Commission I sat on one day. 596. You do not know how some papers are dated the 13th and some the 19th ?—I do not know. 597. Had you not gone away to the French Pass to think the matter over ?—No, the examination was done on the one day. 598. You told us this morning that the certificate was no good to you?— Yes, I tell you that now. ■ 599; You also told us this morning that you had said to Captain Allman you would lose command of the new boat if you did not get the certificate ? —I do not remember telling Captain Allman anything of the kind. 600. You said you might have said it ?—I might have said it. 601. Would it have been true if you had?—l do not know. 602. And you do not care?—l said Ido not know. 603. You were making a statement to Captain Allman about yourself, and you do not know whether it was true or not ?—lt might be so. That is my answer. 604. It might be that you said it ?—I say it might be so. 605. You mean that you might have made that statement?—l mean what I say. 606. I want to know if the statement would have been true if you had made it ?—I do not know. 607. Then you might have said something that you did not know to be true, and stated it as a fact ?—I do not know why I said that. 608. Are you swearing in, the same way now, without knowing whether it is true ?—I am swearing that whatever I say is the fact, but when you come and try to tell me not to keep to the fact, well, of course, 609. Did you mention anything to Captain Allman in the examination-room about your wife and children if you did not pass that examination ?—No. 610. Are you certain of that?— Yes. •■ 611. Did you not hear that statement read over to you by Dr. Pindlay?—l did not mention anything about my wife and family. 612. Did you mention this, that he had his orders to pass you? —No, I did not mention that. - 613. Did you hear that statement in your declaration when it was read over to you, " I also told him that he knew very well that he had got his orders to pass me " ? —No. : 614. Will you swear that you did not ?—No. 615. You do not much care whether it was there or not: Did you know you were making yourself liable for perjury in that declaration ?—No, I did not. 616. You do not know you are making yourself liable now?—No, I am not. 617. You let the statement pass. You had not much curiosity as to what was in this declaration— you wanted to do Captain Allman a good turn ?—I do not know that 1 wanted to do him a good turn. ■ 618. You wanted to help him out of a mess ?—Yes. 619. Had you spoken to Dr. Pindlay about it? Who had been to you about it?—No; no one had been to me about it. 620. You went to Dr. Findlay's office in the morning ?—Yes. 621. And made the statement to him ?—I did. 622. Was this in the statement you made: "I also told him that he knew very well that he had got his orders to pass me " ? —No; I did not say that. Ido not think I ever said anything about an order to pass me,. 623. This certificate really was of no use to you at all, supposing it had been got legally?— What is the use of it to me? No, it was not of much use. 624. You went to all this trouble on account of Captain Yon Schoen ?—The time I was in the " Duco " we used to go across the Straits occasionally, like to Picton, to tow a ship. Then it would have been of use ; but since I have been in the " Duchess " it has been of no use to me. 625. You were in the "Duco" in 1897 ?—Yes. 626. Then it would have been of some use to you ?—Yes, occasionally. 627. Then at-that time it would have been of some value? —Yes, at that time.

137

H.—26

628. You say that some member picked you up on Saturday night. Did you need picking up on Saturday night ? —No; Ido not think I did need picking up. Do you mean I was lying down, and some one wanted to pick me up ? 629. I suppose you mean that he came across you in the street or you met him somewhere ? Yes 630. Was it in the street, or was it in the House of Representatives?—l was never in the House in my life. 631. What member was it ? —Am I supposed to tell you what member it was ? It has nothing to do with this case. There is nothing in it, so I will tell you—Mr. Taylor. 632. Was he the only member?— That is the only member I saw on Saturday. 633. Did you speak to Mr. Millar, M.H.R., on Saturday?—l do not think he is here. 634. You did not speak to him about it on Saturday? — I did not see Mr. Millar on Saturday. 635. Or any other day since this Commission sat ?—No. 636. Are you quite sure of that ?—I think I saw Mr. Millar some day last week. 637. What conversation did you have with him then ?—I had none. 638. Nothing about this case? —No; he never spoke about this case. 639. Did he say anything about your master's certificate ?—He never mentioned anything about the certificate. 640. Have you not made any statement to Mr. Collins or Mr. Carmichael ?—I never made any statements to anybody. I might have talked the thing over, that is all. I might have spoken to them about it. 641. Do you remember any other statements in that declaration—anything about it at all except what you have been told to-day ?—Oh, yes. 642. Can you tell us something else that was in it ?—What do you want to know about it ? 643. I want anything you can remember?—l do not know that I can tell you anything about it. 644. You cannot remember an-ything that is in it? —No. 645. Do you remember this statement in it? It is about your conversation with Mr. Seddon, when you went into the stern cabin : "I put down the glasses, and Mr. Seddon remarked about the size of the tumblers " ?—Yes, I remember saying something about it. 646. Then Mr. Seddon said, " I fixed that,all right for you, old man." Is that true ? He might have said so. 647. Will you swear now that he did say so ?—I say he might have said so. 648. You will not swear that he did say so ? —I say-it is in that affidavit. You can take it from that. 649. When you made this statement in your declaration that Mr. Seddon had said so, did you mean anything more than that he might have said it ? —I meant to say what he said. 650. You stated at that time what he had said ? —Yes. 651. Then he went on to say : " I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do, in spite of the lot of them "?—I say that he said I had got what I wanted. 652. How much do you remember? —He said, " I looked into that and saw that you got what you wanted." 653. It says, " I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do, in spite of the lot of them " ? —I do not remember him saying that. 654. Would you put it in your declaration, knowing it to be false ?—No. 655. You might have forgotten all about it. Do you remember when that statement was made, you signed it believing it to be a true statement? Do you remember Dr. Findlay reading that ?—Yes. 658. You do not know that he read anything to you, in the statement, beyond that ?—I do not remember. 659. You do not remember the last paragraph, that stating that Captain Allman had got his orders to pass you ? —No. 660. Mr. Gray.] I understand you were a good deal at sea before coming to New Zealand?— Yes. 661. And you have been a long time in the employment of the late Mr. W. R. Williams, and afterwards in the employment of his son (Mr. J. H. Williams), in the " Duchess " ? —Yes. 662. You were master at various times of the s.s. " Mana" and " Duco," and other boats of Mr. Williams's, and then he put you on the "Duchess " nearly two years ago?— Yes. 663. The "Mana" and "Duco" were employed almost exclusively in tugging work and doing work about the harbour? —Yes. 664. With occasional trips across the Straits ?—Yes. 665. And since the "Duchess" came out your work has been simply in having charge of her in harbour excursions ? —Yes. 666. When was it suggested that it would be a good idea for you to get a home-trade master's certificate ?—When I was on the " Duco." 667. Who suggested it?—Von Schoen. 668. Did he say why?—He did not say why. I said, " It's no use my bothering." 669. He did suggest it was a useful thing so that you could take the steamer outside the harbour? —I knew that, as far as that goes, it would be handy sometimes. 670. Did you fall in with his suggestion as soon as he made it ? —No. 671. Was there argument about it ? —Yes, a lot of argument about it. 672. How long did it go on before you finally decided to make the application for a service certificate ? —Months. 18— H. 26.

H.—26

138

673. And finally you sent in the application that is before the Court?—l did. 674. With a statement of service made up by Yon Schoen ?—I served more. 675. You thought you were entitled to the service certificate ?—Yes. 676. Did you make any bargain with Yon Schoen that you were to pay him anything if you got the service certificate ?—I made a bargain with him, if he got the service certificate. 677. How much were you to pay him ?—I was to pay £20. 678. No teaching was required to get that certificate ?—Only, of course, he had to go and pass the forms, &c. 679. You agreed to pay £20 if he got the service certificate ?—Yes. 680. You heard that the Marine Department refused your application ?—Yes. 681. Is there any foundation for the suggestion that there was any improper application made to Mr. Seddon to help you? —No. 682. You simply went to him to get justice because he was the head of the Government ? — Yes ; I did not agree with them—that was the only reason I went to see the Premier. 683. Did your employer, Mr. Williams, bring any pressure to bear upon you: did he direct you to get a certificate ? —No ; he never did anything in it. 684. It was not to please him that you made the application ? —No. 685. I understand that you did go out of port sometimes in one of the boats, with a certificated master nominally in charge?— Yes, several times. 686. Who was actually in charge ?—I was always in charge. 687. A certificated officer (a captain) was carried as a dummy?—He would be there to comply with the law. 688. Mr. Williams did not particularly want you to get a certificate?—No, it was nothing to Mr. Williams. 689. After seeing Mr. Allport and Mr. Seddon, you went and saw Mr. Hall-Jones, Mr. Seddon having left New Zealand ?—Yes. 690. Now, when you and Captain Allman were present in Mr. Hall-Jones's room, you state something was said about dispensing with a mate's certificate ? —Yes. 691. Was anything said as to the regulations about tug-service?— Yes; Captain Allman brought up something about tug-service. 692. And what did Mr. Hall-Jones say to that?—l think he agreed with Captain Allman. 693. When you left the room, you left Captain Allman and Mr. Hall-Jones together ?—Yes. 694. When you left the room, what did you understand was to be done in regard to your examination ? —I understood that I had to go to Captain Yon Schoen's to get some teaching. 695. But what did you understand about the mate's certificate ?—I understood they were going to dispense with it. 696. Did Mr. Hall-Jones use any words to convey that impression to you ?—Yes. 697. What did he say? —He said he would see into that—that he would make it all right. 698. You mean that he said something more than he would see into it ? —I think Allman asked him if he would give an order to the department, or something to dispense with it. 699. And what did Mr. Hall-Jones say in answer to that?—He made me understand that he would send an order to the department. 700. Well, the question was not left open for further looking into ?—I do not know. 701. What impression was on your mind when you left the room? —The impression on my mind at the time was that I would get the service certificate. 702. Did you know you were to go up for an examination?— Yes. 703. And you have told their Honours you knew from the regulations you say you have read that a mate's certificate was in the way ?—Yes. 704. And when you left the room it was, as you say, with the knowledge that you were going up for examination soon ? —Yes. 705. Well, what about the mate's certificate?— Well, I left Captain Allman there, as he told me that Hall-Jones told him that he would give him an order, or send an order to the department. 706. Is that what Captain Allman told you, or Mr. Hall-Jones?—Mr. Hall-Jones, before I left the room. 707. Judge Ward.] He would give Captain Allman or the department an order to that effect ? 708. Mr. Gray.] To do what?—To dispense with the mate's certificate. 709. And then you went to Yon Schoen and studied more or less at his house ?—Yes. 710. Did you make any further bargain about what you were to pay him ?—No. 711. Then you went up for the examination ? —Yes. 712. Had you seen Captain Allman in the meantime after being in the Minister's room and before you went up for the examination ?—I think I saw him once since. I think I told him I would be coming up in a few days or something. 713. Was there any sort of arrangement between you and him, or any suggestion of an arrangement between you and him, that he was to put you through anyhow ?—Not at all; no arrangement whatever. 714. How long have you known Yon Schoen? —A good long while, I suppose fifteen or sixteen years. 715. Did you know that he had been a teacher of navigation a long time?— Yes. 716. You have frequently seen in the papers that his candidates had successfully passed for masters' or mates' certificates ? —Yes. 717. Did you know that he was employed a good deal of late as assessor on nautical inquiries ? —Yes.

H.—26

139

718. And I think you told the Commissioners that he was a good deal about the Marine Department ?—Yes. 719. And he himself told you he knew how to work it ?—Yes. 720. Did you look upon him as a person in authority ? —I did. 721. Did you think he had any connection with the Marine Department ?—1 thought he had authority to do these things. 722. Did you think he could do pretty well as he liked? —I thought he could do a great deal there. 723. You had no sort of arrangement, of course, with Mr. Allport about you going through your examination ?—No. 724. And you did not see Mr. Glasgow at all ?—No. 725. When these papers were prepared by Yon Schoen at his house, did he ask you then to write out anything yourself?—No, he did not ask me to write anything at all. 726. You saw him fill in some papers which he afterwards gave to you?-—Yes. 727. Was anything said about your writing?—l told him I could not do the writing very well. 728. Was anything said about the want of likeness between your writing and his writing? — No, I do not think so. 729. How did you think that that writing was going to pass the Examiners? —I did not give it a thought how it was going to pass. 730. You trusted entirely to Yon Schoen ?—Yes. 731. You say he told you to take these papers down to the Examiner, and say that you had done the work yourself ?—Yes. 732. Did you think at that time you were doing anything improper ?—No, 1 did not. 733. You had been up for examination before, when you got the river certificate ?—Yes. 734. It was not very difficult, was it —a little subtraction, multiplication, and division ?—Yes. 735. Were you aware that it might be said that you or Yon Schoen, or both, were doing something which was fraudulent? —No, I did not think it was. 736. In view of what has happened since, you are sorry you had anything to do with it?—l expect I am. 737. You say you were entirely guided by Yon Schoen, and he was constantly at you?—-Yes. 738. He used to telephone to you?— Yes, at any time—Sundays, or any other time. 739. He gave you no peace, you told the Commissioners?— No. 740. Did it occur to you, or did Yon Schoen suggest, that there would be any trouble in getting these papers passed by the Examiner?—He did not suggest anything about it. 741. You thought he was all-powerful in the matter ? —Yes, I thought, of course, that he knew all about it, and he was doing this to befriend me. I had no idea of what was going to turn up out of it. 742. You did not suspect then, I suppose, that he was going to play the sneak ?—No, I did not. 743. And afterwards give information about this—about you and Captain Allman ?—No, I had no idea. 744. Did you trust Yon Schoen at that time ?—Certainly I did. 745. You got the certificate in July, 1897 ?—Yes, I think so. 746. And it was cancelled by a judgment of the Supreme Court in April, 1899. Did you ever use it ? —Yes, once. 747. Where did you go to?—To Kapiti. 748. On the " Duco " or " Duchess " ?—On the " Duco." 749. The master of the " Duco " was laid up at the time, was he ?—No ; the other boat was not out then. 750. Have you ever used it since you had command of the " Duchess " ?—No, I had no occasion. 751. Eeferring to this declaration : You do recollect the Premier being on the steamer one day going to Day's Bay ?—Yes. 752. And you told the Commissioners that Mr. Johnson asked them to come into the cabin, and then there was some refreshment ? —Yes. 753. Is it a fact, Captain Jones, that on that occasion Mr. Seddon did make some reference about having got your certificate ? —Yes. 754. Did he say that he had done what he promised to do ?—Yes ; he said justice was done. 755. You do not know, Captain Jones, whether Mr. Seddon was aware that you had been up for examination, and got a certificate of competency?—He knew nothing at all about it. 756. You never had any conversation about the question of competency ?—Mr. Seddon was only dealing with the service certificate. He knew no more about the other than you did. 757. Did you suppose Mr. Seddon was referring to your service certificate when he spoke to you on the " Duchess " that day?— Yes, I suppose so ; I could not think of any other one. 758. You do say that on the " Duchess" he said something about his having helped you to get it ?—Yes, I do. 759. Are these his words: " I fixed it all right for you, old man " ?—I think so. 760. And then you told us how you came to make this declaration: Allman asked you to go to Dr. Mndlay's office, as he was in trouble then : you knew you had no grievance against him ?— No ; I had no quarrel with Captain Allman. 761. And you were not unwilling to help him if you could?—No; why should I not? 762. You did not place any great reliance upon the fact that there was whiskey on board that day ?—I was only there two or three minutes. 763. I suppose when you mentioned it to Captain Allman or Dr. Findlay you did not rely upon it being important ? —No ; I did not think there was anything important in the thing.

H.—26

140

764. You did not think that this statement about the whiskey would be made a public matter? —No, I did not. I thought the thing was done with altogether. It had been to thq Magistrate and then before the jury, and then I thought the thing was all settled. 765. You did not want to slight the Premier or throw discredit upon him by making this reference about the whiskey?— No. 766. You had no quarrel with Mr. Seddon or Mr. Hall-Jones ?—No. 767. You do not suggest that either Mr. Seddon or Mr. Hall-Jones knew anything about what was going to take place in the matter of the examination ?—They knew nothing about it; at least, Mr. Seddon knew nothing about it. 768. And Mr. Hall-Jones did tell you that you would have to go up for examination ?—Yes. 769. You do not suggest that he knew that the examination was going to be a fraud?—No ; I do not suppose so. 770. Mr. Atkinson put some questions to you about certain members of the House who have spoken to you. I suppose a good many people have accosted you about the matter? —Yes, a great many. 771. Some have been trying to "pump " you ? —Oh, yes. 772. Was Mr. Taylor one of them who spoke to you ? —He wanted to get something out of me, but I did not give him any satisfaction. 773. Several other gentlemen's names have been mentioned ?—I say Ido not want to say anything about it. 774. You have been discussing the matter freely with these outsiders, so to speak ?—No, I have not. If they want to know how it was got, I did not tell them any particulars. They get the paper, and they can see the whole thing. 775. You say in your declaration that on the " Duchess " that day Mr. Seddon and some other gentlemen were on board : " I did not know the other gentlemen, but I knew Mr. Seddon " ? —I knew afterwards that Johnson was there. 776. Is it a fact that you recollected Mr. Johnson, Mr. Bannister, Mr. Wilson, and Mr. Hislop ? —Yes, I think Mr. Wilson was there. 777. Did you remember the names when you made this declaration ? —I did not remember the names. 778. Have you ever been in any Court before, Captain Jones? —I have been in the Magistrate's Court once. 779. Under examination as a witness?—l think it was something in connection with the " Coromandel." 780. Did you give much evidence then ?—There was not much evidence to give in it. 781. Were you in the witness-box ?—Yes. 782. Was that occasion the only occasion on which you have given evidence in Court ?—I think so. 783. You are not used to cross-examination by half a dozen lawyers?— No. 784. You have given evidence to-day at your own desire?— Yes. Mr. Gray (to the Commissioners) : He has not claimed any protection; he declined to. His friends desired him to tell all he could. 785. Mr. Hanlon.] Referring again to this declaration, Captain Jones, will you tell me what it was Mr. Seddon said on the boat that day ?—He made some remark about the tumblers. He said they were large. I said they were the only ones I had on board. 786. Well, what did he say ?—He asked me how I was getting on, and I told him I was getting on pretty well. 787. Did you say anything to him about getting a certificate? —No, I never mentioned about any certificate or anything else. He said, " I accomplished what you asked me to do." 788. Is that all ?—I think so ; I did not stop very long. 789. Did he say, " I fixed that all right for you, old man " ? —I think so. 790. Did he say that as well as saying, " I accomplished what you asked me to do ?"—I think he said, " I fixed it all right." 791. What did you say to him then ?—I thanked him. 792. Anything else ?—No, Ido not know that I said anything else. I say there is no use in talking about that now. 793. Was Mr. Seddon boasting about it ?—No. 794. With regard to the conversation you had with Mr. Hall-Jones : You went up to see Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. 795. Well, you had some conversation with him before Captain Allman was sent for?— Yes. 796. Can you tell me what that conversation was? —I went up for the service certificate, as I told you before, and, of course, he said he could not grant it, or something, so that I would have to go up and pass an examination. 797. Did he say anything about passing the examination before Captain Allman came on the scene, or was it after ? —Before and after. 798. Why was Captain Allman sent for ? —He was sent for to see if there was anything to be done in regard to the service certificate ; at least I think so. 799. Did the Minister tell you he would send for Captain Allman ?—Yes. 800. Now, what did the Minister say he was going to send for him for ?—He said he had seen Captain Allman, who I had said was blocking the way over this certificate, and he sent for us to get us face to face. 801. He wanted to get you and Captain Allman face to face ? —Yes. 802. Because you had alleged that Captain Allman was standing between you and the certificate ? >

141

H.—26

Dr. Giles : Captain Jones alleged that Captain Allman was favourable to his getting it, and Mr. Hall-Jones sent for Captain Allman to have them face to face. Captain Jones : That is correct, sir. 803. Mr Hanlon.] Did you tell the Minister that Captain Allman was in favour of your getting the service certificate ?—I think so ; yes. 804. When Allman came into the room, can you tell me what he said ?—Something about that I would have to go up and pass an examination. 805. Who said so?— The Minister. 805 a. That was when Allman came into the room?— Yes. 806. Did he tell you why he sent for Captain Allman ?—To waive the mate's certificate. 807. What did Allman say to that? —That he would have to give him an order to that effect to do away with the mate's certificate before he would allow me to sit. 808. And what did the Minister say ?—He said he would see into it. 809. Did Captain Allman refer to the regulations ?—Yes. 810. Who suggested looking into the regulations ?—I think the Minister had the regulationbook. 810 a. Did the Minister ask Captain Allman any question with regard to the regulations ?—No, I do not think he did when I was there. 811. What did Captain Allman say about the service certificate?— Captain Allman thought that the service would entitle me to qualify for the master's certificate. He thought it would qualify me to dispense with the mate's certificate. 812. Captain Allman told the Minister that in your presence?— Yes. 813. And then what did the Minister say?—l think the Minister agreed with him at the time that that was so. 814. What did the Minister say ?—Yes, that was right—that the service would entitle me. And then Captain Allman said he would have to give an order to the department to allow me to go and sit and dispense with the mate's certificate. That is all that v;as said that I know. 815. You say you went away and left Captain Allman with the Minister; why did you go away before Captain Allman left ? —Of course they had no more to say to me. The Minister told me that I would be allowed to sit. I had to go to be taught and get coached up for it. 816. Did he tell you that distinctly —no doubt about it at all ?—Yes, that was what I understood. 817. I understood you to say that he was going to look into the question of dispensing with the mate's certificate ?-~—Yes, he was looking into it then. Captain Allman read this regulation over, and they agreed that it was so. 818. You went away with the impression that the certificate was to be dispensed with, and you were to be allowed to go up for examination ?—Yes. 819. When did you see Captain Allman after that ? —I did not see him for a good while. 820. When you were being cross-examined by Mr. Gray you made some mention of the fact that it was Captain Allman who said it was going to be dispensed with ?—No, I do not think Captain Allman told me that. I think it was said in the Minister's room. 821. Now, are you certain that it was said by Mr. Hall-Jones?—Yes, I think it was said by Mr. Hall-Jones. 822. Are you certain? —Yes, I am certain. 823. Did you not go to see Captain Allman afterwards?— No. 824. When did you next see Captain Allman?—l do not know when I saw him after that. 825. Was it a week, month, or two months ?—Two or three days. 826. Then what conversation did you have with Allman when yoa met him?—l did not have any conversation with him that I know of. I told him that 1 was up with Yon Schoen ; I was studying, and that I would be going up for the examination in a few days. 827. Was anything said between you and Captain Allman about the mate's certificate?—l do not think so. 828. Did Captain Allman tell you that he had seen the Minister ? —He might. 829. Can you recollect if he did say anything about it ? —I do not remember. 830. Did he tell you that the order had been given ? —Some time after. 831. Not this time, not three or four days after, that the order had been actually given to the Marine Department —when did he tell you?— Some time after—-that the order was given. It might have been a day after or two days after the first time I saw him. 832. Well, did he say anything about this order ?—No, he said he got an order to allow me to go and sit for the examination. 833. How long after that was it that you actually did sit for the examination?—l forget how long it was ; it might be a fortnight. 834. Can you be sure about that ? —I cannot be sure. 835. Do you believe that it was about a fortnight ?—Yes, I believe it was about a fortnight. 836. You say you were only one day at your examination ?—Yes. 837. Then can you account for putting the dates on these forms, first the 13th and then the 19th?—I cannot. 838. Well, do you know whether it was the 13th or the 19th when you sat ?—I cannot say. 839. Dr. Giles.] If you did all three papers on the same morning would you have dated them differently ? —I may have made a mistake, your Honour. Mr. Travers : Instructions from the Marine Department were only received by the Customs authorities on the 13th; therefore it is very improbable that the examination would have taken place on the very day when the document was received by the Collector of Customs.

H.—26

142

Captain Edwin, sworn and examined. 840. Mr. Hanlon.] What is your name ? —Eobert Atherton Edwin. 841. Are you a master mariner?—l am a retired commander of the navy. 842. Were you, in 1897, one of the Nautical Examiners in Wellington?— One of the Examiners for masters and mates in Wellington. 843. Do you know the last witness, Captain James Jones ?—Yes. 844. Do you remember him presenting himself for examination?— Yes, quite well. 845. Do you remember the date?— Well; the 19th July. 846. Was Captain Allman your co-Examiner? —Yes. 847. And when Jones presented himself for examination, will you tell me what happened?— Captain Allman and I were in the examination-room when Jones came up about 10 o'clock, the time appointed for the examination, and he came into the room and we immediately saw him go through the tests for form vision and colour. When this was done, Jones was told to sit down at a table to go on with the rest of the examination. While sitting down he took out of his pocket an envelope, which he handed to Captain Allman. I was standing not far away, and I said to Captain Allman, "What is that?" He opened the envelope and said, "These seem to be examination-papers " ; and so I said, " Tear them up," and Captain Allman tore them up. I saw him do it, and saw the pieces fall on the floor. There being only one Examiner necessary for any examination, and as I had my own work to do, I went into my own room to do it. 848. Were the whole of the papers which were contained in that envelope torn up?—We know since that they were not. I was under the impression at the time that they were all torn up. 849. There were some questions prepared by Captain Allman ?—I did not see him write any question. 850. What was Jones to sit down and do at the table ? —Well, the examination-papers may have been held by Captain Allman. When an examinee goes up for examination, the Examiners would perhaps prepare the papers an hour or so beforehand. When a candidate first comes in he is put through the colour, form, and vision tests, and then he is set down at a table and the first of his papers is given to him. I did not see Captain Allman give him any papers ; they may have been on a table in another part of the room. We generally take it for granted that these things are all ready to hand to do. 851. Do the Examiners not confer as to the form of questions to be asked a candidate?— The questions are all known for every examination; there is no need for consultation. 852. You knew that it was a breach of the regulations for Jones to take any examinationpapers into the room with him ?—Yes. 853. And that is why you wanted them torn up ?—That is why I told Allman to tear them up ; it would prevent their being used in the examination. 854. Does not the fact of taking papers iiico the room entail failure on the candidate ?—Well, I do not know that it entails failure upon the part of the candidate ; it would have been advisable, probably, to have sent the papers to the Marine Department, and they would have decided. 855. Did you sign the recommendation that the certificate should issue to Jones?—-Yes. 856. Were you satisfied in your own mind that, after these papers had been destroyed, the examination had been conducted properly ?—Of that I had no doubt whatever: that Captain Allman had conducted the examination efficiently and properly. 857. You did not go back into the room after the papers were torn up?—No; I was not in the room until the examination practically was over. Captain Allman asked me to sign the declaration. 858. Did you know auything about Yon Schoen's connection with this examination ?—All I know is that he has been a teaxher of navigation in Wellington for a long time. 859. Is that all the fault you have to find with him ? —Well, I think so. As a matter of course, as a teacher for examinations, he always wanted to know what was going on, and he would try to best the Examiners if he could. That is all I know against him. 860. Have you ever found him in the examination-room, assisting candidates?— Yes ; I found him there once, many years ago. 861. Was he assisting the candidate ?—Yes. at that time ; it was one of his first pupils. 862. What did you do in consequence of that ?—I ordered him out of the room and I failed his candidate. That was the only time I ever saw him in the examination-room. 863. How long was it ago?—lt might be more than fifteen years ago. 864. Since that time he has been continually going to the Examiners and trying to get all the information he could ?—No; he would never come to the Examiners. He has never come to me for information as to what was going on in the examination-room, or on any candidate's behalf, or upon what point the candidate failed. In fact, he never asked any questions about candidates. 865. Dr. Findlay.} Referring to the occasion upon which you found Yon Schoen in the examination-room and ordered him out and rejected the candidate : Did you know whether Mr. Allport was in the Marine Office at that time?—l suppose so. I think Mr. Allport has been in the Marine Department for many years. 866. As far as you know he was in the office at that time?—l think he must have been an officer of the Marine Department. 867. Can you say from your knowledge or recollection of the circumstances whether Mr. Allport would know that Yon Schoen had been in the examination-room assisting a candidate ? —I do not think he did. 868. Was the circumstance not well known to the officials of the Marine Department— was it not a matter upon which you made a complaint ?—I made no complaint; I fired them both out.

H.—26

143

869. You did not warn any of your colleagues about Yon Schoen's action?—l had nothing to do with that; I simply concluded the examination. One does not probably find fault a first time. 870. What! for coming into an examination-room and assisting a candidate?—l have proved that I found fault with him by sending him out. 871. You thought it was a very grave piece of misconduct on his part ?—Yes. 872. Now, did you know that Yon Schoen had been in the habit of writing to the department, in his own name, complaining of the treatment his candidates had received ac the hands of Examiners ?—Certainly not, I have no knowledge of what his correspondence was. Ido not know that any letters came before me at all. 873. Were not complaints referred to you for answer as to the treatment of candidates who had submitted themselves to examination by you ?—They might have come from the Marine Department to me. I think the matter used to go through the Marine Department, but I do not think any letters of Yon Schoen's came. 874. You told Mr. Hanlon that Yon Schoen had never applied to you for official information ?— Quite so. 875. Did you see the letter he wrote to Mr. Hood, stating that he had some kind of official information?— Well, I have seen it here. 876. Is that the first time ?—Yes, I think so. 877. There was an official inquiry about the matter, so Mr. Allport told us? —I was not asked any questions; I have not been before any inquiry in which Mr. Hood's letter was alluded to. 878. It was not submitted to you ?—No. 879. Do you know that it was the opinion that Yon Schoen was too often in the Marine Department ?—Well, I am never up in the Marine Department once in months, and I really do not know what Yon Schoen had to do with them. I could not tell you whether he was accustomed to go in and out of the Marine Department. My office is down in the Customhouse. 880. There is a memorandum in Captain Allman's handwriting, being a comment upon that letter, in which I think he says that you had stated that Yon Schoen was becoming a nuisance in the office?—He could not say that because I did not know anything about it. 881. You never stated so? —No, I could not, because I am very infrequently there. 882. You knew, I suppose, that the dispensation of the mate's certificate was illegal ?—Yes. 883. Then you knew that when Captain Jones presented himself for examination he had not the legal qualification to sit for the examination ?—We had a letter from the Collector of Customs which gave us authority to dispense with it. 884. Were you not sufficiently familiar with the regulations to know that it was not sufficient ? —We have to take our instructions. 885. Are you prepared to take instructions which are breaches of the law?—We certainly had to in that case ; we had authority from the Marine Department. 886. Although you knew this was illegal, you thought the authority given by the Marine Department quite sufficient to allow the man to sit ?—Yes, I think so. 887. What acquaintance had you with Captain Jones at this time?— Very little. 888. Did you know anything of his scholarship ?—Yes. 889. Did you know he was an illiterate man ?■—Well, of course, I knew he was not a welleducated man. 890. You examined him, I think, for his river master's certificate ?—Yes. 891. At the time of this examination would you be aware that it was stated the Minister for Marine had dispensed with the mate's certificate?— Well, I did not know. All my knowledge was confined to what was before me at that examination. I had nothing to do with any of the preliminaries. I only knew that the hours were between 10 and 1 o'clock that Jones was to be examined. That is practically all I was concerned in. 892. Surely you knew whether or not the Minister had agreed to this illegal dispensation ?—I simply went by the letter that we received. I remember afterwards that Captain Allman said we had authority. 893. You asked Captain Allman if he had authority? —Yes. 894. Did he answer you? —He said " Yes." 895. Was any further information vouchsafed? —No. 896. Did Captain Allman tell you that the Minister had dispensed with this certificate ?—No, I should say not. The letter would say that he had authority to go up. 897. There is a distinct expression in the letter that the Minister for Marine had directed dispensation of the mate's certificate?—l knew all that. 898. Did you know at the time? —I had the letter to go by. 899. You say you knew the man possessed no large amount of scholarship?— Quite so. 900. Did you discuss with Captain Allman the probabilities of his passing?—No, not at all. 901. Was there anything said at any time prior to this examination as to his chances of passing?— Not that I can remember. 902. Will you swear there was nothing said?—l certainly say there was not. There was no discussion between Captain Allman and myself as to whether Jones could or could not pass this examination. 903. Or as to his capabilities or chances of passing ?—No. 904. Was ihere any talk of any kind about it ?—No, I do not remember the subject being mentioned at all. 905. Part of the examination you conducted yourself, Captain Edwin —you conducted the colour tests and the rule of the road ?—No, that is incorrect. 906. Did you conduct any part of the examination ?—Only that part in connection with form vision and colour tests with Captain Allman.

H.—26

144

907. At any rate, you were a joint Examiner with Captain Allman ?—Yes, that far. 908. Then you left the room a little later?— Yes. 909. Is it usual for an Examiner to take part in an examination in that way, and then leave the room ?—Quite usual. 910. Supposing there was a difference between yourself and your co-Examiner as to the examinee's qualifications to pass for the particular examination you and he had together— supposing, in the earlier part of Captain Jones's examination Captain Allman thought he should pass and you thought he should not : Has any circumstance like that arisen?—No such circumstance as that has arisen. Examiners have got other work to do besides examining candidates, and it might happen at any time of an examination that the Examiner conducting would be sent for, and would be required to leave the room. 911. May I ask whether you intended to go through the examination when you began it ?—I had no particular reason for taking any part in it. It was an ordinary examination. 912. Supposing Captain Allman had left the room?—He might have left the room. One must remain. 913. Can you recollect why you left the room on this particular occasion ?—As I said, I had my own work to do in another room. 914. Can you charge your memory with what circumstances called you from the room on that particular occasion ?—Simply to do my own work. 915. Anything else?—No, nothing else. 916. You do not believe it was because you did not want to be involved in any trouble about these papers?—l had no idea that it would be necessary for me to remain in any way. 617. Did you return before the examination was concluded ?—No. 918. You signed the report that Captain Jones had passed?— Yes. 919. Did you satisfy yourself, from a perusal of the work in any way, that he was entitled to pass? —No, I signed the declaration, because I had taken part in the examination, and I had no idea that' Captain Allman would ask me to sign a false declaration. 920. You certified, of course, to the whole examination ?—Yes, the whole examination. 921. You did not distinctly state in your report as to what part of the examination you took part in ? —No. 922. You certified that he passed the whole examination ? —Yes. 923. You did not make any inspection of Captain Jones's papers?—l looked through the papers, as I usually do, to see that the right number of forms had been used, and that the proper papers were there. 924. Did you make an intelligent perusal of the answers?—No, I did not. I simply counted the papers and signed the declaration. 925. Have you seen the examination-papers since ? —I saw some of them up in Dr. Fitchett's office. 926. Did you observe there that there is a distinct difference between the handwriting in the body of the paper and the signature at the foot ?—No, I do not think I particularly noticed it. I was not looking to see. 927. And the examination you made of the papers at the time you made your report was not sufficiently attentive to see whether the handwriting was the same in the body of the papers as the signature at the foot?—I made no careful examination, because I had full faith in Captain Allman's integrity in having carried out the examination ; and, as he had signed, I was perfectly confident that everything was all right. There was no need for me to take any steps in the matter at all. 928. Would it not have been a more prudent course to sign no certificate, seeing you were there for a very small part of the examination ? —Well, we have been accustomed to do it ever since I have been an Examiner. Two Examiners are wanted, because they have other duties to do. One Examiner may be called away at any time, and if one Examiner is out of Wellington there is still one left to do the work. If there are two, one will conduct the examination; it might be for ten minutes or it might be for the rest of the day. 929. Was Captain Allman there during the whole of the examination ?—Yes. 930. You were there throughout only a part of it ? —Yes. 931. There was no occasion either for your joining in the certificate as to his having passed? —Not unless Captain Allman asked me to sign; otherwise I should not have signed. We always signed together if we took part in any examination. 932. Dr. Giles.] Would one signature suffice ?—Yes., one signature would be quite sufficient. 933. Where two Examiners sign the report, would it not mislead the department into believing that the examination had been conducted by both Examiners all through ? —There is nothing to guide the department either one way or the other. You see, the two signatures were there, and they would know that those two were taking some part in it. 934. Mr. Travers.) The examination is, in the first place, a supervision, is it not ? You are there while the candidate is doing his work ?—That is what the Examiner is for, mainly to see that the candidate does not look at any books—that he has no assistance in answering the questions. 935. I presume you supposed that Captain Allman had satisfied himself on the latter point when he asked you to sign ?—Certainly. 936. That was the usual course ? —Yes. 937. You had no suspicion of any impropriety of any kind?—No ; I never had at any time. I had been associated with Captain Allman in examinations before. There were occasions when he conducted the examinations singly, and the documents had been signed by him, and they have been signed by both ; but I never had any occasion to suppose that Captain Allman would fail to carry out his duty.

145

H.—26

938. It was in full confidence that he had done so in this case that you did it, and because you had taken some part in the examination ?—Undoubtedly. 939. Mr. Atkinson.] You say, on the occasion when you found Yon Schoen in the room, the candidate was being examined. Had you left the candidate by himself?— Yes. 940. Was that according to regulations ?—I think so. The regulations then were not what they are now. 941. It was not an improper thing to leave the candidate entirely alone?—lt was not; no one could get into the room without my knowing. 942. Was it according to the regulations that nobody else was allowed in the room ?—Yes. I was in another room, and could hear everything. 943. Did you hear Yon Schoen come in? —Yes, and followed him immediately. 944. Had any harm been done ?—I do not know. I cleared them out. 945. You " fired " them both out?— Yes. 946. Who was " fired " out first ? —Von Schoen. 947. Did you ask him for an explanation ?—No. 949. Did he tender any explanation?—He made some remarks, but I did not listen to him. 950. He did not say he had come to see you ? —He did not. 951. You said this was fifteen or twenty years ago?—l cannot fix it. 952. Can you swear whether it was after 1877 ? —I do not remember. 953. Did you state to Captain Allman that it was about a quarter of a century ago ?—Not that I remember. 954. Will you swear that you have not done so ?—Yes. 955. I understood.you to say it was Yon Schoen's first pupil?—l do not know whether it was —it was one of the first. 956. Can you swear whether he was a pupil of his at all ? —Yes. 957. How do you know ?—Because there was no other teacher here then. 958. When there was no teacher there were no candidates ?—Yes. 959. You had no work to do until Yon Schoen came here ?—There were examinations before he came. 960. There were candidates before Yon Schoen was here ?—Yes,. there were one or two. There were no teachers that I know of. 961. Was Captain Chapman teaching then ?—Not that I know of. 962. Was Captain Chapman a naval officer ? —Yes, he was. 963. Now, can you remember whether he was a teacher ?— No, I cannot. 964. How is it you knew that this man was a pupil of Yon Schoen's ? —Because I know he was teaching at the time. 965. You say there were candidates for examination before Yon Schoen came here ?—Yes. 966. How did you know that, because there wa3 a teacher here, a candidate had been taught by him ?—I know he was a pupil of Yon Schoen's. 967. Will you swear that ?—Yes. 968. And there was no other teacher at the time?— That I do not know. 969. If Captain Yon Schoen denies it, you will swear positively that he is not speaking the truth ? —I should say not. 970. This was one of his first pupils. Did you know that Yon Schoen was teaching in Wellington ? —No, it is a long time ago, I could not say for certain. 971. You say that since that date Yon Schoen has not been in your confidence. Have you ever consulted him ?—Certainly not. 972. Not on matters of navigation since then? —Certainly not. 973. Have you ever sent him questions in connection with examination-papers or calculations to work out for you ? —I have not. 974. Did you ever send your assistant to him ? —I have not any. 975. You never sent anybody to him?— No. 976. In 1880, had you any assistant ? —Well, there was no assistant of any kind. 977. You never sent anybody to him ?—■Nβ 978. Was Mr. Drury ever sent by you to Yon Schoen ?—■Nβ. 979. Did you give this [produced] to Mr. Drury on your behalf to take to Mr. Yon Schoen ? —No, I never gave Yon Schoen anything to work out for me, and I never consulted him orally at any time. 980. Have you ever expressed an opinion as to his competence or his character since firing him out ?—I have always considered him competent as a teacher. 981. Did you write him a testimonial in 1878 to this effect [No. 7] ?—Yes, 1 have no doubt that I wrote that. 982. Have you any recollection of giving this testimonial on April 19th, 1880? [Testimonial read.] Have you any recollection of writing that ?—I can safely say that I did not give any such testimonial. 983. Will you swear that you have not expressed a high opinion of his competency ?—I tell you that I have never expressed any better opinion than is given in that testimonial. 984. You never stated he was scrupulously honest, sober, and industrious ?—I do not think I ever gave any testimonial to that effect. 985. Did you write the testimonial dated March 2nd, 1885 ?—I think I remember him coming to me saying that he was going to make application for the position of Harbourmaster at the Bluff. 986. Do you swear you never gave any testimonial as to his being trustworthy and of high moral character ?—When you produce the originals I will tell you. In the meantime I decline to swear to them. [Testimonial produced, 2nd March, 1885, No. B.] 19— H. 26.

H.—26

146

987. Did you see all the papers torn up when Jones was entering himself for examination ; were you sure of it at the time ? —I was quite sure of it. 988. You were not very curious about it ? —I saw the papers torn up. 989. You did not see all the papers torn up ?—Captain Allman tore up the papers, and I saw the pieces fall on the floor. 990. You did not watch very critically ? —I thought I saw them all torn up. 991. How many were torn up, do you know?—l do not know how many were torn up. I thought they were all torn up. 992. May candidates use extra papers in the room and not tear them up ? —No. 993. Is it against the regulations to use extra papers or to do rubbing out at examinations ?— They are not allowed to bring extra papers into the room except those given by the Examiners. 994. May they do work in pencil, for instance, and rub it out and then fill the questions in in ink afterwards ?—lt is generally shown how it is done on the papers. 995. Is it at the discretion of the Examiners whether the workings of answers are shown?— The working of each question is to be shown. The candidate is not supposed to put all his answer in it, but is supposed to show how he gets his answer. 996. May he do his work on extra paper?—He has to do it on the proper paper. 997. Will you look at page 4of the examination-papers. Can that question be answered without the use of books—it is a question of latitude, I think?— The candidate is allowed to use the necessary books required in navigation. 998. Would any be required in answering that question ?—Yes, it requires the book of nautical tables and the " Nautical Almanac." 999. Would it be possible to answer that question without reference to such book? —It would require the " Nautical Almanac " for the time, and the other books. 1000. It would be impossible to do it without?—lt could not be done without the tables and the " Nautical Almanac." 1001. Have you satisfied yourself as to the correctness of the workmg-out of that problem ?— I have not worked it out. 1002. Has a candidate to do all his work correctly? —He has to do a certain number of questions. If he fails to answer a question correctly the Examiner is supposed to give him the question again; and if he fails to do it the second time, then the candidate is failed. 1003. You say you accepted Captain Allman's word ? —Yes. 1004. Who were the Examiners in the case of Captains Bendall and McLellan ?—I was one of the Examiners. 1005. You made some investigation for the department subsequent to the examination ; were you asked to report ?—No, not that I know of. 1006. Did you not write a memorandum to the department re the examination ?—That is not what you would call an investigation ; that was a reply to a memorandum sent by the Marine Department. 1007. Did you report that there was any occasion to suspect fraud ?—I had none. 1008. Were you the Examiner in the room when that examination took place?— Yes, 1009. You were not in the room right through the examination ? —No, I was not. 1010. Who was your colleague ? —Captain Allman. 1011. Did you sign the declaration?—l signed the declaration that the examination was correct.

Thursday, 20th July, 1899. Mr. Travers : I wish to correct a statement in the evidence given by Mr. Allport. He said that licenses had been issued to Captains Bendall and Strang to adjust compasses for six months. Permission was given to them to adjust compasses for a period of three months, not six. They were not really licensed at all, because there was no authority. Examination of Captain Edwin continued. 1. Mr. Atkinson.] In reference to the examination of Captains Bendall and McLellan, it was alleged they had been improperly passed, and the Premier submitted a memorandum to you and asked you to report, did he not ? —I made a report on a memorandum sent to me by the Marine Department with reference to this examination. 2. Do you remember any reference to compass-deviation work?—l do not think there was any. It was just a general statement of what took place. 3. Were you asked to look at the examination-papers ?—No. 4. Were the examination-papers sent down to you with the memorandum ?—No ; I have not seen them subsequent to the examination. No papers were sent down to me with that memorandum. 5. The examination had been conducted, and the Premier wrote to you to report about it a year or two afterwards, and this is the statement of your report in answer to his inquiries ?—Yes. 6. You did not look at the examination-papers critically to see if the work had been honestly done ?—I had not seen them since the examination. 7. Then how could you report without seeing the examination-papers ?—Because I remembered them very well at the time of the examination. 8. Then, do you mean to say that you answered, when the Premier wrote to you, denying that there was any fraud, simply on your recollection of the papers, which you had not seen for nearly two years ? —I had seen the papers at the time of the examination. I was satisfied at the time of the examination that, as far as I saw, the papers were correct. 9. Were you in the room at the time of that examination?— Part of the time.

147

H.—26

10. How much of it ?—I do not exactly know how long for each time. 11. Did you read through the papers then, or did you pay no more attention to them than in the Jones case ?—I saw the papers being done in the room, and I looked at them after they were finished. 12. Did you look through them critically, or did you look through them as in Jones's case ?— I did not look through the papers in Jones's case. 13. You certified that they were correct, although you did not examine them ? —Yes. 14. You only looked through the papers at this time ? —I do not remember much about it. 15. And you were content to answer the Premier's inquiry on your recollection of the papers that were nearly two years old ?—As far as I remember there was nothing wrong with the examination. 16. You had no curiosity to look at them in order to refresh your memory ?—No, I had no doubt. 17. Can you swear now, from your knowledge of those papers, that there are not any errors in the compass-deviation work in Bendall's papers?— Not that I know of. 18. Can you swear that there were not? —There might have been small ones, which would not affect the results. 19. Can you swear to half a dozen small errors then ? —I do not know how many. 20. And I suppose in regard to McLellan's you could not swear any more definitely ?—His answers were fairly correct. 21. You could not swear that there were not some errors of similar nature in both sets of papers ?—No ; the examinations were not on the same day. 22. You were satisfied about the examinations even after there was suspicion in the minds of the officers of the department? —I understood they were correct. 23. At the time of Jones's examination you are quite sure he produced an envelope in your presence? —Yes. 24. Had any part of the examination taken place at the time he produced this ? —Only the colour and the sight test. 25. You are sure they had taken place?— Yes. 26. Did you not state in the Magistrate's Court, at Captain Allman's trial, that up to the production of the envelope no part of the examination had taken place?—l cannot say. I want a copy of the depositions. 27. Did it not occur to you to fire the candidate out when he produced this envelope ?— Captain Allman was the Examiner then ; I did not want to take the responsibility alone. 28. Can you say from memory what the date of the examination was—Jones's examination ? —19th July, I think. 29. Was it the 19th you were there? —Yes. 30. Is the form called " Examiner's authority for delivery of certificate " the form you sign certifying that the candidate has passed?—l signed the certificate on what is termed the " Application form." The other certificate is given by the Examiner to the candidate if he passes. 31. Did you sign the authority for the candidate to get his certificate ?—No. 32. Was that part of your duty as Examiner? —No ; one Examiner's authority is sufficient. 33. Did you sign the certificate to the department to hand this authority to the candidate ? —Yes. 34. In regard to your correspondence with Yon Schoen. Do you remember now whether you have acted in any confidential capacity for him during the years 1880 to 1888 ?—I do not think so. 35. When he went on a voyage to Fiji, did you look after his affairs while he was away?— Not that I know of. 36. You do not remember taking charge of his money affairs and his domestic affairs ?—T had nothing to do with his money affairs. 37. You did not get his remittances from Fiji for him? —I believe I did. 38. Here is a letter dated the Bth February, 1884, beginning : —" Dear Yon Schoen, both of your letters have been received and the drafts, but you need not have sent me any money, for there would have been rather more satisfaction in knowing that you were using it to help yourself along." Does t-hat recall anything to your mind : You were acting as a sort of trustee for Yon Schoen's family, and receiving money from him and paying it into his banking account?—l do not think I was acting as his trustee in any way. I received money from him, but I was not acting as his trustee. 39. You were acting as a family friend, not as a legally-appointed trustee, but as a confidential friend of the family ? —I did not consider myself in any particular confidential capacity. 40. Does this not show some particular relation : "Of course you understand that I am going to see that your wife is cared for well?" —I do not think so. 41. Did you habitually sign yourself, " With kindest regards and best wishes for your success, &c. ?" —Very frequently ; I have often done that. 42. You were the Examiner who conducted Captain Mclntyre's examination ? —Yes. 43. You failed him, I think?— Yes. 44. You set him an impossible problem, did you ? —I know I made a mistake in setting one paper. 45. Should not the Examiner have been failed ?—No, I do not know that it was necessary for me to set a problem that would come out properly. 46. Did you intend that the thing should be impossible? —I do not know. 47. And you did not read it as correct when he was unable to find the solution ?—I did not notice the error in question.

H.—26

148

48. Do you think it was right to fail a candidate who could not solve an unsolvable problem?' —I did not intend-it to be unsolvable. 49. You asked him to make parallel lines meet—that was the purport of it, was it not ?—I forget it exactly. 50. Has there been any alteration in the practice of the department, in so far as reporting to candidates the reason for failure, in consequence of that instance ? —Not that I know of. 51. Do you know that Yon Schoen has been trying to make the department know the mistakes for which the candidates have been failed ? —Not that I know of. 52. Do you know that since then the department has allowed candidates to know of their errors ?—I understand that it is allowable to point out where candidates have failed. 53. Was that a result of your mistake in Mclntyre's case ? —Not that I know of. 54. Will you swear that it was not immediately after the discovery of your error in Mclntyre's case ? —I do not remember. 55. Dr. Giles.'] When was Mclntyre's ease? Mr. Atkinson : The 6th December, 1897. 56. Mr. Travers.] Was it the practice to point out to candidates any errors that they had committed in the examinations ?—No. 57. Is it not the practice of the Board of Trade to point out errors?—l am not sure what the practice of the Board of Trade has been ; but recently, I understand, there have been communications between the Marine Department and the Board of Trade, which have resulted in the instruction that the Examiner may point out certain mistakes. 58. Previously it had not been the practice ?—Not at all. 59. Was it not in consequence of the Examiners pointing out these errors that the new instruction was given, and finding that it was the practice of the Board of Trade to do so ?—Yes. 60. And you were instructed thereafter to point out to candidates any errors they had made ? Y eSi 61. It was not the errors of Examiners that were referred to?— Not at all; only errors on the part of candidates in their examination. 62. Are you aware of any other errors on the part of an Examiner except the case referred to by Mr. Atkinson?—None other that I know of. 63. Have there been any errors on the part of Examiners pointed out to you ?—-I am not positive. 64. Have you any recollection of any such thing ?—No. 65. But in that case there was an error in a problem set by yourself?— Yes. 66. You know of no other errors in putting unsolvable questions ? —No. 67. You appear to have acted as an agent in connection with some money transactions of Yon Schoen's, according to the letters produced. How long ago was that?—By the date of the letter, I think it was sixteen years ago. 68. At that time you were on friendly terms with Yon Schoen ? —Fairly so ; not particularly. 69. Sufficiently friendly to do this kind of thing?— Yes. 70. When you required Yon Schoen to leave the room on the occasion that was referred to, did you consider this act of impropriety such as to justify the use of the term " untrustworthy " as regards him ?—I considered that it was improper conduct; it would not prove that he was untrustworthy. 71. At the time you entered the room was he in communication with the candidate ? —As far as I remember he was standing over the candidate at the table. 72. How long had he been there? —About two or three minutes. 73. So that he had not time to interfere much with the candidate ?—He would not have much time. 74. But it was improper? —Yes. 75. Can you say of your own knowledge whether he knew or had means of knowing that what he was doing was improper ?—That I do not know, whether he had or not. 76. You could not say whether he knew it was improper? —He must have known it. The instructions that were in use at that date were not so precise as they are now ; but I do not think they would allow people connected with examinations to be about the place. 77. You gave some testimonials to Yon Schoen?—Yes. 78. Did you give them in the belief that they were justified by his conduct so far as it was known to you ?—Yes. Gboege Allman, sworn and examined. 79. Mr. Hanlon.'] Your name is George Allman ? —Yes. 80. And you are a master mariner?— Yes. 81. In 1897 you were Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in Wellington ? —Yes. 82. You were co-examiner with Captain Edwin, the last witness ? —On some occasions I was associated with Sir Arthur Douglas and Captain Marciel. It was not necessary that I should be associated with Captain Edwin. I could hold an examination in any part of the colony. 83. You heard two statements, purported to have been signed by you, read here by Mr. Seddon ?—Yes. 84. Dr. Findlay.} Before we deal with the statements Mr. Hanlon has shown you, I will ask about a few matters which are not mentioned in either statement. First, with regard to your qualifications : Ax, what age did you start your sea service?'—At twelve years of age. 85. What age are you now? —I am forty-nine. 86. Then you have been some thirty-seven years at sea, or connected with nautical matters ? —Yes, and about five years on shore.

149

H.—26

87. Where ?—I have been four years in Wellington since I got the appointment, and 1 was twelve months cast away on the coast of India, living with the natives. That makes five years. 88. With the exception of the five years you refer to, that makes thirty-two years you have been at sea?— Yes. 89. Have you served in different services during that time ?—Yes, I have been in three services. 90. What services were they?—My first nautical career was two years spent on board Her Majesty's training ship stationed in the Mersey. I learned everything there it was possible to learn in the way of navigation, and more than is actually required now for any service. I was bound apprentice with Smith, Fleming, and Co., London, for a term of four years. Their ships were trading with India, China, Japan, and Australia, and after I served my time I was appointed third officer on one of the largest ships out of London, when I was nineteen years of age. Owing to the captain's death I was appointed second mate of this big ship, the " Dilawur," at the age of twentyone. I got home to London, and my senior officer took my place, and I was appointed to a smaller vessel in the China trade as second officer. 91. How many years were you in that position ? —-I was second officer for about three years. The vessel I was on was trading on the coast of China and Japan. I know the coast of China and Japan as well as I do this colony's. 92. You were second mate for three years?— Yes. 93. And how long first mate?— About two years. 94. When did you first become captain ?—Well, the master got ill and I took the vessel from Sydney to Shanghai when I was about twenty-four. 95. How many years were you in the service of McMeckan, Blackwood and Co. ? —To connect my sea service I was in Smith, Fleming's employ to 1876. The vessels were all sold off from time to time, and I was the captain of the very last ship that was sold. In 1876 I had to make a fresh start in life, as it were. I had been on a great many voyages, and had a great many friends. They sold their vessels to McMeckan, Blackwood and Co. 96. How many years were you in then- employ? —From 1876 to 1879. 97. And from 1879 onwards were you in the employ of the Union Company?— Yes, and never out of it until lately. 98. Have you had command of any of the largest steamers?— Yes, I had them all; the largest vessel I had command of was the " Mararoa." 99. You left the " Mararoa " to take this position ? —No, I left the " Eotomahana." 100. You have had command of the " Mararoa," and the largest vessels of the Union Company ?—Yes, and the smallest ones too. 101. From the period 1881 to 1894?— Yes, thirteen years with the Union Company. 102. You have testimonials from Mr. James Mills as to the way you did your work ?—Yes. 103. You never lost a vessel in your career ?—I never rubbed the paint off, and I never lost a life. 104. Prior to receiving this position you recently occupied in the Government service, did you pass an examination?— Yes, in Sydney. 105. What was that examination ?—For an extra master's certificate. 106. It has been suggested that you passed that examination improperly ?—Yes, I heard that that report was circulated by Yon Schoen. 107. What were the facts?—l passed a proper examination. 108. And there was no impropriety in your examination at all ?—Not a particle. 109. You succeeded in getting the position of Nautical Adviser in the Government service?— Yes. 110. You knew, as a matter of fact, that Yon Schoen was an applicant for the position ? —I did not know until this trouble arose. 111. Did you know Yon Schoen before? —No, not until I was associated with the Marine Department. 112. We are told that you took some lessons from Yon Schoen ? —Yes. 113. Will you explain as shortly as you can how that came about ?—When I passed my examination in Australia the regulations there comprised a certain amount of matter in compass deviation. It included forty-seven definitions. Now, the instruction at the beginning of the fortyseven definitions is, " The candidate will be required to answer all the following questions correctly, and he is expected to show that he has a practical knowledge of the method of adjusting compasses." Now there is no working out at all —you merely committed these definitions to memory. That is what I passed in Australia. In 1895 the new regulations, which comprised additional problems, were to come into force on the Ist January m Australia. They also came into force at the same time in Great Britain. In New Zealand this additional matter came into force on the Ist July, 1895. After I got acquainted with Yon Schoen 114. That was after you passed your examination ?—Yes. 115. Dr. Giles.] When did you pass the examination?—ln December, 1894. 116. Dr. Findlay.] You passed in December, 1894. This work became necessary some six months afterwards?—On the Ist July, 1895, when I was very anxious to learn the necessary work, and I arranged with Yon Schoen to teach me. 117. At any rate you got some lessons from him—how many lessons in all?—I was there for about a week, in the evenings. 118. For about a week in the evening you had the advantage of tuition from Yon Schoen ? —Yes, to learn this additional matter. One of che two reasons for which I went to Yon Schoen was because the department had not these regulation-books that the matter was in. I asked the department to write to London for them, and I also wrote to Australia ; but, strange to say, they

H.—26

150

did not arrive in the office of the department until the Ist July. One of my objects in going to Yon Schoen was to learn these problems, so as to enable me to show the other Examiners throughout the colony. 119. You went to him, apparently, because he had this information ?—Yes. 120. You desired to get it to assist the Examiners throughout the colony? —Yes. 121. You took up your duties at what time as Examiner and Nautical Assessor?— About the first week in January, after the holidays, 1895. 122. It became necessary to revise the regulations in connection with the Shipping and Seamen's Amendment Act, I understand? —Yes, in the 1894 Act. 123. Did you revise the regulations ?—I revised them all. I made them all—all the regulations that exist in New Zealand. 124. The regulations for the adjustment of compasses were made on the 13th February, 1896. These regulations, I believe, are the regulations at present in force in Victoria ?—Yes. 125. Can you recollect who brought these regulations under your notice with a view of having them adopted in New Zealand?— Well, the Act was passed in the House as to licenses of adjusters of compasses, and I was called upon to act in the matter by the head of the department—or through the Minister, I do not know which—and Mr. Glasgow and I had a conversation over the matter. I also discussed the matter with Mr. Allporfc. I told them that I had not much material at hand upon which to draw up regulations, and I asked Mr. Glasgow if he would communicate with the Australian colonies for information regarding this matter—that is, Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, and South Australia. 126. Did you get that information? —We got all the particulars, and the Victorian regulations were adopted here.. 127. Do you know whether Mr. Allport had anything to do with the adoption of these Victorian regulations—had he anything to do with them at all ? —Well, he talked the matter over with the Secretary, and it was referred to the Crown Law Officers to conform with the Act. 128. Did you know at that time that the effect of these regulations was to throw into the pocket of Yon Schoen the whole of the fees for the adjustment of compasses?—No, I did not. 129. Was that the effect of it ?—Yes. 130. And why ? —Well, because Yon Schoen held the necessary qualifications—he held an extra master's certificate. Of course there were a great many men in New Zealand who had extra master's certificates, but these men were retired masters of vessels, &c. 131. The only licensed adjuster of compasses in the colony at this time was Captain Yon Schoen, who had the qualification necessary?— Yes, according to regulations. 132. If things had remained as they were, then the effect would have been that a large sum of money would have been annually placed in Yon Schoen's pocket ?—I compute it roughly that it meant between £1,700 to £2,000 a year for him, that is, if the regulations had not been amended. 133. Were these regulations suspended in any way ? —Well, as a matter of fact, the adjusters of compasses had been working here for a number of years, and they were thrown out of employment, as it were, by these regulations. Captains Bendall and Strang, I think, interviewed the Minister, and he did not enforce the Act or regulations for a considerable time, probably six months or nine months, I do not know exactly, to enable them to qualify for these licenses as adjusters of compasses. 134. Did you know at the time these regulations were framed that Captain Yon Schoen was the only licensed adjuster of compasses who had these qualifications ? —No, I did not. 135. Were you then of opinion that there were others throughout the colony who had the necessary qualifications? —No, I did not know at all. 136. The regulation in Victoria is that adjusters take a certain portion of the work in turn: is it because there are many licensees who could do the work and have the qualifications ?—I cannot definitely say that. I drew up the regulations myself, and I submitted them after I had done so to the Inspector of Machinery, who is a surveyor of shipping, and he said that he thought the regulations very good, but he did not like this " turn " business, and it was recommended that we should get further information. I agreed with him, and informed Mr. Glasgow and Mr. Allport, and asked them to write over to Victoria and ask why this rotation was adopted, and we got a favourable reply. Then it was definitely decided to adopt their regulations. 137. I find on the sth July, 1897, that is, fourteen days before this fatal examination, there was an alteration made in the regulations for the adjustment of compasses?— Yes. 138. Is it over the name of Mr Hall-Jones ?—I am responsible for them. 139. These were passed on your recommendation ? —Yes, through the representation of a deputation that waited upon the Minister —a deputation of shipmasters. I was present myself at the deputation. 140. What was the effect of these regulations upon the position of those who were licensed to adjust compasses ? —You could select your own adjuster; there was no monopoly; there was no rotation about it; you could select your own man. 141. These regulations met the point you refer to in the first regulation. If this regulation had not been carried Yon Schoen would have had a monopoly of this work ?—He would have got his turn under the new regulations. Subsequently the shipmasters chose their own adjusters. 142. Did you know there was considerable opposition to these new regulations ?—A deputation waited on the Minister and said so. 143. Under the new regulations now in force, the shipmasters select their own adjusters ?—Yes. 144. Did you know that about the middle of 1897, or a little earlier, a Mr. Gilford began an opposition school of navigation to Yon Schoen's ? I did. not know ; I heard of it. 145. Now, do you remember about that time that Yon Schoen met you in the street, and asked you to let his men pass ?—Yes, " in preference to Mr. Gifford's."

151

H.—26

146. What did you reply? —I told him I would do nothing of that sort. I told him that every one who came up for examination got a fair show. 147. On your making that reply did he say anything further?—He said he would make it worth my while. I told him I would not do anything of the sort if he gave me the whole of New Zealand. I would not pass an incompetent man. 148. Do you recollect, afoer your refusal to accept a bribe from him, he spoke to you prior to the opening of the last Parliament, near the Customhouse—did he ask questions then ?—Yes ; several candidates had come up for examination. I did not know who they had been coached ty, and he asked me if his men were going to pass. I said, " Certainly, if they do the necessary work." He said, "If they do not pass I will go to Pirani and tell him about Jones's affair. He has gob his knife into the Government." 149. What did you say to that ? —I told him he could go to h—l and do his d 1. 150. This was a few days before the opening of Parliament last year? —Yes. 151. Had you any further interview with Yon Schoen afterwards ?—None. I nodded to him when passing him on the street. 152. Was an examination then pending? —I think there were two or three men up. 153. Did you know whose pupils they were ?—No, not then. I knew afterwards by seeing their names in the paper. 154. You did not put it in the newspapers? —No ; either Mr. Gifford or Mr. Yon Schoen did. 155. You have seen a letter which was addressed by Yon Schoen to a Mr. Hood, who was an officer in the Union Company's boats and a pupil at Mr Gifford's school. You have heard the letter read, I think. It is dated the 10th September, 1897. It says : '■' I have received official information upon which I will not enlarge ; suffice it to say that I think you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House, Hill Street." Did Yon Schoen ever receive any official information from you regarding examinations?—No, never. _ 156. We have heard his opinion about you. He expressed his opinion about you to Captain Jones. Did he at any interview call you a " cad? " —No, we were always friendly. 157. He never called you that to your face ? —No. 158. He had no quarrel-with you?— No. 159. Was Yon Schoen in the habit of calling frequently at the Marine Department office ? —Oh, yes, very frequently, that is when I was first there. I occupied a table in the same room with the Chief Clerk, Mr. Allport. 160. How long were you in that room ?—Speaking from memory, I should say for about a year. It may only have been six months. 161. What year was it ?—1895. 162. During that time was Yon Schoen often in ?—Yes, he was very often in. 163. What do you mean by very often?—l should say he was in two or three times a week. 164. Whom did he call to see? —He did not call to see me. He used to say " Good morning" to me when he came in. He called chiefly to see Mr. Allport. It was a general office and was free to anyone seeking inquiries. 165. Mr. Allport knew of these irregularities in connection with the examination in February of the year, 1898. Did he at any time tell you that there was any rumour or report that examinations were being conducted irregularly? —Not by word or deed. 166. From February, 1898, onwards, you say that Mr. Allport neither by word nor deed suggested that there was any complaint about irregularities connected with the examination ? —No, nor any one else. 167. You are sure of that?— Yes. 168. Afcer you left this office in which Mr. Allport is, have you seen Yon Schoen in Mr. Allport's room ?—Oh, yes, from time to time when I called down there. 169. I understand from you that you left Mr. Allport's room and got another room ?—Yes, I got a room to myself. 170. Did you commonly find Mr. Yon Schoen in Allport's room after you left this office ?— Yes, a good many times—frequently. 171. Do you recollect on any occasion going into Mr. Allport's room and finding Yon Schoen and Allport sitting together at the table?— Yes, they always sat much in the same position. There was always a chair at the corner of Mr. Allport's table for any one coming in for information. 172. Then between Captain Yon Schoen and Mr. Allport what space would there be ?—They were very close—they could almost rub noses. 173. Do you recollect on any occasion while Yon Sehoen was there seeing examination papers lying between him and Mr. Allport ?—I did afcer this affair of Mclntyre's. 174. What date was Mclntyre's matter ?—The 29th December, 1896. 175. Was it after that?—lt might have been before or after. 176. Can you tell me about what time it was that you went into the room and found Allport and Yon Schoen with examination-papers between them?— About the time of this examination; it was either shortly before or after. 177. It was before Captain Jones's examination, at any rate?—-Yes. 178. Were the papers lying on the table between the two men you mention ?—They were on Mr. Allport's left-hand side. 179. They were on the table between Captain Yon Schoen and Mr. Allport?—Yes, close between the two ; they were examination-papers of some sort. 180. Can you tell me where the examination-papers went to after they were examined by you?— They were sent to the department. Captain Edwin does not examine the papers. 181. What do you do with them?—lf I hold an examination myself, or in conjunction with Captain Edwin, or Sir Arthur Douglas, or Captain Marciel, we sign the certificate jointly.

H.—26

152

182. Yes, but what is done with the examination-papers after they leave your hands ?—I hand them in to the department. 183. What does the department do with them?— Well, the application-form is attached to the papers, and all the information regarding the successful candidate or non-successful candidate is recorded in the office by the recording clerk. 184. Do you know what is done with them after they are sent to the department?— After the particulars are recorded the papers are put away into pigeon-holes or something. 185. The record is kept of the certificate of the Examiners—who keeps it?— Mr. Grix, I think. 186. The papers are put away in some cupboard, are they ?—Yes, a cupboard in the office. 187. Can you tell me any reason why the examination-papers should lie on Mr. Allport's table?—He may have been looking over them for some purpose or other. 188. Can you say with any certainty, for what purpose he could be looking at the examinationpapers?—l should say that it was merely for curiosity. 189. Do you recollect whether there were any examinations proceeding in Wellington, or in the colony, at the time you saw these papers lying on the table? —These were recorded papers that I saw lying on the table, with red-ink marks on. 190. These papers had been put away in the cupboard ?—They must have been put away somewhere; they could not have been lying there for months. 191. Did you speak to Mr. Allport about papers lying on his table ?—No, I did not. 192. Did you mention anything to Mr. Allport about locking the papers up?—l arranged for a cupboard to be put up, and he kept the key of it. 193. Had you any reason" for wanting a cupboard ?—I wanted to make certain that the questions would not get abroad in anyway. 194. Had you any reason to believe that questions were getting abroad?—l heard down on the wharf that Captain Yon SchoenTiad got a copy of the questions and answers that had been sent out from Home by the Board of Trade. 195. Had you any talk with Mr. Allport about the frequency of Yon Schoen's visits to the office ?— No, I cannot say I ever did. 196. We have had reference made to Mr. Matheson's case? —Yes. 197. Matheson was a candidate who came up for examination before you ?—He came up in Wellington. 198. And we have been told that there was some doubt as to his ability to pass the vision test. Do you recollect when he sat for the vision test that he complained that it was a dull day, and for that reason he could not perform the tests ?—This man ■ Matheson was told to come up for examination on a particular day The papers were handed in to the office by Captain Edwin. He informed me that a man was coming up for examination as master. I said, " All right, 1 will be there at 10 o'clock." I went there and Captain Edwin went on examining this man in the vision tests. I was sitting at the table getting the necessary papers ready, when Captain Edwin said " I say, Captain Allman, you might have a look and see this man reading all the vision tests." The man was standing about 16 ft. away from the vision test. I got up and stood beside him and Captain Edwin turned over another sheet at my direction, and this man read it down to about half-way through and then began to hesitate. I said " Cannot you go further —how can you account for that ?" I said, "lam an older man than you," and I went back a little further and I read all the letters distinctly, every one on the sheet. And I asked the man " How can you account for it?" " Well," he said, " Captain, it is a very dull day." And I said " Well, it is." "Well," I said, " if you fail on this matter, it is a very serious thing, because it will mean the loss of your certificate." I told him then to come up to-morrow to finish it, as it might be a bright sunny day, and he might have no difficulty in getting over this matter. This man then said " I have not failed." I said, " No, you come up to-morrow." 199. Did he leave the room ? —Yes, after giving Captain Edwin and myself a bit of his mind. 200. Did you see any papers of his after he left the room ?—I asked Captain Edwin where his papers were. I examined the papers and among his testimonials was a foreign-going mate's certificate. It was opened up a little at the corner, and on examining this certificate I found endorsed on the corner by the Victorian Marine Board, " Failed in the vision test," and the date of it was about three months and four days prior to his application in New Zealand. 201. You say there was a record on the mate's certificate that he had failed in the vision test ? —Yes, in Melbourne. 202. There was an application sent in by him for this examination, I suppose?— Yes, an application form. 203. In that application form was there any statement that he had been failed ? —Yes; there is a place in these application forms where a candidate has to state if he has failed at a previous examination or not, and what he failed at. This was filled in " Not failed." 204. In whose handwriting? —The whole application form was done in \?on Schoen's handwriting. 205. There was a statement sent in by Yon Schoen stating that the man had not failed, although you say there was a statement on his papers that he had failed ?—Yes. 206. Do you know whether he was or was not a pupil of Yon Schoen's?—Well, I presume he was, because the application form was made out in Yon Schoen's handwriting. 207. Mr. Allport tells us that he had some misgiving that you would destroy Jones's examina-tion-papers. Had you, when you were in this office, access to the candidates' papers when they were put away?—l had the run of everything in the department; I had only to ask for them to get them. If I asked for anything Mr. Allport would tell one of the clerks to bring it in.

153

H.—26

208. After the examination of Jones in 1897, did you see those papers again?—-Yes, on one occasion. 209. When was that ?—I saw them in the Minister for Marine's office after Mr. Hutcheson's statement in the House. 210. Did you at any time in 1898 ask for the Jones examination-papers from the department ? —Yes. 211. Did you ask Mr. Allport?—Yes ; I asked all the staff. 212. Did he say he knew where they were ?—He said he did not know. 213. They were not in the proper place ?—No. 214. How do you know ?—Mr. Allport was engaged with the Secretary in the morning. I went through his office into the clerk's room, and asked Mr. Grix, as recording clerk, for Captain Jones's papers. He looked for them, and could not find them. I then asked Mr. Sinclair if he knew anything about them, and he told me that Mr. Allport had got them. Soon after Mr. Allport came into the room, and I asked him if he had Jones's papers, and he said " No," and went out again, evidently in a hurry. When I found this was so I went down to Captain Edwin, and I told him that those Jones papers were not there, and thought it was very peculiar. I made a note in my pocket-book in Captain Edwin's presence on that day 215. You spoke to Captain Edwin ? —Yes, I spoke to him about it. 216. Did you see the Minister after that ?—I went up to his room to see him and was informed that he was out of town. When he arrived I went and saw him and reported the matter to him. 217. Did he say he knew where they were ?—He said he would inquire for them at once. He said he had not got them. 218. You told Captain Edwin that you could not find the papers and you thought there was something peculiar ? —I thought something was wrong. 219. Did Captain Edwin ask what you wanted the papers for?—l told him I was going to report on Captain Jones's examination. 220. At this time had you been asked for a report ?—I had been asked by the Minister for a report. 221. You asked all those in the office for them?— Yes. 222. You did not go to the cupboard first and see whether you could get them ?—No, I never went to a cupboard in my life. 223. You did not ask for them until after you had been instructed to report ?—Yes. 224. You had no intention of destroying the papers, as suggested by Mr. Allport ?—Not the slightest. I could have destroyed every paper in the office if I had liked years before. 225. Do you remember the first interview you had with any one regarding Captain Jones's service certificate ?—Yes. 226. When, and with whom ?—When it first came under my notice in the Chief Clerk's office, Mr. Allport goes through all the correspondence addressed to the Minister for Marine and the Secretary for Marine, as it is part of his duty. One day in the office Mr. Allport remarked to me, " Captain, have you ever known Captain Jones to be outside the Heads for a couple of months? " I began to laugh, and I said, " It is absurd, the vessel could not carry coal to remain outside the Heads all that time." Then Mr. Allport asked me what he had better do, and I told him to send it round to the Customhouse for verification. 227. Had he Captain Jones's statement before him? —Yes, he had all the forms. 228. Did you suggest that it should be sent to the Collector of Customs ? —Yes. 229. What was the next step? —In due course the papers came back to the department. I did not see them, but both Mr. Allport and the Secretary informed me that the statement of Captain Jones's sea service was incorrect. We all had a conversation about it. 230. Was anything said about the part in which it was incorrect ? —No, I think not. 231. There was a minute placed on the papers by Mr. Glasgow?— Yes, for the information of the Minister. I saw them subsequently. 232. Did anything transpire between the incident you are now mentioning and the interview you had with the Premier?—No, nothing. 233. How did you come to see the Premier ?—I was sent for by the Premier—his messenger came for me. 234. Who was in the room when you arrived?—lt was in the Cabinet-room, Government Buildings. There was the Premier sitting at the head of the table, and Captain Jones and Captain Yon Schoen sitting on the Premier's right hand. 235. Was there anybody else present ?—No. 236. What was said to you? —After saying " Good morning " he said : " Do you know these gentlemen, captain? " and I said, " Yes, sir." 237. Can you recall the date ?—lt was about six months after Jones's application came in— I should say it was about June, 1896, but I could not be positive. 238. What followed? —He said, "I sent for you to know about this service certificate of Captain Jones's." I told him that I really did not know much about it beyond that Jones had made an application to the department, and that I understood the sea service was incorrect; that I had not seen the papers myself, and did not examine them. Then the Premier asked me some questions as to Jones's qualifications, and I told him that I thought Captain Jones was a far more competent man than many of those who had been granted certificates under the service Act. 239. Was the nature of Jones's experience discussed at all ? —Well, it was in that way. I spoke generally of Jones. I did not go into details of his service, but, knowing he had been going outside the Heads and to all sorts of places, and in all kinds of weather and under all conditions, that was my opinion. 240. Was anything said then about the interpretation of the regulations with regard to sea service?—No, nothing beyond saying that Captain Jones's sea service did not comply with the Act. 20— H. 26.

154

H.-26

241. Was anything said as to tug-service at that interview? —No. 242. Is there anything else you recollect at this interview that you wish to .say ?-—The , Premier said, as far as I can remember, "I will send you the papers to report on." Then Captain Jones with Captain Yon Schoen withdrew. 243. You were left in the room with the Premier?— Yes. He said, "I will send you the papers, Captain" ; and I asked him if there was anything else, and he said, " No." 244. Did you receive the papers? —A few days afterwards I did. They were brought down in an envelope either by his Secretary or the messenger to me. On the envelope was a minute from the Premier addressed to •me —I am not positive of the words —"See if anything can be done in this matter." It was a foolscap envelope addressed to " Captain Allman," and had the minute on it, "Can anything be done for this man"? Of course, I knew what it meant, because of the conversation I had had with the Premier. I examined the papers carefully which you have here, and saw the different minutes of the Collector of Customs and the Secretary, Marine Department. I replied to the Premier's remarks immediately, saying that I had looked into the matter, and I did not think so, or it may have been, " I don't think so." : 245. Do you recollect how the envelope was addressed? —There was some address on it. It had been addressed to somebody before, but who it was I cannot say. ■ 246. I want to break the thread of the examination to ask you one or two questions with regard to what you have first stated. We will refer first to Mr. Matheson's examination. _Do you recollect whether you reported on what happened in the examination-room in connection with Matheson ?—Yes. Captain Edwin reported to the department in writing. 247. Dr. Giles..'] You did not tell us this morning whether he came the next morning or not? —He came next morning and failed. As a matter of fact, he failed three times, with a different Examiner each time. 248. Dr. Findlay.] Captain Edwin and yourself made a report to the department ?—After he failed the next day we made a report of the whole surroundings, including the false statement that he had not failed. 249. Including a report upon the false statement contained in the application that he had not failed ?—Yes. 250. You reported that to whom ?—The department. 251. You and Captain Edwin signed it ?—Yes, I think so. 252. What is Matheson's first name; Captain Yon Schoen says it is Eoderick?—l do not know. 253. Had you any conversation with Mr. Allport as to that ? —I reported to the department in the ordinary way, and I suppose it would be attached to the papers. 254. Did Mr. Allport have any conversation with you about that or about Matheson's matter afterwards ?—lt was one of my duties to report upon Marine matters for the annual report. 255. For Parliament?— Yes; and that is one of the things I had dealt with. Matters came under my notice more than under the department's notice in some cases. I mentioned the matter of Matheson's false declaration in my annual report. I wrote it out, and it went to the Printing Office. The proof-sheets Mr. Allport showed me, and he said that the Minister or Mr. Glasgow—l am not sure which—thought it would be inadvisable for me to mention such a strong thing in my report about Matheson's false declaration, and he asked me to modify it. Mr. Allport was a sort of go-between between myself and Mr. Glasgow. I looked over it, and altered this false declaration into words stating that this man had omitted to sit. 256. Instead of putting it in as a false statement ? —Yes. 257. Was any inquiry made as to the report you made with regard to Matheson ?—No. It was in the annual report. 258. There is a report made by Captain Edwin and yourself ?—Yes, it was on the file. . 259. Have you any reason to suspect that it was taken off the file?— When this trouble began to brew in the Marine Department I looked over all these papers in the clerk's office. He brought all I wanted, including papers for years back. I had no object in taking anything in the department, and I examined them on the table. Amongst them were Matheson's papers. The report that Captain Edwin and I sent in with regard to Matheson's papers and vision test was not on the file. 260. Was that the report in which you had stated it was a false declaration ?—Yes. 261. Judge Ward.] You said just now you modified that: how did you modify it ?—I understood that Mr. Allport objected to that, and* he modified it. 262. Dr. Findlay.] First, there was a report by the Examiners that was on the file, and then there was a report to Parliament which was modified by the witness. (To witness) : You did not inquire what became of this ? —No, it was not there. 263. Mr. Travers suggests that it had no business there, as it would not be its proper place ? —I do not know whether Mr. Travers is an authority or not. Perhaps the different papers were locked up in different drawers. 264. Was it the proper place ; should it have been on the file ?—Certainly ; that is my view of it. 265. You told us this morning that you had discovered Captain Yon Schoen sitting at the table, and that between Mr. Allport and Captain Yon Schoen were these examination-papers ?—■ I saw them there. I was not discovering. 266. Did you, in consequence of seeing these examination-papers there and Captain Yon Schoen, have any communication with either Captain Edwin or Captain Marciel ?—I mentioned it to both of them. My reason in mentioning it to Captain Edwin was that Mclntyre's papers, or the contents of this question which Captain Edwin had failed him on, were there. I thought it was a most peculiar thing how he should not know this question was inaccurately given, and Yon Schoen should know all about it.

155

H.—26

267. You thought there was something suspicious about that, and that was why you spoke to Captain Edwin ?—My suspicion was so great that I had an additional "go" with him. Captain Edwin went out for a minute, and he could go on in the examination room. 268. What did you say to Captain Edwin ?—I said either the contents of these papers were copied when he was out of the room, or else Mclntyre got it from the department, and to avoid anything like that in the future I had those glass doors made so as to see all that was going on. 269. Did you tell Captain Edwin that you had found Captain Yon Schoen sitting at the table with those papers there ?—I told him something to that effect. 270. You told him of the incident you have mentioned to their Honours ?—Yes. 270 a. Did you mention anything to Captain Mareiel about it ?—Yes, I told Captain Marciel. 271. Of the same incident ?—Yes. 272. We will resume the thread broken by these questions. You told us this morning that after the Premier had sent the envelope down, you sent it back with a memorandum stating, " I do not think so "?—Yes ; inferring that I could not see anything. I took this to the Premier's office myself, and handed it to the clerk or messenger. I delivered it to the staff personally, not to the Premier. 273. Dr. Giles.'] Did that contain papers ? —All the papers with regard to Jones's application for the service certificate-. 274. Dr. Findlay.] Do you know whether in the papers contained in the envelope there were any letters or further certificates as to Jones's service or competency ?—As far as I remember they are identical with the papers here. 275. In addition to the papers here there were several references ?—Yes. They were all highly satisfactory testimonials. There was one from the late Captain Williams, Mr. Jones's employer far many years, one from young Mr. Williams, who represented the firm, and another from Captain Bendall. There was another certificate, stating clearly that different masters had been with him, and this paper was signed by the different masters. 276. Masters who had been out with Jones ?—Yes, and almost stating that they knew they went out with Jones to comply with the law ; that he really was the head or the master. They did not say so in those actual words. 277. Those papers were enclosed with the papers which are now before the Commission?— Yes. 278. And you sent them back in the envelope to the Premier?— Yes. 279. When did you next see that envelope ?—Prom three days to a week afterwards. 280. Where did you see it ?—I had another office down at the Customhouse as well as at the Buildings, and I had frequently to go there on business with the Collector. I was going down there when I met Captain Yon Schoen. He was very affable—he always was at that time, and at that time I thought he was a particularly nice man. However, he informed me that I had blocked the way to Captain Jones getting his service certificate, and I said "iSlot at all—nothing of the sort." So he pulled the envelope out of his pocket and held it up to me to read. He would not let it go out of his possession, but held it up in my face. This was the identical envelope I and the Premier had dealt with. 281. Did he make any comment? —-Yes, he said that was an order, and that I was the bravest man in New Zealand to refuse that order. I said it was nonsense, that the Premier asked me a straightforward question, and I gave him a straightforward answer. 282. Did you see the Premier again about this matter, to your recollection ?—Well, I am a little bit hazy about that matter. I remember meeting the Premier in the corridor near the Cabinet room, when he mentioned something about a service certificate, but whether it was Jones's or Johnston's of the West Coast, I cannot remember. 283. So far as your recollection goes, was this interview which you have described the last you had with him about the matter before he went to England ? —I never had another one. 284. Either before or after ?—No. 285. Had you any further communication from the Premier about the matter either before or after he went to England ?—I did not. 286. What was the next step, after having seen Yon Schoen in the street; when was this matter next brought before your notice ?—There was a considerable interval. 287. How long do you think it would be?— Several people spoke to me about it outside some time afterwards. 288. Who were they?—l cannot very well remember any particular person. They thought it was rough that Jones could not get a service certificate, because he had been so long associated with the place, and had been going in and out of the place day and night. 289. These, I suppose, were friends of Jones?— Yes, I presume they were. 290. What is the next matter you definitely recollect in connection with this thing ; you say there was a considerable interval ? Carry your memory forward to the next incident ?—I should say it would be about March, 1897. 291. What happened then —that would be an interval of about six or seven months?—l should think it was. 292. What was it ? —lt was in conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones. 293. How did you come to have that conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones?—Well, in my position as Nautical Adviser, I used to have to see the Minister occasionally—l do not say frequently. I never went there unless I was sent for to deal with some matter in hand. 294. What was the effect of this interview ?—He mentioned Jones's service certificate. 295. Were you sent for ? —I will not say I was sent for, but I had often business with the Minister on nautical matters. I was there, anyhow. 296. What happened?— The conversation went on to this service certificate of Jones's. These applications are for a service certificate.

H.—26

156

297. This was March, 1897? —Approximately. We talked about Jones, and he said it was a hard case. I agreed that it was a hard case, but that it was one of those cases which the Act did not cover, and I mentioned how absurd the Act was, because it provided that any one who had been three years on the coast of New Zealand as a master of a vessel of 15 tons was entitled to a certificate. I said there was a case in Auckland where a man applied for a certificate, and he had only been about three years and three months at sea altogether, and that was on a little vessel a fraction over 15 tons register. 298. Was this man illiterate ?—Most of them are illiterate. His experience was in taking a little cutter over to the Little Barrier Island for firewood, and I said, taking that in connection with Jones's case, I was of opinion that Jones ought to have a certificate, in degree of comparison; but I said the Act would not allow it, and nothing further could be done. That is all that transpired at that interview. 299. Very well, what was the next interview? —The next interview, as far as I can recollect. I should say was in the first week of May, 1897, when Mr. Hall-Jones sent for me and the question of Jones's certificate again cropped up—Jones's service certificate—and he told me that he had received a communication from the Premier, and he was very anxious that Jones should get a certificate before he returned. 300. Who said this ? —Mr. Hall-Jones :or he may have said—l have only inferred this since I have seen this telegram read out in Court—" See that this matter is settled." But I took it from Mr. Hall-Jones that he was anxious Jones should get a certificate before he returned. 301. Was the inference you made, this : That the Premier was anxious that Jones should get the certificate before he returned, or was it that Mr. Hall-Jones was anxious he should get the certificate before he returned ?—-Mr Hall-Jones represented to me that it was the Premier's wish that he should either get the certificate, or that the matter should be settled. 302. I want to know with what impression you left Mr. Hall-Jones that day with regard to this service certificate of Captain Jones ? —I told Mr. Hall-Jones, there and then, that Captain Jones could not get a service-certificate —that it had been vetoed by the department. 303. We may assume, now, you are referring to the telegram from the Premier to Mr. HallJones ?—He showed me that subsequently. He said he had received the communication, and the Premier was anxious Jones should get a certificate before he returned. I said he could not get a service certificate, because that had been vetoed by the department. I had not seen the telegram up to this time. I told Mr. Hall-Jones that if Captain Jones, instead of sending in this extraordinary application of service made out by Captain Yon Schoen, had sent in a general application stating that he had been in and out of Wellington Harbour—l believe it was fifteen or sixteen years— I would have been prepared to recommend the issue of the certificate ; but making a certificate in a specific form, I said it could not be done. 304. You told the Minister that at that time?— Yes. 305. Well, was the telegram produced ?—Yes, he opened a drawer and handed the telegram to me to read. 306. You read the telegram ?—Yes. 307. What did you then infer the telegram referred to? —Well, considering that I had vetoed the service certificate to Mr. Hall-Jones twice and the Premier, I thought to myself, well, it must mean something else. 308. You thought it meant that if you could not give him a service certificate, you were to try and give him some other qualification ? That was the inference you made ?—Yes. 309. You made that inference from reading the telegram ?—Yes, and knowing the surroundings. I may mention that there was no part of the telegram underlined when I read it. 310. Are you quite sure about that ?—Positive. 311. The inference you made was that you were desired to find some other way of getting Jones's certificate : did you mention that impression to Mr. Hall-Jones?—Well, Mr. Hall-Jones almost asked the question. 312. What did he say ?—He said, "Is there any other way of getting Jones a certificate?" 313. Well, what did you say ? —I told him there was a clause in the regulations which related to tug service, but I was not quite clear on the matter, and would look it up if he liked to see what could be done; so I had Mr. Hall-Jones's consent to do so. 314. Was there anything said about the conditions upon which these certificates were granted being in the hands of the Government ?—Not at that time. 315. You are sure of that ? —lt was either that or the next time. 316. In your declaration or statement you say it was at that time ?—lt may have been—l am not clear about it I have got a fair memory. 317. Did you explain to the Minister then, or later, that Jones would have to pass an examination. Yes, I did. But I looked up the regulations, as I told you. 318. Dr. Giles.'] You looked them up then, while in the office?—No, I was very busy, and it was probably four or five days after. 319. Dr. Findlay.] You seem to have explained to Mr. Hall-Jones that this service certificate could not be given, then there was something said about tug service, about which you were not very sure, and you said you would look it up ?•—Yes. 320. Was that all that took place at the interview ?—I think that about finished the interview that I was to look up the regulations. 321. When did the next interview take place ?—Probably not for over a week. 322. How did you come to have that interview?—l looked up the regulations. I know I did not look them up in my own office for four or five days, as I had something of importance to do. 323. When did you see the Minister about it?—l looked up the regulations and saw this tugservice clause, and reasoned out the matter this way : Jones has been going oucsjde the Heads as

157

H.—26

master, not as mate, and, as a matter of equity, I thought he might be allowed to go up on the tug service. This is my own reasoning, in my own office, on this regulation. Afterwards, I saw Mr. All port, and told him what had transpired in the Minister's room, and we looked over these regulations. He said "It is stretching them a bit." I said, " Yes, it is stretching them a good bit," and I explained to him about Jones's service, and so on, and then Mr. Allport and I came to the conclusion that nothing could be done in this matter, unless the Government or the Minister gave an order to the department. That is what we arrived at. 324. An order for what?—An order to allow Jones to go up for examination for a master's certificate without holding a mate's certificate. 325. You are sure you discussed this with Mr. Allport between the interview you have mentioned and the interview we are coming to ? —Yes. 326. Did you see the Minister afterwards ? —Yes, a day or two afterwards. lam not clear to a day. 327. How did you come to see him ?—I took him up the regulations and this clause. 328. What clause ? —Clause 26, about the tug service. 329. Did you discuss that regulation with him ?—Yes. I told him that Jones had been going outside as master, and I thought it was only fair, as he could not get this service certificate, that he should be allowed to go up for examination to prove himself. It was only giving a reasonable amount of latitude to the man whom the Act barred from getting his certificate. 330. You thought this was only common justice to Jones, and told the Minister so?— Yes. 331. Who was present at that interview —anybody else ? —Only the Minister and myself. He told me he would consider the matter. 332. Was that the end of the interview ?—Yes, as far as Jones was concerned. There were other matters that we talked over—about lighthouses, or something else. 333. That is all that pertains to this matter?— Yes. 334. Was there a third interview, at which Captain Jones was present ?—Yes. 335. Before we come to that interview, did you, in the interval between the interview you have just described and the one we are coming to, see Mr. Glasgow, or was it afterwards ?—I do not think I ever saw Mr. Glasgow about Jones particularly. I know it was mentioned about the service certificate, and the service being incorrect, but this absence of the mate's certificate was not mentioned to Mr. Glasgow. 336. You say you had an interview at which Captain Jones was present, along with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. 337. Were you sent for?— Yes. 338. What time of the day was it ?—ln the forenoon, about half-past 10, I should say. 339. When you went up, what was said to you ?—After the usual salutation between the Minister and Captain Jones, Mr. Hall-Jones informed me that he was going to allow Captain Jones to sit for examination without the mate's certificate. 340. You were told that by the Minister ?—Yes. 341. Was anything said, before this, as to your blocking Jones from getting his service certificate ? —No, I do not think that was ever inferred. 342. I am speaking, now, with regard to this interview we are talking of. Was anything said by Captain Jones or Mr. Hall-Jones about it ? —No. 343. You remember that Captain Jones said there was something said about your being called up to the room to be confronted by him, as to whether you were blocking the service certificate or not ?—No; I was not blopking the service certificate ; I did my level best to get it. 344. Was that suggested to you in the room? —No. 345. The first thing you heard was that the Minister had made up his mind to dispense with the mate's certificate?— Yes. 346. What else was said?—He said he would give me an order, and I said the order would have to go to the department. He said he would send the order to the department. I said, " All right, sir." He may have said a few more words, but that is the purport of the conversation. This was when Captain Jones was present. 347. Captain Jones told us yesterday that something was said about the tug regulation at this interview, and that the Minister had a copy of the regulations on,his table. Do you remember what was said, if anything, about the tug service at this time ?—I am not prepared to say whether there was or not. There was some conversation about the matter. 348. You will not contradict Captain Jones about it ?—No. 349. Do you recollect whether the Minister had a copy of the regulations before him ? —Yes ; he had. 350. Did you leave the room before Captain Jones, or after ?—Captain Jones left first. 351. Do you recollect whether anything was said by Captain Jones, when he left the room, as to when he should get his certificate? —Yes. Mr. Hall-Jones said, "Good-bye" to him, and that he would be able to go up for examination as soon as he liked. As a matter of fact, I did not tell Captain Jones he could go up for examination, neither did the department. 352. But the Minister said something to that effect? —Yes. 353. Did you get any order from Mr. Hall-Jones in writing ?—No. 354. I want you to be very careful about this; there is a conflict between the Minister, yourself, and Mr. Allport. Did you see the Minister writing anything while you were in the room ? Captain Jones says he was writing something; did you see him ?—He was at his table there, but I could not see whether he was writing or not. 355. Then you saw him write no memorandum of the kind you have seen while you were there? —I did not see him. He may have been writing. lam not prepared to say whether he was writing or not.

H.—2fi

158

356. After Captain Jones left, did anything further transpire between you and the Minister ?— No, beyond the fact that I told the Minister that one reason I had for suggesting or recommending that Jones should be allowed to go up for examination was that I knew he had already passed for a river certificate of competency. That was the basis I went on. 357. You knew the requirements for a river certificate of competency ?—Yes. 358. They involve reading, writing and figuring? —Yes. 359. And he had a river master's certificate for competency ?—Yes. 360. Did you know anything at this time about Jones being illiterate ?—Not more than the man in the moon. 361. Then did you know at the time that he had practically no chance of passing the examination ?—I did not think there would be the slightest difficulty about it. 362. You know that Mr. Allport and Mr. Glasgow said, when the matter was discussed by them, that it did not matter, as they knew he could not pass the examination ?—I did not know this. I never dreamt there would be any difficulty. 363. You were not then so well acquainted with Jones's qualifications as Mr. Allport and Mr. Glasgow appear to have been ? —I had no knowledge except that he held a river certificate, which involved his qualifications of reading, writing, and arithmetic. 364. May I take it that when you suggested dispensing with the mate's certificate you bond fide believed that this man could pass his examination ?—Undoubtedly. 365. Was there any discussion between you and the Minister as to Jones's chance of passing this examination? —Not the slightest. 366. Was there any suggestion made to you of any kind, by the Minister or any one else, that you were to deal leniently with Jones ? —No, I took it as an ordinary matter of examination. 367. Mr. Gray tells me that you have not yet made clear to us the first point of time at which you told the Minister that Jones would have to sit for examination. You told us at the second interview you discussed the tug regulations?— Yes. 368. You say, "the Minister said, 'Is there any way of getting Jones's certificate.' I mentioned the tug service, and said I would look up the regulations." Was it a week later that you told Mr. Hall-Jones that Captain Jones would have to sit for examination ?—At the first interview I got the telegram ; the second interview was regarding the result of my studying the regulations; and the third interview was when Captain Jones was present. 369. I still want to know when you told the Minister that Jones would have to sit for examination. Was it the first or second interview?—lt must have been the first, because I would look over the regulations to see if something could be done with regard to the tug service. 370. It would be when you mentioned the tug service to the Minister at first when the question of examination arose ?—Yes, it must have been. 371. Mr. Hall-Jones says that he gave you the memorandum or envelope. You saw it here? —Yes, some days ago. 372. He says he gave you that envelope at the conclusion of the interview you have mentioned and asked you to look into the matter and take it as a reminder ?—He never gave me an envelope in my life. 373. Is that so —this particular envelope?— Certainly not. 374. Was any order given to you personally dispensing with the mate's certificate ?—Well, it was understood it was on my recommendation. 375. Was any order given to you by the Minister?— No. 376. Did you see Mr. Glasgow after this interview ?—I the Minister's room and went down and told Mr. Glasgow immediately what had transpired upstairs in the Minister's room. I told him about stretching the regulations, and that I would take the responsibility. 377. What did he say ?—He said I was very foolish, and that if I had been in the service as long as he had I would not have done so, and he talked in that strain a considerable time. 378. What reply did you make ?—I told him I did not look upon it as such a serious matter as he did, and that he had better see the Minister, and Mr. Glasgow inferred to me that he was going to see the Minister about it. 379. Was there anything said about stopping it ? —I will not say I said anything about stopping it, or anything of that sort, but he inferred to me that he would make further inquiries. 380. Did you say anything to the effect that it was not too late to stop it if he wished ?—I do not think I said that. I know we had a conversation about it, and Mr. Glasgow inferred that he would see about it. That is as far as my recollection goes in the matter. 381. What was the next stage of the thing?— The next stage was that either that afternoon or in the evening I was in the Chief Clerk's room, and I have almost a distinct recollection of this message being brought down either by Mr. Horneman or a messenger. 382. Were you in the room where Mr. Allport was ?—Yes. 383. What hour was it ? —ln the evening. 384. What hour? —Well, on towards evening—four or five o'clock. 385. You were speaking to him ?—I had a table there in the department to do my work on. 386. What were you doing at that time ?—I was at my desk. I had brought in a lot of papers or letters to go through when this memorandum arrived either by the messenger or Mr. Horneman. 387. You say you were in this room where Mr. Allport was when you saw some one come down and give something to Mr. Allport ? —Yes. 388. Did Mr. Allport say anything on receipt of it ?—He mentioned what was on the envelope —"Jones, 'Duco,' "or something, "permit examination." He said, "That is'the order you were speaking of, captain, last week." 389. On receipt of it, Mr. Allport turned round and said to you, " This is the order you talked of some time last week " ?—Yes.

159

H.—26

390. And you say he read from it some words—•" Jones, ' Dueo,' permit examination " ?—Yes. 391. In the second statement you made to the Minister you say—"l recollect it granted in express terms authority for Jones to sit for his examination. It ran as follows : ' Jones, " Duco," — permit examination.' " Had you at the time you signed that statement ever seen this envelope ? — No. I never saw it until I saw it here the other day. -392. When Mr. Allport told you he had this envelope, and read it to you, was there any discussion about it ?—Yes. He read it over, and said, " "We will get this recorded. I will go and see Mr. Glasgow about it," and I saw Mr. Allport go out of the room—and the door of this room opens on to the corridor—and saw him go into Mr. Glasgow's room. I cleared off and went home then. I had finished for the day. 393. Mr. Allport says that you brought this envelope in and handed it to him?— Quite so. 'I do not contradict Mr. Allport, but I am of a different opinion. 394. Mr. Hall-Jones says he gave it to you? —I say he did not. 395. Do you contradict Mr. Allport, then, when he says you handed the envelope to him ?— Yes. He may be labouring under a delusion in some way. 396. Do you contradict him in this ?—Yes, I am almost certain that Mr. Horneman brought that down. 397. You are quite certain that Mr. Allport is wrong, when he says you handed that to him ? —Yes. 398. And you contradict the Minister when he says he handed it to you ?—Yes. I never had it in my hand in my life. 399. Have you ever heard it suggested in the Government Buildings that this envelope was taken off Mr. Hall-Jones's table without authority? —No. I knew nothing about the envelope until it transpired in the Supreme Court. 400. What is the next matter you had to deal with in this case ?—The matter which I can never shake off, and never will, is that Mr. Horneman brought down that envelope. 401. Does anything intervene between this interview with Mr. Allport and the examination itself ?—And the order ? 402. Yes?— No. 403. The next thing we come to is the examination?—As far as I am concerned it was. 404. Had you any further interviews with Mr. Glasgow at all ?—No. 405. Then follows the examination. Do you know what is in this first statement of yours? —Yes. 406. You say in that, "Just at that moment Jones interposed and said, 'For God's sake, captain, don't destroy them; I did them myself, so help me God.'" Is that true?— Perfectly true. 407. You are sure that he is wrong when he says you are wrong? He did use those words, " For God's sake, captain," and , " So help me God " ?—Yes. 408. Did he refer to his wife ? —He referred to his family. 409. Did he refer to losing his billet ?—No, he referred to not getting a continuation of his billet, because the new boat was coming out, and she was going outside. 410. He made then, I understand, an appeal to you to let him go through ?—Yes. 411. At that time did you know that Captain Jones had been studying with Captain Yon Schoen? —Yes, I did, because I met Captain Jones probably a week before. He was going along towards the Customhouse, and I asked him when he was coming up for examination, and he said, " By-and-bye," or " Later on—l am at school with Captain Yon Schoen." 412. When Captain Jones entered the examination-room that morning, was there any arrangement or indication that there should be a bogus examination ?■ —Not the slightest—not a particle. 413. When Captain Jones produced these examination-papers, and told you he had done them all himself, had you any reason to disbelieve him ?—No, what struck me was when he opened this envelope, and Captain Edwin said destroy them. I did not do so, but I destroyed part of them. But I thought in my own mind for the moment that Captain Jones was afraid of the time limit. In all these examinations there is a limit of time, and I told him to go on with what he was doing. 414. You thought he was afraid of the time limit ? Did you at that time believe that Jones had done these papers himself ?—Yes, until I examined them, and then any fool could see. 415. How did you work them ?—I told him to do Examination 9 2 . 416. Was there anything in the papers themselves to indicate that the work had not been done by Captain Jones ?—Well, I have seen the papers since, and have mixed the present with the past up considerably. 417. When you saw those papers and looked at them, did you assume or know that they were not written by Jones ?—I thought they were. 418. Then he did some of the work himself ?—Yes, I think he did the first problem. He did not do it, but started with it. 419. When did you conclude that he had not done the papers ?—When I noticed his work. 420. In the examination room ?—Yes. 421. Captain Edwin did not return until the examination was over ?—No, I do%ot think so. 422. You passed this man Jones, and you passed him improperly ?—Yes. 423. And you admit that what you did was illegal, stupid, and wrong ?—lt was more stupid than anything else. I did it under the impulse of the moment. I know it was wrong now, and knew five minutes afterwards, but I went on with it. 424. Well, after this examination was concluded—that I believe was the 19th July—when did you first hear more about it ?—-The next thing I heard about Jones's examination was when

H.-26

160

Captain Yon Schoen mentioned it to Mr. Piraniin Jones's case. The next was when Mr. Hutcheson launched out in the House about it. There is a slight error in that. The next I saw about it was in the Evening Post, in the train coming down from New Plymouth, which contained some remarks Mr. Pirani had made in the House about examinations. ::.:.: 425. You were tried in the Supreme Court and acquitted? —Yes. 426. You were dismissed from the service ? —Yes. i'K,|£427. I understand now that you are picking up a precarious living on the wharf ?—Yes, when I can get it. 428. As what ?—Tally clerk. 429. Mr. Gray.] Do I understand that you made any inquiry as to Captain Jones's sea service other than what appeared on the paper put before you by the Premier ? —I think I did, but I forget whom it was put to. There are many mariners who spoke to me about it, and I think I know them all by sight. 430. Did you make any inquiry to disprove the statement of service ?—Yes, I spoke to a great many people about it. 431. What people ?—People connected with the sea. 432. Did you show them that statement of service?— No. 433. How could they know what you wanted ?—The information I wanted was about the service, and almost every one knows that when Captain Jones went on board the ship he was master, whether he went to Waikanae Beach, Picton, or Cape Palliser. 434. Those were the only inquiries you made ?—Yes. 435. You are satisfied that when he claimed to be in command he was actually in command? Yes. 436. You made no inquiry as to whether the times he claimed to have been at sea were right or not ?—That was known to the proper authorities. 437. You made no inquiries for the Premier's information ?—No. 438. You were satisfied from the inquiries you made of the various captains who wrote, that Captain Jones had been actually in charge when the others had been dummies ?—I do not say they were dummies. They probably went out to get a little bit of sea breeze. 439. It was to avoid the law ?—lt was to avoid the law, but everybody in the department knew. 440. You were then and still are satisfied that Captain Jones was more highly qualified than many others who were getting certificates ?—More qualified than the captains of vessels of 12 or 13 tons register at the present day. The only drawback was Jones's education, and some of these other captains have none. 441. We have been told that there are men who hays less literary qualification for the service certificate, and who cannot write their names ?—Yes. 442. You' had no interest in passing Jones?— Not a particle—not a single iota. 443. In doing so, were you influenced by any feeling that the Premier or Mr. Hall-Jones desired that Captain Jones should get through?— Not as regards Jones's examination. 444. With regard to anything else? —I stretched the regulations to try and get Jones up for examination. 445. Because you say it was a deserving case ?—Because I knew the position of Jones. 446. That was' all ?—Yes. 447. As to this envelope which you say was brought down to Mr. AUport's office, was there any doubt in your mind, when you left the Minister that day, that he would give the direction asked for ?—He said he would send the order to the department. 448. Did he say in so many words that he would give an order to allow Jones's examination ? —Yes. 449. And this was said in the presence of Captain Jones and yourself?— Yes. 450. Are you certain of that ?—Positive. I am not going to mention a lie at this stage of the proceedings. 451. And at the examination you said Jones did make an appeal?— Certainly. 452. But you admit now that he did not specifically mention his wife?— Well, his family. 453. How did he put it ?—He inferred that he would not have objected, but had got his family to look after. 454. And ff he did not get his certificate? —He inferred that the new boat was intended to go outside frequently. 455. But you know, as a matter of fact, that she does not go outside?— Yes, but I know she was intended to go outside. Mr. Williams intended that. 456. Did Captain Jones tell you he had himself worked any of the papers you were tearing up? —Yes ; and I thought he had myself at the time. 457. He did some work in the room ?—A little work. 458. Satisfactorily ?—He probably might have done it in a more satisfactory way if we had given him sufficient time. 459. Most answers to the questions are given there, and are correct ?—Most of them, I daresay. 460. ever known any other occasion where any order or instruction to allow men to go up for examination, as in this case, has been given?— There was one, but there was no comparison between the two cases. 461. Then, this is an extraordinary case? —Yes; some time ago there was a man whose certificate had been cancelled who was allowed to go up. 462. There is no case similar to that of Jones ? —Not to my knowledge. Ido not know what occurred in the past. lam only responsible for a few years.

161

H.—26

463. You know there are known to the department certain forms of permit for things allowed to be done by the regulations ? —Yes. 464. You say you know of no case where permits have been given such as this ?—No. 465. And there is no regulation dealing with the examination ?—Not with examinations. 466. In your discussion with the Minister was the word "permit" used?—No; it was " order." 467. Did you ever tell the Minister that you would look into the matter and see whether a permit could be given ?—What I said to the Minister was, I would look over the regulations and see what could be done in the matter. 468. You did not mention the word " permit " to the Minister at all ?—No. 469. You have seen the statutory declaration made by Captain Jones? —Yes. 470. And which was forwarded by you to the Secretary of Marine ?—Yes. 471. How did that declaration come to be made?— After the Supreme Court case in my own instance, where I was acquitted as it were, the Minister of Marine instructed the Secretary to write to me. 472. And you wrote a reply, which is also in ; and after that how did the declaration come to be made ? —I asked Captain Jones to give me a declaration of all he knew regarding his examination and subsequent results. 473. Did you also mention this picnic on the " Duchess " ?—No ; I took him up to Sir Bobert Stout's office, but Sir Bobert was down at Christchurch, so Captain Jones made the statement before Dr. Findlay, and it was taken down in shorthand. It was read over shortly after by Captain Jones, and we went over to sign it. 474. Did you mention to Captain Jones, or did he mention to you, anything about the picnic on the " Duchess?"— Not until he mentioned it in Dr. Findlay's office. 475. Then Captain Jones first mentioned it? —Yes. 476. Mr. Travers.] You, I think, said that in 1898 you asked Mr. Allport for Captain Jones's examination papers, and could not get them. Can you fix the date ?—Certainly, I have it in my pocket-book [produced] —14th November, 1898. 477. You went to look at the papers in order to verify certain points connected with them?— I went to get the papers with a view of reporting on Jones's examination. 478. Can you state about what hour in the day it was ?—I think it was in the forenoon. 479. You cannot be sure ?—No. 480. If you are told as a fact that the papers were at that time in the hands of Mr. Glasgow, would you say that was mentioned to you when you applied for them ? —No. 481. Did you ask Mr. Glasgow himself about them? —No, I never thought of asking Mr. Glasgow for them. They were not debited to Mr. Glasgow in the record book. They were debited to the department. 482. Have you any idea when the papers first went to the Minister ?—They must have been there prior to this date. I know the Minister had them shortly after the close of the session. 483. When you went to Mr Allport to ask for the papers, it was in consequence of the Minister having requested you to report upon it ?—Yes, quite so. 484. Was the request made in writing?—No, half the business in the Government departments is done by verbal communication. 485. It was a verbal request that you should report upon the subject? —Yes. 486. Was the request made on the 14th November, or before? —It was made before. 487. How long before —the day before? —The Minister asked me some days before. 488. And on the 14th you went down to see the papers?— Yes. 489. And were unable to obtain them ?—Yes. 490. I think you said Mr. Allport was not in the office when you first went to ask for the papers? —Not in his own office. 491. But that while you were there making inquiries he came in and went out hurriedly ? — Yes. 492. And his answer to you was when you asked him for them, that he did not know where they were ?—Something to that effect. 493. When you found you could not get the papers, you thought something was wrong, and had some conversation with Captain Edwin about it ? —Undoubtedly. Captain Edwin being my co-examiner, I went and conferred with him. 494. With reference to that matter in which you found the report unattached to papers connected with some false declaration, did you ever ask for the production of that before ?—No. 495. Are you surprised to hear that it is on a file as a separate record ?—I am very glad to hear it. 496. You are not surprised that it is so ? —I am not surprised at anything. 497. As a matter of official order, not as a separate document, it was not attached to the papers? —No. 498. You went into Mr. Airport's room on one occasion and saw Yon Schoen sitting at the table ?—Yes. 499. And there were examination-papers on the table ?—Yes. 500. Will you tell me whether they had a front sheet to them ?—Yes, that is all. 501. And in point of fact they were away from Mr. Airport's place as if he were no longer using them, and they were not open in front of Captain Yon Schoen ?—I did not see them open. 502. So, for ought you know or can say, they were not referred to in conference between Captain Yon Schoen and Mr. Allport? —No. 503. But you thought it was an impropriety that they should be on the table in that way ?— Yes. 21— H. 26.

162

H.—26

504. Are you aware that after examinations are complete, and the papers are returned to the office, that any use is made of them for any purpose?— Not to my knowledge. 505. Then do you say you are not aware, for example, that copies of them are made for the Board of Trade in England ?—Copies of certain portions of them. 506. Might not those papers have been on the table for that purpose, or in connection with that purpose ?—I do not know ; they might have been. 507. Can you say? You had the opportunity of looking at them ; you say the examinationpapers were on the table—who did they relate to ?—I did not examine them. 508. Did you see whom they related to?— No. 509. Therefore it is possible that they might have related to somebody else than Captain Jones ?—Oh, yes. 510. The inference which you perhaps undesignedly suggested was that they were Captain Jones's papers, or Mclntyre's ? Do you suggest that they were Mclnlyre's ?—I do not say they were anybody's. 511. And they might have been on the table for a perfectly proper purpose, so far as you know ?—I do not know. 512. But it struck you as extraordinary? —Yes. 513. The words you used were something to that effect ? You thought there was something suspicious about the papers being there ? —lf you were in my place, would it not strike you too? 514. So much so, that you thought that either Mclntyre's papers had been improperly got independent of Mr. Allport, or that Mr. Allport had been giving access to them?—lt was not a question of their having been improperly got, it was a question of their having been taken out of the Minister's room. 515. At any rate, you thought there was something improper in consequence of seeing a bundle of papers on the table ? —I thought there was something wrong. 516. Did you associate Mr. Allport's name with it by suggesting that possibly the information might have been got from Mr. Allport ?—I admit that I thought the papers should not have been on the table while Captain Yon Schoen was there. 517. But if they had been on the other side of the table ? —lf they had been on the other side of the table, I would not have said anything about it. 518. But, being on that side where Yon Schoen was, you thought they should not have been there ?—I did not like the look of it. 519. You had several conversations with Mr. Hall-Jones with reference to what he was desirous of getting : you have mentioned several?—l have mentioned four. 520. It was a matter of considerable interest, apparently, to Mr. Hall-Jones, at all events?—lt was a matter of no interest to me. I was a civil servant at the time, and like a good many more had to do what I was told in the way of making inquiries. 521. Did it not occur to you that it was of some interest to Mr. Hall-Jones because it was so frequently referred to?—I do not know. 522. He sent for you on the subject?—On two occasions. 523. Would you not infer from that that it was of some interest to the Minister?—l do not think so. I was interested in Captain Jones myself in trying to get him a service certificate. 524. He says the envelope was written at the interview late in May, at the interview you were present with Captain Jones of the " Duco " ?—I think it was written on the day it was sent down, but according to Mr. Allport, he placed the date Bth July on it. 525. Mr. Allport's impression is that it was taken down, but that you took it ?—Yes, but I did not take it. 526.., Mr. Hall-Jones says that before you left the room he said to you, "Take this as a reminder "?—I gave my evidence to Dr. Findlay on that point. 527. And that it was at the end of May, at the interview between you, Captain Jones, of the " Duco," and himself. Captain Jones says distinctly that he left the room with the impression that the Minister was about to give the order that he was to be examined. That is the interview at which Hall-Jones says this memorandum was written, and he says he gave it to you. You deny that ? Then Mr. Allport says you gave it to him on the Bth July, and you deny that ? —I never had it in my hand in my life. 528. It is very remarkable that there should be that interval, from the end of May until the Bth of July, before it reached the department ?—Yes. 529. You say that was the authority for the examination when it reached the department ?— I think so. 530. On the Bth July? Well, we have the evidence of the officers of the department that, on receiving this envelope, Mr. Allport, on the Bth July, took it to Mr. Glasgow ? —Yes. 531. That Mr. Glasgow went up to see the Minister about it ? —Yes. 532. And that the Minister confirmed the purpose for which the order was granted. We see, further, that on the 12th July—a Sunday having intervened—the instruction for the examination was sent up to the Examiners ? —Yes. 533. Now, will you tell me how you suggest that, until that order was sent down, Captain Jones should go up to Captain Yon Schoen's to be instructed and have his examination-papers all prepared, in the absence of that authority ? The authority, yon say, was written at that interview in May: you admit it was written then ?—I do not admit that; I said that was about the time. 534. At all events it did not reach Mr. Allport until the Bth July? —Yes. 535. Then how do you suggest that Jones should have gone up to Captain Yon Schoen ?— Because the Minister told him to go. Captain Jones said so in his evidence.

163

H.—26

536. And all the examination-papers were prepared, according to your view of it, within a day or two after this authority reached the department ?—That may have been so. I know it was some time before when Captain Jones and I were present. I did not tell Jones to go up for examination. 537. You were present when the conversation took place between him and the Minister, and he left the room under the impression that an authority would go down, and you say that that authority was never given to you. You say, moreover, you were present when it was brought into Mr. Airport's office by a messenger?— Yes. 538. Will you say on what date it was sent down by a messenger ?—No. 539. You made no memorandum of that?—No ; that was my impression. 540. You were present when it was presented ; what did Mr. Allport do with it ?—He took it to the Secretary's room. 541. He first made some remark, " Here's the order you were talking about"?— Something to that effect. 542. And you had been talking about it just previously ?—Yes. 543. How did you come to talk of this authority just previously if you had never heard of an authority during the interval between the May interview with Mr. Hall-Jones and the Bth July, when it appears to have been received by Mr. Allport? How is it that nothing had cropped up about it ? It is distinctly stated by Mr. Hall-Jones, Captain Jones, and yourself that it was written at the end of May ?—I did not say it was at the end of May. It might be the end of June, as far as I know. 544. There is this remarkable fact: that if Mr. Hall-Jones prepared the memorandum in the way he states, it was somewhere, in nubibus, until the Bth July, because you say you were present when it was presented to Mr. Allport?—That is my impression. 545. That is a curious point : the whole of the studies of Captain Jones having been carried out, and the examination-papers prepared in anticipation of the examination, and you cannot account for it. But you distinctly deny that you ever had it or presented it to Mr. Allport?—l never saw it in my life. 546. But you remember the circumstance of Mr. Allport reading it ?—Yes. 547. And he took it to Mr. Glasgow?— Yes ; that is quite distinct. 548. Mr. Glasgow says it was brought to him by Mr. Allport on or about the Bth July. You are unable to account, then, for the circumstance that I referred to with reference to the interval between the date mentioned by Mr. Hall-Jones and the date mentioned by Mr. Allport ? —It is a mystery to me. 549. Can you say whether you had an interview with Mr. Hall-Jones on the Bth July ?—I would not say. 550. Had you any interview with Mr. Hall-Jones with reference to Captain Jones's examination between the end of May and the Bth July ?—The last interview I had with Mr. Hall-Jones was when it was decided that he would send a memorandum to the department. What date it was I do not know. 551. How long was that before you saw the document you say was presented to Mr. Allport? —It might have been that day, a few days after, or it might have been a week. 552. So that Mr. Hall-Jones is utterly wrong in saying it was the end of May?— Certainly. 553. Would you assume that it was when he told Captain Jones that he had better go up and be instructed by Captain Yon Schoen ?—He never told me that. That might have been prior to my being present. 554. Captain Jones says he went up upwards of ten days before the date of the examination ?— I dare say it was. I would not say either way. 555. Are you quite sure you did not forget getting the envelope at the end of May and putting it in your pocket ? —I told you before I never handled it. 556. And you cannot explain the peculiarity at all of the statement of Mr. Hall-Jones that he gave it to you, and of Mr. Allport that he received it from you ?—You have their statements before you. lam giving my evidence now. 557. You distinctly deny you ever had it ? Mr. Hall-Jones says he gave it to you, and Mr. Allport says he received it from you ; but you confirm Mr. Allport's statement that he took it to Mr. Glasgow? —Yes, I remember that. 558. This is in your report: "I told you (Mr. Glasgow) what had transpired, including the fact that I had recommended the Minister to permit Jones to sit for his examination. You told me that you thought I was foolish to do so, but I replied to you that, from what had happened upstairs, I knew that the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones, the Minister, were anxious that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination, and that an order would be sent down by Mr. Hall-Jones to the department giving him permission to sit. In the evening of that day I was in the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department's (Mr. Allport) room, and I explained to him that the Minister and myself had arranged that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination, and that an order would be sent out accordingly. While I was there the messenger came down and handed Mr. Allport a document, whereupon Mr. Allport said, ' Here is the order you were talking about.' " Is that consistent with your evidence to-day?—l think so. 559. It seems to me that the interview could not have taken place at the end of May, that it must have taken place on the Bth July ? —That is the date I can fix it to the "best of my ability, and I say that statement is absolutely true, so far as I know. 560. Captain Jones had only heard on the Bth of July, at the interview he had with you, that he could go up for examination, according to that statement ?—How do I know what occurred between Mr. Hall-Jones and Captain Jones, when he was told to go up to Captain Yon Schoen ?

H.—26

164

561. According to that statement, the interview must have taken place on the Bth July. You say the interview took place between you and Mr. Hall-Jones, when Captain Jones, of the "Duco," was present. You say, " I was sent for by Mr. Hall-Jones, who informed me that he was going to allow Jones to go up without reference to the qualification of mate. He said he would give me an order. I said the order must go to the department. He said lie would give me an order. I saw the Minister at the table. I did not see him write the envelope after Jones left. I did not see anything transpire. I did not know Jones was illiterate." There we have the reverse. He said he would give you an order. How do you reconcile that with what you now say?— Mr. Hall-Jones said he would give me the order, and I said the order must go to the department. 562. Why should he say, " I will give you the order," when he never gave it to you?—He said he would give me an order, but did not give it to me. That was general—" I will give you an order for so-and-so " —but he did not say he would write it out then and give it to me. 563. You go on to say, " I did not know that Jones could not pass. I did not know he would have no chance of passing. I bond fide believed that he could pass. I went to Mr. Glasgow, and told him what passed in the Minister's room." Is that so? Did you go to Mr. Glasgow personally and tell him what passed in the Minister's room immediately after? —Yes. 564. " And told him how I had stretched the regulations. He told me I had been very foolish ; if I had been as long as he in the Government service, I would not have done it. I have a recollection that the envelope arrived while I was in Mr. Allport's room. A messenger gave something to Mr. Allport, and he read it and said, ' Here is the order you have been talking about,' and read from it, 'Jones,' 'Duco,' Permit Examination.' " You say all that took place on the Bth of July? —I do not say it took place on any particular date, but it was well on that way. 565. Well, Mr. Allport has put on the memorandum the date he received it, and if you were present when he received it ?—You must recollect I never saw this order, and knew nothing about it until the thing was mentioned in the Supreme Court. 566. You say you never saw it, never handled it, had nothing to do with it; that it was never in your possession at all, notwithstanding what has been stated by all these parties ?—No. 567. And that Captain Jones would have to go up for tuition simply on the statement of the Minister, without any reference to this order at all?—I do not know what transpired at all with the Minister and Jones. 568. When Mr. Allport said, " Here is the order you are speaking of," did you see the document ? —No. 569. Nor asked to read it?— No. 570. He merely read it out ? —He has read thousands of things out for me. 571. You say you knew nothing about it, and had not the curiosity to look at it, nor anything of the kind ?—I knew the order was coming down to the department. 572. And this document, which is identified by Mr. Hall-Jones as having been written in May, only reached the department in July, the date when you were present?— That is my impression. 573. You told us what happened in the examination-room, that an envelope was handed to you, that at the time it was handed to you you had no suspicion of its contents ?—No. 574. You opened it and Captain Edwin asked you what that was ?—I think we both noticed it. I think it was simultaneous. I showed the papers to him and Captain Edwin said " Destroy them." 575. You showed them and you tore them up?—l tore up portion of them. 576. How many pages?— Three or four. I know there were some torn up. 577. Would not portions of them have the 13th July upon them? —I think it is on the 19th. 578. You see the application is dated the 12th July, and the certificate the 19th July. Then there is another document —there is a certificate at the foot of that application dated 19th July, signed by you and Captain Edwin. Then we have an instruction to deliver a certificate of competency and testimonials to Mr. Jones, also dated 19th July. But we have one sheet of paper signed by Jones, the test for reading and writing, dated 13th July?— Yes. •579. We have the examination-papers to be used by a candidate for a certificate of competency as a mate also dated 13th July, and we have some sums in addition dated 13th July. Then we have all the other papers dated 19th July. Now, will you look at these and say which of the papers were prepared in the examination-room, and which were in their original condition ? —-I do not attach any importance to the date. 580. I only want to see which of the papers you identify now as having been prepared in the examination-room, and which as having been included in the envelope?— Exhibit " N " 2, 3, and & were done in the examination-room on the 19th. No. 1, the test in writing, was brought into the room by Captain Jones. No. 2 was set by me in the examination-room. No. 3 was set by ■me, and No. 4. Nos. 2, 3, and 4 are supposed to have been done by Captain Jones in the examina-tion-room. 581. Was he assisted in doing them?— Jones was assisted. Those two sheets applying to the deviation question on the back of those you call No. 4, were brought into the room by Jones. This Exam. 9c was done in the room—the chart question. Exam. 9d was also brought into the room; and the last one is only answers to the questions made out by the Examiner. 582. Dr. Giles.] This part of No. 4 was brought into the room by him?— Yes. 583. Mr. Travers.] I understand that 2, 3, and 4 were done in the room ? —Yes. 584. The remainder of the examination-papers were brought by Jones with No. 1 ?—Yes. 585. When Captain Edwin said those must be destroyed, you commenced to tear up the papers as he was leaving the room ?—Captain Edwin did not say they were to be destroyed. He said " Destroy them." 586. And you proceeded to tear up some papers ?—Yes, certainly.

165

H.—26

587. Did he leave the room ?—Yes. 588. Therefore he had no reason to suppose they would not all be torn up ?—I do not think so. 589. Did he return to the room at any interval in Jones's examination?—He returned to the room after Jones had gone. 590. Had you prepared the certificate for signature then or afterwards? —I could not say whether it was done then or not. If Jones had gone, he certainly had the certificate. 591. Was it not a usual thing in connection with examinations that, even if the examination had taken place entirely before one Examiner, both signed it for conformity sake ?—Not at all. If there had been twenty Examiners, only one would have signed it. 592. Is not the order for the certificate signed by both ?—No, only by one—by me. 593. I mean the certificate of passing is signed by both? The certificate of examination is signed by you—the authority for delivery of the certificate is signed by you in this case?—l say so. 594. Now here his certificate is signed by both of you ? —The custom is that when two conduct the examination, both sign it. 595. In this case it was signed by boih because Captain Edwin was present when the sight and colour tests were taken ?—Yes. 596. That is the reason ?—Yes. 597. And had he conducted the main portion of the examination and you had been present, you would have signed the certificate—tacitly, not expressed—on his assurance ?—Yes, it was a common thing. 598. In fact, in the report you sent to the Government in reference to this, you frankly enough acquitted Captain Edwin of any complicity?— Yes, he had nothing to do with this bogus examination. 599. Mr. Hislop :] In your first report to the Minister, after going through various matters, you say " this brings my narrative down to about the middle and towards the end of 1897." Then you go on to speak of Captain Yon Schoen, and say " but one day just prior to the opening of last Parliament we met. He asked me if his men (who were then under examination) would pass "?— Yes. 600. Now, down to that time, which would be just prior to the session of 1898, I understand you were on perfectly good terms with Captain Yon Schoen ?—Well, we had always been on good terms up to that date, but previous to that I kept aloof from him as much as possible, about 1897. 601. You say " up to the time Captain Yon Schoen attempted to bribe me, I had no idea as to his real motives and his real character." That is in 1898. You say " his reply to this was, 'If they don't pass, I will see Pirani about it; he has his knife into the Government,' " and you say " I told him he could see who he pleased." When was that ?—That was in 1898. 602. Up to that time, were you not on perfectly good terms with Yon Schoen ?—No. It was at the end of 1897, when Mr. Gifford started, when our relations got a little strained. 603. Several candidates failed during the period mentioned ?—Yes. 604. Was that in the middle and towards the end of 1897 ?—Yes, as far as I can recollect. 605. So that up to the middle or towards the end of 1897 you were on perfectly good terms with Yon Schoen ?—Yes. 606. And did not suspect him of anything?—No, quite the opposite ; he always pretended to be a good friend of mine. 607. And you did not suspect him of anything improper pertaining to the department ?—Quite the contrary. 608. You are aware that Mclntyre's matter was in January, 1897 ?—Yes. 609. That does not accord with what you stated with regard to your suspicion of Mr. Allport and Captain Yon Schoen?—A man may have a suspicion and cannot make it public in any way. 610. Do you not think your evidence on that point is a little inconsistent with your statement that you suspected Yon Schoen of nothing up to the middle and towards the end of 1897 ?—There was nothing there directly to suspect. Mclntyre stated that he took this copy out of the room. 611. I notice in your second report that you say, referring to the interview with Mr. HallJones, " I knew that the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones, the Minister, were anxious that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination " ?—I know it is there. 612. Then in your summary of the report you say —" (B.) I was plainly led to understand that it was the desire of the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones that Captain Jones should get the certificate he applied for." You notice these two statements? —Yes. 613. And you believed them, and still believe them, to be correct ?—That was the representation Mr. Hall-Jones made to me. 614. As a matter of fact, were you not aware before the Premier went Home that he was anxious Jones should get something—l do not say one certificate or the other ? —lt never came under him when I vetoed it once. 615. I would like to direct your attention to another statement in your report. You say here, in referring to yo.ur being urged with regard in this matter: "I mentioned the matter to the Hon. Mr. Ward, who was then Minister of Marine." You go on to state that you did not see your way to do anything, and Mr. Ward replied, " Do not have anything to do with it " ? —Yes.

Feiday, 21st July, 1899. Captain Allman's examination continued. 1. Mr. Hislop.] I was directing your attention to your report in which you stated that you knew the Ministers, namely, the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones, were anxious that Captain Jones

H.—26

166

should get what he desired. Was that your impression, and is it so still?— Well, owing to' surroundings, it was my impression at the time. 2. You will notice from the papers, the first application which Captain Jones sent in was dated early in 1895 ? —I do not know the date. As a matter of fact, I have not seen any of these papers since the time I dealt with them. 3. I notice that Mr. Williams's letter is dated the 14th May, 1895 ?—Yes ; it was long after that it came to me. 4. I want to know whether that envelope was not given to you in September, 1895 ?—I do not know, as I said before. It was either the end of 1895 or the beginning of 1896. 5. You cannot remember the exact words on it?—l could not say definitely at all. I know the meaning was to look into the matter, and see if anything could be done for Captain Jones. 6. I understand that you did carefully look into the matter yourself ?—I saw all the papers. 7. You reported that there was no possibility of getting over the difficulty ? —I reported on the envelope, in reply to the Premier's memorandum, that I did not think so, or something to that effect —that is what it really amounted to. 8. Had you any difficulty in coming to that conclusion by a perusal of the papers?— Well, I had in this respect. The Customhouse where the records had been kept had been burnt down, and there was a lapse of time which could not be checked. Captain Jones stated in the application, that he had done so much service, and there was nothing on the files to show that he had not. 9. Supposing he was correct for the time he applied for—during the time of the destroyed records—and that were added to what you admitted since then, would it have come up to the three years ?—I do not think it would have come up to the three years myself. From my own experience, he was in and out of Wellington for that period. 10. He required to have three years' service ?—Yes. 11. Part of the time he claimed for was for the period during which there were no records. Supposing you added the whole of the time he claimed for prior to 1890, would it not have amounted to the three years' service?—l could not tell you, unless I went through the papers again. 12. After that, you say, the application seems to have come up in 1895, and a letter was written to Captain Jones in June, 1895, intimating that the certificate could not be granted. Then it came up again in 1896. Do you remember when it came before you again ? —No; it only came before me once. lam inclined to think it was in 1896. 13. Were you not spoken to by the Premier, prior to his going home ?—No ; never. 14. Can you tell me what the Premier meant in his telegram—the one which stated, " Captain Allman thinks him highly qualified " ? —I said that in the presence of Captain Jones and Yon Schoen at the interview. 15. Do you think that you had not spoken to the Premier for a period of nearly two years on the subject ?—I do not think anything at all about it, lam positive. I spoke to him about another certificate, but not Jones's. 16. You told us that several persons interested themselves with you during some considerable period with regard to this certificate. How long before the Premier went Home was the last interview you had with any person ? —I could not fix the date accurately. 17. Was it within a month or two ? —Long before that. 18. Within six months, then ?—I should say it was more like the middle of 1896. 19. Can you tell us who it was that interested themselves? —Well, several people spoke to me. 20. Did Mr. Williams speak to you about it ?—He did not mention the matter. He stated that he was quite satisfied that my opinion was correct. 21. He told you that the envelope had gone to his office?— Well, he inferred that it had. He said that after he saw my rnmute he was satisfied. 22. He told you that he had seen the minute ? —Yes. 23. Can you tell us now of any others who interested themselves ?—The Premier's secretary spoke to me about Jones. 24. I mean people who last spoke to you before the Premier went Home. Did anybody speak to you about it?— Well, as far as I can recollect —I would not be positive about it—Mr. John Hutcheson, senior member for Wellington City, spoke to me about Jones at the end of 1896. He told me that he had made several complaints to the department and also to the Minister. He mentioned Jones, and I said that I would only be too glad to do anything I could for Jones, but I said I was afraid he did not come under the Act. 25. Well, anyone else ? —Not that I know of. 26. Do you know a Mr. Trask ? —Yes. 27. Did he ever speak to you on behalf of Jones?—l cannot say that he did. 28. Can you say whether he did or he did not ?—I should be inclined to say he did not. 29. The next time you were spoken to was by Mr. Hall-Jones in March', 1897 ?—Yes, I should think it was about March. 30. Did you gather from his conversation on that occasion that he was anxious something should be done for Jones ?—No, the conversation was general, and he mentioned this Jones business, and asked me what I knew about it, and I told him that I thought it was a very hard case. 31. I have drawn your attention to the fact that you have stated in your memorandum that the Minister, Mr. Hall-Jones, and the Premier were anxious that something should be done for Jones. Will you tell me from what conversation it was that you gathered that from Mr. HallJones ?—I had four conversations with Mr. Hall-Jones, and they were all more or less in that strain, and had that tendency.

167

H.—26

32. Was it during the first conversation in March, 1897, that you gathered any desire on his part to do something for Jones? —No, we were talking generally of Jones. 33. Was it during the course of the conversation when the Premier's telegram was discussed that you gathered any desire that Mr. Hall-Jones wanted something done?— Owing to the conversations first, and the telegram afterwards, I understood there was a tendency to try and get Jones a coasting certificate. 34. Did anything of this sort happen with regard to any other candidate? Had you been interviewed by Ministers in regard to any other candidate ?—I reported on several applications which went before the Minister. 35. Do you know of any other case where, after the department has refused an application of this kind, or a similar kind, you have been repeatedly asked to do something or to see whether something could be done ? —No, I cannot say I have. 36. And beyond that, you gathered they were anxious something should be done ? —I inferred so from the conversations with Mr. Hall-Jones. 37. You say you read something in an evening paper as to Mr. Pirani's speech, when you came down from New Plymouth by train, was it not?—l was on board the train when I got the paper. 38. How did you come to be on board the train ?—I was coining down to Wellington. 39. Were you telegraphed for? —I was at Cape Bgmont lighthouse, and was there for three days. 40. You heard a witness state that you were telegraphed for ?—I have never received the telegram. The first I heard of it was the mention of it in this room. 41. Did you telegraph that you were coming? —I generally used to keep the department posted up where I was. 42. Can you explain how Mr. Hall-Jones knew you were coming down?—-I do not know unless he got it from the department. 43. You arrived at the station, and you were accosted by a messenger ?—Yes. 44. Were the words he said to you, " Mr. Hall-Jones wants to see you before you see any one else?"— The words were, "You are wanted at the Parliamentary Buildings." 45. Is that all he said?—He said, " The Minister wants to see you." 46. Were there two messengers ?—Yes. 47. Who was the other messenger—we have heard of Burgess ?—The Premier's messenger, as far as I can remember. 48. Can you say whether or not it was the Premier's messenger?—To the best of my recollection it was. 49. Did he accost you ? —They were both down there. 50. What did he say to you? —"You are wanted at the Parliamentary Buildings." 51. Are you sure of what he said? Did he say that the Premier wanted to see you?— Well, if he did not say it, he inferred it. 52. Have you said frequently to different people that Mr, Hall-Jones's messenger stated to you that you were to go to see Mr. Hall-Jones before you saw any one else?— Yes, that is true. 53. Is it true that the messenger said that to you ?—Yes, he said I would have to see Mr. Hall-Jones first. 54. Which messenger said that ?—Hall-Jones's messenger. 55. Burgess ?—Yes. 56. Will you tell us what the Premier's messenger said to you—did he use words of the same kind? —No. 57. What did he say ? —He said the Premier wanted to see me. 58. At once? —Well, of course, I inferred "as soon as possible." 59. Did he say he wanted to see you at once ? —■Nβ, he did not. I drove up to the Parliamentary Buildings, and the man went home with my luggage. 60. Were both messengers on board ?—Yes. 61. Did you see Mr. Hall-Jones before you saw the Premier?— Yes. 62. Will you tell us what took place between you and Mr. Hall-Jones?—As far as I can remember it was a conversation commencing with the evening paper ; I do not know now. 63. You had read the Wellington evening paper ?—Yes ; it is the paper I am alluding to. 64. Did the reading in the paper bring back the Jones examination to your mind ? —Yes. 65. Did you mention the Jones examination to Mr. Hall-Jones before he and you saw the Premier ? —I think so. 66. Are you not positive? —I say lam positive. 67. Did he seem to remember about Captain Jones's examination?—l really cannot say whether he did or not. 68. Did you mention to him the circumstance of the mate's certificate having been dispensed with?—No; I said, as far as I can recollect, "This is Jones's business, I suppose." I did not remember anything about the certificate (the mate's); it had gone clean out of my memory. 69. What did he say in reply to chat?—l know I told him I helped Jones a lot. 70. At the examination ? —Yes. 71. Did you tell him that Jones had brought papers into the examination-room?— Not at that time. 72. In what way did you explain to him that you had helped him?— Well, I told the Minister that Jones required a lot of assistance to get through. 73. Did you tell him that ?—Yes; I told him I helped Jones a lot to get through. 74. Did you tell him in so many words that you had helped him with the papers ?—Yes ; there was nothing else I could help him with.

H.—26

168

75. Did he upbraid you, or say anything about it to you ?—-I cannot say that he did. 76 v He did not?— No. 77. Was he astonished ?—Well, I could not say whether he was or was not. 78. Did he express any astonishment ?—Well, he expressed astonishment in this way—he said I ought to have failed Jones. 79. Was there anything said during that conversation as to the papers being therein evidence ? —Nothing whatever. 80. Or that they could be produced ?—No ; as a matter of fact, every one knew they could be produced. 81. This was the first conversation you had with Mr. Hall-Jones after you came up from the train ?—Yes. 82. Now, was it arranged between you and Mr. Hall-Jones that this should not be mentioned to the Premier ?—lndirectly, it was. 83. As a matter of fact, you did not mention it to the Premier ?—No. 84. Was it arranged between you and Mr. Hall-Jones that you should not to mention it to the Premier?— Mr. Hall-Jones told me to see the Premier, and I was to say there was nothing in it, beyond that I assisted Jones, as it were. There was nothing in it. 85. Were you to tell the Premier that you had assisted Jones ?—I was not to tell him that at all. I was to tell him there was nothing in it. 86. Was it arranged that you should say to the Premier that there was nothing in it ?—Yes. 87. You say, then, that it was arranged you should say to the Premier that there was nothing in it? —Yes, quite so. 88. Was there any further conversation that you remember?—No, not just then. 89. You went in then to see the Premier?—No; I did not see the Premier until 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning—after Mr. Hutcheson's speech. 90. You saw Mr. Hall-Jones before Mr. Hutcheson spoke ?—Mr. Hutcheson spoke on two occasions that night. 91. That is so. The adjournment for half an hour came between portions of his speech— was that it ? —I think the adjournment was just on when I arrived up there. 92. Did not Mr. Hutcheson speak immediately after the adjournment ? Was not he the first speaker? —I could not say; it was about 11 o'clock. 93. You saw the Premier with Mr. Hall-Jones about 2 o'clock in the morning, you say ?— Yes. 94. Did you again see Mr. Hall-Jones ?—I was sitting on the floor of the House, and talked with him occasionally. After Mr. Hutcheson's speech, Mr. Hall-Jones and I went into the Cabinet-room. 95. Had you another conversation with him there?— Yes. Mr. Hutcheson had mentioned about receiving the papers that Captain Jones brought into the room ; and he asked me about it, and I told him it was so, and that I accepted some papers, and others I did not. 96. Was anything further said as to what you were to tell the Premier?—No; the Premier came in shortly afterwards, and I told him the same as I told Mr. Hall-Jones. 97. Did you speak to him about Jones ?—Yes, regarding the papers Jones brought into the room. 98. That was after they were mentioned by Mr. Hutcheson ? —Yes, I told the Premier, in the presence of Mr. Hall-Jones, that Jones brought these papers into the room, and that I destroyed them and gave him others. 99. What did you say about helping Captain Jones ?—I do not think I mentioned to the Premier that I helped Jones ; I inferred I was lenient with him. 100. Have you stated to any one, Captain Allman, that Mr. Hall-Jones told you on one of these occasions that you were " To keep him straight with the Premier," and that he " Would look after you " if you did so ? —No, there is a certain amount of your question bearing on the matter. 101. What was the other matter ?—The other matter was, he asked me for a confidential report. 102. Then you mentioned to the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones that these papers had been destroyed?— Yes, I told the Premier I destroyed them. 103. That was not correct ? —No. 104. The next time I want you to come to is the time that you were to furnish this confidential report. What was the conversation you had with Mr. Hall-Jones then ?—Well, the first conversation I had with Mr. Hall-Jones after this business in the House, on the morning of Mr. John Hutcheson's speech, was in the recess. I avoided the Parliamentary Buildings and Mr. Hall-Jones as much as possible. It was a painful subject to me: I suppose you can quite understand that. It was during the recess. 105. Your first report is the 13th December. You had a conversation prior to that being put in. I want you to tell me about that conversation ?—A short time after Parliament adjourned I saw Mr. Hall-Jones—as Minister for Marine I frequently had to see him—and when I went into his room he had Captain Jones's papers before him. "Talking about that business of Jones's" (I stood immediately behind him) he turned over the papers one after the other, and he said, " Mr. John Hutcheson said that was done in Yon Schoen's house ; Mr. John Hutcheson said this was done in the examination-room ; Mr. John Hutcheson said this was done in Yon Schoen's house," and so on until he came to the end of the chapter. "Well," I said, " Mr. John Hutcheson could no more tell you where those papers were done than I could tell you what is in that drawer, unless Mr. John Hutcheson had actually seen these papers and compared them with the originals in Yon Schoen's possession " —which I presume he had. He asked for my opinion, and I did not give him any : I left the office. 106. Was that all that took place ?-—Yes.

169

H.—26

107. "When did you next see him ?—lt was prior to the 14th November. 108. Seeing that the House prorogued on the 6th November can you fix approximately the time you had this second conversation—after the House prorogued ?—I know the House was not sitting when we had the first interview. 109. How long after that conversation was it before you had the next one? —A short time afterwards, I could not tell from memory. 110. What took place ?—He said that Mr. Hutcheson was going to insist on having an inquiry —or that is what it meant. I told him the thing would not stand inquiry. 111. You told him ?—Yes. 112. Did you explain why ?—I told him that Jones did not do the work as a matter of fact, and it would not bear investigation. 113. Was there any conversation at that time with regard to the circumstances under which Jones came to be examined ?—-I cannot say that there was—l think it was on a former occasion, because an order was sent round from the department to the Customhouse, and it was on the papers. 114. We will go back to the first conversation. You noticed, did you, that the order for examination was on the papers ?—Most certainly I did—it was there. 115. Was there any conversation on the subject?—l said, " Well, there is the order." 116. What did he say ?—He did not say anything. He turned up the order and saw the Customhouse stamp, and said he could see the date of the stamp. 117. You mean that " order " is that copy of the letter which stated that the mate's certificate was to be dispensed with—Mr. Allport's letter to the Collector of Customs ?—Yes ; I believe it was Mr. Allport's letter. 118. Did he or you say anything about the order dispensing with the mate's certificate not on that occasion. 119. Did you make any reference during that conversation to the examination having taken place at his request ?—No, I did not. I said, " There is the order." 120. We will go back to the second conversation. You said that the question rose out of a promise which arose out of a conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones prior to the confidential report being put in ?—He did not make any definite promise to me. I told Mr. Hall-Jones I was a responsible officer. Whatever occurred, whether it was in Auckland or anywhere else, the thing would reflect on me. I told him I was quite prepared to accept the situation of the circumstances. He asked me to write a confidential report to the Premier and tell him all about it, and give it to him, and he would see what could be done on my behalf. , 121. Was that all ?—Yes. . ' 122. At this time was there any reference made at all to the " order " for examination ?—I do not think so, beyond the first allusion I made to the order. 123. Have you not stated to a number of people that during this conversation you pointed out to Mr. Hall-Jones that he was responsible in the first instance for the whole thing?—No; I do not think I went to that length. 124. What length did you go to ? —-I told him that we were stretching the regulations to enable Jones to go up for examination. 125. Who stretched the regulations ?—He and I did. 126. And what did he say to that ?—I do not think he made any reply at all. 127. Did you speak to him and he to you, as if he knew all about it ?—Yes, I think so. 128. At this conversation, at any other prior to January, did he say anything to you in the way of contradicting the statement that he agreed to the dispensing with the mate's certificate? —No. 129. Never?— No. 130. When you said to him, " You in a measure are out of it," did he deny he was in it at all ? No, he did not. 131. I want to ask you whether you have not to a number of persons said that Mr Hall-Jones's attitude on this occasion was, that you were to put him right with the Premier, or if you furnished a report "to keep him right with the Premier?"—He asked for a confidential report, but never mentioned the Premier. 132. Did he ask you in that report to keep him out of it ? —lt was understood that I was the responsible officer, and that I was to take the blame. I did do so; you can see it by the report. 133. Have you not said, and was it not a fact that you agreed in so many words with him that you would take off his shoulders any blame whatever ?—I only arranged that I was to take the whole responsibility. 134. Was that arranged in so many words?— Yes. 135. And you furnished the report accordingly ?—Yes. 136. You stated the whole matter first to Mr. Hall-Jones, and then he afterwards asked you to make a confidential report, and that he refused to make it confidential—you heard Mr. Hall* Jones's evidence ?—Yes. I furnished a confidential report at Mr. Hall-Jones's request. 137. Did he know that it was to be a confidential report ?—That was the understanding. 138. Did he refuse at that time to allow it to be confidential ?—No, certainly not. 139. Dr. Giles.] Was it not directed to the Premier?— Yes, to the care of the Hon. HallJones, sir. 140. Mr. Hislop.] When did you first know that it was not to be treated as confidential?— About the 12th or 13th of January of the present year. 141. How did you learn? —I had no idea of what was going on, they kept it dark entirely— the Secretary for Marine, the Chief Clerk, and the different Ministers, and the Crown Law Officers , no one gave me an inkling of what was going to happen. 22— H. 26.

EL— 26,

170

142. I asked you, how did you learn ?—I called on the Premier on Christmas Eve in his office in the Cabinet-room. We talked this matter over, and I told him much as the Premier said in his evidence. He said he was very sorry for me ; I had made a great mistake. I said that I was aware of it; it was a terrible mistake. He was very sorry for my wife and family, and this took me by surprise. I thought it must be very serious talking in this manner, and I asked, " What is to be the outcome? " He replied that it was entirely in the hands of the Minister of Marine. He said "You had better see him about it.". 143. The Premier stated that he told you to see a solicitor about it ?—At this interview he may have said so ; I would not contradict it. Ido not remember it. 144. He told you to see Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes, that " it was entirely in his hands, that he was Minister of Marine." That was on Christmas Eve. 145. Did he tell you that you were to be prosecuted, or that any proceedings were to be taken?—No, nothing about it. 146. Did you see Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. I made inquiries, and I found that he had gone South to his home. 147. When did you see him ?—-I saw him on Friday, the 13th January. 148. What took place then?—l called at his office in the forenoon and asked him what was likely to.be done in this matter, and he told me that there was going to be an inquiry. I told him there was no necessity for an inquiry. " You asked me for a confidential report, and I told you all I knew about the matter," I said; "in the confidential report I have convicted myself." He said, "It is decided that there is going to be an inquiry." So I asked Mr. Hall-Jones, " Where do you come in ? " He said, " I don't come in at all." He said, " You ought to have failed Jones." So I took my hat and left the room, and that is the last I have seen of Mr. HallJones to speak to until I saw him in Court. 149. Was this in the Minister's office ?—Yes. 150. Did you ever see him at the Royal Hotel ?—Subsequently I did. 151. What took place on that occasion ? —Knowing in my own mind that the Premier was entirely ignorant of the whole of the surroundings of the bogus stretching of the regulations and everything, I went down and I saw Captain Hennah, Officer in Charge of the Government Buildings, and the Premier's brother-in-law. He was not there, so I waited about until 1 o'clock, and then I met him. He was preparing to go away on a trip in the " Hinemoa," and I told him I wanted some private conversation Judge Ward : We do not want you to go into every private conversation. Witness : I told him that Mr. Hall-Jones was going to have an inquiry on this matter, and that the Premier was ignorant of the whole of the surroundings, and I told him to wire to the Premier. What I said 152. Dr. Giles.] Your conversation was with Mr. Hennah, not with the Premier?— Yes. 153. Mr. Hislop.] Well, did anything arise out of that telegram, as far as you know?—l do not know. 154. Did you see the Premier immediately after he came back?— No. I have not seen the Premier to speak to since Christmas Eve. 155. What was the date of the conversation you had with Captain Hennah?—On the 13th j anuary. 156. Did you not see, the Premier after that ?—-No. 157. You say that you had a conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones. Is that all that took place—you put your hat on and left the office? Did you tell us all that took place on ', that occasion ?—Yes. 158. Did you go to the Eoyal Hotel and see Mr. Hall-Jones afterwards ?—I did not go for the purpose of seeing Mr. Hall-Jones ; I went to see a friend. 159. Did you see Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes; I met him as I was going out. 160. Did you have a conversation with him ? What did you say to him then ? —He passed me, and pretended not,to know me, and I called him back, and I asked him what he was prepared to do with me, as I had got into trouble to a great extent on his account. He asked me what I said, so I repeated it again. He said, " You must not talk to me like that." I said, " I will not talk to you ; I will write to you next time. ,. So he struggled upstairs. 161. Is that all ?—Yes. 162. Did you not on that occasion remind him of a promise that he had made to you?— No. 163. Did you not say, "You would not have got that confidential report out of me if you had not made that promise to me "?—No, I never mentioned the confidential report at all. 164. Did you not say, " You would never have got that confidential report " ?—No, I never mentioned that to Mr. Hall-Jones. As a matter of fact, he never would, if there had not been some understanding. 165. What was the understanding ? —The understanding that he would see what could be done in the best of my interests. 166. And what consideration did you give him for that ?—The consideration I gave was the confidential report, and settled matters. 167. And freed him ?—Yes. 168. That telegram, you say, was sent from Onehunga ?—I did not say so. The Premier sent the telegram. , ■ 169. You have not a copy of it ?—I presume there is a copy in the Post-office. I have not a copy. . . ;..._■•-.. 170. Mr. Atkinson.] You mention in your first statement that you got Captain Yon Schoen to do some examination-papers for you in connection with Strang and Bendall's examinations ?—No, it was not done for that purpose.

H.—26

171

171. Were they used by you in connection with that examination ? —Yes. 172. Do you mean that you had not got any particular examination in mind at the time you asked Captain Yon Schoen to do the work?—No, I had not—it was only compass-adjusting business. 173. You found him useful afterwards when that examination took place ?—Yes. 174. There was no mention to Yon Schoen of any examination pending?—No, I do not think so. 175. Has he done any work to help you at all, apart from the special tuition you mentioned ? —I do not think so. 176. Was there any payment in connection with this working on the part of Captain Bendall'a papers ?—-Yes, Captain Yon Schoen and I arranged the questions to be taken out of the deviascope book. 177. Was the work paid for, or was there any mention of payment?—Oh, yes; payment before ever I went there. He said his usual terms were ss. an hour—he usually, got that, but he Would let me down easy. 178. Did he get any payment?—No, I tendered the money to him, and he would not take it. 179. Can you fix the date of that transaction ? —No, I cannot fix the date. 180. Was it the beginning of December, 1897 ?—I could not fix the date. 181. Then he was not very close-fisted in money matters towards you at this period ?—No, Yon Schoen and I never had any money matters at all. 182. Only he offered you that bribe in December, 1897 ?—I could not say the actual date. 183. Is that the first money transaction suggested between you?— Yes; he would not accept any money. 184. Can you remember the terms in which this bribe was offered?— Yes, it was to give his men the preference. 185. Was there an examination just pending ?—I think there was. 186. Were there any names mentioned ?—No. 187. Tell us as closely as you can the language he used ?—Well, you have my report, 188. "He asked me to let his men pass in preference to the other teacher's men." Is that it ? —Yes, that is about the terms it was in. He said he would " make it worth my while." 189. He did not mention any specific sum ?—No, I do not think so. 190. You are quite certain he meant pecuniary consideration?— Yes, positive. 191. That began to alter your relations with him for the first time?— Yes, I "sheered off," as we say in nautical language. 192. You took care to keep out of his way as much as possible after that?— Yes. 193. Had he been in and out of your office before that ?—I should not say he was there frequently ; he was probably in about once a week when I was in Wellington. 194. Sometimes oftener, and sometimes the interval would be longer ? —No, I do not think he was in oftener. 195. Did you succeed in putting a stop to these semi-official calls of his at your office ?—Yes, I think I did. 196. Your " sheering off" put a stop to that —of course he saw less of you? —Yes, no do.ubt about that. 197. Did you show it in your manner on the next occasion that is mentioned here?—We always met the same as you meet anybody else. 198. You did not show any coldness in your greeting?—l cannot say that I did so expressly. 199. You shook hands in the usual way? —Yes. 200. It was on this occasion that he proceeded to threaten you—the next meeting you mention in the statement—" that he would see Pirani " ?—Yes. 201. Can you give us any more closely the date of that incident ?—No; I cannot accurately fix the date. 202. " Last Parliament" meant "last session," did it not? —I presume "last Parliament" meant " last session." 203. You were writing in 1899 ; " last session " referred to the session of 1898?—-Yes. 204. This was subsequent to December, 1897, when you say the bribe was made ?—Yes. 205. Do you not remember that Mr. Pirani's life was despaired of just at that time ?—I saw something in the paper about it. 206. Did it strike you as particularly proper to call him from his bed of sickness to stick a knife in the Government ?—lt was in enmity I took it. 207. You frequently had deputations about interpretations of regulations, and so on, and interpretation of rules, and why candidates had not passed, &c. ?—Yes. 208. You are quite certain that this particular phrase was used, about "seeing Pirani and sticking his knife into the Government " ?—Not " stick his knife in " ; " he has got his knife into the Government." 209. You are certain that some such phrase was used ?—Something of that description. 210. And you swear that it was not used in connection with ordinary matters of the department ; it was not made in reference to the interpretation of regulations in general ?—I do not think so. 211. You will swear it was made as a threat to secure the passing of his own candidates?— Yes. 212. Will you swear positively that you could not have misunderstood it ? It is a serious charge. Do you think it is quite impossible that the words could have been used in a general way, and have nothing whatever to do with the passing of pupils? —It was used oh' this particular occasion.

H.—26

172

213. There was nothing else discussed except the passing of his pupils?—No, I do not think so. ...•_.■ 214. Will you swear that?— Yes, positive. 215. Was Walley's case being discussed in any way about that time ? —I cannot fix the date. 216. That was during the year 1898 ; can you remember that ?—-Yes, I remember there were several candidates up. 217. Did you not personally discuss with Yon Schoen that case?— No. 218. Do you remember the case of Captain Pender, about August, 1898 ? —No. 219. Do not you remember he was allowed to pass?—l do not remember the incident at all. 220. Did you not hear Mr. Allport in his evidence state that there had been exactly the same point raised in Fender's case, that it was decided in favour of the candidate, and the same point was decided against another candidate a month or two afterwards ? Are you in a position to say whether that is correct ?—I do not remember the particulars at all. 221. Do you remember the nature of the question that was being discussed between Yon Schoen and the department over Walley's case ?—No, I did not see any papers on it. 222. You do not remember the point ?—The points were these, as far as I remember : There were some papers in which I did not think the sea service was sufficient, neither did Captain Edwin, and I reported it. Captain Edwin and I were subsequently discussing the matter in Captain Edwin's office, when a lawyer friend of mine came into the room, and I asked him what was the reading of the different paragraphs. He said they were all alternatives. I said, " Are you sure ?" and he said, "I am positive." On knowing that, I went round to Mr. Glasgow and told him that a lawyer friend of mine told me they were all alternatives. He told me to make further inquiries into the matter. I sent for Mr. Allport and we discussed the matter. 223. Did Mr. Allport state what the practice had been ?—Yes, he mentioned what the custom had been. 224. Did he tell you that it had been invariably accepted before ?—Yes. 225. Can you remember that it was the same as in Pender's case?— Yes. 226. With reference to the adjustment of compasses, it was open for any one to do the work up till "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1895," came into force?— Yes, I believe so. 227. Did Yon Schoen have a monopoly of compass-adjusting under the Act?— Yes, he may have had it. 228. How long were the first regulations in force ?—I should say for about a year or so. 229. Did you think the monopoly under this regulation would be worth £1,700 a year?—l based my calculations—that if every ship that came to the colony came here to Wellington, that would be the amount. 230. If every ship that came to the colony came to Wellington, and there was only one man here to do it ? —Yes. 231. Captain Bendall has done a good deal of that work, has he not?— Not to my knowledge. Captain Strang, I think, had the lion's share of it; he had been in the Union Company, and he did all their work. 232. Do you know of anybody else outside Captain Strang, of the Union Company ?—Yes, there was a lot of adjusting done in other parts of the colony. 233. lam alluding to Wellington ?—I do not know of any others; there are only three, as far as I can remember. 234. Would you contradict Captain Bendall when he said that it had never been worth more than £20 a year to him?—l could not say what his earnings were. 235. There were others who could have qualified if they had chosen to pay the Government fees, and even if there had not been any new regulations ? —Yes. 236. You went up for an examination in Sydney?— Yes. 237. How long were you in Sydney ?—I have been known in Sydney for a good number of years. 238. Did you go from New Zealand in order to qualify ?—Yes, I was there for four or five days, I should say. 239. Where did you make your arrangements from if you were there for only a few days ? ■ No arrangements were needed at all. I put in an application to go up for the examination. 240. You had to produce some certificate ?—Yes, my credentials. 241. Had you previously tried in Melbourne to pass an examination?— Yes. 242. How were you treated there?—l failed in Melbourne some two months before. 243. Then you went on from Melbourne to Sydney : Was it a square examination in Melbourne ?—Yes, I am not the only one who has failed in an examination. 244. Did you come back to Wellington in the meanwhile, or did you go on to Sydney? -I came back to New Zealand. 245. Did you hear that the conditions in Sydney were laxer than in Melbourne?—No, I did not. 246. In reference to Mclntyre's papers: You say you found Captain Yon Schoen and Mr. Allport seated in his (Mr. Airport's) office with some examination-papers on the table: Will you swear positively that it was Mclntyre's file ?—No, certainly not. I said papers were there. 247. Do you suggest now that there was some illegal or improper use being made of the papers ?—Well, I did not suggest it at all, but it struck me as suspicious seeing papers there. 248. What is your opinion of it now ? —I take Mr. Airport's statement as correct. 249. You found Mr. Allport to be an honourable man, did you?—l cannot say anything to the contrary. 250. You found him a good officer in the department ?—Yes, an excellent officer.

173

H.—26

251. Did I understand you to say to Mr. Hislop yesterday that you knew Mclntyre had taken a copy of a question out of the examination-room ?— It is supposed he had either committed the question to memory or taken a copy. 252. There was no occasion for any suspicion at all, Captain Allman, to explain the fact that Yon Schoen knew the nature of this question on which Mclntyre had been failed: you do not suspect Mr. Allport, after the simple explanation that you heard Mclntyre had made ?— I did not hear it until afterwards. 253. Did the examination of Captains Bendall and McLellan take place soon after that com-pass-deviation work? —Some time after; Ido not know how soon. 254. Captain Edwin was with you as Examiner ?—Yes, I believe so. 255. Did you test the working-out of their questions carefully ? —Yes, I looked over them. 256. Were they bound to answer all the questions correctly ?—Well, I do not think it is necessary for adjusting compasses, especially when the men had been doing adjusting of compasses for years past. 257. Did you notice any similarity of errors between the two sets of answers ? —I cannot remember distinctly just now. 258. I suppose you would have noted it as suspicious—it must have made an impression ?— I had a conversation with Captains Bendall and McLellan in the examination-room. 259. You did not notice anything suspicious on the face of the papers, or I suppose you would not have passed them ?—Oh yes, I would, because they were fully competent men. You do not fail men 260. If there were identical errors in the papers of the two candidates, sitting at the same time, I take it your suspicions would be aroused at once. Supposing there were half a dozen small mistakes in an important paper, and supposing they were identical—that the same mistakes had been made in both papers—would not your suspicions be aroused?— Well, perhaps they would. 261. Did you notice anything of the kind in the case of Captains Bendall and McLellan's papers ? —No, I cannot say that I did. 262. Did you have any conversation with Captain Marciel with regard to those papers ?—No, none at all. 263. Did you know whose pupils they were —Captains Bendall and McLellan ?—No. 264. Do you know now that they were not Yon Schoen's pupils?—l never asked the question. 265. As to the conversations you had with Mr. Hall-Jones : I understood you to say that the first interview was in the first week in May, 1897 ?—Yes, but I cannot fix the date exactly ; I can only speak approximately. 266. And the next interview was a week or two later ?—Yes, quite so. 267. And the third you put in July ?—No, I said the third was a considerable time after. 268. Captain Jones was present at the first interview ?—Yes. 269. Was it not on the evening of that day that you saw this memorandum brought to Mr. Allport's office ?—I never saw the memorandum in my life. 270. Was it on the evening of the third interview ?—Yes, I think so. 271. Then if Mr. Allport swears that is the Bth July, you would not contradict it?— No. 272. You stated in this second statement that the gist of that telegram from the Premier was, " See that Jones gets his certificate before I return " ?—Yes, that is what it conveyed to me at the time. I know now it was that portion which said " See that this matter is settled." 273. Did that appear to be Mr. Hall-Jones's impression ? —No ; I will not say whether it was his impression, but that is the impression it conveyed to me. 274. Was there any suggestion that he did not share in the impression himself ?—He did not say he did not. 275. Then you were called up to see Mr. Hall-Jones at the date of the third interview, and you found Captain Jones with him ?—Yes. 276. Who was it first mentioned the question of an order to dispense with the mate's certificate —had it been mentioned at your previous interview, and were you to look into the regulations ?—The question of looking into the regulations was mentioned at the first interview. On the receipt of the telegram, the second interview, I explained the circumstances to Mr. Hall-Jones. 277. When you came into the room, who spoke first, when Mr. Hall-Jones and Captain Jones were present, and you were sent for?— Mr. Hall-Jones broke the ice. He said he had decided to allow Jones to go up for examination for the master's certificate. I will not say these are the actual words. 278. Was absolutely nothing said about Jones's literary qualifications at that interview?— Not a particle. 279. Not a particle that he could not do paper-work?—No ; nothing in my presence. 280. Nothing about coaching ?—No. 281. You knew this application for a service certificate had been before you more or less for two years? —It had not been before me. I knew it was on. 282. Did it not suggest itself to you that there would be some difficulty about his passing the examination ?—No, it did not, because he would have to go as mate. The position that Jones was in is this : He would have had to get away from his present employers, and serve for a year as mate in another service. 283. Did you learn enough of his affairs to know that ?—No; that was my own reasoning. 284. You are quite certain that you did not say anything to Mr. Hall-Jones about the thing being as easy as two and two making four ?—No ; I had no such conversation.

H.—26

174

285. You heard what Mr. Hall-Jones stated about the examination? —I told him that Jones had passed an examination for a river certificate, and that the other one was not a considerable addition to the former one, and that with a little schooling he would be able to overcome it. 286. There was nothing to suggest at all any difficulty about it ?—No. 287. With regard to the memorandum written by Mr. Hall-Jones on the envelope, you are still clear that you never saw it until it came to Mr. Allport's hands ?—I did not see it until I came here. I saw it twenty feet away in the Supreme Court. "'■''■ 288. Your knowledge of it was obtained by hearing Mr. Allport reading its terms ?—Yes. 289. You stated yesterday that you were almost certain that Mr. Horneman brought it down ? — Yes, that is my impression. 290. Do you know Mr. Horneman denies it ?—Yes. I suppose he has forgotten it. Ido not think he is denying it wilfully, or any one else; but he may have forgotten the circumstances. 291. He is more likely to forget than you?— Yes, I think so. 292. Do you remember having said, in your second statement, " As far as I can recollect, it granted, in express terms, authority for Jones to sit for his examination. It ran as follows: ' Jones " Duco " Permit Examination.' " Do you think it is likely that you could quote the exact terms of it when you had not read it yourself ?—What impressed it on my memory, more than anything else, was because I talked it over with Mr. Allport. 293. Were you discussing its terms ?—No ; it is one of those things which strike a man at the time, but I made no note of it. 294. You stated that you read Mr. Seddon's telegram, but you did not remember the exact words; but you give the exact words on the envelope. Are you satisfied that you did not read it ? —-Yes. Mr. Seddon's telegram contained about thirty words, and the envelope only contained three. 295. Five, was it not ?—Yes. 296. Do you remember the last occasion on which you saw that memorandum from Mr. Seddon on the envelope referring to the service certificate ?—I cannot fix the date, unless it was prior to June, 1896. It might have been in 1895. 297. After you minuted your reply at the foot you sent it up?—l handed it in to the Premier's office. 298. Did you see the original again?—No; I have never seen it since Captain Yon Schoen showed it to me. 299. Did you ever see it in Captain Jones's possession ?—No, never. 300. You do not dispute the correctness of the reply, " I have carefully considered Captain Jones's case, and I regret to say there is no way of getting over the difficulty " ?—That is what it meant. 301. This was in September, 1895 ?—Yes ; that is the only time I was dealing with an envelope. 302. Seeing that Mr. Seddon reopened this matter nearly two years later, did that not help to impress it on your mind that there was great urgency to get it through ? Did you consider it unusual to be asked to reconsider an application of that sort ?—No; it did not strike me as such. 303. Had you any dealings with Yon Schoen about the competency certificate for Jones ?— No, the only dealing I had with Yon Schoen was regarding this communication. 304. He charged you with blocking the way occasionally ?—Yes, he said, "You blocked the way." I say that Jones is perfectly qualified as a matter of service. 305. You are still satisfied that your interpretation of how service could be computed is correct ?—-Well, the service in this instance was according to records in the Customhouse—that is the only thing I knew about it. 306. You had no dealings with Yon Schoen with reference to the certificate of competency ?— Not a particle. 307. Or any matter relating to the Jones examination fraud ?—■Nβ. 308. You had some negotiations with him about the service certificate? —The only time that Captain Yon Schoen mentioned the service certificate was in connection with this memorandum on the envelope. Of course it was Yon Schoen's business to get candidates, and to get the best terms he could. 309. It was his business to worry you ? —Von Schoen did not worry me at all about the matter. 310. Have you not been present with him at interviews with the Premier ? —The Premier sent for me —Yon Schoen and Jones were present. 311. Was this before or after this minute was written?—lt must have been before, because the Premier said, " Send me the papers." 312. You say in your first statement that Jones pleaded in the examination-room after you had torn up part of the papers ; Jones pleaded to you for the sake of his wife and family, and said several other things. I think you corrected the reference to his wife?—l think " wife " should be substituted for " family." 313. You did say something about his " billet." He did not say he would lose his billet, did he ?—He said it would prevent him from getting the new boat—that was the inference. 314. And " several other things," you say in your statement?— The "several other things" would be pertaining to that direction. 315. Pertaining to what, the benefits Jones would derive by getting the certificate ?—No, I do not remember. His greatest fear was that he would not get the new vessel when she came out. 316. You cannot tell me of anything else covered by the " other things? " —No. 317. There were no references at all to his connections with the Minister ? —I do not think there were.

175

H.—26

318. Will you be certain that there were not ? —Well, lam almost certain. Of course, ir is mentioned in Captain Jones's affidavit. 319. In the second of your statements, Captain Aliman, you refer to your having passed him. "(d.) That the irregularities which took place in connection with his examination were due partly to my consideration of Captain Jones's qualification, and partly by my desire to carry out the almost express wishes of my Minister." You cannot suggest that the reference there can be solely to the order dispensing with the mate's certificate ?—Yes, that was the only inference I remember. 320. The dispensing of the mate's certificate had nothing to do with the examination in the room ?—Very little. 321. Unless you suppose that the expressed wishes of the Minister went beyond a mere dispensing of the mate's certificate, could you have made that statement ?—That is referring to the stretching of the regulations, in plain English. 322. Was there any pecuniary inducement held out to you by anybody to assist Jones ?—No. 323. Neither by the candidate nor any other person ?—No. 324. You say Jones was not a particular friend of yours ?—Well, he is a man I have known by sight for a good number of years—for ten or fifteen, or probably even longer. Ido not think I ever spoke a hundred words to him in my life prior to the examination. 325. And you did not think he would be a beggar if he did not pass ?—I did not know anything about his affairs. 326. You did not form any opinion on the subject ?—No, I did not. I took what he said as what he meant. 327. He did not use very much eloquence with you?— Not beyond what I have stated. 328. And he does not look delicate or calculated, to move any one's pity ? —No. 329. I only want to call your attention to this fact: that the inducement which seems to have led you to go wrong, from your own statements, appears to be so very small. Are you quite certain that the " almost express wishes of my Minister " had nothing to do with Jones passing that examination ?—No, it had nothing to do with the bogus examination; it related to the other portion of it. 330. With regard to the examination itself: Do you know the problem on paper No. 4, Exhibit N, to find the latitude ? Was any help given to the candidate with that question, and is he allowed to use any books ?—lt is impossible to work it out without the " Nautical Almanac " anyhow. 331. Then a " Nautical Almanac " and the tables would have been required for the working out of this question ?—Yes. 332. Did you hear Captain Jones state that he was able to do without apparatus ?—Unfortunately he had forgotten the circumstances. 333. Do you think he could have forgotten what books were needed if he had done such a problem as this ?—Well, as a matter of fact, he did not do that problem. 334. Then you helped him with it ? —I helped him with them all. 335. You have not helped him with this problem in latitude ; there has been some working in pencil underneath ?—Yes, I did ; I copied it down in pencil, and he copied it over. 336. The workings are not all correctly done? —I would not say that it was done carefully, nor very accurately either. 337. Did he do the chart and the quadrant work?—No, they were on papers he brought into the room. 338. They were all on those papers ? —Yes. 339. Did he do the first papers, to test reading and writing?—No, that was one of the papers he brought into the room. 340. Can you say definitely what time of the day it would be—this interview between Mr. Hall-Jones and yourself?—lt was in the morning. I should say it was shortly after 10 or 11 o'clock, as far as my recollection goes. 341. Have you anything to bring it to your mind particularly?—-I am quite sure it was in the morning. ;. 342. Mr. Hanlon.] This confidential report was sent in consequence of an interview you had with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes. 343. Do you say that you sent that report in in consequence of an implied agreement between Mr. Hall-Jones and yourself in this matter ? —lt was an understanding. 344. I want to know what you took to be an implied understanding ? ■ 345. Dr. Giles.] What words did Mr. Hall-Jones say to induce you to suppose it was an understanding ? —I told him I was a responsible officer, and that I was in it up to the neck, and I would take all the blame. 346. Mr. Hanlon.] Was it right that you should take the blame, in your own opinion ?—I knew I was in trouble, and I thought that was the easiest way out of it. 347. What was the easiest way?—To write this confidential report. , 348. Then I understand it was for your own sake that you wrote the confidential report ?—I was asked by the Minister for the confidential report. 349. I want to know what was said at the time —what was arranged between you and Mr. Hall-Jones. Was that report to help him or to help you ?•—To help both of us. 350. In what way was it suggested to help Mr. Hall-Jones ? —His name was not mentioned in it. 351. Did he ask you to keep him out of it ?—Yes, indirectly. 352. Do you swear those are his words?—He told me to keep him out of it. 353. Do you swear that positively ? —That is what he implied. I cannot quote the exact words that he did say.

H.—26

176

354. It was an understanding on your part ?—I took it as an understanding. 355. He did not communicate to you what h© understood, did he ? —He did, as I say, indirectly. 356. Was it his manner?—No, in the conversation. He said, "You can make a confidential report to the Premier," and he said he would do all he could to see me right in the matter, and that he was to be kept out of it. 357. He said so ? —Yes. 358. What did you say? Did you say it was impossible for you to keep him out of it?—No, I did not. 359. Did you think it was legitimate for you to keep him out ? —No ; it was not legitimate. 360. You recommended the Minister to stretch the regulations?— Yes, I suggested it to him ; after the telegram was produced, and I looked up the regulations to see whether there was a chance to obtain an authority for examination. 361. You stated afterwards that Eegulation 26 applied ?—I did, undoubtedly. 362. Did you say that the Minister agreed to sign the order ?—-Yes ; certainly he did. 363. To the Marine Department ?—Yes. 364. Did he agree to sign that order at the time ?—No ; he said he would send an order to the department. 365. Did he at any interview tell you he would send an order ?—-It was the third interview when he told me that he would send an order, in Captain Jones's presence. 366. What did he say to you when you told him you thought Regulation 26 would apply?— He said he would consider it. I talked over the matter regarding Jones, and explained it in this way, that Jones had not been going out as a mate, but practically as a master, although the records of the Customs did not show it. It is generally understood among shipping circles that Jones was always a master. 367. Then you say that in consequence, of the understanding which you say existed between you and the Minister, you sent in this confidential report ?—Yes. 368. Now, is that confidential report true in every particular ? —I think so. 369. Are you sure of it ?—I am sure of it 370. Did you write a true report or a false one ? —lt is not a false report. 371. Then, as far as that report is concerned, it cannot be suggested that you misconstrued anything in order to help the Minister ?—There were plenty of things which I put in the second report which I might have put in the first. 372. When you wrote that report you bond fide believed it to be correct, and you did not misconstrue anything in order to help the Minister ?—That is perfectly right, with the other added on to it. It has a condensed reference to the second report. 373. Was that not handed in with the first report ?—No. 374. How could it have reference ?—The material contained in this paragraph, " The following remarks have no connection with Mr. Hutcheson's statement." The material in that you find in the second report. 375. Now, in this report you say, " To enable Jones to get a coastal certificate I suggested to Mr. Hall-Jones that he should be allowed to go up for examination for the certificate required, knowing that he already held a certificate of competency as river-master, which was obtained at Wellington some years ago. Subsequently permission was given, and Jones was duly notified." Do you know that?— Yes. 376. Who informed you ?—The Minister. 377. When ?—ln my presence. 378. What ?—He informed me that he (Jones) could go up for examination—the Minister told me he could go up for examination as soon as he liked. 379. That was at the Government Buildings, with Captain Jones, the Minister, and yourself ?— Yes; the last interview we had regarding this examination prior to the examination. 380. It was stated in your presence that "he could go up for examination when he liked " ?— Yes; by Mr. Hall-Jones. 381. Was anything said to you about the day he could go up for examination?—He put in his papers, and was told by Captain Edwin, I suppose, what day he should go up. 382. He was not told by you ?—I will not say that he was not. 383. You say that he was told by Captain Edwin to come up for his examination ?—Well, I am almost sure he was. 384. How do you know he was told by Captain Edwin at all ?—lt was immaterial whether I told him or not. 385. Are you sure that he told him at all ?—I presume he did; Ido not know as a matter of fact. 386. Did you make out the necessary examination-papers ?—I made out a portion of them before Captain Jones came in. 387. Did any one but you and Captain Edwin know what questions were to be set?— Nobody ; I set the questions out of my own head. I gave the nautical problems which are generally taken from set questions. 388. Were the papers which Captain Jones brought into the room with him filled in with the questions which you had prepared prior to Captain Jones coming into the room ? —No ; certainly not. 389. They were distinct papers altogether ?—Yes. 390. And no one could possibly have known of the questions you were going to set?—No, they could not.

177

H.—26

391. In this report you say that "the papers I had I supplemented by others, which are on the file." What did you mean by " supplementing " ? —I may have used a wrong word. I meant " using those in their place." 392. Who prepared the other ones in place of those destroyed?—l did. 393. What about the answers to them?—l did them myself in pencil. 394. You admit, do you not, Captain Allman, that when you had your interview with Mr. Seddon you did not tell him the truth ?—Yes ; I only told him part of the truth. 395. You did not tell him the whole truth ?—No. 396. You told us in this report that you regret you were not candid enough to tell Mr. Seddon when he asked for the whole truth?— Yes, that is so. 397. Can you tell us why you did not tell the whole truth ? —Well, there are one or two reasons. One reason was that Mr. Hall-Jones told me not to tell him. 398. Did Mr. Hall-Jones tell you not to tell the truth ?—He did not tell me to tell an untruth, but to give a qualified answer. s 399. Did he say that ?—He did not say " a qualified answer." He said, " Tell him there was nothing in it " —what had been stated in the House. 400. Did he say that you were to tell Mr. Seddon that ? —Yes, equivalent to that. Well, those are not the words. As near as lean remember they were, "To see the Premier and tell him there is nothing in it." 401. Where did this take place ?—ln Mr. Hail-Jones's room upstairs shortly after I arrived. I was not in the Cabinet room until 3 or 4 o'clock in the morning. 402. The messenger told us here that he went down to the station and brought you up to the Secretaries' room ?—I went there first. 403. Then they say that Mr. Horneman went and got the Minister out of the House, and he then went with you into the Cabinet-room ?—No, I went upstairs. 404. You contradict Mr. Horneman and the Minister on that point ?—Yes, I do. 405. Then Mr. Seddon said he saw you that evening in the Cabinet-room ?—Yes, he saw me in the Cabinet-room between 2 and 3 o'clock in the morning. It was the first time I saw Mr. Seddon except at a distance in the House. I saw him passing in and out once or twice into the Cabinet-room through the Secretaries' room. 406. Did he see you ?—I do not know whether he did or not. 407. He did not recognise you?— No. 408. Did you say that Mr. Hall-Jones took you to his room upstairs? —No, I think it was either the messenger or Mr. Horneman. Somebody took me there, because I would not have been able to find it; the place was all disorganised. 409. Did you find Mr. Hall-Jones there ?—Yes. 410. It was there that you allege this conversation took place ?—Yes. 411. Was there anyone else present ? —No—unfortunately for me. 412. How long were you there ?—I was there for about a quarter of an hour or so, He asked me to have some refreshments, and the messenger brought some—" after my long journey,"—that was the expression. 413. What was the date?—l cannot tell you the date. 414. It was the night of Mr. John Hutcheson's speech ?—Yes, I know he had something to say about 11 o'clock, and he also said something in the early morning. 415. Was it on that night that you agreed to write this confidential report ?—Oh, no, not for months afterwards. 416. Then Mr. Hall-Jones was in possession of the facts immediately after Mr. John Hutcheson's speech, we may take it ?—He was in possession of this fact, that I helped Jones a lot. 417. And that probably what Mr. Hutcheson and Mr. Pirani had said was in reference to Jones's case ? —I would gather so. I did not tell him it was a bogus examination at that period. I told him that I helped Jones a lot. 418. You do not suggest for a moment that Mr. Hall-Jones wanted a bogus examination ?— No; I never did suggest that. 419. Now, when Mr. Seddon saw you, did he see you alone or was it in company with Mr. Hall-Jones ?—Yes; in the Cabinet-room. 420. Was he present all the time ?—Yes. Mr. Hall-Jones and I went into the Cabinet-room after the speech of Mr. Hutcheson, where he made mention that these papers were brought into the room. 421. Immediately after Mr. Hutcheson's speech?—l think it was. Mr. Hall-Jones and I talked over the matter, and I told Mr. Hall-Jones then that such was the case. 422. How long had you been in there before Mr. Seddon came in ? —I should say we were there for about ten minutes. I did not expect to see Mr. Seddon. 423. You did not see him in there until 2or 3 o'clock in the morning?—l do not think so. 424. It was after Mr. Hutcheson spoke—between 20 minutes past 10 and from 11 to half-past II ? —lt was after his speech—some little time after. 425. You say it was immediately after his speech ? —lf that is the hour it would be the time. 426. You may be wrong when you say that you saw Mr. Seddon at 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning? —I did not notice the hour. I know I was all night in the establishment. It was after the speech, anyhow. It may have been half-an-hour after, or five minutes, I cannot say which. 427. It is clear, then, that you contradict the messenger with regard to the statement about taking you up there, and why you were taken ?—There was another messenger in the cab. 428. Will you contradict him ?—Yes. 429. Then you contradict Mr. Horneman, who says that he saw Mr. Hall-Jones take you into the Cabinet-room ?—Yes. 23— H. 26,

H.—26

178

430. And you contradict Mr. Hall-Jones, who said he took you in?— Yes. 431. You contradict these three people ?—Yes. 432. I think you also contradict Mr. Hall-Jones when he says that he gave you that envelope? —Yes ; I never saw it in my life until recently. 433. You will contradict Mr. Allport, who says that you brought it to him ? —He did not swear it the other day when he gave his evidence. 434. If he swore here that you gave it to him ?—I would contradict him. 435. You say it was Mr. Horneman who gave it to you?— Yes ; it was him. 436. All these people are wrong ?—I am saying what I believe to be facts. 437. Now, are you very sure that they are facts?—l am very sure of it, especially about that envelope business. 438. Your memory is quite clear ? —Yes ; as clear as daylight. It is clear about all this matter, anyhow. 439. Notwithstanding the fact that you are so perfectly clear in your own mind about these circumstances, does it not strike you as being extremely strange that you are in conflict with all these witnesses ? —■Nβ, it does not. If Mr. Pirani had not made that statement in the House regarding my movements on the night I arrived in Wellington, probably the evidence would not be so contradictory as it is at present. 440. I want to know what inference you want us to draw. Is it this, that these people have " trimmed their sails " ?—I do not say what they have done or what,they have not. 441. What do you mean by saying that the "evidence would not be so contradictory"?— Well, as a matter of fact, I say there were two messengers, and some say there was only one. 442. The messenger says it is not true ?—I was down on the wharf, and I met the Premier's messenger, and he told me about the remarks of Pirani. He said, " You ought to think about that, Captain ; I did not go down to meet you." I said, "If it was not you, it was your ghost." " No," he said, " I met you on the steps when you arrived." 443. You are in conflict with the other messenger as well ?—Those two men were down at the station, and they got into the cab with me. 444. In that confidential report you put some memoranda as to the probable results of what your disclosures would be, and what terms of imprisonment could be imposed, &c. ?—Yes, and I left myself out of the question. 445. Who aided you in the preparation of that report ?—No one. 446. You had no assistance from a lawyer ?—No. 447. Not Mr. Allport?—Mr. Allport would be the last man I would go to about it. I wrote it in the Marine Department office by myself. 448. In that statement I understand you applied to resign. Is that correct ?—I applied to resign on the 13th January. As a matter of fact, I did not know that proceedings were going to be taken until a policeman came to the door with a summons. That is the way I was treated by the department. 449. They refused to accept your resignation ?—Yes ; I got a letter from the Secretary to that effect, saying that he regretted very much he could not accept my resignation, and that proceedings were to be taken against me. 450. And after that they formulated some charge under the Civil Service Act ? —Not at all; the next action was to put me in the Magistrate's Court. 451. When were the charges formulated?—lt was after the action in the Supreme Court. This very nice letter was for me to show cause why I should not be "hanged, drawn, or tered," and the second statement was my reply to it. 452. You prepared this, knowing at the time that the Minister contemplated dismissing you? —No, " to show cause why-I should not be dismissed." 453. Did you know that the Minister contemplated dismissing you before you wrote this document ? —I put at the end of the report that the Minister evidently contemplated my dismissal. 454. You wrote that report with this in your mind?— Yes, undoubtedly ; I was asked to show cause why I should not be dismissed. 455. Now, the communication that Mr. Hall-Jones got from the Premier, as you know, was a telegram ? —Yes. ■ ■ 456. —And you stated what your recollection of that telegram was ?—I stated what it conveyed to me at that time; that was my recollection. , • 457. And that was that it was " See Jones gets his certificate before I return " ?—Something of that sort. 458. You had the telegram handed to you ?—Yes. 459. Mr. Hall-Jones actually handed you the telegram, so that you could see it for yourself? —Yes. 460. You read it ?—Yes. 461. And you say that is your recollection of it?— Yes ; but look at the time that has elapsed? That was the impression it conveyed to me—it tended in that direction. 462. It is only the production of the document itself that makes you change your mind?—l have not changed my mind at all. 463. You know that it does not say anything about "before I return"?— That was the impression it conveyed to me ; it was my impression until I heard the telegram read out here. 464. Do you still put that interpretation upon it—-that this was to be fixed up before Mr. Seddon's return ?—No ; I would not say that after hearing the telegram that was read the other day. 465. You say in your second statement, " If these were not the exact words they were cer* tainly its purport ? " —Yes, I firmly believed it at the time.

179

H.—26

466. Do you admit now that your memory is not particularly good ?—I think my memory is pretty good. '. ■ ■ 467. Then you say a little further on, "I then explained to the Minister that under the existing law, in the absence of the necessary sea service, Captain Jones would have to pass an examination set by me." You say you reiterate that to-day : that it was you who suggested that Jones would have to go up for examination ? —He could not get it any other way, that was certain. 468. Did Mr. Hall-Jones fall in with that suggestion, that Jones should go up for examination, as a way of getting over the difficulty?—l looked up the regulations, and he approved of my doing so. 469. Was Jones present at that time ?■—No, I had four interviews with the Minister. 470. Mr. Hall-Jones has stated that at the time the examination was suggested Captain Jones was present?—He was not there at all. The whole thing was arranged—no question about that. 471. You were sent for the day after Mr. Hall-Jones and Captain Jones had the conversation ? —Yes. 472. Did you know why you were sent for?;—He sent for me to tell me that he had sent for me because he was going to allow Jones to go up for the examination without the authority. 473. Was there any necessity to send for you at all?— Yes. He wanted to let me know what he was going to do. He sent for me, anyhow—l do not know what was in his mind. 474. What did he say when you first went into the room as an excuse for sending for you— did he say, "Captain Allman, I sent for you for so-and-so?"—He started on the matter of Jones's business, and said he was going to allow him to go up for examination. That is why I was sent for, but he did not say why. 475. Did you have a look at the regulations while Jones was there ? —No, I did not. 476. Then you contradict Mr. Hall-Jones on that point, and you contradict Captain Jones on that point. I want to see whether you agree with anybody, or if you are in conflict with everybody. Captain Jones and Mr. Hall-Jones both swear that you looked through the regulations in the room ?—I do not remember doing so. 477. Will you contradict both these people on that point ?—I do not remember. 478. You will not swear that you did not? —No, I will not. There was no talk of the regulations then ; all that was arranged. 479. Did you leave first, or did Captain Jones leave first ? —Jones left the room first. 480. Are you certain?— Positive. 481. What conversation did you have after Captain Jones left ?—The conversation was very vague. 482. I want to know what the conversation was. What did you say, and what did he say ?— It was as to Captain Jones going up for examination. I said that he had already passed for a river certificate, and that he would not have much difficulty in getting through. 483. Did you tell the Minister it was a very simple examination ?—I do not recollect telling the Minister that. 484. What else took place?—l think that is all. 485. And Jones had scarcely time to get down the stairs before you were after him ? —I was after him in a very few minutes. I was going down the stairs, but not after Jones. 486. Will you tell me what you mean by this: "I knew that the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones (the Minister) were anxious that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination " ?— Yes, that was my impression. 487. How did you gather that impression?—By the telegram and the conversation. 488. The telegram does not say anything about it?—lt relates to Jones's certificate. 489. You knew that Jones was applying for a service certificate. Did you, at that time, believe that the Premier in that telegram referred to a certificate of competency ? —lt was my impression he was referring to a certificate other than service. That was my belief, 490. From reading the telegram ? —Yes, and from the conversation I had with Mr. Hall-Jones. 491. What I want to know is this : You say, " I knew that the Premier was anxious " —leave Mr. Hall-Jones out in the meantime —how did you know that ?—I knew it from the telegram and the conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones. 492. You say you " knew it "?—That was my impression, because I had already dealt with the service certificate four times. What else could I think? 493. Are you still of that opinion ?—Not since I heard the Premier's explanation; I was, up till then. 494. Will you tell me what the Minister said to lead you to believe that he was anxious that Jones should be allowed to sit for his examination?— When Mr. Hall-Jones sent for me , about the Premier's telegram, one of the first words he said was that he had received a communication from the Premier, and that he was very anxious that either Jones should get a certificate or the matter of Jones's certificate should be settled. Of course, the matter of Jones's certificate was settled—it has only come into my mind since I heard of this telegram. I told him that Jones could not get the certificate of service. Then Mr. Hall-Jones* asked me if there was any other way of getting a certificate. I told him that there was a flaw in the regulations relating to tugservice. I spoke in Jones's favour; 1 said that I thought Jones was a good seaman, and that he had been outside the Heads as master instead of mate. 495. Did the Minister tell you that he was anxious that Jones should be allowed to sit for his examination? —He did not say so in those express terms. I understood so. 496. Every statement you make seems to be based on some inference or assumption ?—The assumption is, I got the regulations and showed them to Mr. Hall-Jones.'

H.—26.

180

497. Was that an inference, that the Minister was anxious that Jones should be allowed to sit —was that simply the inference you drew from some conversation ?—-Yes; partly from conversation and partly from that telegram. 498. When did you go to the Marine Office after leaving Mr. Hall-Jones ? —I went right down stairs and saw Mr. Glasgow in his office, and told him the conversation which took place between the Minister and myself. 499. Did you remain there long?—No, I did not. 500. When did you see Mr. Allport?—l saw Mr. Allport that morning and again in the afternoon. 501. When did you next see him after the conversation between Mr. Hall-Jones and yourself ? —I do not think I saw him until well on in the afternoon of the same day. 502. It was then this authority went down ?—Yes. 503. You say that Mr. Allport read the document?— Yes. 504. Did you see what he was reading from?—No; we were sitting at right angles. 505. Did you see the document delivered?—l saw some one come in, but I would not be positive whether it was Mr Horneman or the messenger. 506. Did you see him deliver any document ? —Yes, I think so. 507. What did he deliver? —Something was handed to him. 508. Was it enclosed, or did he hand an ordinary envelope ? —I did not look round. I did not look round to see what was delivered to Mr. Allport at any time. 509. You did not take notice of who came in and what was handed to Mr. Allport ?—No, beyond knowing that Mr. Allport read it out. I did not take particular notice, but my impression is that it was Mr. Horneman, and I could never shake it off. 510. Then Mr. Allport knew that Captain Jones had not a mate's certificate ?—Yes, we had a conversation about that some time before. 511. Were you discussing the absence of the mate's certificate at the time when this message was brought in ?—Some time during that interview with Mr. Allport I was. I told him that it was going to be sent down to the department to Mr. Glasgow. 512. Did it not strike you to be a coincidence that you should happen to be in the room when this message was brought down ?—■Nβ, Ido not think so. I spent a great deal of my time in that room, always an hour or two in the morning and in the afternoon. That was the invariable custom. 513. You ask that this second document should be read in conjunction with the confidential report ? —Yes. 514. And your first report was truthful ?—Yes. 515. Did you ever hear anything about candidates being hustled at the examinations ?—No ; quite the opposite. Every latitude possible was given. 516. All the candidates during your tenure of office got all the latitude possible you could give them ?—Yes. 517. Dr. Giles.'] In what sense?—So far as the regulations would allow. Dr. Giles : Mr. Hanlon meant the room to work in. 518. Mr. Hanlon.'] Did they get the full time allowed by the regulations, and sufficient room ? —Yes, and they had a separate table each. 519. Is it true that people were in and out constantly while candidates were being examined, in order to speak to the Examiner?— Not since that door was placed in the examination-room. Well, a few years ago, prior to that door being opened, people coming there to see myself or Captain Edwin, entered at the door of the examination-room, and we usually went out into the corridor or Captain Edwin's room to converse; but after the door was made they went into the next room. 520. Well ?—There was no noise at all; no undue noise at any time. 521. While candidates were being examined?— No. There were people passing along on the outside going to the Customs. On the other side there is a room occupied, by the civil servants in the Telegraph Department-—their reading-room—and if they passed close along you might hear the heavier footsteps ; beyond that there was nothing. 522. In your opinion, were they allowed reasonable facility to fill in their papers ?—Every facility. 523. With regard to Captains Bendall and McLellan : Are these the papers of these two candidates [papers produced] ? —Yes, they are. 524. Well, what time was allowed for the filling in of those papers ?—Eleven hours ; I could not tell without looking at the regulations now. 525. About eleven hours ?—I fancy so. 526. Have you compared that in any way with any text-book?—No, I have not; I read them over from memory. 527. You cannot say whether that long answer, covering a great number of sheets there, has been copied word for word from the book?—No, that has not been copied, to my knowledge. 628. Did you examine those candidates ? —Yes. 529. Were you in the room the whole of the time ?—Captain Edwin and I were. 530. Captain Bendall's is also a very long answer. Have you compared that one with the book ? —I have not compared any of them with the book. I have just read them over. 531. There is a book published by Towson, is there not ?—Yes, sir. 532. What is the subject ?—" Laws of Deviation," or something of that sort. 533. You cannot say whether or not that is the true copy taken from Towson's book ?—Oh, no. Undoubtedly the -man's own statement—all these men are men that have been years and years at this work. They have retentive memories.

H.—26

181

Judge Ward: I may say, the Commissioners gave notice to Captain McLellan, asking him whether he desired to appear either personally or by counsel, and this is his reply : " I have not the means to attend myself or pay counsel on my behalf. My papers in the examination were done by me without assistance, in the presence of Allman and Edwin, having studied for eight months prior to my examination. This I declare to be correct.—(Signed) Hugh McLellan." 534. Mr. Hanlon.] You say, as far as you know, that these candidates had no access to any books from which this could have been copied ?—They had the books to work out the problems. 535. Those books they are legitimately entitled to ?—Yes. 536. Not books from which they could copy answers ? —No. 537. Did you discover any errors in either of these papers?—-No, I did not. 538. Did you go carefully through them from beginning to end ?—No. 539. When you were deciding?—No ; I did not go and add up every figure in it. It is very seldom I do that. 540. As long as a man puts down the question and the answer it does not matter what sort of work there is between ?—No, Ido not imply that for a moment. The papers that go from Wellington to Dunedin, or Auckland, as the case may be—if the answers are within a reasonable distance, as it were, as the answers on this sheet, they are allowed to pass. 541. That applies to all examinations. Then, as far as you know, these two candidates properly and legitimately passed the examinations which were set ?—-Yes, probably they have forgotten about it now. They have been adjusters all their lives. Captain Bendall has been an adjuster since T came to the colony in 1876, and a simple matter of adjusting the compasses any ordinary master knows all about, especially those on foreign-going vessels. Mr. Atkinson: In regard to these certificates, Mr. Hanlon has already been examining in chief, after my cross-examination, your Honour. Judge Ward : Mr. Hanlon's is re-examination. Mr. Atkinson : It was simply on this last point that I was going to ask your Honour to put a question to the witness. Ido not think Mr. Hanlon quite understands the technicalities. I understand there is a third department of the work of these papers, which is the department in which Captain Yon Schoen had done some work for Captain Allman, and that third part has not been touched upon in Mr. Hanlon's questions. That is the book-work in Towson's, and that, of course, could be learned by memory. But then there is the deviation work: problems of the compass deviation, which your Honour will see could not be in any manual except the problems were there. That particular part of the work he got Captain Yon Schoen to do could not possibly have been done by a knowledge of Towson. Will your Honour allow me to put a question ? Judge Ward : Very well. 542. Mr. Atkinson.] There is a third branch of the work there in problems in compass deviation, Captain Allman. Is this a sample of the specimen examination-paper ?—Yes. 543. No man could learn by heart to answer those questions from Towson's manual? —No. 544. Have you compared the working out of these problems ? It was the working out of problems in that class of paper which you asked Captain Yon Schoen to do for you ?—Yes. 545. Have you compared this work of the two candidates in question with one another or with the work Captain Yon Schoen did for you ?—I have compared it with the answer letters I had. I have gone over it roughly. 546. You admitted to me you had not gone over it very considerately ?—Quite so. 547. This work is not deviation work in regard to Towson's manual —that is what I want to get from you?— No. 548. Dr. Findlay.] It seems, Captain Allman, that Captain Yon Schoen compared these papers —these questions and answers, and gave them to Captain Jones to bring into the examina-tion-room? —Captain Jones gave them to me. 549. It has been suggested that there was between you and Captain Yon Schoen an arrangement by which this should be done?— Not the slightest. He never spoke to me about an examination. The only time he spoke about Jones's certificate or anything else was the time of the certificate that is there. 550. Is it true that nothing whatever was said between you and Captain Yon Schoen as to Captain Jones's examination?—No, not a word—or deed. 551. No letter?—No, none at all. 552. You were asked by Mr. Hanlon and Mr. Hislop with regard to a confidential report which you gave to the Minister of Marine. I want to be clear on this. There seems to be some conflict in regard to your testimony. When was the first occasion after you came back to Wellington that you saw the Premier about this matter ?—After Mr. Hutcheson made the speech. 553. You told Mr. Hanlon that you saw a report of Mr. Pirani's speech in the newspaper ?— Yes. 554. Did you come to the House that night ? —Yes. 555. Did you see the Premier that night ?—Yes, before daylight in the morning. It was daylight when I reached my home after leaving the House. 556. When you saw the Premier did he ask you for any report ?—Yes, the Premier asked me, in Mr. Hall-Jones's presence, if there was anything in this at all. I told him there was nothing in it. 557. Did the Premier ask you for any written report ?—No, the written report business did not come up until months afterwards. 558. How long after that incident you mention is it that you were asked for the report ?—I was asked for the report, by Mr. Hall-Jones, a few days before the 14th November. The reason I can remember it is, I wanted Captain Jones's papers to enable me to report on them, and I went to the office and found they were not there.

H.—26

182

559. A few days before the 14th of November you were asked by the Minister for a report?—> Yes. 560. The Minister says that he did not ask you for a confidential report ?—Undoubtedly he did. 561. You heard Mr. Hall-Jones's evidence ?—Yes, I heard it. 562. Did you yourself say, " I will furnish a confidential report "?—No. 563. Did Mr, Hall-Jones refuse to accept a confidential report ?—No. 564. lam speaking of a few days before the 14th of November. You say Mr. Hall-Jones did not refuse to accept a confidential report. I understand you said you would write a confidential report ?—Mr. Hall-Jones asked me for a confidential report for the Premier. 565. Can you recollect his words as nearly as possible ? —The words were, as near as I can remember, " Write a confidential report for the Premier, and tell him all about it," and he would see what he could do to help me out of it. I knew I was in a corner, and there was no way out of it. 566. Now the way you were helped out of it. I think they used this confidential report in the Supreme Court ? —Yes, they tried to put me in gaol with it. 567. Then you told us that Mr. Hall-Jones said, "Write me a confidential report for the Premier, and I will see what I can do to help you out of it." You are sure these words were uttered ? —Yes. 568. Was anything said then ?—" Let me have it as soon as you can." 569. Is that all?— Yes. 570. Now you took that as a promise to you that this report would not be used against you ?— Undoubtedly. He told me it would not be used against me. 571. Would you have given it if you had known it was going to be used ?—I was asked to do an honest thing, and I did an honest thing; that is all about it. 572. There seems to be some doubt as to whether the regulations were before the Minister of Marine on the occasion when you and Captain Jones were present. Do you recollect the occasion when Captain Jones, the Minister, and yourself were present ?—Yes. 573. You have heard the evidence. Were the regulations lying open before the Minister either when you came into the room that morning, or at any time during that interview ?—I am under the impression he had them in his hand. He did not say anything to me at that time. 573 a. There is nothing about that, you see, in Captain Jones's declaration. 574. Dr. Giles.] You gave us to understand that you in some way screened Mr. Hall-Jones from his share of the responsibility. Will you say what it was you screened him from ?—Well, I took the responsibility of stretching the regulations. 575. That is, advising him ?—Yes. 576. But that could not exclude him from the responsibility if, as you say, he sent down an order. That would be taking upon himself the responsibility ?—He sent an order down, but it was never intended that that order should come out before the public. 577. Still if it did come out, it was fixed as a responsibility upon him?— Yes. 578. What you mean is that it relates only to the dispensation of the mate's certificate ?—I do not say for a moment that the Minister intended a fraudulent examination. 579. Do you consider you accepted any blame or responsibility which was more than you ought to have accepted ? Was there any blame you took upon your shoulders which did not properly belong there ?—I took all the blame. 580. Did you take anything that did not belong to you properly ?—The regulations would never have been stretched if it had not been for the almost expressed wish and desire of my Minister. 581. Did you advise him ? —I suggested it as a way of getting over the difficulty. Mr. Allpobt recalled. 582. Mr. Travers.] I would like to ask Mr. Allport a question. You are on your oath, Mr. Allport ?—Yes. 583. You heard I think, Captain Allman say that he came down to your office, while you were absent for the moment —some time, on the 14th November—to ask for the examination-papers in the case of Captain Jones ?—Yes. 584. He thought he could not obtain them from the clerk ? —Yes, that is so. 585. Did you happen to go into the office casually, or in a hurry ? Did he ask you ?— Mr. Grix said the Minister wants Jones's examination-papers. 586. What was your answer ? —I think I said. " Are they not there ? " 587. As a matter of fact, where were they?—ln my drawer locked up. 588. On what date did you give them to Mr. Glasgow? —Within five or ten minutes afterwards. 589. " I told their Honours he was given them before?"— That is an error. 590. You explained in your evidence before that you were afraid they might be tampered with. You did not say by whom ?—No. 591. Prom the circumstances which came to your knowledge, you were afraid they would be tampered with ?—I put them there for safe keeping. . . 592. You did not see them afterwards for a long time ; you had not the custody of them?— No, nor since. 593. They passed up then to the Minister ? From Mr. Glasgow's drawer to the Minister, and back to Mr. Glasgow again. 594. Dr. Findlay.~\ Did you not tell the Commissioners before that you had given them to Mr. Glasgow because you thought that Mr. Glasgow was the proper custodian of them under the circumstances? —1 told them that I gave them to Mr. Glasgow because I wanted to get rid of them.

183

fi.—26

595. Did you not lead us to think the papers had been given to Mr. Glasgow before they were inquired for by Captain Allman ?—I did not intend that. 596. They were in your drawer at the time they were asked for ?—Yes. 597. "What was your reply to Captain Allman?—l said to Grix, " Are they not there? " 598. You intended it as a put-off?— Yes. 599. You were afraid that Captain Allman might destroy them ?—I thought they might be taken away for some improper purpose. Judge Ward: Captain Allman suggested a little while ago that Mr. Allport had spoken erroneously about his haying brought the envelope. It might be well to ask the witness that question. Witness : My mind is quite clear on the point that Captain Allman brought the envelope to me; lam quite clear about that. 600. Mr. Eanlon.] Did you read the document to Captain Allman?—l read it, and believe I did read it out aloud. Mr. Travers : I would like to ask Mr. Glasgow about the delivery of the papers to him. Mr. Glasgow, recalled. 601. Mr. Travers.] You have been sworn, Mr. Glasgow ?—Yes. 602. You have heard what Mr. Allport says as to handing you the examination-papers ?—Yes. 603. Can you recall the date upon which they were given to you ?—I cannot. In my evidence before, I said Mr. Allport had said it was & few days before or after the Prince of Wales's Birthday (the 9th November), and I could not give the exact date, but I assented to that. I know I had them a short time before the date on which I first spoke to Mr. Hall-Jones about the revelation made to me by Mr. Allport. 604. Did Mr. Allport say anything when he handed you the papers?—At that time he told me all Captain Yon Schoen had told him some months before, and he told me Captain Allman had been inquiring for the papers, and thought it better they should be in my safekeeping. 605. You remember that quite distinctly ?—Yes. Geoege Yon Sghoen, sworn and examined. 606. Mr. Hanlon.] What are you?— Master mariner and teacher of navigation. 608. And reside in Wellington ?—Yes. 609. I understand that you have had a good many students of navigation through your hands ? —Yes. 610. And you know Captain Allman, late Nautical Adviser to the Government ?—Yes. 611. You have had several candidates—students of yours—who have presented themselves for examination since Captain Allman has held that position ? —Yes. 612. Have you at any time ascertained from Captain Allman the questions that were to be asked of the candidates?— What do you mean? 613. I mean have you at any time found out from Captain Allman, previous to an examination, what questions would be asked of the candidates when they presented themselves for examination ? —I do not understand you. You see, Ido not know what questions you mean. 614. I want to know if you, at any time prior to an examination being held, have ascertained from Captain Allman the questions which were to be asked of the candidates when they presented themselves in the examination-room?— No. 615. Have you ascertained by any means whatever what questions were to be asked of the candidates before they presented themselves ?—.No. 616. Have you at any time asked Captain Allman to pass candidates tutored by you in preference to candidates tutored by other teachers ?—That is not true; I swear to that. It is an infamous lie. 617. Is it true that you have offered a promise to make it worth Captain Allman's while to let your candidates pass ? —That is another infamous lie. 618., Are you on good with Captain Allman ?—Fairly good terms. 619. At the present time ?—I have not spoken to Captain Allman for some time. 620. You say you are on fairly good terms?— Yes. 621. So good that Captain Allman went to you for instruction, did he not?—He did. 622. For how long? —Well, first of all he was with me in the evenings for about a week or a fortnight for some hours. After that I continued to instruct him at his own office at the Government Buildings. . . . 623. In what subjects ?—ln all subjects on navigation. .. • ~ 624. Not alone on the matter of deviascope ?—No. 625. Well, did you charge Captain Allman anything for that ?—Nothing ; not a red cent. 626. Then, might I ask you, what you expected to gain by giving this tuition free of charge 5WA competent man to examine my candidates. 627. You did not expect to get any undue favour extended to your candidates ?—Decidedly not; lam quite competent enough to prepare my candidates. lam a thoroughly competent man. 628. We find that you had another student besides Captain Allman—-Captain James Jones; is that correct ? —lf you mean by student a person whom I am in the habit of teaching, then I must say that I only taught Captain Jones when he passed his examination for a river master in 1887, and at no other time. . ~ • 629. Did he pay you for that—for teaching him when he went up for his examination as river master ?—Yes, Captain Jones always paid me. 630. How much ?—About £5 or thereabouts. Not more than that. 631. That is the only time you taught him?— The only time I taught hinj. ■ ' . ~

H.—26

184

632. Then did Captain Jones, just prior to his presenting himself for his examination for his certificate of competency in 1897, get any teaching from you ?—No. 633. He used to go up to your house, did he not ? Mr. Atkinson: Would your Honour allow me to interpose. I do not know what time Mr. Hanlon is referring to. We advised Captain Yon Schoen to refuse to answer any questions except from the Bth July, 1897. It would be far preferable to my client and in the public interest. The authority which granted this Commission has not granted any indemnity. Judge Ward : You claim that your client should be excused from answering any questions on questions bearing on the point subsequent to a particular date ? Mr. Hanlon : When I ask a question which might incriminate the witness it will be time for you to object, Mr. Atkinson. Dr. Findlay: I might point out that the witness has answered such of the questions as he thinks will help him by declaring he did not teach Captain Jones at all. There is a conflict between his oath and that of Captain Jones, who was in the box before him. It is unfair he should not answer any further questions on the point. Judge Ward : His counsel answers for him, if his answers will incriminate him. You may put the questions, of course, and then it will be for his counsel to claim that he can refuse to answer. Mr. Atkinson : Ido not want to shut out anything that cannot be legitimately shut out. Mr. Hanlon's question was somewhat vague. I only wished to call the attention of the Court to the point. Judge Ward : I do not exactly remember what the. point is, but if you rise and object then we will deal with it. 634. Mr. Hanlon.] I asked if Captain Jones was in the habit of going to your house prior to his going up for examination ?—He saw me once or twice. He was not in the habit, you know. 635. He saw you once or twice at your house ? —Yes. 636. Had any arrangement been made between you that you were to teach him so that he would be able to pass his examination?— No. Of course, I understand by "arrangement," " you prepare me for examination, and so-and-so." 637. Well, then, is it correct that Captain Jones paid you £17 ?—No ; that is not true. 638. How much did he pay you, if anything? —£15. 639. Will you be good enough to tell their Honours what that was for ?—Yes. Captain Jones came to me in May, 1895. He did not come to my house, mind, but I met him in the street. He said that a lot of people were getting certificates under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894," and he thought his services entitled him to obtain a certificate too. He employed me to look into the matter and see what could be done, and I said, "Yes, I would do so ;" and on that day, or some other day, he said, " Well, Captain Yon Schoen, if you are successful in getting this certificate, and making a representation to the Government," and one thing and another, " I will pay you £20." 640. That was a service certificate?— Yes. I said, "All right, Jones, never mind the £20; we will leave the matter an open question;" and it has always been left an open question. 641. Did you get the £20?— I got it in dribblets. I never asked for the money. I never let him know I wanted the money; that was given to me voluntarily. 642. Was that on condition that you got him the service certificate, or would use what influence you could to get it ?—No; he said, "Of course, you must understand, if I do not get the service certificate there will be no pay." 643. Mr. Gray.] Do you say so still ? —Certainly. 644. Mr. Hanlon.] And that was the understanding?— Yes. 645. What did you do in pursuance of that agreement ? —Well, it was two years and three months after I did what I could for him to obtain that certificate. I told him he had to get his services made out by his employers and so forth, and make out an application form. I made out a copy of that statement by Williams, his employer. 646. For a service certificate, you mean ? —I made that out, and I interviewed the Premier in company with them. I will state what took place at the interview. I said to Captain Jones at one time, and have always thought, that he (Captain Jones) was entitled to a service certificate. Well, I thought that Captain Jones was right. I also thought that there was no reason why the Marine Department should withhold from him his certificate of service. If any other person had applied for a certificate of service under the same conditions he would have received it. Captain Jones's services were of such a nature that you had to give him to a certain extent the benefit of the doubt, because it is this way : If we count sea-service, for instance 647. You say he could not get his certificate of service on account of the " cussedness " of the Marine Department ?—Yes. 648. Then you filled up his application form and did that work you told us about for this money ?—Yes. Well, I cannot say I did it for the money; I would have done it without the money. 649. However, Captain Jones did not get the certificate of service ?—No. 650. Now, did you urge him to go up for examination ?—Certainly not. 651. I heard him swear you did? —I swear I did not. 652. You know that he did go up for examination?— Yes, I know he did. 653. First of all, do you know Mr. Allport very well ?—Yes, fairly well. 654. A little more than that, do you not —you are a little more intimate than knowing him ' fairly well ? " —The same as Captain Allman. 655. How long have you known Captain Allman ?—Since he returned from Sydney in December, 1894.

185

H.—26

656. How long have you known Mr. Allport ? —I have known him nineteen or twenty years, I think. 657. You have frequently had a chat with him?— Not at first. 658. Have you been in the habit of chatting with him during that twenty years?— Not the whole twenty years. 659. Part of it?— During the last eight or nine years. 660. Going to his office ?—Sometimes. 661. What for ?—Business. 662. What sort of business?— Business connected with the department and myself. 663. What was the nature of it ?—Well, regulations. 664. Had you anything to do with those regulations of adjustments ?—I do not mean those. With regard to the examinations of masters and mates and engineers. 665. Then you were in the habit of going to find out about regulations and adjusting of compasses ?—I have to get my diagrams and all the forms for examinations. 666. Did you have a look at any of the examination-papers while there ?—There are examina-tion-papers like these [Examination-form produced]—these examination-papers not filled in. 667. I mean the examination-papers filled in ?—I swear I never saw any of them—never—■ well, hardly ever. 668. That means, hardly ever?— That was a slip of the tongue. I never saw any filled-in examination-papers in Mr. Allport's office. I saw once or twice examination-papers in Captain Allman's office, not in Mr. Allport's office. 669. Well, did you get sets of blank examination-papers from that office?— Yes, when I applied for them. 670. Did you apply for them frequently ?—No, because all these forms you can buy at any stationer's shop. 671. You make a practice of getting the others from the Marine Department?— That is the only place to get them from. 672. Did you have a chat with Mr. Allport about the examinations when you went for these forms? —I might have talked about examinations, you know. 673. You did not have a look at the papers of some candidates that have been failed to find out in what they have been failed, and so on?— Certainly not. 674. You know those regulations in regard to licensing adjusters of compasses ?—Yes. 675. Had you anything to do with those? —Making them, you mean? 676. Yes, altering them after they were drafted ?—No. 677. You had no connection with them whatever?—l understand they draft the regulations very well. How could I draft them when the regulations are in force ? 678. lam asking you, did you do so ? —I did not draft any regulations. 679. Captain Allman might have asked you some questions ?—He might have asked me. I would not swear he did not. 680. I suppose you know that the result of this regulation was to give you a monopoly of this business?— Well, that is all I know about it. These regulations came into force on the 22nd or 23rd February, 1896. I swung my first ship—in my life—on the 13th May, and then I took my turn with Captain Strang and Captain Bendall conjointly; therefore, where was the monopoly ? 681. Were you all qualified? —All qualified except Captain Strang ; he qualified and passed his examination a few weeks afterwards, and Captain Bendall passed his examination in December. Anyhow, license or no license, they were allowed to take their turn. 682. At the time of the coming into force of these regulations you were really the only man qualified?— For a few days only. There might have been more men in Wellington for all I know. 683. You told us this : that you know James Jones went up for an examination for a certificate of competency? —Yes. 684. Did you prepare him for that examination?—l did not. 685. Did you prepare any papers and instruct Jones to present them to the Examiner in the examination-room ?—I decline to answer that question. 686. Will you state the grounds for declining to answer ?—Yes ; because my evidence may be used against me. 687. On a criminal charge?— Yes, it might incriminate me. Mr. Atkinson : There is no other right of refusal before this Court. Judge Ward : Then I understand, Mr. Atkinson, you object to the answering of this question on the ground that it might incriminate your client ? Mr. Atkinson : Yes. 688. Mr. Hanlon.] Had you made any arrangement with any person whatever that the papers to be prepared by you were to be presented to the Examiner by Jones? Mr. Atkinson : I object to that question in its present form. Mr. Hanlon : " Any person whatever," is my question. Mr Atkinson : I object to that question, your Honour. 689. Mr. Hanlon.] Did you tell anything to Mr. Allport about Jones's examination ? Mr. Atkinson : I object to that, your Honour. Mr. Hanlon : Why, how can an answer to that incriminate the witness ? Witness : I decline to answer that question, on the ground that it will incriminate me. Mr. Hanlon: Very well, your Honour, if the witness claims privilege, I will leave him at that. 690. Dr. Findlay.] Captain Yon Schoen, you have listened very attentively to the evidence we have heard here during the last few days?— Yes. 24— H. 26.

H.—26

186

691. You have heard all the evidence of Captain Jones ?—Yes. 692. And you do not feel a bit ashamed of yourself ?—No. 693. You have had the £15 in your pocket ?—Yes. 694. Did you ever give it back, or any part of it?— No. 695. You got £15 from Captain Jones, and have not paid it back ?—No. 696. Do you intend to? —It seems to me that is my business, not yours. If Captain Jones makes application to me, I do not know what I will do. 697. Do you intend to repay that money ?^Yes. 698. The intention, I suppose, began this moment ?—lf he applies to me he may get it back. 699. Have you ever expressed that intention before ?—No. 700. Have you ever been asked ?—No. 701. You were good enough to give us some information, Captain Yon Schoen; you told Mr. Hanlon that you never taught Captain Jones, except for his river master's certificate ?—Yes. 702. You got £5 for that? —I think so—about that amount. 703. Then later you were employed to look after his service certificate as master ?—Yes. 704. And he said, on your successfully making representations to the Government, " I will pay you £20?" —He said he would pay me £20 if I was successful. 705. You said, " All right, ' and you would leave the money question ?—Yes. 706. But the money question has been gradually closing?— Yes. 707. He never got a service certificate? —No. 708. Now, any part of that £15 you received was for no purpose other than your attempting to get him his service certificate ? —That is so. 709. Nothing else ?—No. 710. Did you know the reply that was given by the Premier to your application for a service certificate for Captain Jones at the end of 1895 ? Do you remember a memorandum—do you remember the envelope? —Yes. 711. Do you remember the reply was, " Nothing could be done for him " ? —Yes. 712. At that time you were told officially he could not get his service certificate?—l was not officially told. 713. You knew, at any rate, that that was the reply intended?— When I interviewed the Premier the first words he said when I mentioned what I had come for—for Jones—were: "Well, we must be very careful, because there is Sir Eobert Stout in the House." 714. I want to know, when did you know that the application for a service certificate by Captain Jones had been refused ?—I could not tell you that date at all. 715. Was it a year ago ?—lt was in 1895. 716. Now, you got £15 from this man?— Yes. 717. When did you get the last money from him?—ln September or October of 1897. 718. Two years after you knew the service certificate had been refused; yet you swear no part of that money was for other than for getting the service certificate ? —That was the arrangement. He paid me £2 after I made application for the service certificate—he paid me first £2. 719. How much did you get in October or September, 1897 ?—I got £2, then £8 in 1897, and £3 and £2. 720. When were the £3 and £2 paid ?—I think it might have been paid in the beginning of 1898. 721. £8, £3, £2, in September and October, and probably in the beginning of 1898 ?—Yes. 722. Will you tell me on oath no part of that money was but for your service in getting him a service certificate ? Do you still swear that no part of the £15 was paid you for other services than for getting the certificate ? Did you not receive any part of that £15 but for getting him a service certificate ? —I do not want to implicate myself in the matter. 723. The question is whether any part of this money was paid for anything other than for attempting to procure a certificate of service ?—I always understood it was paid for me to do it. 724. Although the larger portion of it was paid after the service certificate had been refused ? —Well, Captain Jones is a man who always sticks to his bargain. 725. His bargain was that this money should be paid to you for procuring for him a service certificate ? —Yes. 726. After the certificate of service was refused the greater part of this money was paid to you ?—Yes, of course, Jones stuck to his bargain; because he got a certificate in the end he paid that money. I will swear I never asked Jones for the money. 727. The question is whether you received any part of that £15 for anything other than obtaining the service certificate. Now, on your oath, Yes or No ?—I must admit it looks as if I did. 728. Judge Ward.] We all know how it looks. Did you receive this money on account of some other service than that of obtaining the service certificate ?—Possibly I did. I would rather say that than swear to a thing which seems to be a little bit crooked. 729. Dr. Findlay.] When you swore a little while ago you received it only for a service certificate you were not telling the truth ?—I cannot say that. 730. You told us you gave Jones no teaching other than for a river certificate ?—Yes. 731. You contradict Captain Jones when he says he went to your house before the examination in July, 1897. for the purpose of getting instruction ? —He did not come to me for instruction at all. 732. Did he go to your house ?■—Yes. 733. Did you give him any instruction in navigation matters when he came to your house?— No, no instruction on nautical matters. 734. You told us that you had been friendly many years with Mr. Allport—some twenty years ?—I had known him.

187

H.—26

735. And for eight or nine years you have seen him very frequently ? —Yes. 736. On an average, how many times have you been in Mr. Airport's office during the last four or five years?— Well, I might go there once or twice a week, and might not go there for another two months. I have known myself to be there sometimes three times a week. I might go there, and go out and go back the same day. 737. Now, were you in the habit of getting things from any officer in the Marine Department as to the character of questions to be set to candidates—as to the questions to be set to candidates? —Of course there may be two meanings to this. To know the character of the questions I should apply for examination-papers. 738. As to the questions that were going to be put ?—No. 739. Was there any special treatment accorded to you that was not accorded to other people that chose to call at the Marine Office for information?—l do not think so. I would have resented any other treatment than what I received. 740. You got no special privileges, at any rate?— No. 741. From Mr. Allport or anybody else?— Neither from Mr. Glasgow nor from anybody else. 742. Have you read the letter addressed by you to Mr. Hood, who was at that time a pupil of Mr. Gifford's ?—Yes, I know the letter. [Captain Yon Schoen's letter, dated the 10th September, 1897, produced.] 743. Do you know who Mr. Hood was ?—I did not know the man byname previous to writing that. 7-!4. Did you know his name when you wrote this ?—I inquired for his name. 745. Who was he? —He was the third officer in the " Takapuna." 746. And where was he then staying ? —When I wrote that letter I was told he was staying at Mr. Gifford's. He was his first pupil. 747. He (Mr. Gifford) had a rival school ; he had started a navigation school in opposition to you?— Yes. 748. "I have been waiting for you since last Thursday week, on which day you left the ' Takapuna,' to take your place (as contracted upon between you and me) at the Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Wellington. I have received official information, upon which I will not enlarge. Suffice for me to say that I think you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House, in Hill Street, to-morrow (Saturday") afternoon at half-past 3 o'clock. I shall stay in for that purpose." You wanted to get this man to become a pupil of yours. This letter was written for the purpose of getting him to become a pupil of yours; you wrote to bring him to your school. Now, what do you mean by the words, " I have received official information upon which I will not enlarge"?— One day at the Queen's Wharf, when near the "Takapuna," one of the officers came up to me and addressed me, and said "I am coming to you for instruction." That was this man Hood. I said "Yes." Then he commenced to talk to me about his service. He asked me things about his papers, and I gave him my opinion; and then he said, " I am expecting a letter as to whether I can stay behind this trip or the next. He said "1 will telephone to you and let you know when lam coming up." He did not turn up for nearly a week. I made inquiries about it. I thought he did not leave the " Takapuna." I made inquiry of Mr. Larnach, and he said he was with Gifford, who had started a navigation school. I said, " Oh." I said " That is rather a shabby trick to play me after my giving him information about his service and papers." Then I wrote to him and found out his address, and I told him "from official information I had received, upon which I will not enlarge." I did not like to put in the letter, "it was a shabby trick ;" I thought I had better tell him that when he came to my place. Anyhow, I thought he would serve his interests better by coming to me. 749. What do you mean by the words "official information?" You say "from official information upon which you will not enlarge": was your information got from the Union Company?— The Union Company told me Gifford had started a school. 750. Do you tell the Commission that, when you wrote to him " I think you will serve your interests most by calling at so-and-so ?"—I should think a man would serve his interests best by coming to me, than going to a man who has never shown his abilities. 751. You were told by the Union Company this man had an opposition school, and that was the "official information upon which you would not enlarge," and was sufficient to say, if he called at your school instead of the other one ? —Yes. 752. And that was made by some official in the Union Company?— Yes. 753. If it had been made by the office-boy it would have been "official information"?— Not quite from the office-boy. 754. Do you know this letter found its way into the public Press and was published ? —No. 755. Do you swear you did not know this letter was ventilated in the Press ?—I heard it was going to be published. 756. You did not know there was any trouble about the letter ?—I knew that this man Hood and Gifford went to the Marine Department, and Hood was advised to go to Mr. Hall-Jones. These people went to Mr. Hall-Jones, who said, " I shall give orders that there shall be no assessor work done by Mr. Yon Schoen." 757. You have given us an explanation. Were you ever spoken to about this matter before : about writing this letter to Mr. Hood ?—-I was spoken to almost immediately afterwards. 758. Who was it spoke to you?— Captain Wheeler, I think. 759. Have you spoken to Mr. Allport about it ?—No. 760. Will you contradict Mr. Allport ? —I say Mr. Allport is incapable of telling a lie ; I will take his word for granted. 761. If Mr. Allport spoke to you and asked you about it I suppose you would give him a truthful answer? —I think I would.

H.—26

188

762. Will you tell me how it was you did not tell Mr. Allport this when you spoke to him about it ? Can you tell me why you did not give an explanation then ? —I do not remember. 763. If you had been asked this question by Mr. Allport you would have given a truthful answer? —Yes. 764. Do you always give a truthful answer? —Well, there are Captain Edwin's testimonials. 765. I am afraid Captain Edwin would not give you that testimonial again ?—Wouldn't he ! 766. If Mr. Allport asked you about it you gave him a truthful answer ? —I think so. 767. The answer you gave Mr. Allport was not the one you gave me? —It is simply my word against Mr. Allport's. 768. Mr. Gifford has been continuing in Wellington since he startad the opposition school to you? —I never speak to him. He was a pupil of mine, and I know his capabilities. 769. There has been a certain rivalry between your school and his. You always published the names of successful men in the papers ?—Yes. 770. Will you swear that you never spoke to Captain Allman about Mr. Gifford's qualifications?— Yes, I will swear to that—not to my knowledge, 771. You are not quite certain about it?—l think lam pretty well certain about that. It is against my disposition to do that sort of thing. 772. You do not like to say anything about your rival teacher? —No ; why should I? 773. He is a very good man ?—I do not know anything about the man. 774. You told us that when you wrote this letter you wanted to save this man against the incompetent opposition man ?—I do not like to speak badly of any one. 775. Did you not, on any occasion, ask Captain Allman if he was going to pass your candidate ?—That is an infamous lie. 776. Did you ever speak to him about your candidates at any time ?—At the beginning Captain Allman knew everything that was going on —we were then as thick as thieves. There was nothing secret going on at that time. 777. You were " as thick as thieves " ?—Yes. 778. Do you mean to imply that you were getting information from Captain Allman that you should not have got ?—No. 779. Do you say then that he never gave you any information that you were not entitled to? — I suppose he had little soft things for me, but nothing that would affect the State. 780. Will you kindly tell me the little things he would not tell another man ?—We used to discuss —supposing he examined a man of mine, after there was some discussion about it, I would go and give him information, and he would say, "I think you are right, Captain," and I would say, " What are you going to do? " 781. You have implied that you were getting things that other members of the public would not get. Do you swear that you at any time have got anything from Captain Allman that, as one of the public, you were not entitled to get ? —No. 782. Now, when did you first become acquainted with Mr. Pirani?—ls he here ? 783. Never mind that ? —Everybody knows little Pirani, you know. 784. Can you give me an answer to that question ? —I think it was in 1896 that the Hon. John Rigg introduced me to Mr. Pirani. lam not quite certain of the year. 785. You applied for the position that Captain Allman was appointed to ?—Yes, I was one of the applicants. 786. You were one of the unsuccessful applicants? —Yes. 787. Did you know him before you applied for that position ?—I am not prepared to say. 788. Are you prepared to say whether you asked him to give you his help in getting you that place ?—I will swear I did not. 789. You will not swear you were not acquainted with him in 1894 ?—No, I could not swear to that. I may be a year or two out. 790. You say Captain Allman was friendly —that he showed you a soft side and all that kind of thing. How long did this continue ? —lt continued, I think, until December, 1896, or the beginning of 1897. 791. During that time he had a soft side to you ; you were friendly?— Yes. 792. A change came over the scene in the beginning of 1897 ?—Yes. 793. What led to the change ?—Captain Allman asked me to work up certain papers in the deviation of compass. I did so. There is the file. Shortly after that I had two candidates passed, and I had a little bit of suspicion. Captain Allman asked me to work out these questions because he had the Imperial answers. I thought the answers ought to be sufficient. When I got to know that two other candidates had passed I got suspicious, and from that time I cooled down a little bit; I was suspicious. 794. Because you had these suspicions you cooled down a little bit ?—Yes. 795. Were your suspicions confirmed immediately after they arose ? —No, not immediately after they arose, but some time after. 796. How long after?— About February, 1897, I think. 797. That was the time when the new regulations came into force?—l do not know. 798. What did you do in February, 1897 ?—Well, I went up to the Marine Office one day, I think, to get some blank deviation cards. I saw Mr. Allport. 799. Was that in 1897 ?—That must have been in 1898. 800. Are you quite sure that it was in 1898 ? —I think it was in February, 1898. 801. You went up to see Mr. Allport in February, 1898 ?—Yes. 802. What did you tell Mr Allport ?—I went up to get these cards, and in the conversation I mentioned the examination. I think I said the examination

189

H.—26

Mr. Atkinson: I object, on witness's behalf, to his answering this question. The witness will answer only to this particular matter. There were several matters mentioned in the same conversation. Witness : I said I thought the examinations in Wellington in particular were getting from bad to worse, and that something should be done to get them on a better footing. Mr. Allport said, " What is up now ? " 803. Dr. Findlay.] Why should he say, "What is up now?"—I have always been complaining about the examinations since 1890. 804. Did you ever complain to Mr. Allport about the examinations ?—I should not wonder if I had. 805. You tell us you were always complaining about the examinations ?—Yes ; more or less. They are not on a proper footing now. They never have been on a proper footing. I consider they were satisfactory in Captain Johnson's time. 806. How long ago was that?—ln the beginning of 1890, and before that. 807. You spoke to Mr. Allport, and told him that the examinations were unsatisfactory? — That is it. 808. What else did you do ? —Then Mr. Allport wanted me to tell him all about it. I declined to do so.

Satueday, 22nd July, 1899. Captain Yon Schoen further examined. 1. Dr. Findlay.] You were telling me that up to February, 1898, you and Captain Allman were friends—that he had even a " soft side for you " ?—lt may be the end of 1897 ; I could not fix the date. 2. You first thought it was February, 1897, and after further thought you discovered it was February, 1898 ?—I think it may have been the beginning of 1897, or the middle of 1897 ;I do not think it was 1898. These examinations took place in December, 1896, and February, 1897, and I think it was some time after that that my suspicions were aroused. I got a bit confused yesterday. 3. Now, in the calm moment of 11 o'clock, will you tell me what the actual facts are. Was it February, 1897, or in 1898, that your suspicions were first aroused?—ln the middle of 1897; I could not fix the date exactly. Igo by the examinations. 4. We are not dealing with the matter upon which you refused to give answers, but with regard to this compass-adjusting matter, so you will understand I am not asking about Jones's papsrs. You told the Commissioners that Captain Allman had got some questions and answers from you for examination-papers? —Yes, I made those papers out for him. He gave me the forms, and I worked them out. 5. You were suspicious that he was going to use these papers ? —No, not for some time after. 6. Now, who was the first person to whom you expressed suspicion ?—I think it must have been Mr. Allport. 7. Mr. Allport tells us it was in February, 1898? —That would be about right. 8. Up to that time, February, 1898, you had no reason to suspect Captain Allman's honesty as an Examiner? —Well, of course, I did not. I kept all these matters to myself. In fact, they were drawn from me by Mr. Allport afterwards. I never made these statements voluntarily. 9. They were drawn from you by Mr. Allport ?—Yes. I hesitated at first about telling him about it. 10. How did he draw the information from you ?—I went to Mr. Airport's office in February, 1898, about some business, and we had a bit of a conversation about examinations. He said, " What about examinations?" I said, "The examinations are getting from bad to worse. They were very bad once, and they do not seem to improve." He said, " What is the trouble about now?" And I said, "I do not like to say. I do not like to make any statements about examinations." 11. You plainly showed him you did not want to say anything about examinations?— Yes. So then I said to him at last 12. Did anything intervene between?—l refused to tell him at all at first. Well, then he pressed the matter. Then I said to him, " Well, look here, if you give me your word of honour that you will not disclose what I tell you, I will show you that there may be some reasons for making statements to you about examinations getting from bad to worse." So he said he would give me his word of honour not to disclose anything that I would tell him. 13. Did he make any objection ?—Not the slightest. He gave it to me readily. 14. He made no objection to giving his word of honour?—No, he readily gave it. 15. What followed that? —Well, then I told him. He said, " Where are the proofs? " I told him they were merely my suspicions, but that I would bring him the calculation book where the questions are worked out, and he could look over the things and compare them—compare them with the examination-papers of Captain Bendali and Captain McLellan—compare the whole of the work. He said, " Yes, I could do that." I said, " Mind, do not keep the book ; I must have the book." He said it would be all right. So I took the calculation book to him, and he said, " Leave it," so I left it. Then I called in a day or two for my book, and he handed me the book ; and I said, " Well, what do you think of it? " " Well," he said, " I think you are about correct about that matter. It appears to me that the examination papers are a copy of your book." I took my book and the matter ended.

H.—26

190

16. That was the first time you had expressed your suspicions about examinations? —The first time, Yes. 17. Did Mr. Allport tell you that he had suspicions that the examinations were not properly conducted ?—No. 18. Did he give any reason for pressing you?—No, none whatever. 19. The only thing you said to Mr. Allport was that you thought the examinations were getting from bad to worse ?—Yes. 20. He asked you your reasons, and you said you would tell him if he gave you his word of honour ?—Yes. 21. Do you agree with Mr. Allport that this conversation took place in February, 1898? —Yes, it was about that time ; I could not swear to the exact date. 22. Had Captains Bendall and McLellan been studying with you ?—No. 23. They did not take lessons from you at all ?—None whatever. I may state that McLellan wrote a letter to me, which I showed to Captain Allman, asking me whether I could instruct him in the calculations of the compass deviation paper by correspondence; but we did not come to terms about it, and the matter ended. 24. Did you ever ask Captain McLellan for £15 for showing him the deviascope ?—That was the fee at that time, and he refused to pay it. 25. Do you know when Captains Bendall and McLellan were examined by Captain Allman? — Yes ; Bendall in December, 1896, and the other gentleman in February, 1897, I believe. 26. In each case over a year before this interview with Mr. Allport ?—Yes. 27. Then, the papers that you gave to Captain Allman must have been given considerably over a year before you spoke to Mr. Allport ?—Yes, I think they must have been. I gave them shortly before the examination of Captains Bendall and McLellan. 28. You did not express suspicion to any one in the meantime? You told us over a year " elapsed between the time you gave these papers and the time that you first expressed suspicion to Mr. Allport about the matter ? —Well, I would not like to express my suspicions to any man in the street. 29. Was there anything in the meantime, between the date you gave these papers, and between the passing of these men, McLellan and Bendall —between thai, time and the time when you told Mr. Allport —that particularly increased your suspicion ? —No, I cannot say. I do not remember. 30. You were often at Mr. Airport's office between the time that these men passed and this date, February, 1898 ?—Yes. 31. There lies between these two dates about fifteen months. I suppose you had been dozens of times in his office, at any rate, during the year ?—I suppose I had been a dozen times. 32. You say you saw Mr. Allport frequently ?—Yes. 33. Will you tell the Commissioners that this suspicion, which was secreted in your mind from the end of 1896 and the beginning of 1897, was not mentioned to Mr. Allport for over a year afterwards, although you had seen him at his office frequently?—l think I can account for that. The subject of the conduct of examinations had not cropped up until that time. I should never have disclosed it at all; it was just by accident. 34. Do you mean to tell me that throughout that year, after the examinations, your suspicions were not mentioned?— Not the conducting of examinations. Not that the examinations were getting from bad to worse. 35. That was your own remark ?—Yes. 36. These papers were prepared, you say, for Captain Allman ?—Yes. 37. You spoke to Mr. Allport some twelve or fifteen months after ?—Yes. 38. You brought down your book and you asked him to compare these papers with the answers given by Captains McLeilan and Bendall?—Yes, with their workings, not with the answers. 39. You did not know that these questions had been given to Messrs. Bendall and McLellan at all ?—lt was simply suspicion. I will tell you why. These papers were Board of Trade papers, and to them is attached an answer-sheet by the Board of Trade, which gives the different stages in the working. Captain Allman asked me to give him the full working of every figure, from the beginning to the end ; and that is what afterwards appeared to me to be suspicious. Why should the whole of the working be required of me ? So that Captain Allman could check the candidates' work by. 39a. Dr. Giles.] Was the information you gave him taken out of your calculation book—did it correspond ?—Captain Allman gave me the Board of Trade papers with the questions on, and he also gave me the answer-sheet, with the answers filled in in print. I gave the different stages of the work, not merely giving the proper answers, but giving several items in each problem. 40. Did these details you gave him come out of your calculation book that you spoke of just now ? —Yes ; I spent a day or two—two full days—in working them out. 41. What I want to know precisely is this : Did the papers that you gave Captain Allman correspond with the working in your calculation book ? —Yes. 42. Dr. Findlay.] I want to know why you suspected that those papers had been given to Captains Bendall and McLellan?—Nothing but suspicion. Captains Bendall and McLellan passed their examinations shortly afterwards. 43. I am told by Captain Allman that numerous candidates sat for the same kind of examination ?—Yes. 44. You know, as a matter of fact, that a great number of candidates have sat for the compass examinations ? —No, I did not know that. I can give you the number.

191

H.—26

45. How do you know the number?—l know from the Statement of the Marine Department, issued every year. 46. How many are there?—ln compass-deviation, I believe only three—Captains Strang, Bendall, and McLellan. 47. In that year?—Up to now, I believe. 48. What about Captain Robertson ? —ln Auckland, not in Wellington. 49. How about Captain Fernandez?—ln Auckland, not in Wellington. 50. Where did these examination-papers come from ?—Of course, that Ido not know. That is Captain Allman's business. 51. At any rate, when you spoke to Mr. Allport you suspected it was the papers of Captains Bendall and McLellan ? —Yes. 52. And your only reason was suspicion ?—Yes. 53. We have heard a great deal about this book of yours. Where is that book?—lt is at home. 54. Have you any objection to produce it here ?—I have no objection. 55. You say that the reason why you did not divulge this matter to Mr. Allport before was because the subject of examinations was never mentioned ?—The conduct of examinations was never mentioned. 56. Will you tell us, Captain Yon Sohoen, that you had your suspicions at the time these two men passed their examinations ?—Yes. 57. You had the same suspicions, and yet you never breathed a word about it until a year later ?—Yes, I dismissed it from my mind altogether. It is not nice to mention things of that sort. 58. When you spoke to Mr. Allport you did not put it in the way of suspicion. What you said was that the examinations were going from bad to worse. Is that true ?—Yes, that is quite true. 59. How did you know they were going " from bad to worse." You had only suspicions—you had no proof that these papers had been used?— Well, there was the " Manaroa" case and Matheson's case. I think that was going " from bad to worse." 60. Were you referring to Captains Bendall and McLellan ? Were they the only illustrations ? —I was speaking generally. 61. Then you were not referring to Captains Bendall and McLellan at all ?—Well, those were intended, I suppose ; it was general. 62. At that moment you had no proof whatever that these papers were used in Bendall and McLellan's examinations? —I had no proof ; I have got no proof now. I disclaim all responsibility so far as lam concerned. I never compared them, so I could not tell. 63. You have been trying for years to prevent irregularities in the conduct of examinations ?—■ Yes. 64. You feel that it is part of your duty to see that they are conducted properly ?—Yes, it is much better for me. 65. From a public spirit you desired that these examinations should be properly conducted ?— Yes. 66. And you would not be willingly a party to anything that would lead to a fraudulent examination ?—Well, I will say I would not be willingly. 67. On your oath, Captain Yon Schoen, will you swear you have never willingly been a party to a fraudulent examination ? Mr. Atkinson : I object to the question, your Honour. Objection allowed. 68. Dr Findlay.] If you knew at this time that the examinations were being conducted irregularly, will you tell me why you did not speak to Mr. Allport earlier ?—Well, I explained—it cropped up in the course of conversation. 69. It does not seem very satisfactory ?—I cannot say anything else. 70. You had this suspicion, that Captains Bendall and McLellan passed improperly, and you strongly desired that there should be no irregularities in connection with examinations ?—I did not like, on mere suspicion, to speak to any one at all about it, and if it had not cropped up in conversation nothing would have been said at all. 71. Animated by this very high spirit to keep things correct in examinations, will you tell me how it was you came to be found in an examination-room prompting a candidate who was sitting ?— Yes, I was not teaching at the time at all. I had not started ; that was in 1877. 72. I think Captain Edwin said you were ? —lt is not so. lam quite willing to admit all that took place. 73. Were you in the examination-room ? —Yes. 74. Did you know the examinee ? —Yes, I knew him. 75. Were you standing by the pupil? —Yes. 76. Were you there for the purpose of helping him ?—I was not. 77. For what purpose, then?— The examination-room door was open, it was the old Customhouse. I went to see Captain Edwin first of all, but I cannot recollect for what purpose. I did not know the man was there at all. I went to the door and it was open, and I asked the man whether Captain Edwin was in, and he said, " One moment; here, here." I went up to the table, and, before I could say a word, Captain Edwin came in. 78. And " fired " you out? —No, he did not. lam too good a man for that. Captain Edwin is not a man of that sort. He said nothing, but simply failed the man, and never said a word to me. I tried to explain to Captain Edwin, but he would not listen. I stayed a few minutes and then walkedjout.

H.—26

192

79. You wrote the statement of sea service in Captain Jones's application ?—I did. 80. I see that in some of the statements there you say that he was outside the Heads for over two months in certain cases? —I do not know what I said. I got a statement from the books in Captain Williams's office in pencil, and he (Captain Jones) brought this to me. 81. Have youjmown Captain Jones for a very long time ? —Yes. 82. Did you know if he has ever been over two months and eighteen days outside the Heads ? —No ; I shall explain. I say that Captain Jones was entitled to the service-certificate for these reasons 83. I want you to answer the simple question first. Do you know of your own knowledge that Captain Jones was ever two months and eighteen days outside the Heads at one time?—No ; he has never been outside for that time, or any other ship either. 84. Do you know that you put in the statement of sea service that Captain Jones has been on more than one occasion outside the Heads for periods of over two months ? —I have not seen the statement since then. 85. Do you know that you did so ?—Well, it might be there. [Statement produced, and shown to witness.] This is the time of the wool season. If an English ship cannot get freight and she anchors in Wellington Harbour for twelve months, all that time counts as " sea service." 86. Dr. Giles.] But Captain Jones's ship belongs to Wellington. If she is at Wellington wharf that does not count as sea service, does it? —No. Take the " Kahu," for instance, trading to the Chatham Islands. She arrives here on Sunday, and she leaves the following Tuesday, and she is back on the Sunday following—all that time goes as foreign service, although she only visits the Chatham Islands twice or so a year. 87. Then every time Captain Jones goes outside the Heads it is counted as a separate voyage?—We do not count separate voyages, it counts for sea service from the time he joins to the time he leaves. 88. Dr. Findlay.] Do you suggest that if this tug-boat Captain Jones was on was only out for an hour or so and in again for days, for a period of two months eighteen days, it would count for continuous sea service ?—Yes; that would count for two months and eighteen days' sea service. 89. And that is what you believed when you filled in that sea statement ?—Yee. 90. Well, if he was only out half an hour it still applies ?—Yes, if he is engaged outside. 91. You, I think, wrote out the application for Captain Jones to sit for examination as master? —Well, that is touching again upon Jones. 92. Did you write the application which Captain Jones signed to sit for his examination as master ? Mr. Atkinson."] I object to that question, your Honour. Objection upheld. 93. Dr. Findlay.] Well, then, you wrote out Matheson's application?— Yes. 94. And in Matheson's application there is a statement that he did not fail before ?—Yes, I believe there is. 95. Did you know as a matter of fact that he had failed before?— Yes, he told me he failed in Melbourne. I saw the certificate. 96. And yet in this application you made out, you stated, in your own handwriting, that he had not failed before ? —I always make out the applications, and then they go to the Customs to be checked to see if they are correct. It is to be verified before it goes to the Examiners, and 97. Dr. Giles.] Then the man told you he had failed ? —The man did not fail—he did not fail in his examination ; he failed in the vision test. 98. Dr. Findlay.] Why did you not state that on the face of the statement? —There might have been a slip made. 99. Do you charge anything for making out these applications?—No, it is not a special charge. 100. Is there not a special charge made by you of 10s ?—There was once. 101. Will you swear that you did not charge 10s for filling in this application?—l will not swear that. 102. You should not charge that 10s. for filling in that application falsely? —I object to you saying that I filled it in falsely. It is the duty of the Clerk of the Customs Department, and of the Collector of Customs, and the Examiner, to read and examine the parchments. 103. You say you had this interview with Mr. Allport, and he gave you his word of honour about the matter ?—Yes. 104. Will you tell me to whom you next expressed your suspicions after you had seen Mr. Allport ? —I think it was to Mr. Hutcheson. 105. When did you tell Mr. Hutcheson ?—I could not tell you when; it was before last session some time. 106. Was it long before the speech in the House ?—No, it could not have been long. 107. Did you tell him before you told Mr. Pirani?—Yes, I think so. 108. Did you get his word of honour that he would tell nobody ?—I am not clear about tnat; I do not suppose so. 109. You did not ask him to give you any obligation of confidence ?—I do not think so. 110. Did you do the same with Mr. Pirani ? —No, I do not think I said anything to Mr. Pirani about the business at all. I do not recollect that I had anything to do with Mr. Pirani. 111. Did you tell Mr. Pirani about this matter ? —I might have done so ; I have never been clear about this Pirani business at all. I have been trying to recollect it for some days past, but I am it.

193

H.—26

112. You did not get any promise of confidence from Mr. Pirani ?—I do not recollect. 113. You gave Mr. Hutcheson a written statement ?—No, I do not recollect anything of the sort. 114. Did you or did you not give Mr. Hutcheson a written statement ? —I am positive I did not. 115. From neither Mr. Pirani nor Mr. Hutcheson did you get any promise of confidence ?—I do not think I asked for any. 116. After you told Mr. Hutcheson, is it not a fact that you were really prepared to have the matter made public?—l did all I could not to make it public. I wanted to tell the Premier about it. 117. Did you offer to go to the Premier about it ?—No, I was waiting to be sent for. 118. Did you ever write to the Premierabout it ?—No. 119. You were anxious to tell the Premier about it then ?—I did not desire to tell him about it. 120. Then you did not want to tell the Premier about it ?—I did not want the thing made public. 121. You say you did not want the thing made public. You told Mr. Hutcheson about it, and you got no promise from him of confidence, then why did you tell Mr. Hutcheson about it ? — For his own information. 122. Did you expect that he was going to keep his information quiet?—l did not tell him to keep it quiet. 123. Do you really mean to say that you desired him not to make it public ?—I did not want it made public in the manner it is made now. 124. What was your purpose in giving the information to Mr. Hutcheson —was it to have it mentioned in the House?— Well, I believe I did. 125. And yet you say that you did not want to make it public ?—Well, I do not call that public. You see, Mr. Hutcheson never mentioned names. 126. When Mr. Allport came to you repeatedly and asked you to release him from his obligation of secrecy, you refused to allow him ?—I did. 127. Why ? —Because I wanted to keep the thing quiet. I did not want it to come out. 128. You told Mr. Hutcheson some time in August and Mr. Allport in February—between those two dates you desired to keep it quiet. Well, after August you had no objection to releasing Mr. Allport ? —Yes, I still had objections. 129. You told Mr. Hutcheson with a view of his mentioning it in the House, and you objected to release Mr. Allport from his promise ?—lt was never intended that the thing should come out. in the manner it has done. 130. If there is any reason in you at all, can you tell me why, after you told Mr. Hutcheson, knowing that it must be mentioned in the House, you declined to release Mr. Allport from his promise of secrecy ?—Yes, I declined. 131. What is your reason?— Well, if I had released Mr. Allport from this pledge of keeping the matter secret, he would have informed the Minister and the Secretary ; then, of course, the things would have come out in a different way from what they should come out. 132. Is that your answer ? —I wanted to keep the matter as private as possible. 133. By having it mentioned in Parliament?— There were no names mentioned in Parliament. 134. Mr. Allport begged of you to release him from his promise of secrecy ? —Yes; I told him I would see Mr. Hutcheson. 135. Do you say that Mr. Allport did seriously come to you, and that he seriously asked you to release him ? —Yes ; and I told him I would speak to Mr. Hutcheson again. 136. This was after Mr. Hutcheson's speech in the House?— Yes. 137. Did Mr. Allport point out to you that, as you had told Mr. Hutcheson, and the matter had been mentioned in the House, he should be released, to tell his superiors ?—Yes ; he put that to me. 138. And you refused still ?—Yes ; I refused still. 139. And for the reason you have given ? —I told him I would see Mr. Hutcheson before I could give him an answer, and after that I told him that Mr. Hutcheson had arranged with the Premier that he should send for me—that the matter should be investigated privately. I did not want to make it public. 140. One of your objects was to show up Captain Allman ?—Oh, no. 141. Was it to expose Captains Bendall and McLellan, then?— No. 142. What was your object ?—My object, mainly, was to put the examinations on a proper footing, and to show up the irregularities, if possible. 143. And that would have the effect of vacating the billet held by Captain Allman, and leaving it open for Captain Yon Schoen ?—Oh, no; that is absurd. 144. Before these painful suspicions arose in your mind, you say you had the soft side of him (Captain Allman), and that he was in the habit of telling you things he would not tell everybody; you were very friendly ?—Yes ; until after these candidates passed the examinations. You know I corrected myself this morning. 145. I want to know whether your relations with Captain Allman were friendly up to the time you had the conversation with Mr. Allport or not ?—No, they were slightly strained about six or eight months before then. 146. Will you tell us what strained the relations? —These last examinations of Captains Bendall and McLellan. 147. But Captains Bendall and McLullan's examinations had taken place over a year before? —That is what I said this morning; I said February, 1897. 25— H. 26.

EL—26

194

148. You told Mr. Allport in February, 1898, and you told us that your relations with Captain Allman had become strained some six or eight months before that ?—I should think it would be in March, 1897. 149. These examinations took place four months before March —your relations in March were friendly. I only want to know when the breach took place ? —Oh, some time after I had the suspicions about these two papers. The last examination was in February, 1897, and it was some time after that. 150. Did you hear Captain Jones tell us that you had spoken very disrespectfully of Captain Allman? Captain Jones swore that you called him (Captain Allman) a " cad " ? —I never used that expression. 151. Will you swear that you never used it?—No, I will not. 152. Mr. Gray.'} About this sea service of Captain Jones. I think you explained to the Commissioners that if Captain Jones were engaged in a particular season in Palliser Bay or up the coast, you would count the whole of the service as service at sea ? —Yes : I would state so in the schedule of service. 153. You counted a particular period of a month to a later period of another month as continuous service ? —Yes. 154. It is absurd to say that he was outside the heads for two months at a time?— Yes; the ". Great Eastern" could not lie outside the heads for that time. 155. Then, when you prepared that schedule of service you did not suggest anything improper? —When I saw the service which Captain Jones brought with him from the office, and when I heard the explanation, I thought it was quite correct. I think so still, and that Captain Jones should get his certificate. 156. And you agree about his qualifications? —Undoubtedly. 157. He is better than other men who hold certificates ?—1 think he is competent to take a ship round any part of this coast. 158. About this money Captain Jones paid you. We heard it was £17 ; you say £15. Did he not pay you £10 first of all ?—No. 159. Did you keep any record ?—1 keep two records. 160. Do you duplicate anything ? —No ; lam not a business man. I keep simply a little book, you know, to put the items down. 161. Did you keep a record of what he gave you? —I kept a record of ohe £2 and the £8. He paid me £2 for service in May, 1895. Then, the other money I received was paid a couple of years after. It may have been in 1897. 162. And the next payment. Were there only three? —There were altogether four payments. 163. £2, £8, and £3?—£2, £8, £3, and £2. 164. Did you give receipts? —No. 165. You have already declined to say what was done in regard to his examination ?—Yes. 166. Have you any objection to tell the Commissioners what you told Mr. Allport about it ?— I must decline to do so. 167. We have already had Mr. Airport's statement, and you have said he is a man incapable of telling a lie. We must assume the statement he gave us is true ? Mr. Atkinson : I object to that, your Honour. 168. Mr. Gray.] You still decline to tell us what he told you ? 169. Will you tell us what you told Mr. Hutcheson ?—I decline to do so. 170. You did not mention to Mr. Hutcheson the name of Captain Jones? —No. 171. So, when he made his speech in the House he did not know, at all events from you, who the person was that he was speaking about ?—Not from me. 172. As we can get no information from you, Captain Yon Schoen, about my client, I will not pursue it ?—I am sorry that I cannot give you the information. 173. Mr. Travers.] Captain Yon Schoen, when you saw Mr. Allport and spoke about the examinations, you said they were getting from bad to worse ?—Yes. 174. Was that a general observation ?—Yes. 175. Not having at the time reference to specific cases ? —They included those cases. 176. After you had mentioned this to him you say he pressed you for it. Did he appear surprised, or did you think that he did not place reliance upon what you said ?—I expect Mr. Allport was curious to know. 177. Did he appear surprised that such a thing should have occurred?— Most decidedly he was surprised after I told him about these two cases. 178. Before you told him, was he surprised at your saying the examinations were getting from bad to worse ?—I did not notice. 179. Did you mention it, and he asked you to give him particulars—to tell him what you referred to ? —Yes. 180. He pressed you to tell him the cases, and at first you were not inclined to tell him ? — Yes. 181. But afterwards you told him of two cases ? —I told him if he would give me his word of honour it would be kept strictly confidential, then I would point out particular cases for the sake of guidance. 182. And you then proceeded to point out particular cases ?—Yes. 183. Especially the earlier cases, those of Captains McLellan and Bendall ?—Yes ; I made no definite charges. 184. Did you make any definite charge against any other person?—l decline to say. 185. You made no definite charges as regards those two other cases? —No. 186. And you assumed this would convince Mr. Allport—by producing your book?— Yes.

195

H.~ 26

187. And he had the opportunity of comparing your book with these two cases ?—Yes. 188. Did the book that you produced to him enable him to compare it with any other case? — What other case ? 189. With any other case of examination that had recently taken place?—He could only compare these particular cases in the Syllabus in the Deviation of the Compass. 190. Did the book extend to records of other examinations at all ?—No; it was my own private book. 191. Then that calculation book did not contain anything that he might gain from other examination-papers than McLellan's and Bendall's?—No. 192. Only in the case of Captain Bendall and Captain McLellan ?—I will show the questions I worked out for Captain Allman. 193. When you told him (Mr. Allport) the cases in which you had suspicion, did he appear to be surprised about it ? —I think he was a bit taken aback. 194. By what you told him ?—Yes ; I do not think he expected anything of that sort. 195. You did not think he expected what you told him ?—I do not think he was prepared for a thing like that. 196. He had the materials, however, from you ; he had sufficient materials from you to enable him to verify what you told him ?—He had the whole work of the questions, with the questions written on top ; to compare it with the papers and see whether there was any truth in my suspicions. 197. He had the full means to ascertain whether what you told him was founded on facts or not ?—Yes. 198. When did he next see you after having the opportunity of verifying the suspicions—how soon afterwards; you left the book, did you not ?—Yes, I left the book. I did not have the book with me at the time. 199. Did you take the book down to him ? —Yes, the same day. 200. Did you leave it with him ?—Yes. 201. How long did he keep it ?—A day and a half. 202. How did you get the book back ?—I called in. 203. Had you any conversation with him ?—I merely asked him what he thought of the business. 204. And he thought ?—That I was about right in my suspicions. Something of that sort. 205. Did he express any positive opinion as to any of the examinations, or did he think you were right in regard to your suspicions ? Did he tell you that he had satisfied himself that the examinations were wrong, or was it simply that he thought your suspicions were well founded ? —He said that he was sorry to say what I had told him was correot, or 1 believe it was something very similar. 206. And that took place when ?—I do not remember the date. ■ 207. You said it was about February, 1898?— Yes. 208. It was before that date Mr. Jones, of the "Duco," had been examined, waa it not?— Yes ; I suppose so. 209. In 1897 ?—Yes. 210. Did the book you gave him enable him to consider that question also, as well as the questions relating to Captain Bendall and all ?—Are you alluding to the jury case ? 211. Yes? —Well, I decline to answer. 212. You are going to produce the book ?—Yes. 213. Then, if it be asked for it will speak for itself?—No doubt. 214. And if it happens to contain any reference to Jones's examination, that can be seen there, too? —In my calculation book in regard to compasses, there are two cases and no other case. 215. Your suspicion in regard to Captains Bendall and McLellan amounts to the fact that you had supplied questions to Captain Allman ? —I calculated the questions and gave them to Captain Allman. 216. How did you come to know, if you did know, that the calculations in Captains Bendall and McLellan's cases corresponded with yours ?—I did not know that. 217. You simply suspected ?—Yes. 218. Then, your book enabled Mr. Allport to ascertain that ?—Yes. 219. Did you see the examination-papers? —I.did not. 220. He did not produce them to you ?—He wanted the book. 221. Did you point out the particular portion of the book which contained the calculations in question ?—Yes. 222. And by comparing that with those examination-papers he would himself be able to detect anything ?—Yes. He was perfectly at sea with regard to the setting of the work; but he could easily use his eyes and look. 223. The calculations used so far corresponded that there would be no mistake if they were compared ?—Yes. 224. Your suspicion went to this, that certain questions put to Captains Bendall and McLellan led you to suspect, was it not ? You had a suspicion as to the questions ?—I thought it was most likely that those questions worked out for Captain Allman were for him to be used in certain questions, simply to give the same questions as he had given my two other candidates, and that he intended my work should be a check for him to form an opinion as to whether these questions were correct in every detail. 225. You supplied a series of questions to Captain Allman with the necessary solutions ? — Yes, I supplied him with even the detailed answers. 226. Questions and answers ? —Yes.

196

H.—26

227. These were given to Captain Allman practically in the nature of instruction, were they no t?—He asked me to do them for him, and I thought that they were intended simply for him to have the complete worked-out set of papers to check the work of candidates with. 228. If the questions put to candidates were the same as you had put in the papers furnished to Captain Allman, then no doubt he would be able to test the answers, if he put the same questions ?—Tes, supposing a candidate works out the questions, he gets the answers right, but what you call the guts of it might be all wrong, and Captain Allman had the inside all right. These papers were made out for him as a key. 229. Now, what objection do you see to Captain Allman using those questions to pass the candidates ? —None whatever. 230. If he used the questions, and the candidates gave the proper answers, what injury was done to the public ?—None whatever. 231. Then, what led you to suspect something wrong ? What suspicion was in your mind as to something being wrong, merely from the use of questions with a key to the answers ? Why should you suspect anything wrong in connection with Captains Bendall and McLellan ?—Captain Allman already had an answer-sheet; not the one I made out. 232. He had the answer-sheet without the mode of arriving at the answer? —Yes. He wanted these details from me, and shortly after that the candidates came up for examination. •Then it struck me as to whether these papers made out were to be given to these people. 233. You suspected that he might have assisted these people by showing them your calculations?— Yes. 234. Your suspicion was aroused that the candidates had become aware of the mode by which you had calculated for the answers ?—lt was simply a matter of suspicion on my part. I made no charge. 235. You have never yet verified your suspicions by comparing your answers with the papers ?—■Nβ. 236. You left that for Mr. Allport to do ?—Exactly. 237. And, because of the correspondence between your mode of ascertaining the answer and the mode shown on the paper, you think that verifies your suspicion. Why should not the mode of answer have been arrived at by precisely the same way as you did it ?—lt might. 238. Suppose Captain Bendall had compiled exactly the same mode of solution of the question as you did, that would not give rise to the suspicion ?—I do not dispute that. 239. Everything might have been quite honest, and still the same calculations appear as in your paper ?—Yes. 240. So that the mere fact that it did so does not necessarily arouse a suspicion in regard to Captain Allman ?—Not necessarily. 241. You say if they actually corresponded it would be a peculiar thing? —The calculations I made were worked out to the finest point. I hardly think any other man would work them as fine as I do. 242. You mean to say you went into the minutest details in your calculations, and another person would not, in working out the problems, go into the same details?—lt would not be necessary. He might make a lot of mistakes to arrive at it. 243. To arrive at a correct conclusion?— Yes. 244. You state that it would appear to you to be a strong suspicion, if in all the minutiae of the calculations the answers would correspond with yours ?—By looking over these papers. 245. You suggest that by comparing your book with these calculations, if you find them corresponding absolutely, then your suspicion is well founded? —Yes. 246. But the same solution under the mode in which it was arrived at might have been worked out by a different mode of calculation, and be quite correct?— Yes. 247. Therefore it was not the mere solution, but the mode in which it was arrived at ?—Yes. 248. Did Mr. Allport exhibit to you the contents of examination-papers at all for your information ?—At no time. 249. At any time did he give you any information whatsoever in reference to that class of papers ?—Never. 250. So that you had no opportunity of examining the papers, or anything of that kind ?— Never. 251. You heard what questions were put as to the position in which you sat at the table?— Yes. 252. And on one occasion Captain Allman said he saw examination-papers lying in such a position that you could at least see the top page ?—Yes. 253. Did you ever avail yourself of the opportunity to look at the file of papers ?—No. 254. You took no advantage of anything that would have unintentionally been exposed ?— Certainly not. 255. So far as Mr. Allport is concerned he never gave you any information whatsoever with reference to the records of the department ?—Never. 256. Or confidential reports of the department ?—Never. 257. Mr. Atkinson.] We have your correspondence with the department in already, Captain Yon Schoen?—Yes. 258. You have been complaining of things in general from 1891, and pretty well onwards ? Yes. 259. Complaining of the system and working for certificates ?—Yes. 260. Have a good many of your suggestions been adopted by the department ?—I think so. 261. Can you give us a few?— Well, there is the whole correspondence accompanying the examinations and appointments.

197

H.—26

262. Subsequent to the date of Captain Allman's appointment in 1894, you still had complaints to make ? —Yes, sometimes, but they were in some other parts of the colony other than in Wellington. Captains Edwin and Johnson were very good. 263. During the last few years have your complaints had special reference to Captain Allman ? —No. 264. Now, just a word or two on the occasion when Captain Edwin found you in the ex-amination-room. What sort of a room was it in which the examination was held?—An old shanty in those days—lB77. 265. Wa3 it used for other purposes? —The Custom-house was down below, the Post Office was down below, and there were a few old rickety rooms upstairs. 266. Was there anything to show it was an examination-room ? —Nothing particularly. It was varnished all round, with a table, and there was a room adjoining, I think, which had a glass-eye in it for the purpose of examining. 267. Was it a natural place to go to find Captain Edwin ?—You had to go through one room to get to the other, if I remember rightly. 268. That was in 1877 ?—Yes. 269. You were voyaging to Fiji a few years later? —Yes. 270. Who acted for you in your absence in regard to your money matters and family affairs ?— Well, Captain Edwin did, out of kindness. 271. Did he make any charge?— Certainly not, we were on the most friendly terms. 272. To whom did you remit money ? —To Captain Edwin. 273. And whom did you ask to look after your family and pay money into the bank for you ?— Captain Edwin. 274. You have reason to suppose that you still have his confidence ?—His utmost confidence. I consider Captain Edwin one of the best friends I ever had. 275. You think he was putting a lot of frill on when he made that remark the other day. You think as a matter of fact he did not fire you out ?—Fire me out, no. 276. As to this question of compass adjustment. You never had any monopoly ?—No, never. 277. Did you ever expect any ? —No. 278. Who had the running of the business of adjustment of compasses in Wellington ?—I believe before these regulations, which gave me a leg-in in the business, came into force, Captains Bendall and Turner were doing the business. I asked Captain Bendall for a leg-in and he said there was not £20 a year in it. Neither Captain Bendall nor Captain Turner was prevented from doing this. I was the best man in Wellington for this work at that time. Captain Strang afterwards qualified. 279. Did it ever occur to you that Captain Allman had deprived you of a monopoly worth £2,000 a year ?—Captain Allman said that if you took every iron ship that came to the colony, then there would be £2,000 a year in it. 280. Did it ever occur to you that Captain Allman had deprived you of a monopoly of £2,000 a year?— No. 281. It was about the middle of 1895 that Jones first came to you with regard to a service certificate ?•— About that time. 282. Just after passing the new Act, the Act of 1894 ? —Yes. 283. Did you, as a matter of fact, go and solicit him or did he come to you?—He came to me. 284. Did it occur to you from what he said that he did not want a certificate ?—He wanted it very badly. 285. He did not say it would not be of use to him ?—No, certainly not. 286. As to this statement of service You did not see Mr.- Williams's books to compile this statement from ?—No. 287. You had some instructions in pencil, which appeared to be a copy ?—From Jones. 288. Did you put this officially into the statement ?—Yes. 289. Did you make any falsification of them ?—What falsification of them ? What do you mean? 290. Do not take it that I mean to insult you, Captain Yon Schoen. Did you read the things actually on the official form, the substance of what was there in pencil draft ? —Yes. 291. Is it true that at that time—you heard Captain Jones's evidence—you were continually urging him to get this certificate?—l used to speak to him when I met him. I said, "Jones, what about that matter?" There were ladies interested in the matter. 292. Did you get ladies to work for him ?—Mr. Williams, 1 think, got the ladies to interest themselves in the matter, but never mind the ladies. 293. You knew that the application had been refused some time in 1895. Can you say what this document is [produced]?— Yes. 294. Is it in your handwriting ?—Yes. 295. Have you seen the original?— Yes. 296. Where did you take that copy from ? —I took it from the envelope in which Captain Jones's papers were. I believe he got the original back from Mr. Hamer, Private Secretary. 297. Who gave you this envelope?— Captain Jones read the letter he received from the Government, which was with his papers, to me. 298. When did you receive this copy? —At that time. I put it against a house in the street, and took the copy from the original. 299. This is the envelope with a red seal on it ?—I just took a copy and put it in my pocket. 300. Is that the very copy ?—Yes. 301. Who got the original?— Jones must have it. Then, I claim, your Honour, that I am entitled to put that copy in. I gave my friends notice yesterday.

H.—26

198

Judge Ward: Before this goes in we want to know what has become of the original. Mr. Atkinson : Well, Sir, the witness has sworn Captain Jones took it, and I have given Captain Jones notice. Judge Ward : What does Captain Jones say on the matter ? Was he asked whether he had that envelope ? Mr. Gray : Yes, Sir. Judge Ward : What did he say ? Mr. Gray : He does not know what has become of it; he does not know where it is ; it is not likely to have been preserved. It would be four years old now if in existence. Judge Ward : If there is no positive evidence we must take it for what it is worth. Mr. Hanlon : The last we know of it is that Captain Yon Schoen took a copy of it. Witness : I only took a copy of it, and it was returned to Captain Jones in the street. Mr. Hislop: Already a great deal of secondary evidence has been given in regard to that question. Mr. Hanlon : What is the good of putting in a document if you have the secondary evidence before the Commission ? Judge Ward : We will take it for what it is worth. Your client is entitled to refresh his memory with it, Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson : What is the usual practice with regard to a document of this sort, your Honour ? Judge Ward : A copy cannot be put ill unless satisfactory evidence is given that the original is lost. Mr. Atkinson: Notice to produce has been served upon three of the parties concerned, and I submit that that Judge Ward : We simply receive it as secondary evidence, and take your client's evidence for what it is worth. Mr. Atkinson : Your Honour will not take it as an equivalent of the original. Judge Ward : Certainly not, it depends entirely on the authority of your client. This is a, document which simply depends upon his veracity. Mr. Atkinson; Your Honour will allow me to put it in. Judge Ward : Yes, for what it is worth. [Copy put in.] 302. Dr. Giles.] You traced this, Captain Yon Schoen?—No, no; I simply copied it, there and then, in pencil. 303. Mr. Atkinson.} This document you copied from the original, Captain Yon Schoen. It reads, "Captain Allman, — Can anything be done to get over this difficulty? — E.S., 21/9/95." " I have carefully considered Captain Jones's case, and I regret to say that there is no possibility of overcoming the difficulty.—George Allman, 27/9/95." Were negotiations continued notwithstanding these minutes for the service certificate ? —I think so ; they were going on continuously. 304. Did you interview Mr. Seddon subsequently ? —Yes ; I thought Jones was badly treated, and I suggested to Jones that I go and see the Premier. I told the Premier I thought it was " cussedness "on the part of the Marine Department that the man did not get the certificate. I think he was blocked by someone. 305. Did you continue this in 1896 and 1897 ?—Yes, all the time. 306. Can you estimate the value of the work you did ?—Had I been a lawyer I would have charged £80 for it. 307. That would be six shillings and eight pence for every attendance?— Something like that. 308. Not being a lawyer, what do you think would have been a fair remuneration for your trouble ?—Not less than £20. 309. Were you present when the statement of Jones's service was signed? Did you take it to Mr. Williams ?—No, I was not present. 310. You just handed Jones a copy?—l handed Jones a paper, and he went himself. 311. As to the part payment, was there any agreement made with you as to payment at any time? —When Captain Jones mentioned this certificate of service, he said to me, " Well, if your negotiations are successful, if you can put me in the way of getting that certificate, I will give you £20." I said, " That is all right, Jones." I never asked him for any money.

Monday, 24th July, 1899. Captain Yon Schoen further examined. 1. Mr. Atkinson.] This compass-adjustment question, Captain Yon Schoen: in the alleged monopoly —Was there any short time during which you were the sole licensed Adjuster of Compasses acting in Wellington ?—You mean during the whole of the time that I have been an adjuster ? 2. Yes? —There were others had licenses all the time. 3. Was there any time in which you were the only one resident for the period ?—During the month of November, I think, I was the only man ; Captain Strang had gone to Dunedin. That was in November, 1896. 4. Captain Bendall had not got his license then ?—He got his in the beginning of December. 5. You had practically a monopoly for that month ?—Oh, yes. 6. How much was it worth ?—I could not tell you. 7. How many ships had you that month?—l could not tell you. About ten or eleven, I dare say.

199

H.—26

8. During November? —Yes. I know during the month previous I had three, and during the month after, one ship. After that, I believe, one ship a month ; sometimes two ships. Never more than that. 9. As to this question of payment in connection with your efforts for the certificate of service : that arrangement you made in 1895. Is that so ? —Yes. 10. Was it mentioned again before Jonea's examination in 1897 ?—No. 11. The subject of payment was never mentioned between you?— No. 12. Dr. Findlay asked whether you intended to pay back that money, and you answered, Yes. Had you considered the matter fully then ? —No. 13. I think you said you had never formed the intention before ? —No. 14. Had you had legal advice before when you answered Dr. Pindlay ?—No. 15. Have you had legal advice since? —Yes. 16. What is the effect of it?—My solicitor said I was a dashed fool for offering to pay the money back. 17. What is your present intention ?—I think I will leave it to my solicitor. 18. Then you gave no receipts for any of this money ?—No. 19. Were any receipts ever asked for ? —No. The money was always given in the streets, except the first £2, which was given in the house—the other payments were made in the open street. 20. Were Captains Bendall and McLellan your pupils ?—No. « 21. Did you show to either of them the working-out of the questions you had done for Captain Allman ?—Certainly not. 22. Have you shown anybody the working-out, or a copy of them, previous to the year they passed ? —No. 23. You mentioned on Saturday you worked it out very tine ? —-Yes, I worked it out fine. 24. Would you explain what that means? —Well, it means this. If Captain Allman had not provided me with the Imperial printed answer sheet—if I had been left to work the answers out in my own way—l could not have obtained the result asked on the answer-sheets. In one or two instances I have had to doctor the working to make it come right. Without that I could not have arrived at the results I did. 25. You had to adapt your working in order to get your right answer ? —Yes. 26. Supposing you had not the answer before you, you would not have had the answer you intended?— That is so. I had to " doctor" the questions. Of course, that question lam talking about, had it been worked one-thirtieth part, it would have passed the Board —the candidate would still have passed. I work out to the very minutest point. 27. Candidates would not be required to work it so fine ? —No. If I had been up for examination I would not have done it that way. 28. Do you remember when you were last employed as Nautical Assessor to the Government? —I am not perfectly certain. I think the last case I was Assessor on was the " Wainui." I think she was wrecked on the 12th or 13th of July, in 1897, at the French Pass. 29. You heard subsequently that Mr. Hall-Jones said there would be no more assessorships for you? —I have heard it said so. 30. What was that in consequence of?—ln consequence of the Hood affair. 31. You had no reason to expect Government favours after that?— No. 32. This " official information." There was no intimation from the department, but what you got from the Union Company's office ?—That is so. 33. Did you profess in that letter to Mr. Hood to cite any opinion that the office had expressed ?—What office ? 34. The officials in the Union Company's office. Read the last sentence, " Suffice for me to say that you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House." Was any opinion to that effect expressed to you in the Union Company's office?— What opinion? 35. The words you quoted? —I said the opinion I received was from the Union Company's officials. 36. Was the official information, " he ought to call at my house " ? —No, that was not official information. 37. The quotation-marks come in curiously, " suffice for me to say I think you will serve your interests most by calling at Trinity House "?—That obviously could not be the " official information," your Honour. 38. Do you recollect, now, having mentioned that matter to Mr. Allport ?—I do not recollect that; I might have done so. 39. Mr. Allport says when you mentioned that to him and he questioned you, you said, " Cannot I have official information of my own ?"—I do not remember it, but might have said so. 40. Captain Allman has charged you with offering him a bribe and holding out threats in order to have pupils passed ? —That is not true. 41. Can you give anything to account for either of these statements ?—-No. 42. Have you had any warm words, or anything like that?— Nothing of that sort. 43. You cannot think of anything?— No. 44. If anybody wanted information about the regulations from the Marine Department and went to the office next week about it, what officer would he see?— Mr. Allport, I should think. 45. If he wanted deviation-cards, what officer would he see? —He would see Mr. Allport, and possibly get them from somebody else if he was not there. 46. If he called about Assessor's work?—He would see Mr. Allport. 47. Supposing in those cases Mr. Allport were not there?—He would go home, I suppose. 48. There would be no one else there to get it from ?—Except cards.

H.—26

200

49. Occasionally you saw Mr. Allport there, because you had to be frequently there ? —Yes. 50. Jones, has said that you urged him to go up for his examination. Is that true? —That is not true. 51. Did you ever suggest it to him —that he should go up for a competency certificate? —Never. 52. He put the period as " May or June, 1897." Did you ever mention the subject to him in May or June, 1897 ?—No. 53. When was the subject first mentioned between you?—On the Bth July, 1897. 54. About what time ?—About 3 o'clock in the afternoon. 55. Who was it that first mentioned it ?—Captain Jones. 56. Did you say anything to him about qualifications in reference to certificates ?—Yes. 57. What did you tell him ?—I told him it was impossible to go up for a certificate of competency, because he had no mate's certificate. As the department had refused him a certificate of service, according to the regulations no person could be examined for any grade unless he has had two months at sea within the last two years or three months at sea within the last three years. I could see no possible way of his going up for examination. 58. What did he answer ?—Well, it did not matter. 59. Did he tell you he could get over the difficulty ? —Yes ; he thought so. 60. How?—He said he had just come from the Government Buildings, where he had seen Mr. Hall-Jones and Captain Allman. 61. And so he was all right ?—Yes. 62. Had you any dealings, directly or indirectly, with Captain Allman on the subject of this examination ?—None whatever. 63. Or with Mr Hall-Jones ?—I never knew Mr. Hall-Jones at that time by sight. 64. Or Mr. Allport ? —No ; certainly not. 65. And you first mentioned the matter to Mr. Allport about February, 1898, we have it ; and you say the matter cropped up then in a casuai conversation ? —You mean about what case ? 66. The Bendall and McLellan matter?— Yes. 67. There had been a general complaint about examinations from you. Had you gone there with any general intention about the matter ? —No ; for some deviation cards. 68. Then you said that you wanted to make matters better for the future—that is why you told Mr. Allport. Why did you bind him to secrecy ?—Because I did not want the thing to be made public. Mr. Allport had no information. 69. You mean, without getting other persons into trouble?— Yes. 70. How did the question crop up in your conversation with Mr. Hutoheson ?—I met Mr. Hutcheson one day at the Parliament Buildings—somewhere near Sydney Street and Charlotte Street —and it was in matter of conversation, you know. 71. Had he got some complaint against the department in hand at the time ?—I do not remember. 72. Do you remember how the subject came up?— No. 73. You do not remember at all ?—I knew Mr. Huteheson. 74. Did it arise in conversation, as with Mr. Allport, or had you gone to tell him ?—He was talking about Marine matters and nothing else. 75. Then you were talking about these matters, and this came in ?—Yes. 76. Did you mention any names to Mr. Hutcheson ?—No, no names of any kind. 77. Either at that or a subsequent interview?— Never any names. 78. Did you give him authority at this interview to disclose your name to any other person ? —Not at that interview. 79. Then, you did not bind him to secrecy ?—No, I did not. 80. He had no names to disclose ? —No, there was no necessity for that. 81. You gave some information to Mr. Pirani. Do you remember? —I do not remember. 82. Did you volunteer any information to Mr. Pirani ?—I do not remember; I might have done so. 83. Mr. Hanlon.] Would you mind giving me a sample of your writing with your left hand ? —I swear I never wrote with my left hand. 84. Would you mind trying to do so? —I will try, certainly. 85. Suppose you were to try and write these words, " Steam vessel?" —-[Witness then wrote the words " steam vessel" with his left hand. 86. That is very good ?—That is the first time I have tried. 87. You might do it again?—[Witness again wrote the words " steam vessel " with his left hand, and remarked, " This is a little more shaky than the other one." 88. You say you have never tried to write with your left hand before?—No; not in my life. 89. That is your first attempt ?— Yes. 90. Mr. Hislop.} Have the Government employed you within the last twelve months, Captain Yon Schoen? —I do not know about the Government, but I have adjusted the compasses of the " Tutanekai" at the request of Captain Post, on the 13th January of this year. 91. Anything else?— Nothing else. Of course it-lies with the captain to employ his men in the Government service. 92. Mr. Hanlon.] Is that the book you were going to produce?— Yes. [Captain Yon Schoen's calculation-book produced.] 93. Dr. Giles.] Will you point out the working? —The question is copied from the Imperial papers supplied to me by Captain Allman. There are all these sheets [witness referred to pages of his book], and here is tiie copy of the answer-sheet as supplied to me, with the numbers here showing it is Imperial.

201

H.—26

94. You have the answers, Mr. Hanlon ? Mr. Hanton : Yes. Dr. Giles : Well, the point is to look at this book and compare it with the answers. Witness : This is the work. I have copied it on to the sheet given to Captain AUman. 95. Dr. Giles.] Where are Captain Bendall's papers? Mr. Hanlon : Here they are, your Honour. 96. Dr. Giles.] Have you seen these papers'?—No, I have never seen those papers. lean only hand you the book. I may point out that the calculation is an examination in itself. It is on sheets in book form. 97. On blue paper ?—ln book-form. They are sewn together or placed togther. [Captain Bendall's papers examined.] Ido not see anything here corresponding with that book. 98. Mr. Hanlon.] You gave a copy of that to Captain Allman, Captain yon Schoen ? —-Yes. 99. Well, tha.t is attached to Captain Allman's first statement?—— 100. Dr. Giles.] What Mr. Allport was asked to examine was the candidates' answers and to compare them with your book ? —I left this book with him. 101. It was the candidates' calculations, was it not ?—That is what he said he had done. 102. Have we not those candidates' calculations in evidence? Mr. Hanlon : Those are the two sets of calculations before you, your Honour. Dr. Giles : There is nothing similar in them. Mr. Hanlon : Perhaps Mr. Allport can point the matter out. Mr. Allport: Here they are, your Honour. [Dr. Giles and Mr. Allport then compared the witness's book with Captain Bendall's exami-nation-papers.] 103. Mr. Hanlon.] There are some alterations that have been made in this book ? Dr. Giles : Mr. Allport says he knows there were some alterations in the working which were not produced in the book, but the results were the same. Witness : I may state this book has never been used since then, and whatever alterations made in it were made before. 104. Mr. Hanlon.] Were all the alterations here made prior to your working and copying— prior to your handing them to Captain Allman ?—I swear they were. 105. Is this [document produced] what you made up for Captain Allman ?—Yes. 106. Do you swear this is a true copy of what you have got in your book ?—lt ought to be. I believe—l am positive, because I copied it from there [book referred to] ;it must be ;it cannot be otherwise. 107. Did you wilfully make any alteration in any figure?— Certainly not. I copied what is here on to that sheet [document produced]. 108. As well as you could ? —Yes. 109. And you honestly believe it is a true copy?— Yes, the sheet that I got you. 110. What did you mean by speaking of " doctoring" ? —lt is such a small thing, you know. The questions here. These alterations were made [witness indicating the alterations to the Commission] by me. They are very small —only a minute, so as to come in with the answers given here at question 62. This is all in one; this should have been here 17° 7' —it should not have been 17° 7', it should have been one more or less, and that would have brought the result, you know. It would have come to 12° 49', but the man is allowed 30. 111. Then you doctored the working in order to make it fit the answer ?—To make it 12° 50' I thought it had better come one back. 112. Do I understand, then, that is not an absolutely true working of the problem ?—Not an absolutely true working of the problem. It would be a calculation in itself. No man would have an answer-sheet to get that result. 113. You had to get a certain answer, so you made certain working to fit it?— Only in this particular work. 114. Is that the working that you gave to Captain Allman?—Yes; whatever appears in this book must have been what I supplied to Captain Allman. I think I put a name on what I gave to Captain Allman. 115. Here is 17° 7', which compares with your book ?—The calculations in this book bring out the result, with my algebra. [Witness then explained his mode of working to Mr. Hanlon.] If he (the candidate) has done the same as I have done, he must have been a counterpart of mySelf. 116. You think if any person worked these things out the same way as you did it is a very singular coincidence ?—-It is a singular coincidence. 117. It is a simple way? —This could be worked by a dozen different books with different results. 118. What book have you used for this work?— The Admiralty Manual—Deviation of Compass. 119. Have you got Towson's Manual ?—I have. 120. Would you let me see it ?—Yes. [Towson's Manual produced.] 121. Is that Towson's Manual? —Yes. 122. Will you leave it here ?—Certainly. 123. Dr. Giles.] If you had not had the answers before you, you might have brought them out slightly different by your own working ?—Most decidedly; lam positive there. I had to try several methods to find out, or methods to arrive at, these results. 124. Would your own answers have varied greatly from the given ones if you had worked it entirely your own way ?—I would never have calculated to arrive at certain results, which I was quite safe in taking up from the book. 26— H. 26.

IL—26.

125. If you had just got your own answers out in your own way would they have differed greatly or very slightly? —Perhaps some 4, 5, 6, 7, or 10 minutes. 126. That would not be considered important in an examination ?—A sixth in compass-work ; you could not see it with a microscope. 127. Mr. Travers.] There is a limit of error in these calculations? —It is always understood in compass-deviation work we allow half a degree. These papers should be compared with the work which is on the file, because Captain Allman never had my book—he never saw my book. Captain J. A. H. Marciel sworn and examined. ~ , ; 128. Mr. Hanlon.] What is your name ? —James Alfred Henry Marciel. 129. What are you, Captain?—l am Examiner of Masters and Mates. 130. You are an Examining Master?— Yes; I hold a master's certificate. 131. I understand that certain examination-papers were submitted to you some time ago by the Marine Department?— Yes, they were. 132. When ?—At the end of December, 1898—last year. 133. Whose papers were they—who were the examinees ?—Captains Bendall and McLellan, and all candidates that have passed examinations since the 16th March, 1895—a1l candidates who have passed their examinations for all grades since then. Those papers I was instructed to look at with a view to determining if there had been anything that would look to be suspicious with regard to examinations. I will show you a letter I got. This is the first letter I received from Mr. Glasgow. It is addressed, first of all, to Sir Arthur Douglas, and then addressed to me, and this is a copy of my reply to it. The date is the 3rd of January, 1899. [Letter to Captain Marciel and reply thereto put in.] 134. Then, were the papers of Captains Bendall and McLellan submitted to you ? —They were. 135. Are these the papers, in files No. 11 and 12 ? —Yes. 136. Will you tell us what you discovered as far as Captain Bendall's papers are concerned ? —Yes. 137. Will you tell me what fault you had to find with Captain Bendall's papers?— Yes. Question A : I may say that in the written answers to the questions there was some inaccuracy in Captain Bendall's; and, in question 61 (b), the magnetic course gives us east-north-east. The compass course required, according to the candidate, was north 49° west, but should have been north 49° east. Of course, that would be an error which should have been corrected if the papers had been properly examined. I mean to say, that error should not have been allowed to remain on the paper. It was an oversight, I suppose. 138. That is one error ?—Yes. Then we come to question 61 (c). The compass course required was north-north-east, and the candidate gave as his answer the magnetic course required, south 38° east; it should have been north 37-J° east. So that was another error. There was a mistake in question 72, as well. 139. Will you tell me what fault you had to find with Captain McLellan's papers ?—Yes. In question 61 (c) the compass course given was west-north-west. The magnetic course required, according to the candidate, was north 75° east. It should have been north 76J° west. Then, in question 62, ship's head, by compass, is given as east-south-east. The resulting deviation is given as 20° 25' west. It should have been 30° 35' west. Then, in question 69, in finding the time, there is an error. There are also errors in questions 70 and 72. 140. Judge Ward.] But those errors would never show as errors to the candidate, and never be indicated by the Examiner, and under those circumstances there, would be nothing suspicious?— Quite so, your Honour. Then I come to 62. In question 62 in Captain Bendall's paper I found the course deviation on east-south-east in the answer column. I read it as 20° 25' west. It is worked as 30° 35', west, and it should have been 30° 35' west. In Captain McLellan's papers it is the same ; the work is 30° 35' west. Of course, your Honour, in my report I have alleged carelessness. Ido not know how these errors were obtained, and there may be some explanation. I point them out as things I cannot account for, and I thought it my duty to place the papers on one side. 141. Mr. Hanlon.] That same error occurs in both papers?— Yes. 142. Dr. Findlay.] Is the working-out shown?— Yes, and it comes to 30° 35', but it is written down in the deviation column as 20° 25. Of course in this paper of Captain Bendall's I may say. the figure may be either 2or 3—it may have stretched into the 3. I read it as 20° 25', and I shall not question it if it can be proved that it is 30° 35. ' ■» 143. Mr. Hanlon.] Are there any other errors common to these papers?—No, and if there be-anything in that error of a common nature to both papers that, in my opinion, would invalidate my confidence in the working of both papers. I have said in my report with regard to Captain Bendall's papers I am inclined to think that candidate had access to Towson, and I base my assumption upon the fact that the answers to minutes of these questions are almost identical with the answers of Towson; but that of days I might have taken exception to, because I have known a man to memorise and reproduce with almost identical accuracy the same questions; but, taking this particular instance, which I cannot honestly account for in my own mind, under these circumstances I was pressed to give an opinion in this particular case, and I gave the opinion I did. But I should like your Honours to understand the grounds on which I gave that opinion purely. That is,the only error that I have observed in both these papers. 144. : Dr. Giles.] Is there anything in Captain Allman's own examination sheets—is there anything corresponding there ?—lt is 30° 35' here, sir. In this paper that I have before me the answer is correctly stated at 30° 35. 145. Then, the presumption would be they did not have that to copy from at all events?— .J see 30° 35' is given correctly and the -20° 25' is in pencil. Of course I am a novice at this

202

203

H.—26

detective work, and it is a business that I try to get out 'of. The very fact of that 20° 25' being there I could not account for, because if the Examiner had recognised the error it seems to me that the thing would have been corrected. Certainly if the candidate had copied the paper he would undoubtedly have put down the 30° 35' in large red letters —nine hundred and ninety-nine out of one thousand would have done so. 146. Mr. Hanlon.] You were telling us about this very long answer in these papers. . You say that is almost identical with Towson's Manual? —Yes; but, of course, there is this about it: Candidates work at Towson's Manual day in and day out till they memorise it as nearly as.possible, and if they have exceedingly good memories they almost reproduce it with identical accuracy, and I should not reject any paper that was almost identical with Towson on that point alone;. but if I found other papers associated with that on this particular point it would be different. In this particular case the candidate had access to Towson. That is my opinion, and nothing more. 147. This is Towson's Manual, is it not?— Yes ; it is the supplement to Towson's. 148. Then, at page 99 this compass syllabus starts—viz.: " No 1. Describe an artificial magnet, and how a steel bar or needle is usually magnetized. An artificial magnet generally consists of a tempered-steel bar magnetized by the inductive action of another magnet, either natural or artificial. The load-stone and the earth itself are natural magnets. A very general method of magnetizing the steel bar or compass-needle is by means of a horse-shoe magnet; the needle to be magnetized is laid on a flat surface, and one of the poles of the horse-shoe magnet, when pressed on the needle, should be drawn from end to end. The other pole of the horse-shoe magnet should then be brought to the needle and drawn several times in the opposite direction. This process should be repeated on the other side of the needle, and care being taken in all cases that the same pole of the horse-shoe should be drawn.to the same end of the needle. Steel bars for correcting compasses and similar pieces of steel for compass-needles are also magnetized by drawing each half over the poles of a strong compound magnet or of an electro-magnet " ?—Yes. 149. Then No. 2, viz. : " Which end of the compass underneath your magnet is termed the red, and which the blue pole ? That end of the compass-needle or magnet which points towards the north when it is suspended so as to move freely in the horizontal plane is usually.termed the red, and the end which points towards the south is termed the blue " ?—Yes. 150. Then there is No. 3., viz. : " Which is the red magnetic pole of the earth and which the blue, and give the geographical positions ? The northern magnet-pole is termed blue, and. the southern red. The blue pole is in latitude 70° north and longitude 97° west. The red pole is about 74° south and 147° west" ?—Yes, I have examined these carefully, and many of them are to me as I have read them in this particular case. 151. What do you say about them ? —ln some of them there are very slight differences, and many of them are the same. If a man has free access to Towson he is a very foolish man if he does not copy it all down; so far as the sense is concerned, he can analyse the material. But an exceedingly clever man would so construe matters, I should imagine, that he would, while having the sense in view, change the. words. 152. You say, in the majority of these answers they are the same as the book ?—Yes, the Same as the book. 153. How many pages are there altogether —a large number, are there not ?—There would be ninety-seven questions to memorise, and you do not know what you would get. The numbers are set by the Examiner. He has a minimum discretion. 154. They go up to eighty-five ? —But not consecutively. There are not eighty-five of them. I will count them. There are fifty-three. 155. You say they are practically the same as the book ?—Yes. ■ . 156. Now, with regard to Captain McLellan's paper, will you tell us about that ?—The error common to the other papers appeal's in Captain McLellan's. The working on the margin is right, and the entering in the deviation column is wrong. 30° 35' is correct, and 20° 25' is incorrect. 157. Are there any other errors in Captain McLellan's papers?— Not errors common to both. 158. Errors that should have been detected ?---Errors that, if the examination had been strict, should not be there. In 61 (c) the compass course given is west-north-west. The magnet course required should be north 76° west, and the candidate has north 75° east, so there is east instead of west. Of course that is an error. . . ' . ' .. 159. A little bit out, too? —Yes; practically no one would do it. Then in question 62 the same thing occurs.. The work is. here in the margin 30° 35. There is a blot over the 3, but the addition must make it that. 160. It is 20° 25' in the deviation column ?—Yes. Well, then, in 69 the candidate, is required to get the sun's true azimuth, and in getting his apparent time at ship he states his time as 19 days 27 hours 46 minutes 46 seconds. He takes his longitude.as 3° 55' 20", and makes it 19° 51' 28". Pour from 27, is not 1.9. Ido not understand that. You will see that he gets an identical result within a second of that in the working of examination-paper to what he makes it here in spite of his error. Then in question 72 "the stars hour-angle" is wrongly calculated. 161. Will you refer to the questions?— Yes. Well, in these papers the same adherence to the text of Towson is not observable. At least I mean to say there are so many inaccuracies in the answers that I could give no opinion at to whether the thing had been copied or not. 162. I suppose there are so many errors that he did not copy ? —Yes. I think he would have been a very silly man if he did copy all the errors. 163. The same thing applies to Captain Bendall's papers?—He has not copied all the things from Towson's accurately. In my. opinion he had access to Towson, but another man might form a different opinion. . : . 164. Very well,, that is about all you. can tell us with regard to the papers of Captains Bendall andMcLellan? —Yes, that is all. ... .

204

H.—26

165. What can you tell us generally with regard to the other papers submitted to you ?—I examined all the other papers in the same light. 166. How many, about seventy or eighty?—l had tabulated forms drawn up which I attached my signature to, when I could see, in my opinion, there was no dishonesty of examination, and those others that I had any doubt at all about I laid on one side. 167. How many had you any doubt about ?—I think it was four. 168. Including Captains Bendall and McLellan?—No, without those. 169. Mr. Travers.] Would the witness give the names of the four he is about to mention ?—- Here is my report. 170. Mr. Hanlon.] Will you tell us how many there were you were in doubt about ?—Four. 171. Can you tell us why you doubted their examinations ?—Because I could not reconcile the handwriting. It seemed to me the handwriting in the chart problems was the Examiners'. As I was examining it with the view to determining the dishonesty, if there was anything that could be considered in any way dishonest, I laid them on one side for examination by an expert, and received a letter afterwards that they had been submitted to the Solicitor-General, and he had reported that they were a little suspicious—but not enough for criminality. I said, in my opinion, the candidate could not be blamed or his certificate invalidated; but that was only my opinion, of course. 172. Will you give us the names of those four? 173. Judge Ward.] Were these handwritings submitted to an expert?—l cannot say, Sir. I left the papers in the hands of the department, and they submitted them, but to whom I do not know. I received a letter from the department asking me for a further report, and in that letter they said it had been submitted to the Solicitor-General, and I presume he took the necessary precautions before giving his opinion—that they were without criminality. Mr. Hanlon: Does your Honour think it right these four men should be named ? Judge Ward : It would be as well that the names should not be published, but they could be given to the Commission. Mr. Hanlon : If the names were mentioned I think we would have to put in the examinationpapers. Judge Ward : You might ask the Solicitor-General for his opinion. If he has submitted the handwritings to an expert, then there is nothing more. The opinion of Captain Marciel seems to be that there is some difference in the handwriting. But, of course, that is merely Captain Marciel's opinion. Witness: Simply my opinion, your Honour. I was examining them, and it struck me with regard to the handwriting. 174. Mr. Travers.} I understand there is an examination for a certificate of competency for a mate as well as a master. Would you distinguish in these whether they were for a mate or master's certificate? There are four : were all four masters, or mates, or were they mixed?— One was on the 17th November, 1897, another was on the 7th November, 1898, another was on the 25th June, 1897, and another was on the 18th January, 1897. One took a master's hometrade certificate, another took a master's foreign-going certificate, another took a first-mate's certificate, and another a mate's home-trade certificate. 175. Those did not include Jones's case?— Fortunately, I had nothing to do with that case, Sir. 176. Dr. Findlay.] Dealing with these last four papers first: Your ground of suspicion is that the writing in the papers varies ?—My ground of suspicion is given in evidence. 177. lam asking you to repeat it. I want the ground of your suspicion with regard to the last four papers you mention ?—These last four papers are not put in yet, and I want to see the numbers. 178. Do you know the ground for which you suspected their bona fides ?—Yes. 179. Will you tell me ?—Without mentioning the names I will give them to you. In the first one, the mate home-trade, in his examination I found I could not reconcile the handwriting in paper examination 9 (c) with that of the candidate, a specimen of whose handwriting may be seen in his examination-papers, and will show in paper examination 9, for master, restricted limits. 180. Can you tell me what interval of time elapsed between the writing of those two papers. You compared this paper, I take it, with an earlier paper ?—Yes. 183. Do you agree with Mr. Allport, who has told us that the writing of these gentlemen generally varies from time to time ? —I could believe it. 184. According as the hands get softer from their different work. If they are in a sailing-ship their hands get thicker ?—Yes. 185. You do not rely upon this difference in the handwriting as any grave grounds for suspicion against the paper ?—No. I was asked to give my opinion upon a thing that might be construed into dishonesty of examination. 186. Though there is plenty of ground for saying the handwriting of sailors alters within certain intervals, and that might be reasonable ground for the handwriting in these papers ? I should say that is a very plausible explanation. 187. And that explanation will apply to all the papers with which you have been dealing?— Yes; if to one, to the whole. 188. When you made the examination of these papers it was for the purpose of stating anything upon which a suspicion might be hung?— Quite so, in my opinion. 189. Did you, at the time you made the inspection, know that this trouble, had arisen over Captain Jones's papers?—l did. 190. Can you give me an approximate date of your examination of the papers ?—1 can give you the date, I think. Well, I sent in the report on the 9th January, and I should think the

205

H.-26

examination was going on from about the 27th December; but I will not be sure of the date that I commenced on without referring. I examined the papers and sent in my report, but it is about the 27th December. 191. That was some days after the case was heard in the Magistrate's Court, on the 24th. You sent your report in on the 27th January ?—No ; the 9th January. 192. You sent it in on the 9th January ? —lt is dated the 9th January. 193. At that time you knew of the allegations made against Captain Allman with regard to Captain Jones's papers ?—Yes. 194. You knew you were asked to make an inspection for detecting further irregularities?—■ And I was as keen as I could be in my examination. 195. Now, Captain Marciel, as you have made this very keen inspection, you find in none of the papers more than ground for suspicion ? —No, I do not. 196. Out of how many cases in all?— Seventy or eighty, roughly speaking; they are all tabulated, if you want them. 197. You were fair enough to admit that these sailors sitting for examination have been known to commit Towson's book to memory?— Yes. 198. Do you know that one of these candidates, Captain McLellan, used to pride himself upon being able to recite word for word large portions of Towson's book—that he has done so on the wharf to wharf clerks ?—I cannot say I have. Judge Ward : The curious part of the thing is, Captain McLellan is the one who made so many errors. I understand Captain Marciel to say in Captain McLellan's examination there are a number of blunders which show, even if he had this memory, that he had forgotten a good deal of it. Witness : That is so. 199. Dr. Findlay.] Would you suggest that if the books were available in the room the papers would present the character they do ? Supposing the candidate had Towson's book there, would blunders that you mention have been reasonably expected ?—I should not think they would. For instance, if you or myself were using a book we should copy accurately. 200. The fact that these blunders do occur in these papers is some grounds to suspect they had Towson's book in the room ?—I expressly stipulated it should be so. 201. You find that the 30 has taken the place of the 20, or vice versd, in some of the answers. I suggest to you that the candidates sometimes work out the working in pencil, and then, having worked out in pencil, copy from their working into the examination-papers. Do you know it is not unusual for a candidate to be permitted to work out in pencil, and then copy from this into his examination-papers ?—He should not do it; Ido not let him do it. 202. Captain Allman has permitted his examinees to do the rough work in pencil, and afterwards to copy it on to the examination-papers. Would not that transcript from the pencil notes to the examination-papers (in the chart-work) be allowed ?—Yes, the candidates very frequently do write in pencil and then write their answer down; then you have to make them rub it out and put the answer in. 203. Assuming the work is done in pencil first, and then copied from the pencil to the examination-paper, that might account for such blunders as you have told the Commissioners— about 20 taking the place of 30 ?—You are confusing the chart-work with the other. 204. You understand the explanation I am endeavouring to suggest. Is that not a fair explanation of such blunders ? —lt would be in chart-work. 205. It would not affect the other work? —In the other work the corrections are in ink. 206. I suggest in the examination-room it is done in pencil and then copied. Assuming that were done, would it not afford some explanation of these blunders you have told the Commissioners about ? —lt might. 207. If Captain Allman gives that explanation, you would believe him if he said so?— Yes. 208. Dr. Giles.] There were no other examinations for compass-deviation except Captains Bendall and McLellan's?—Yes, others, and very well done. 209. Mr. Atkinson.] Do you regard pencil notes on the face of the papers themselves as suspicious circumstances ?—Well, of course, anything that is not allowed strictly by the regulations is irregular. 210. Did you notice that a pencil could be traced round the edges of the ink in some of those papers ? Did you notice whether there was any pencil tracing in any of the four papers of which you were suspicious ? —What papers do you mean ? If you talk about a compass-paper and then a chart-paper you will be getting a wrong answer from me. 211. You noticed it in the chart problems and failed to notice it in the others. You did not think that suspicious ? —No. 212. Did you notice a fault in any of the other four papers, or any of the others you set aside ? —Yes. I noticed that a question had been left in in pencil. Of course, it was not regular. 213. Is that not among the four? Is this one [examination-paper produced] the same one as you referred to the Solicitor-General ?—One of those. 214. You got his opinion. There was no criminality?—l got that through the department. 215. What was the next? —I will read it to you: "Marine Department, Wellington, 27th January, 1899 (No. 144/99). — Sir, —With reference to your letter of the 9th instant reporting the result of your examination of the papers submitted to you, I have to state that in regard to the eases" —and here the cases are mentioned—" the Solicitor-General reports that he agrees that there are grounds for suspicion affecting these, but nothing to indicate criminality. He thinks they would be subjects for inquiry into the conduct and nature of the examinations, and observes that there

H.—26

206

should be special reports by you as to whether the papers show such a knowledge on the part of the candidates as entitled them to certificates. I have, therefore, to request that you will furnish a report on this. I enclose a copy of your report in question in case you have not one, and I forward under separate cover by registered parcel the examination-papers, which should be returned to me in a similar manner. —I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant (Sd.) W. T. Glasgow, Secretary." This is addressed to " Captain J. A. H. Marciel, Box 92, Post Office, Christchurch." 216. Mr. Atkinson.] You did not find any other circumstances to justify suspicion in regard to that candidate ?—No. I will read my reply to it. 217. Before you read it, were you able to conduct any further inquiry before looking into the papers themselves ? —What do you mean ? 218. Did you conduct any further inquiry into the methods of this particular examination?— Clearly I did. I had instructions to do it. Before I replied I conducted certain inquiries. 219. What inquiries did you pursue ? —Well, I went over the papers again. 220. Any inquiries other than looking into the papers ?—I went over the papers again and made a report. 221. And did you conduct any other inquiries besides looking over the papers again?—-No other inquiries. 222. Will you read your reply now ?—Yes —viz.: " Sir, —I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter (No. 144/99) of the 27th January instant, also the receipt of the four examination-papers therein enumerated. I note that the Solicitor-General observed that there should be special reports (by myself) as to whether, in other respects, the papers show such a knowledge on the part of the candidates as entitled them to certificates. I will deal with the four caaes seriatim. (1.) This candidate has not passed his examination because (Ex. 3), examination 9 (c) is wrong. (I may say these are compound addition sums or subtraction), and (Ex. 1) examination 9 (f) is wrong. These errors, if uncorrected #s at present, would constitute a failure. His chart answers examination 9 (c) are doubtful as to handwriting. Clearly, with these errors standing uncorrected, this candidate should not have passed. These errors, however, have evidently been passed by the Examiner, —see examination 9 (h)— and the candidate may have had no opportunity to correct them. (2.) —I.M.P.G. In examination 6 there is the error of the compass and deviation found by the line azimuth, which does not correspond with that found by the altazimuth, and as it stands would constitute a failure. The candidate may have had no opportunity to correct this error, as it has been passed by the Examiner as correct. I have alluded to the apparent discrepancy in the handwriting of examination 9 (c). (Ex. 3, 1, 2.) (3.) Except for the handwriting on the examnation 9 (c), already referred to, and the candidate's spelling in his answers to compass questions, I should not demur to his papers. (4.) Master's H.P.—This candidate failed on the 30th December, 1896, and was re-examined on the 18th January, 1897, but not de novo. There appears to have been a special report made to the department by Captain Allman on this examination (14/1/97). A portion of the papers, New Zealand, examinations 9 (c) and 9 (/), were done on the 29th December, 1896, and readmitted as work done on the 18th January, 1897. This is not allowed by the regulations, but the matter may have received treatment in the special report referred to. In my opinion, it is a highly irregular proceeding, and forms a bad precedent. The above embody, my objections to the subject-matter of the examination-papers quoted. I, of course, can say nothing to the very important portion of the examination which is conducted vivd voce, and which would materially influence my judgment in pronouncing an opinion as to the fitness of a candidate to hold a certificate obtained where such laxity of examination has been present. In conclusion, I would point out that the certificate may have been obtained with the cognizance of the Examiner and without criminality. Under these circumstances, Ido not see how the candidate can be blamed or the certificate invalidated." 223. If after a question is returned, and the second answer is wrong, would that fail a candidate? —Some discretion is given to the Examiner, and if a candidate's work is exceptionally good, and the error most trivial, personally I should be inclined to give the candidate another opportunity. As you will see from the regulations, every Examiner is allowed some discretion. 224. Of course you could speak with regard to the case before you as to whether you would consider it reasonable discretion?— Yes. 225. Dr. Giles.] No cases were referred to you of rejected candidates, were there ?—Yes, your Honour. 226. Mr. Atkinson] Was there anything in this paper to show exceptional excellence of work? —There was no particular excellence. The errors were two in that paper, and they would come within the discretion of the Examiner. 227. Then you took it that there was not sufficient evidence on the face of the papers to justify a criminal charge? —I did not take it in that way. My duty was to ascertain, according to the best of my belief, whether there had been dishonest examination, and I reported accordingly. 228. But, of course, the Solicitor-General's opinion is that there would be not evidence enough to support a charge in a Court of law ? —Yes. 229. As to those questions which you had suspected on the ground of difference in handwriting, you answered to Dr. Pindlay that sailors' handwriting varies?—l answered in a very qualified way, but according to my belief. 230. But I suppose the handwriting would not vary very much during three hours in an examination-room ?—Not being an expert, I am not in a position to speak about handwriting. 231. Are you perfectly familiar with this compass-deviation work that you were asked to test? —I think I am fairly well up in it. 232. What was your procedure when the papers were sent to you. Did you set about working out the answers yourself?— Yes, whenever I had a doubt I worked them out. Of course, I explained clearly to the Secretary for Marine that I could not undertake to work out the answers

207

H.—26.

in every paper. I was expected to look through the papers with ordinary intelligence, and if I came across anything suspicious I was to report the matter. You see, if you have to test the accuracy of a paper absolutely and scientifically, you would need to work out the problems in every conceivable way that is known to us, whether the result is the same or not. Different processes might land you in a different result ?■—Yes. t ,-jij 234. How many processes would it be susceptible of?—I should say, two or three. 235. A complete test would involve such labour that you did not think it was worth while ?— I think you could form a judgment without going into the papers minutely. The question was whether the candidate had passed his examination or had not. 236. Was that the only question ? —And as to whether they had passed it honestly or not. 237. Was not that the whole question to be considered?—-The two things were inseparable; one superimposed upon the other. 238. You have admitted already that, as a test of fraud, the common error of decimals would be just as significant as an error in millions ?—Quite so ; yes. 239. You did not seem to put yourself in a position to apply that test?— Well, I have indicated a suspicion. The sheeting-home of fraud is not in my line. 240. You heard Captain Yon Schoen's evidence ?—I heard a part of it. 241. You heard him allude to the fact that once or twice he had to try the working in order to bring out the answer ?—Yes. 242. You are not in a position to say whether that is correct or not, because you have not worked with that point in view?— No. 243. What would be the probability of three men working independently, making one mistake only, and making that mistake in precisely the same figure ?—lt would be a few millions to one. 244. If you had found the , same mistake running through three candidates' papers, you would have reported, without doubt ?—I would have reported it as a highly suspicious circumstance. 245. Does it occur to you, Captain Marciel, if you were asked for really exact information, that further research into those papers is really necessary ?—Well, I do not know. I realise the possibility of the necessity for further research. If it is considered that further search were needed, I would only be too delighted to make it. The truth is what we want. 246. Mr. Travers.] Is the syllabus, as used here, similar for the purpose of the deviation of compasses and adjustment—is it the same as that given in the second part of Towson?—l think I may say that they are the same. 247. A number of questions seem to be the same?— The language is the same; I embodied that in my report. 248. If a person committed the answers given in Towson to memory, and was able to put them opposite to the question syllabus used here, they would be proper answers to those questions?— Yes ; provided that his memory served him aright.

John Hutcheson sworn and examined. -, 250. Mr. Travers.] Do you know Mr. Allport ?—Yes. 251. Have you known him long?— For about nineteen years. 252. Have you had intercourse with him in connection with the department ?—When I was in the Government steamers I had to see him occasionally about affairs of the department. 253. Now, what opinion did you form of him as an officer ? Did you form any opinion; if so, what?— From my knowledge of Mr. Allport, I have always regarded him as my ideal of what a thoroughly honourable officer ought to be. Mr. Atkinson.] You have had considerable experience in nautical matters, Mr. Hutcheson ?—I have had some. . v 255. How many years have you been in Wellington ? —-I arrived here early in 1881, just ■: immediately after the new year. 256. You are pretty familiar with the working of the Marine Department as an outsider ?—: I was in the Government steamers for some years in different capacities. 257. I want to get from you the circumstances under which you made your speech in the House of Representatives on the 26th August last—the information from which you spoke ?— There were several matters that I had occasion, to complain about, gleaned from a variety of sources, and as the debate in the House was progressing I had a conversation with Captain Yon Schoen, the result of which was that he communicated certain information to me, and that information (after satisfying myself of its veracity) I incorporated with the other matter I had to complain of, and made my speech in the House. 258. How did this conversation arise—did Captain Yon Schoen seek you out at your own office ?—Being " brothers in the cloth," we generally had conversations when we met. I do not know that I attached any particular significance to the interview at which he disclosed this information to me—not more than any other casual occasion. 259. Did he ask you to bring it before the Legislature ?—He authorised me to make use of it. : 260. Did he mention any names to you on that occasion ?—No, he refused to do it. 261. That was before you spoke?— Yes. 262. Did he disclose the names subsequently, after you had made the speech ?—Not at any time. 263- As a matter of fact, were you able to infer from his information to you whom the persons were concerned ? —I had no reasonable suspicion as to the identity of the persons concerned until ; the progress of the departmental inquiry was well on foot. Up to that time I had not even a reasonable suspicion. •

H.—26

208

264.—W0u1d this be in January that the departmental inquiry was held ? —lt must have been early in the year, or very late in December. 265. —Is Captain Jones a friend of yours? —Well, I have been on most friendly terms with him ever since I have been in Wellington, and the friendship, as far as I was aware, had not diminished even of late times. 266. Did you tell him that if you had known that he was the man concerned you would never have spoken about it?—No, I did not. I would like to make a statement of what is my clear recollection of the words or the sense of what I said on a certain- occasion. I have not had any conversation, either spoken or by communication in writing, with Captain Jones, but on one occasion since the matter was first referred to by me. That occasion was on one particular Saturday afternoon, just after the Magisterial inquiry, when a picnic of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters was being held at Day's Bay. I was invited to that picnic, and while going to the steamer " Duchess " at the steamboat jetty, Captain Jones was standing opposite the gangway of his steamer at the other side of the wharf, and he beckoned to me to come over from the gangway, just as I was going on with my wife. He held out his hand as I approached him, and he had a kind of subdued smile on his face, and he said " Well, old man, I am very grateful to you for your expression of good-will towards me that I have heard from some mutual friends." I was engaged shaking hands with him at the time, and he said " Whatever happens, I hope the friendship will make no difference between us." I then said "So far from my desire to do you a personal injury, I believe I would go considerably out of my way to do you a good turn. I was actuated by no personal feeling, and certainly not by any malice in the action I took. I was not aware that it was you, as to who was concerned, until close on the Magisterial inquiry." What inference he drew from that I do not know, but I am positive I never said to any one that had I known it was him I would never have brought the matter up. 267. After you had made your speech did the Minister, or any of them, send for you to ascertain where you got your information from ?—No Minister has ever sent for me on any occasion in reference to this, and without I made it my business I cannot say they were extremely pleased to see me—that was my impression. 268. How long after your speech in the House would it be that you saw them ?—I think I spoke on a Friday, and on the Saturday afternoon—l was authorised in the interim by Captain Yon Schoen to see the Premier —I waited, without solicitation from the Premier, on the Premier. 269. That was on the day after? —I think so. 270. Had you any authority from Captain Yon Schoen to reveal the name of your informant ? —I was authorised by Captain Yon Schoen to put the Premier and Captain Yon Schoen into touch with each other, in order that they might make any arrangements they thought fit. I was not authorised on Captain Yon Schoen's behalf at all to give information, but I was to say to the Premier, " If you desire to know all about the thing in the shortest possible time, and to have all the proof which my informant has, put before you, I am prepared to submit his name to you." And I certainly had the impression that the Premier promised me that he would send for him. 271. Was this at the first interview?— Yes, but immediately after the speech in the House the Premier and I met in the lobby, perhaps it would be about 12 the same night, or early on the following morning, and he said, " Well, old man, you have either said too much or too little." And I said, " When I am prepared to reveal further information to you I will do it, and if I can judge of what I have heard, Ido not think I have made any mistake, lam sure lam right." And then, of course, the next day the interview. 272. Then did you take it that the Premier promised to send for Captain Yon Schoen in consequence of what you told him ?—Yes, my impression was clear on that point. lam not saying that he said in specific words, " I will send for Captain Yon Schoen," but it certainly left that impression upon me. 273. Did you regard it as a condition of your disclosing the name, that the Premier should put himself into communication with your informant ?—Yes, for this reason : I quite recognised the injustice and the injury that it would inflict upon many holders of New Zealand, certificates. 274. You are interested yourself as a holder of a certificate ? —Yes, I have a first mate's certificate. 275. Did you think the publication of the facts in the House would have a damaging effect on the holders of certificates ? —No ; it is not until the thing is thoroughly before the people that they take any notice of it. Even the most illuminated statements of members of Parliament do not receive much notice. They do not read Hansard. 276. As long as the statements were not specific, they would not have a prejudicial effect?— I think not. 277. What led you to make the charge in the first instance?— The continued dissatisfaction at what I considered to be the Minister's ineptitude in fixing these matters up. 278. Had you any specific grounds of complaint against the department?—l thought I had. 279. Will you mention some ?—I submitted very fair proof that no exact record was kept of the discharging of our uncertificated seamen. When a seaman happened to lose his certificate of discharge, he could not be furnished with an official duplicate, and when he went up for examination he was unable to be examined, because he had not the necessary testimonials. To rectify this, I advocated the appointment of officers, to be called " Shipmasters " or " Superintendents of Mercantile Marine." 280. Have those officers been appointed ?—They have, I believe. 281. Judge Ward.] The Commissioners will be glad to hear expert opinions as to how the law might be amended. Is that the only case you can mention, Mr. Hutcheson ? —Well, I had an accumulation of grievances, your Honour, that I failed to get redress for.

209

H.—26

282. Are there any other grievances that you would like to mention ? —Well, I think the seaman ought to be put into direct contact with his employer per medium of some permanent responsible official, not by a licensed procurer. That was one of the grievances. Licenses were given to men who were not properly responsible to procure seamen to be shipped, and very many and grave irregularities—instances of which I quoted in large numbers to the Minister —occurred. I wanted procurers abolished, and I wanted a proper Government official to be the only medium between the seaman, the shipmaster, and owner. I also wanted the Minister of Marine to cause a more vigorous inspection of the seaworthiness of sailing-vessels. Of course steam-vessels are regularly inspected by a fairly qualified man at intervals, but sailing-vessels are subject to no such examination until such time as a protest is made by the crew. There is sufficient reason for the crew refraining from doing so owing to the fact that when they get on the high seas the master of the vessel is practically master of their fate. The department should take the initiative and appoint a man to inspect the vessels as to seaworthiness, loadline, finding, top-hamper, accommodation, equipment, &c. There is no person at present to look after the interests of the men. The underwriters had some interest in the matter, but seamen are very doubtful as to the interest taken in the safeguarding of their lives by the underwriters. It is often a question of business with them. I made very strong representations to the Minister about this matter, and I thought he should initiate some reform. I also wanted him to have the crews of foreign-going vessels mustered immediately before they sailed. I gave specific cases of vessels leaving without the proper number of men. There were cases where a ship was allowed to go into the stream with nominally a full number of men on the articles; but the desertion of some of the crew was connived at. Whether it was connived at by the shipmasters, or whether it was never intended they should turn up, are open questions. The result usually was that the vessel would go away shortJianded. I drew the Minister's attention to this also. All these were causes of complaint with me, and the time arrived when I had to speak about them. 283. Mr. Atkinson.] Did you make specific charges on these matters, or any of them, to the Minister of Marine?— Some I made privately, some personally, and others by deputation, and in writing, both by myself and jointly with the secretary of the Seamen's Onion. 284. What success did you have ?—ln some cases the whole thing was pooh-poohed, or simply ignored, while cases which could have been proved were allowed to drag on until the Statute of Limitations precluded us from taking action. We have the files on record in the Seamen's Union. 285. Can you give us any particulars about this procuring of seamen you speak of? —Well, I pointed out to the Minister of Marine that there was a licensed procurer in Wellington, and it was well known, although I will not undertake to prove it, that he was acting in conjunction with a sailors' boardinghouse-keeper. We had more than a suspicion, it was a belief, that the tout of the boardinghouse-keeper induced crews of foreign-going ships to desert their vessels here, and then they were accommodated at the boardinghouse until their vessels had gone. Ultimately they would be drafted on to another vessel similarly deprived of its crew. I contended for the abolition of licensed procurers and the appointment of Government officials. The procurers impounded the discharges of seamen. In fact, one of them told me that he did impound discharges from seamen, because, in his opinion, a seaman was not respectable, or was not a sober man. He took the' discharges from them on the most trivial pretexts, and kept them in his possession. I drew the attention of the Collector of Customs to the fact. The procurer had retained, I suppose, over a hundred discharges. I saw them in his possession; he pulled them out of pigeon-holes in his office, and there must have been over a hundred of them. I pointed out the illegality of his holding these things at all. I accused him of manipulating the discharges, and giving them to incompetent men. For a fee he foisted these men on the travelling public as qualified men, whereas some of them were costermongers from Whitechapel, or some refugees from the slums of London. One of these particular cases was amongst those which the department had allowed to hang fire. The man made no pretence of being a seaman. He had only made a single voyage. He made a declaration before the Collector of Customs that he was an able seaman, and he was furnished with a permit. The man shipped on a coastal steamer. The Seamen's Union was going to take a case against him for making a false declaration, but he left the vessel and the country. This was one case that the department did not take before the Court until such time as we were outside the limit of the law. ■286. Was it against the law to keep the discharges? —Yes. I think he gave them to the Collector of Customs afterwards. Ido not know whether he gave them all up. 287. Did you mention this case to the Minister?— Yes; I went personally to the Minister. 288. Were there any prosecutions instituted?— There were. I think one man was fined by Mr. Eyre Kenny, S.M., who told the man that if he did not make himself scarce in the meantime, there would be much more serious trouble. 289. Was that for the illegal holding of discharges?— Yes. They first secured their right to a discharge by swearing an affidavit, and receiving a permit to go as able seamen. 290. Was the procurer prosecuted in that case ?—No; I think not. His license has since been cancelled, or renewal was refused. 291. There have been no prosecutions of procurers that you know of ?—No. 292. There were cases of refusals to grant certificates brought before the Minister by yourself ? — Yes ; there was one young man who presented himself for examination as first mate. His name was Walley. He was refused examination by, I believe, the Chief Examiner, and also on the advice of the Crown Law Officers, but against the advice, I understand, of the Marine Department. The candidate has since been upheld in his contention in his right to be examined by the Marine Department of the Board of Trade. The Marine Department, at my instance—through the Premier, I believe —communicated his case to the Board of Trade, and asked for a ruling; and 27— H. 26.

11.-26

210

five months afterwards the young man was given permission to sit. In the meantime, however, he was ruined. 293. Do you mean that they would not grant him permission to sit for his examination? —It would have been in accordance with the custom that had been uniformly followed, but after my speech, and against the decision of the department, he was refused permission to sit. 294. Judge Ward.} There is another matter upon which we should like to ask your opinion, Mr. Hutcheson, and that is with respect to the employment of boys and apprentices on board vessels. With the evidence at present before us, it appears that there are very few boys employed on our New Zealand vessels. A considerable number of the men are obtained in Sydney or elsewhere ? —I simply attribute the non-application of youths for sea employment to the one fact—that the most of. our mercantile marine work within New Zealand is done by steamers. Steam vessels are not good training-grounds for boys. They are taught nothing of seamanship—they are simply sea labourers. Our fleet of sailing vessels is limited, and we do not have many foreign-going vessels coming to New Zealand. There is no field for our New Zealand youths unless they want to become sea labourers. There is no inducement for our boys to go to sea, because the emolument paid to them as sea labourers is very small. They can earn more by selling newspapers ashore than by going to sea. 295. Dr. Giles.] Why was any legislation wanted to restrict it if there is no inducement ?— My personal opinion is that the idea was to limit the number of young inexperienced lads on board the steamers, with due regard to the fact that there is not so much expert training or skill required as in the old sailing ships. Steamers have not the means of training apprentices on board; they should be trained on sailing-ships. You cannot train them on steamers, because they have no seamanship to do. 296. Judge Ward.} But the fact is that the sailing-vessels are fast becoming obsolete, and there are very few chances for a boy to learn now. Then you have no suggestion to make with respect to the apprentice question ? —My honest opinion is this : that our youths have no desire to go to sea whatever. We say, " Let the Dutchmen run the ships, because it is only fit for Dutchmen and foreigners." There is no romance in the sea now, your Honour. 297. Mr. Atkinson.} Do you know whether Captain Allman was in the House ?—-To the best of my belief I thought I saw Captain Allman sitting over on the secretarial benches, alongside the Speaker's chair. . 298. What time was that ?—About the 26th August. It would be between 11 and 12 at night. 299. Dr. Findlay.] You told Mr. Atkinson that you knew something of Captain Jones? —Yes. 300. Do you recollect a man named Cooper, who is a licensed procurer of seamen ? —Yes. 301. Do you recollect being in company with Mr. Cooper on a day upon which you met Captain Allman, some time in the early part of 1897, and your mentioning to Captain Allman that in your opinion you thought Captain Jones was entitled to his service certificate ?—No ; I have no such recollection that even Captain Jones had any desire for it, or had made application for it, until Captain Yon Schoen communicated the affair to me. 302. Do you contradict the suggestion that I make advisedly that in the early part of 1897 you spoke to Captain Allman and you told him that in your opinion Captain Jones was entitled to his service certificate?—l have no hesitation in saying that I never said that to Captain Allman. 303. Did you ever speak to Captain Allman about Captain Jones?—l may have done so unconsciously, but attached no importance to it. It is a matter which I would recollect. 304. Captain Allman's recollection, he says, is very clear. He spoke to you early in 1897, and then you asked him to consider Captain Jones's claims to a service certificate ?—Never. I am positive that the subject was never mentioned to me. 305. Could you recall any topic of your conversation with Captain Allman about Captain Jones ? —No ; and I think I should remember if I had from the fact that I had so very few conversations with Captain Allman in my life, amounting in all to not more than two or three. It is almost certain that I could recollect the topic, and that topic is certainly not in my mind. 306. You may have had conversations with Captain Allman about Captain Jones; I want to know whether you know what the topic was ?—I do not know whether I had any conversation about Captain Jones, further than that Captain Jones's name may have been mentioned in parsing reference or in the way of ordinary conversation, but I am certain Captain Jones's affairs were never made a topic of conversation between us. 307. Captain Yon Schoen spoke to you some time prior to August, 1898? —Yes; that is my recollection. 308. Can you recollect how long before you made the speech in the House ? —I think a number of days. I think the first reference might have been a week before. 309. That was the first intimation you had from him of these irregularities ?—Yes ; I believe so. 310. In the course of his conversation with you then, did he tell you that he had explained the whole matter to Mr. Allport ?—No; he was not so full as that. He did say that he had submitted the manuscript-book to Mr. Allport with an indication to him [pointing to a certain folio] to look up and compare it with certain examination-papers. 311. Did he tell you that Mr. Allport had looked through those papers and had concurred with him that there was something wrong?— Yes, I think I can recollect the exact words he used. I said, " I will call again in the course of a day or so, and you will see." I went back next day or the following, and all I said to Mr. Allport was : " Well, are you satisfied; am I right ? " and Mr. Allport replied, " I am sorry to say you are." Those are the very words, as near as I can recollect.

211

H.—26

312. When he explained this to you, did he place you under any obligation to keep it secret? —My impression was and always has been that I was fully authorised to use as much information as he gave me, but he most persistently refused to disclose the names of the individuals concerned. That I always regarded as his safeguard. I looked upon it that he considered it was his safeguard in preserving the incognito of the people. 313. As soon as you made the exposure in the House you thought inquiry would be made, and that the names would have to be divulged?— Yes, that would be the result. . 314. Did you mention that to Captain Yon Sohoen—that that would be inevitable ?—I had promised to be guided by him, and to do nothing without his sanction, and he permitted me stage by stage to make the necessary disclosures ; and, as I have already said, he authorised me to go to the Premier and tell him so. 315. At the first interview he told you you could use the information as you thought fit'?— Yes, that is so. 316. There was no laxity of any confidence? Did he tell you that he had Mr. Airport's bond of secrecy ?—I do not know that he told me at the first interview; Ido not think he did. 317. Did you ask him? —I do not think he told me that he had made a confidant of Mr. Allport. 318. He submitted the papers to Mr. Allport, you told us ? —But at which interview, I am not sure, he told me that. lam inclined to think that when he gave me the information I was not aware he had made a confidant of Mr. Allport. ... 319. You would be in ignorance that he showed the papers at all? —Yes, at the first interview. 320. When you were aware that the matter had been mentioned to Mr. Allport, did he say that Mr. Allport was under a bond of secrecy ?—No, it did not occur to me to ask him. 321. Would it not occur to you that if Mr. Allport knew, he would in turn, and in his duty, report to his superior officer ?—No, I did not think what the relative positions of the different people were ; and I did not know the significance of the confidence until some time later on —until, probably, when the departmental inquiry was on. 322. You were not made aware at the first interview between you and Captain Yon Schoen that Mr. Allport knew six months before of the whole of the circumstances connected with this Jones examination ?—To the best of my recollection, I did not know. 323. Did Yon Schoen tell you of what part he had played in the matter—of the modus operandi by which this was carried through?— Yes, he did. He told me that he took his pupil's hand in his and guided it over the work. 324. Did he tell you that there had been any arrangement of any kind between him and the Examiner, by which these papers were to be accepted ?—Certainly not; he never told me that. 325. Did he explain to you any reason why he thought these papers would be accepted by the Examiner? —His explanation was this : " My pupil assured me that if he got his papers made out ' by hook or by crook,' he would get the Examiner to receive them ; that he would take the responsibility of it." Captain Yon Schoen said, out of pure mischief, to see if such a thing were possible —"in a spirit of mischief, as it were, I thought I would try, and I prepared them for him." 326. Did he tell you also that in a spirit of pure mischief he took £17 from the man?—l do not know anything about that. 327. That was the story he told you, Mr. Hutcheson, that in a spirit of pure mischief he did this for Captain Jones. "If you manufacture the papers by hook or by crook it will be all right ? " —Yes, "It will be all right if you make out the papers ; I will get the certificate." 328. In other words, that the idea originated with Captain Jones, and not with Captain Yon Schoen ? —So I understood from Captain Yon Schoen, that Captain Jones took the initiative in the matter. 329. You have heard the evidence throughout this inquiry ?—I have read it closely in the Press. 330. You believe that Captain Jones originated this fraud?—l am not really prepared to give an opinion. . 331. Mr. Gray.] Did Captain Yon Schoen tell you that he had niade out not only the answers to questions, but the questions themselves ?—I understood that. 332. Did he tell you that he had given the papers to Captain Jones to hand to the Examiner? —I do not know that he said that in substance or in word. He gave him the papers, and the headlines were not filled in. The headings of the questions were not filled in in writing, but were supplied in blank. The answers were to be given to the Examiner. 333. He did not explain to you by what process these papers were to be passed by the Examiner ?—No. 334. You have not satisfied yourself yet ?—No. 335. Did Yon Schoen tell you why Captain Jones was a pupil of his?— No. 336. Did he not mention Jones ? —No. 337. Did he mention that this individual had been a pupil of his?—No, he did not permit me to cross-examine him. He made a very guarded statement. I" said, very naturally, " Who is the man ? " He became reticent, and he said, "I am not going to tell you. If you like to accept the information from me without the names, you can. I will not tell you." I said, "Ishe in charge of a vessel at the present time? " and he said, " Yes, and carrying passengers every day." 338. You stated in the House that it was a coasting vessel?— Yes, I made a mistake. 339. He gave you no clue to the individual ?—No, none at all. 340. Did he actually tell you this person could not write his own name?—l said, " I must take very great care not to be put in a false position ; I would rather do anything than make a

H.—26

212

statement that was not absolutely true. How then, supposing the thing is challenged—are you going to prove this?" "Well," he said, "the simplest method possible. Ask him to give an exhibition of what he can do; ask him to sign his own name, and he would show his inability at once." 341. In writing his own name ? —Probably that was meant to be figurative, and not to be taken literally, but in that way they could prove by an elementary test in writing or something like that, that it was impossible for him to pass. 342. I understand that all Captain Yon Schoen complained about was the improper passing of an illiterate candidate, and the passing of two candidates in the deviascope examinations ? —Yes, that is so. 343. Did he tell you when those examinations were supposed to have taken place?— That is one thing I was not sure of. 344. He did not tell you they were old and stale subjects?—' No. 345. He did not indicate about when they took place?— Yes, he indicated that about Captain Jones. I got no relative date, but in so far as mentioning Mr. Seddon's departure he did give me a clue about the date. 346. Did you get a statement from Captain Yon Schoen in writing ?—No, never a scratch. 347. Did he express any feeling against the Examiner ? —No, nothing further than that he had very strong reason to believe that the examinations were erratic. 348. He did not express any feeling against Captain Allman ?—No. 348 a. You have been asked in regard to something that a suggestion was made by you to Captain Jones that if you had known it was he whom you had spoken about you would not have taken the matter up—you deny that ?—Yes. 349. You say that you told Captain Jones that you were not aware that it was he when you made the speech in the House ?—Yes. 350. You put it that what you had said was done from a sense of duty ?—That is so. 351. You spoke in Timaru a few weeks ago largely upon this Marine scandal ? —Yes. 352. You made a statement there that Captain Jones had been a candidate for a vacancy on one of the Government steamers ?—I did. 353. I believe you made it upon some sort of information that you thought authoritative? —Yes. 354. Have you since seen any reason to change your view upon the matter?— Well, I have had Captain Jones's own denial of its accuracy, and not having proof of its accuracy equal to his denial I have seen fit to modify it, and to throw the onus of the statement I made upon the man who informed me. He has written and signed a statement reiterating the statement I made; but for my own part I have withdrawn it and express regret if Captain Jones felt aggrieved at my having made it. But I made the statement in good faith, and, as I say, it has been supported by a written and signed statement of my informant reiterating all I said. 355. You made no inquiry at the Marine Department to ascertain whether Captain Jones was captain of a coastal steamer?—-I did not. I asked Mr. Allport if I might ask him, and he said, " Kindly go and see Mr. Glasgow." I asked Mr. Glasgow if I might ask him, and he said, " Put it in writing." And I said to Mr. Glasgow, " Consider the question never asked." 356. When you made that statement about Captain Jones you had no official knowledge ? — No. 357. Who told you?—lt was Mr. Storrier, of Timaru. 358. In what connection did he tell you?—He said that after Mr. Hall-Jones's speech he accosted him in the street and asked him this question : " Did it ever come to your knowledge, that Captain Jones had acquired his home-trade master's ceitificate of competency, during the whole time that elapsed between your issue of the memorandum to Captain Allman and Mr. Hutcheson raising the question in the House?" And the Minister replied, "Well, yes, I may say it did, because we had a vacancy on one of our Government steamers, and Captain Jones was one of the applicants for the position." That Mr. Storrier has put in writing, and he has told me not to abate one jot. 359. Upon that you made the statement ? —I do not think lam quite correctly put; I did not make it as a positive statement; lam sure it was not my intention. I knew I had no proof, and therefore I made no positive statement. 360. When did you first learn that Captain Jones got his certificate ?—Mr. Glasgow came to my little office while the departmental inquiry was on, and asked me if I could further assist the department with any information, and there he let slip the first direct knowledge of Captain Jones being the individual concerned. Previously my attention was directed to another Captain Jones in a coastal steamer, whom I had known in former years—Captain Jones, of the " Herald." 361. Until Mr. Glasgow spoke to you, you did not know that Captain Jones had a master's certificate ?—I did not. I always understood he had a restricted certificate. 362. How long have you known him ?—Ever since I came to the colony. 363. Do you know him fairly well ?—Yes. 364. Do you agree with Mr. Seddon's estimate, and the estimate of every witness, that he is a capable seaman ? —Well, he is a practical seaman, and a good one ; but I do think it is necessary that a man ought to be able to handle instruments, and that Captain Jones ought to give us some evidence that he would be able to do it. 365. You say he is a practical seaman ?—Yes. 366. And a man of upright character? —I have always found him so. 367. And not likely to knowingly commit a fraud, or to tell a lie ?—Well, I do not know ; I am not going to say anything about that. I have always looked upon Captain Jones as a very decent citizen, and a good straight bluff seaman.

213

H.—26

368. Mr. Hislop.] Did the Premier send for you on the night that you addressed the House on the subject'?—l have no knowledge that he did. 369. The Premier said in his evidence that he sent for Mr. Hutcheson, who told him he could give no information, " neither would he give me (the Premier) the name of his informant " ?—Both the Premier and I might be right; he might have sent a messenger for me, but the fact is we collided in the lobby. 370. Do you remember his telling you that you had placed yourself in a false position ?—Yes. 371. Did he ask for information ? —Yes; that was the night after I made the speech. 372. Did he tell you then what his officers had informed him?—He said it was absolutely impossible that the thing could be as I stated. My opinion is that his object was to discover how much I knew; of that I feel certain. He either said to me, " You have put yourself in a false position," or " You have either said too much or too little." 373. You do not remember whether he told you that he had seen any of his officers at that time ?—Not on that occasion ; shortly afterwards he did say that he had seen his officers. 374. Where did you see him on the second occasion ? —ln the temporary Cabinet-room, where he has his office. 375. Did you go there by appointment ?—No ; I on my own initiative entirely. 376. His statement was that you had promised him on the first occasion to try to get into the position of being able to give the name of your informant—that you were to find out whether you could give up the name of your informant ?—I told him in the lobby on the night I spoke, that if my informant would agree to my disclosing the name in order to put him in touch with the Premier, that I would let him know, but until I had my informant's permission to disclose his name I was not at liberty to do it. 377. Did you have any conversation as to the possibility of an inquiry on this occasion?— Not on that occasion. It was on the third interview that I had with him that I strongly urged reform. I also gave my opinion as to the course it should take, and what steps for a prevention of the recurrence of the thing. Ido not think anything further was discussed between us. 378. And was it on the second occasion that you disclosed the name of your informant?— Yes. 379. Was your third interview in connection with an inquiry into these abuses, or was it in connection with future changes ?—Both. I strongly recommended that he should appoint as Chief Examiner a man not at present resident in New Zealand, to allay all suspicion of favouritism, and insisted that he should probe the matter to the bottom, and as time went on the matter was much uglier than I at first anticipated. 380. Did you urge him to have an inquiry at that interview ?—Oh, yes ; I had written to him previously strongly urging him to have an inquiry. That would be after Mr. Seddon's return from the Pastoral Show. It was some time in the middle of January. 381. After the House rose ? —Yes. 382. Then no steps were taken between your second and third interviews?—l am not aware of any departmental affairs; I have always kept away from the Civil Service. I received no communication. 383. Did you ask Mr. Hall-Jones whether anything was taking place ?—No, I had never any further truck with Mr. Hall-Jones after my speech in the House. I dealt with the Premier exclusively from that time. 384. Do you know any reason why these examinations should not be supervised in the same way as examinations in connection with universities and other institutions—by independent persons not attached to the office at all ?—I think it is advisable that a thoroughly responsible officer should conduct the examinations, because you might get men with very varying capacities. You might get all manner of men, and there would be irregularity of the pass standard, if you got different men to do it. 385. There is that irregularity now, is there not ?—There has always been, owing to the number of Examiners. Captain Marciel gave evidence that Examiners had a large amount of discretionary power in examinations. If there were different men there would be no uniformity in examinations. 386. Then you consider that examinations should be held in one place? —Two at most, and one for preference. There is no reason why one Examiner should not conduct all the examinations that we shall have for many years to come in this colony. 387. Mr. Hanlon.] You say in your speech you had a conversation with Mr. Seddon.—Yes. 388. Was it on that occasion that Mr. Seddon told you that if you knew anything about a candidate getting a certificate improperly it was very dangerous not to disclose all you knew ? —Yes, that is so. 389. And he impressed upon you the seriousness of it ?—He seemed very much impressed. 390. Did you tell him all you knew ?—Not then. I declined then to tell him the name of my informant. 391. Did you tell him all your informant had told you? —I think I did tell the substance of all I knew at that first conversation. 392. You refused to give the name of your informant ? —Yes, at that time. 393. Why?— Because I agreed with my informant that it was highly desirable that this matter should be dealt with thoroughly, and yet as carefully and as gingerly as if we were carrying about a barrel of gunpowder with the staves burst. 394. Yet it was a very simple matter to do that and disclose the name ? —My experience with Mr. Seddon was that he was not at all mindful of who got " left." I did not want to see my informant get " left." 394 a. How could your informant get "left" if he knew there were irregularities going on in the Marine Department ?—My informant said, in effect, "If you put me in touch with Mr. Seddon

fi.—26

214

I will disclose what I think needful. You, as representing me —as my proxy—might not disclose enough, or might disclose more than I think right." 395. The easiest way to do was to name your informant ?—As I did the next day. 396. You did not on the night in question ?—No. 397. You had another conversation, as you say, next day, with Mr. Seddon ? —Yes. 398. Did you give him any further information excepting the name of your informant ?—No, excepting that we talked over the examinations for some time back, and we reviewed the troubles that had arisen in connection with some matter some time before, and the unsatisfactory state.of affairs. 399. At that time do you swear positively that you did not know that Jones was the man who was referred to ?—I do. 400. And you did not know until the magisterial proceedings, or thereabouts ?—I think the departmental inquiry was on. Ido not think that Mr. Glasgow intended to disclose the name to me, but the words he used confirmed a suspicion that was gradually getting upon me, and it was this : Mr. Glasgow said, "You are quite right about Jimmy Jones." Now, that is when I first learnt about it, and until that time I did not know of it. I thought it was very stupid of me not knowing who it was before. 401. On the 14th November, 1898, you wrote to Mr. Seddon ?—Yes. 402. You said, " The Eight Hon. the Premier, —Concerning the charges of gross irregularity in the examination of masters and mates made by me in the financial debate, I strongly desire that you will at once send for Mr. Glasgow, Secretary Marine Department, who, I have reason to believe, is in possession of such information as will enable him to corroborate the principal charges I made." What did you know that Mr. Glasgow knew at that time?— Just exactly what Captain Yon Schoen told me. I was acting on his advice, and at his instigation. 403. What did Yon Schoen tell you that Mr. Glasgow knew at that time ?—Just exactly what is there. 404. You say, " I have reason to believe Mr. Glasgow is in possession of such information as will enable him to corroborate the principal charges I made " ?—The reason is, the word of my. informant, Captain Yon Schoen. I had found him absolutely correct in every detail he had told me. 405. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Glasgow about that time?— Never at any time have I had conversations with Mr. Glasgow except on two occasions. Once when I asked him if I could ask him a question; and the second time when he asked me if I could assist the department with information. Both were extremely brief—two or three minutes on each occasion. That is all the conversation I have had with Mr. Glasgow about the matter. 406. Did you say that you had no conversation with Mr. Hall-Jones after your speech in the House?—No, none of such importance as would impress itself on my mind. If think if I had had any conversation with him I should remember it. 407. You were never asked by Mr. Hall-Jones as to who it was you referred to ?—No. 408. You gave him no information at all as to who was referred to?—No, I am positive of that. 409. You never told him that it was a man he knew ?—I could not say that; I did not know who it was without knowing his identity. 410. You spoke of a case a little while ago, in answer to Mr. Atkinson, in which undue delay on the part of the department had caused the statute of limitations to intervene, and you could not take action. What case was that ?—I could easily get the papers in connection with it. There was one man named Searl, and another—l cannot tell you his name. They shipped as able seamen on the " Southern Cross," and they were engaged on the East Coast. The secretary of the Seamen's Union demanded that they should leave the ship and discontinue their employment as able seamen, as he knew they were not seamen. However, the men were advised otherwise and continued on, and complaints were made. But I could give the details if necessary, showing that the cases were allowed to rest in abeyance. There were all sorts of negotiations going on until an action would not lie at law. These were the two cases I referred to. 411. Judge Ward.] Were these men holders of. permits by reason of false declarations?— Yes, your Honour. They said that they had lost their certificates. They made a declaration before a Justice of the Peace. They were given permits without question, and when they were discharged from the vessel temporarily they got properly issued able seamen's certificates of discharge. 412. Mr. HanlonJ] As far back as 1890 you knew about irregularities in connection with the conduct of examinations ?—lt was a subject of common talk among men of the mercantile marine. 413. Were any special cases brought under your notice?— There were instances given by sailors; they were really amusing, some of them. 414. Was any action taken to have these irregularities rectified?—l was not connected with politics at that time. Everything was not put in order then. 415. Did you take any action in 1890 ? —No ; it would have been a vain task. 416. Do you know of instances where candidates have been assisted in the examinationroom ?—I might not be able to prove that there were any cases, but I have heard of many such instances. If you knew a man, Mr. Hanlon, intimately, and knew what his educational qualifications were, and you knew that he was just about up to Sixth Standard form, and he had got, a B.A. degree, you would wonder. Well, that is the sort of information I had. 417. You know of no instance, then, of a candidate having been assisted in the examinationroom ?—Yes. In one instance a shipmate of my brother's went up for examination in Dunedin. He brought down the chart question to an adjacent hotel, and, having forgotten a portion, he went back again and got it; then he went back again to the examination-room and filled it in and got bis certificate. This was in 1890.

215

H.—26

418. Did your brother give him any assistance ?—Yes, of course he did. There -was no Examiner thera for four or five hours. 419. You know this, do you : it is a report of an interview with Mr. John Hutcheson, appearing in the Lyttelton Times ? —Yes. 420. Are these statements pretty much the same as you tell us to-day?— That is " Walker's whiskey " ; but what I have told you to-day are facts. 421. This was sent to you by the Minister? —Yes, a copy of it was. 422. The letter is dated 4th February, 1899. The Secretary says : — "Marine Department, Wellington, 4th January, 1899. "Herewith I forward an extract from the Lyttelton Times of the 20th ultimo, which gives an account of what purports to be an interview between the reporter and Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.R., in which certain allegations are made regarding crimping at this port, and I have to request that you will report whether you consider there are any grounds for these allegations or not. " I may state that Mr. Hutcheson has informed the Minister that the whole article was written and published without his knowledge or approval, and that the cases referred to in it are very inaccurate and garbled. "W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. "The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington." 423. Judge Ward.] To whom was that letter addressed ?—To the Collector of Her Majesty's Customs, at Wellington. It is signed by Mr. Glasgow. 424. Mr. Hanlon.] The Minister wrote to you on the 26th January, as follows:— " Deae Sib, — " Wellington, 26th January, 1899. " I enclose what purports to be an interview between a Press reporter and yourself in reference to matters concerning the Marine Department. I would feel obliged if you would be good enough to let me have any information you may have which will assist the department in dealing with the cases therein referred to. " Yours, sincerely, "J. Hutcheson, Esq., M.H.E." "Wμ. Hall-Jones. Is this your reply ? : — "DeabSie, — " Wellington, 28th January, 1899. " I beg to thank you for sending me a copy of what you very properly say ' purports to be an interview between a Press reporter and myself,' &c. " The enterprising pressman who constructed the article may have extracted some information from me in the course of ordinary conversation, and drawn on his vivid imagination for the rest. "But there was no 'interview,' and the article was written and published without my knowledge or approval. "As 'the cases therein referred to' are grotesquely inaccurate and garbled, I am of course unable to give you any such information as will enable the department to deal with them. " Yours sincerely, " Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine." " John Hutcheson. —That is the reply to the Minister regarding the very subjects you gave evidence on to-day ?— Yes. Captain William Bendall sworn and examined. 425. Mr. Hanlon.] You are a master mariner ?—Yes. 426. Do you hold a certificate as extra master? —No. 427. You hold a certificate as licensed Adjuster of Compasses ?—Yes, and as master mariner. 428. You remember when you went up for examination for your license ? —Yes. 429. When was it ?—I think it was in December, 1896. 430. Is that your application and your signature ?—Yes. [Exhibit 11,] 431. After you put in that application did you present yourself for examination ?—Yes. 432. Who examined you ? —Captains Allman and Edwin. 433. And are you prepared to tell us all that took place in the examination-room?—' Well, I did all the work that was put forward for me to do. 434. Without reference to any books that you were not legitimately entitled to ?—Yes. 435. Eeferring to these questions on the compass syllabus, they are very long answers?— Yes. 436. Were all these questions answered from memory?— Yes, every one. I could almost repeat them now. There were very few questions I could not answer. 437. You swear, then, that the examination, so far as you were concerned, was perfectly legitimate —you did all the work that was set for you to do ?—I did. 438. Will you tell us whether there was any cribbing going on, or were you the only candidate there ? —I was there alone. Either Captain Edwin or Captain Allman was in the room, and sometimes both. 439. ■ You were in Court this morning when Captain Marciel explained the errors that were in your paper ? —Yes, I just came in at that time. 440. Can you account for them ? —I could explain that a mistake might have been made. As a matter of fact, I can point out mistakes in the text-books that I studied from. 441. Are you sure they are mistakes?—l do not say they are computers' mistakes, they may be printers' errors. 442. There is an error here in Captain McLellan's paper?—lt is a very simple problem, one of the simplest of the whole lot. You can copy most of it, and it does not require much working out. 443. Can you account for the same error occurring in Captain McLellan's and your own paper? —No, I cannot. 444. You say that the whole examination was conducted fairly and properly ?—Yes, so far as I am aware. I did all the work allotted to me without assistance from any one.

H.—26

216

445. Have you had much experience with the deviascope ?—Not very much in the deviascope. 446. In compass-adjustment ? —Yes ; twenty-two years in this harbour. I have adjusted for the Government, the "Union Company, and others. During that period, up to 1895, when this new regulation came into force, there was an Act passed to bring it into force, and it necessitated a further examination on the syllabus. I was quite conversant with the syllabus, and have been so for many years. I applied in Wellington to pass an extra master's examination in the early part of 1877, but in those days they had no authority to issue these certificates in New Zealand. 447. So that you have had very considerable experience in adjusting compasses?— Yes. 448. And you were quite competent to pass the examination that was held?— Yes. 449. I suppose you studied from Towson? —Yes; from Towson and the Admiralty Manual. John Andeew Millar sworn and examined. 450. Mr. Hanlon.] You are a member of the House of Eepresentatives ?—-Yes. 451. You have taken a great deal of interest, I understand, in maritime matters?— Yes, I have. 452. There is a question which we wish to get some light upon if we can : At whose instance or suggestion, and under what circumstances, did the provisions of the Shipping and Seamen's Acts relating to the employment of apprentices, or boys come to be initiated. We want to know as much as we can of the effect of the Shipping and Seamen's Acts in regard to apprentices and boys ? —Well, I initiated the Shipping and Seamen's Amendment Act, and I drafted out the schedule of 1894. Prior to that I had the amendment of the Shipping and Seamen's Act in 1890. This came about owing to the fact that a vessel could go to sea with a master, an engineer, and a mate. It was not compulsory to carry any seamen at all on board, and at the same time she might have a certificate to carry three hundred passengers. It was not absolutely compulsory to carry any seamen at all then, and not absolutely compulsory to carry life-saving apparatus. This schedule was drafted out; it was a bigger schedule than the one existing at present. The object of the schedule was this: that in the interest of the travelling public it is necessary to have a certain number of competent men on board to take charge of boats in case of emergency. This schedule has now been cut down to a minimum. Personally, I have no objection to boys going to sea. But I say no boys or apprentices should be taken except in addition to the minimum number of seamen laid down by law. Otherwise the vessel is not safe to go to sea; and lam speaking as a man of seventeen years' experience, and I have also a master's certificate. I do not think that a vessel could go to sea with fewer men than we have fixed by law at present. Let me take a case in point. I take the " Eotomahana." She is certified for about three hundred and fifty passengers. According to our schedule, she only carries nine deck-hands all told. She has to carry six boats—l think it is six—and there are three or four life-rafts to provide for the safety of those travelling. Now, if you divide these men you would only have about two men to man each boat, and in the ease of accident they would have to depend entirely upon the firemen and passengers to man them. If you reduce the number of seamen you increase the danger to life. So far as the training of boys is concerned, you will never make seamen of them on board steamers. There is nothing for them to learn in the shape of seamanship. There are no yards, and all the work is done in the engine-room. Boys should only be carried on sailing-vessels. No boy should be allowed to go upon any vessel carrying less than four able seamen, because your Honour must understand, I suppose, with your large experience, that the men are divided into watches, and with four men you have just two men on the watch, one man on the look-out, and one at the wheel. Well, if you allow two men only to be taken, it would mean keeping one man at the wheel for four hours, and four hours is far too long for any man in the winter weather here. Whenever boys are carried they ought to be only in vessels carrying not less than four men; but if you want to make seamen of them they should be apprenticed for four years on a sailing-vessel. Four years is laid down as the time by the Board of Trade before they can go up for a second mate's certificate. Boys certainly ought to be trained in sailing-vessels. As far as boys are concerned, and the openings for them on steamers, they do not care about going on deck at all. They want to go as trimmers, where they get £6 10s. a month; they do not want to go on deck, where they can only earn £1 10s. In three years a trimmer is entitled to become a fireman at £8 10s. a month. Every one of them makes for the stoke-hole; they have no desire to go on deck at all. That is the only way they are trained. Boys should be duly indentured and allowed to go on the sailing-ships, and if any amendment to the Act is necessary they ought to make it apply to sailing-vessels, not to steamers. 453. Judge Ward.] I quite agree with you that a sailing-vessel is the best ground for training boys, but there are so very few sailing-vessels just now. There are no means of training boys ?— Well, there are a few sailing-vessels ; but, of course, the sailing-ships have pretty well been done away with here. There does not seem to be a very strong desire on the part of our youths to go to sea. There are a few schooners trading out of Auckland, and some of the farmers want their boys to be allowed to go in them. That class of vessel, however, according to the Act at present, need only carry one able seaman. 454. The men must drop off in time, and there will be no one to take their places ?—They are gradually being replenished from the Home boats. The wages are higher here both on sailers and steamers, and it is always an inducement for them to come here.

Tuesday, 25th July, 1899. J. A. Plimmee, Jun., sworn and examined. 1. Mr. Hanlon.] What is your name ?—John Alfred Plirumer. 2. What are you, Mr. Plimmer ? —A manufacturer.

217

B\~ 26

3. And you reside in Wellington ?—Yes. 4. Do you remember when the New Zealand Times picnic took place in 1898 ? —Yes. 5. We have been told it took place in Day's Bay, and you went across in the steamer "Duchess"?— That is so. 6. Were you in the cabin on the road over to Day's Bay ? —No. 7. We have had it told to us that on the road over some conversation took place between Mr. Seddon and Captain Jones : do you know anything about that ?—No. 8. On the road back did you hear anything?-—No. 9. Mr. Gray.] Was your father on board on that trip ? —Yes. 10. He is a personal friend of Mr. Seddon's ?—I think so. . : : ' 11. He is more intimate with Mr. Seddon than you are ?—I am not intimate with Mr. Seddon at all. . . _: 12. Mr. Hislop.] Were there any other of the Plimmer family on board the " Duchess" at that time?— There was not any other member of the family present then. 13. Have you mentioned to any person outside—have you ever said anything to this effect: that you heard a conversation had taken place between Captain Jones and Mr, Seddon ?—No, certainly not. 14. Never at any time?— Never at any time. 15. Mr. Hanlon.] What is the state of your father's health at present ?—He is not at all well, He has not been able to get out at all for the last two weeks. 16. And he is not in a condition to come here in answer to a subpoena ? —No, sir, Haeold Beauchamp sworn and examined. 17. Mr. Hanlon.] What is your name ? —Harold Beauchamp. 18. What are you, Mr. Beauchamp ?—A merchant. 19. I understand, in Wellington ?—Yes. 20. Were you present at the New Zealand Times picnic in 1898?— I was. 21. Were you present in the cabin of the " Duchess," going across to Day's Bay?— Yes. 22. Were you there when Mr. Seddon was there, and Captain Jones?— Yes. 23. And several other gentlemen ? —Yes. 24. Did you hear any conversation take place between Captain Jones and Mr. Seddon ?—Not that I can recollect. 1 heard some joking, but nothing of an extraordinary nature I can fix in my mind. 25. Mr. Gray.] I suppose you did not stop in the cabin going across the whole of the way ?— No. 26. You do not undertake to say you were present on every occasion when Mr. Seddon and Captain Jones might have been there ?—I certainly should not like to go so far as that. 27. Either when going to the Bay or returning from it ?-—Quite so. 28. Were Messrs. Alfred G. Johnson, A. E. Hislop, Bobert Bannister, John Plimmer, sen., and J. A. Plimmer, jun., present in the cabin on that occasion?—l can fix Captain Jones, Mr. Bannister, Mr. Plimmer, sen., myself, and Mr. Alfred Johnson. Those are the only gentlemen that I can recollect. 29. Was Mr. Wilson, M.H.E., present ?—I cannot recollect him. 30. I suppose the whole staff of the Times were in the cabin ?—I hardly think it could accommodate them. Judge Ward : We have it in evidence that the cabin is only 10 ft. square. 31. Mr. Gray.] There were several gentlemen connected with the directorate of the Times present ?—I was chairman of the directorate at the time. 32. Were you present when Mr. Alfred Johnson got a key of the cabin from Captain Jones ? —I cannot recollect. 33. Did you go down to the cabin ?—Yes; I think, to get some refreshment. 34. In the nature of a stimulant, Mr. Seddon called it ?—Yes. 35. And there was a good deal of chaff ? —Yes, a fair amount of talk. 36. So it would be impossible to pretend to remember what was said ?—I should not like to do so. 37. Even anything ? —I cannot recollect anything. I heard nothing that would make an impression on my mind. 38. Mr. Hislop.] Was Captain Jones there when you went down ?—I cannot say. When I went down they were having refreshment, 39. Can you remember if he unlocked the room into which you went?—l cannot. 40. You do not remember if it was unlocked ?—I cannot remember. 41. Was the conversation general, or by each individual ?—I cannot place the conversation at this time. " ■ : . . • Sir Akthuk Douglas sworn and examined. 42. Hanlon.] What is your name ? —Arthur Percy Douglas. ' 43. What are you, Sir Arthur? —Under-Secretary for Defence. " 44. You are Examiner for Masters and Mates in Wellington?—l have been employed from time to time in that way. _ : , 45. Do you remember if you were one of the Examiners who examined F. Farmer, James L. Martin, arid J. Irvine, about October, 1898 ?—Yes. I think those were the names of the candidates who were up in October, 1898. It is a long time ago, and Ido not exactly remember the names of the men, but there were some men up then, I know. 28— H. 26.

218

H—26

46. You might look at this letter, and say whether it was submitted to you. It is a letter of complaint as to the manner in which the examination was conducted ?—Oh, yes, I have seen that letter before. 47. You have seen that letter before ?—Yes. 48. You know the nature of the complaint contained in it ?—Yes. It was, generally speaking, saying the examination had been very badly conducted, or something to that effect. 49. That they did not get a fair opportunity, on account of noise, to get through their examination ?—Yes. 50. Is there any truth in that ?—None whatever. 51. Were the examinations with which you were connected conducted in a proper manner ?— Yes. ' . : . . . 52. Did each candidate have a fair opportunity of performing the task set him ?—Yes. Each man. had a separate table. I could not say how big or how far apart they were—the usual size of small tables—the customary tables. 53. Bach candidate had a table, and plenty of room ?—Yes. 54. Was there any kind of noise which might be disconcerting to the candidate'?— Certainly not. 55. Were there any people going in and out of the room to speak to the Examiners ?—lt is nine months ago. 56. Was there sufficient of that sort of thing going on to make it inconvenient to the candidate ?—No, certainly not. 57. Mr. Atkinson.'] How many tables are there in that room?— Well, I really do not know— I never counted ; six or seven, as far as I remember. 58. You have got the normal number there?—l really cannot tell. There are some little tables there, I cannot say the number. 59. You are satisfied there would always be a sufficient number brought in to provide for every candidate? —Oh, yes. 60. Is it your practice as Examiner to be in the room during the examining ?—Yes; when I am Examiner, unless some one releases me, I never go out. 61. How many were there as Examiners then—-two?— Two on this occasion. 62. Were there two present right through?— Yes. 63. Was Captain Edwin one ? —No, he was in the next room. 64. He was not an Examiner then?—He was there to relieve one of us if one had to go out. 65. You had one Examiner for each candidate ?—No. 66. Captain Edwin did nothing but supervise ?—There were three Examiners told off. Captain Edwin has always been the Examiner here, and on this occasion I was asked to go down, as far as I remember, because there were several candidates coming up, and they wished to have two Examiners in the room. Two were there. 67. Had there been any complaints as far as the supervising was concerned?—l could not tell you. 68. Has it been the practice previously, in the case of two Examiners, to only attend alternatively ? —Well, I cannot really say what was the practice. It was the first examination I had sat on in Wellington. 69. Were you specially requested to attend this examining?—l think I was, yes. 70. Is it your practice, when you are conducting examinations conjointly, to sign the certificate that everything is in order when you know nothing whatever about the supervising personally, or about the nature of the work that has been done on paper? —I have never been asked to do such a thing. 71. Would you do it if you were asked?— Well, Ido not know. I generally sign for what I have seen. 72. There is no provision in the regulations expressed on the subject ?—Not that I remember, It is in the Examiners' discretion, as far as I remember. 73. You would not exercise it in that way ?—No, I do not think I should in that way. Eobebt Thompson, M.H.E., sworn and examined. 74. Mr. Hanlon.] What is your name ?—Eobert Thompson. 74a. What are you : member of the House of Eepresentatives ?—Yes. 75. I understand that you have taken considerable interest in maritime matters in the colony ?—Yes, I have. 76. Can you throw any light upon the question of the employment of apprentices and boys in the New Zealand shipping ? —Well, of course, I am not in a position to give any expert evidence on the question. My position is simply this: that a large number of my constituents^—a great many of their boys—are in the habit of going to sea, learning to be sailors; and even now many of them are masters of vessels in various parts of the world. Most of these boys, when first intending to go into the seafaring life, were working on boats in the harbour in the Province of Auckland. In the Province of Auckland we have a large number of sailing and coastal vessels, which is different to any other part of the colony, and in fact the harbour surrounding Auckland has been a sort of nursery for seamen in the colony; but, unfortunately, since the Shipping and Seamen's Act was passed there have been no apprentices taken on, owing to the fact that owners of vessels have been compelled under that Act to carry a full complement of seamen according to the tonnage of the vessel, and no provision having been made for apprentices there is now not an apprentice, so far as my information goes, obtainable. The whole means of access to the seafaring

219

H.—26

life has been cooked, and of course lam continually being"got at" by my constituents, and they complain that their boys have now been shut out from sea life, and that if they wish to go to sea they have to go out of the colony and place themselves on foreign vessels in Australia. They are no longer able to learn to be sailors in the colony. 77. Judge Ward.] Can you suggest any remedy ?—The remedy I would suggest is this, that the regulations be altered so as to allow two apprentices in the place of one able seaman. I think if that were 'done, then there would be no difficulty about the matter. Of course the owners of the vessels say, Well, the law has compelled us to carry a full complement of men; there is no provision made for apprentices, and we are not going to take on apprentices at our expense simply for training seamen, when the law compels us to carry the full complement of men. ■ ,i 78. Suppose the law stipulated that two apprentices of a certain age, say, fourteen or fifteen, should be recognised as equal to one able seaman ?—I, of course, cannot give any explanation as an expert; lam not a seaman myself. I only wish to voice the complaints of my constituents. •,::iSS79. There has never been a suggestion of that kind made ?—No; but the fact remains that owing to our legislation this avenue of employment has been practically closed to our boys. 80. Dr. Giles.] Of course you would limit such a provision as you suggest ? You would not allow more than a certain proportion of the men to be replaced by the boys ?—Certainly not, according to the tonnage of the vessel. I would then go so far as to suggest every vessel should be compelled to carry one or more apprentices. As things stand now the whole of our coastal vessels are continually manned by foreigners and our own people shut out, and unless the law is altered, in some few years you will find the whole of the mercantile marine will be gone. I only wished to point this out. Thomas Eedmond sworn and examined. 81. Mr. Hanlon.] Your name is Thomas Eedmond ? —Yes. 82. I understand you are messenger to the Premier? —Yes, sir. 83. In August of last year did you occupy that position ?—Yes, sir. 84. Do you remember about that time last year going to the railway-station to.meet Captain Allman ?—I never went to the railway-station to meet Captain Allman. 85. Did you ever, at any time, go the railway-station to meet Captain Allman ?—I never went; I never was sent. 86. Did you drive up in a cab either from the railway-station, or did you get into the cab on the road up from the railway-station and drive up to the House of Eepresentatives with Captain Allman and Burgess, another messenger? —No, sir. 87. Are you quite sure?— Certainly; I was in the room at my work when Captain Allman arrived from the train on that night. 88. Was anything done that would impress it on your memory?— Well, I knew that there was some disturbance in the House of Eepresentatives over this matter, and I made a remark to Captain Allman when he came in. I said, " Captain Allman, your number is flying inside." He said, " That is all right," or something to that effect, and sat down in the room. 89. Did he come up in a cab on that night ?—I think so. There was a cab at the door with his luggage in. 90. Since that time has Captain Allman met you and spoken to you ?—I met Captain Allman and told him I had nothing to do with this matter. It was what I read of Mr. Pirani's speech in the House -where he said the Premier's messenger went to meet Captain Allman at the station. That is the first intimation I had of my name being mixed up in it at all, and I met Captain Allman a fortnight afterwards and told him that he had made a mistake—that I never went to the railwaystation that night; that he must have been under a misapprehension, or something to that effect. 91. What did he say? —He seemed rather confused, and said, "I am very glad you met me, Tom." He seemed rather confused —seemed to be trying to recall his memory back to the night. 92. You are quite sure you did not go ?—Yes. 93. And told Captain Allman so?— Yes. 94. Dr. Findlay.] How many messengers has the Premier ?—He has only got me as a messenger. He has another old man attendant at the Cabinet-room. 95. Were you the only messenger in August, 1898?— With the exception of that one. 96. And thus in 1898 would be sent by the Premier in a cab to bring another person that the Premier wished to see ? —I have not the slightest idea. 97. Do you recollect whether, in August, 1898, when the Premier had any errands of this kind, he sent you. On any occasion in August, 1898 ?—-I do not suppose in two years I have gone in a cab for the Premier anywhere. 98. Do you recollect whether in August, 1898, you went any message for the Premier at all ? —I do not know. 99. You do not recollect ?—No. 100. You might have gone a message to any other part of the town ?—But certainly not to the station. 101. Captain Allman seems to have known you pretty well. He addressed you as Tom?— Yes; I have known him for many years. 102. Can you explain why he was certain that it was you who came to the railway-station to bring him up to the Parliamentary Buildings. You went in a cab to tell him the Premier wanted hjm ? Ido not know why Captain Allman should say so. The only thing I think is that Captain Allman has made a mistake. 103. Do you know if any one went for him that night in a cab ?—I do not. 104. You say the first you saw of him was when he came to the Parliament Buildings with a small black bag in his hand?—l think it was a black bag.

H.—26

220

105. He says he has never had a black bag ?—I will not bejpositive that it was black. 106. You are quite certain you never went in the month of August to bring him to the Parliament Buildings? —Quite certain. Mr. Hanlon : Those are the only witnesses I know of, your Honour, that can throw any light upon the subject of this inquiry, and those are practically the whole of the witnesses I have to call.

Wednesday, 26th July, 1899. Mr. Hislop: May I trouble the Commission for one moment ? In both newspapers it is reported your Honour stated, as a reason for not hearing me yesterday, that no evidence had been called on my client's behalf. Judge Ward : I did not say so; but really, Mr. Hislop, I cannot undertake to be responsible for what appears in the newspapers. The Commission has no power to hear an address from counsel when the other side is not represented by counsel. The reason for that is perfectly clear, and it follows the practice in criminal cases in the Supreme Court. Here there is special power given for the accused, or party against whom the charge is brought, to appear by counsel, or personally, and if by counsel: to cross-examine witnesses, call evidence in reply, and address the Commission on the evidence. No such power is given to the accuser. The Commission have already strained a point in your favour by allowing you to appear for your client although the other side is not represented. What we think is this :as Mr. Hanlon has disclaimed that he is appearing for either Mr. Seddon or Mr. Hall-Jones—and has not addressed the Commission—then we are not entitled to hear counsel for the party who made the charges. Mr. Hislop : It seemed to be understood by your Honour when I was examining the witnesses that I was examining them in support of my charges. Judge Ward: Yes. You did not call any specific evidence, but examined certain witnesses as in examination-in-chief. Mr. Hislpjp : I can appreciate the objection to my being heard, because I notice the Commission is so framed as not to include counsel for those who are in the position of prosecutors, but I only wished the reasons might be properly put by the Commission. Judge Ward: The reasons are perfectly clear. There is no evidence to be called upon the other side. The counsel for the Crown does not reply. The newspapers somehow had a most peculiar account of it. Mr. Hislop : Both the newspapers had the same report, your Honour. Mr. Hanlon : I have Mr. Millar here, your Honour, but there seems to be considerable difficulty in getting hold of Mr. Hutcheson. I have had messengers sent for him, and the messenger has gone now to try and get hold of him. The question is whether Mr. Millar should give his evidence in the absence of Mr. Hutcheson. Judge Ward : It is only fair that Mr. Hutcheson should be here. Mr. Hanlon : At a quarter to eleven we sent to the place where they expected to find him, and they said it would not be very long before he would be down, but that is somewhat indefinite. Judge Ward : Was he served with a fresh subpoena ? Mr. Hanlon: No, your Honour, but I thought, by leaving a message at his office for him, and perhaps the messenger trying to get hold of him, was better than giving one a subpoena to serve him. However, the Press published the fact that he would be called again this morning. Seeing the nature of the evidence which was to be given by Mr. Millar, I naturally expected he would be here to hear and refute it if he could-. ■ Judge Ward: What can you suggest—that we postpone the hearing till twelve o'clock? Mr. Hanlon : If it would not be inconvenient for your Honour, or perhaps two o'clock would be a more convenient hour. Judge Ward : Very well, say two o'clock. Mr. J. A. Millab, M.H.E., recalled. 1. Judge Ward.] You are already sworn, Mr. Millar?—Yes. 2. Mr. Hanlon.] Do you remember, Mr. Millar, the night that Mr. Hutcheson made his speech in the House,' in August, 1898 ?■—l do. 3. Shortly after that speech did you have a with Mr. Hutcheson ?—Well, either on the same night, or within a night or two afterwards. I would not swear it was exactly the same night. I think it was on the night he spoke. It was in the lobby. 4. What did he say ?—Well, of course, Mr. Hutcheson and I both belong to the same profession. We had professed a certain amount of interest with regard to the profession, and we had often discussed different matters, and on this occasion when I spoke to him we commenced to talk about the same affairs; and Mr. Hutcheson, in giving me an outline of the matter, said privately that his informant was Captain Yon Schoen, but that Captain Yon Schoen wanted to be kept in the background. Well, then, I think it was myself that asked afterwards who was the man, and Mr. Hutcheson told me it was Jimmy Jones. 5. Now, you are quite sure he told you it was Jimmy Jones ?—I am positive. He told me that the examination-papers had been worked out by holding the man's hand, and he held his hand over so, and in writing illustrated the method to me. 6. You are quite sure he told you that ?—I am positive. 7. You are perfectly certain that on the night of the speech, or within a night or two afterwards, he told you that Captain Yon Schoen was the informant and Jimmy Jones was the man ?— Yes ; and that was given privately. The second occasion upon which we had a conversation upon it was on a night when he asked me to go in with a deputation to see Mr. Hall-Jones, the Minister, with regard to a man called Walley.

221

H.—26

8. When was that ?—lt was from three to four weeks after the first conversation. 9. Judge Ward.] Not more ?—No. Prior to the end of last session. I could not fix the date, your Honour. I did not take any notice of the date. 10. You are sure that it was during the session?— Yes. 11. MrtHanlon.] What happened on that occasion?—We had been in to see the Minister about Walley's matter, Mr. Hutcheson having asked me to go in to see the Minister of Marine with him and Walley, which I did, and we discussed the matter then under dispute. We did not get any satisfaction from the Minister, and we came out of the room, and Mr. Hutcheson then remained talking to Mr. Walley outside whilst I went into the lobby. He (Mr. Hutcheson) then came into the lobby and we had a conversation, and it commenced about this matter of Walley's, and he said he did not think the Minister would do anything with regard to Walley ; and then we discussed the matters about the Marine Department. On that occasion Mr. Hutcheson told me he then had the permission of Captain Yon Schoen to give his name. Those were the only two occasions that I remember upon which Mr. Hutcheson and myself had any conversation on this matter. 12. Did he say anything about Captain Jones on the second occasion ?—I do not think so. As far as I remember, we had only the one conversation afaout Captain Jones. Mr. Atkinson : Will your Honour allow me to put a question to the witness? Judge Ward : For whom do you appear, Mr. Atkinson ? Mr. Atkinson : For Captain Yon Schoen, Sir. Judge Ward : Well, yes, as Captain Yon Schoen's name has been mentioned. 13. Mr. Atkinson (to witness).] Did you have any conversation with any of the Ministers immediately after Mr. Hutcheson's speech ?—lf I remember rightly, I had one conversation with the Minister of Marine. 14. Upon what subject?—-As far as I can remember, upon the above subject. 15. Was that the night upon which Mr. Hutcheson spoke ?—-No; I think it was afterwards. 16. Did he mention the name of the man who gave the information about this?— Not the name of the man. He mentioned the charges made by Mr. Hutcheson. 17. Did he mention Captain Yon Schoen's name to you?— Not to my knowledge. Ido not think he mentioned any name. 18. You are quite certain he did not mention Jimmy Jones's name?— Perfectly certain. 19. Did you talk over the whole matter at some length?—We talked over the different matters that Mr. Hutcheson had brought before me, including this last one about the examination. .20. Was Captain Allman's name mentioned?—l would not like to say. I fancy it would be. 21. Did the Minister tell you then that he had promised Captain Allman to see him through ?— He did not. 22. Nor in a subsequent conversation about the same date?— The only thing is, if Captain Allman's name was brought in it would be in connection with Captain Allman being publicly examined. 23. Did you ever tell anybody else that the Minister had made that statement to you ?—Not to my knowledge. 24. That means No ?—Yes, to the best of my belief. 25. Why do you say not to your knowledge?—l swear, in the absence of direct proof, I never made any such statement. 26. Within the last month, have not you made that statement to which I refer—about the Minister and Captain Allman ? —I said it in my speech in the House. . Judge Ward : Well, one cannot refer to that. Mr. Atkinson : I take it, if the witness claims privilege, I cannot proceed ; but, if it is not a matter of claiming privilege ■ Judge Ward : Claiming privilege has nothing at all to do with it. Mr. Atkinson : I was not going to suggest what is in the debate is anything on record. Judge Ward : We have already ruled on that three times; we can take no cognisance of any words spoken in Parliament. Mr. Atkinson: lam not suggesting that Hansard is evidence. Judge Ward : No; I should think not. Mr. Atkinson : I am asking the witness what he said. Judge Ward : He referred to words spoken in debate. I say we take no cognisance of words spoken in debate. Witness : I said that Captain Allman had said that there was no truth in the charges, and upon a second occasion said there was no truth in the charges; if the Minister said he would see him through, under the circumstances, he had only done his duty as a Minister of the Crown, notwithstanding the Civil Service. 27. Mr. Atkinson.'] There was not very much to see him through?—lt was in the House. 28. There was nothing in the charges ?—He was going to take him up against those charges. 29. You never made any further statement ? —No. 30. Not prior to within the last month ?—No. 31. Did you know who Jimmy Jones was?— Certainly. 32. Do you remember if the name of his steamer was mentioned in your conversation?—-I do not think so. Mr. Hutcheson knew I had been in Mr. Williams's employ, and that I had been sailing in and out of Wellington for some considerable time as his foreman. 33. Mr. Hutcheson would have known that Jimmy Jones was not a captain of a coastal steamer ?—Yes.

H.—26

222

34. You say Mr. Hutcheson also told you the examination had been conducted by Captain Yon Schoen holding Captain Jones's hand ? —No. I said he told me Captain "Yon Schoen was his informant, and the name of the man was Jimmy Jones, and Captain Jones's hand had been held; but he did not state Captain Yon Schoen or any other person held the hand. He only gave me the name of Jimmy Jones. 35. Is this the first time you heard about the holding of this pen?— Yes. I have no recollection of having heard it before. It might possibly have been talked of in some previous'conversation with Mr. Hutcheson, as we had a prior conversation to this, as far as I can remember, when it came out definitely; so on the occasion when it came out I mentioned it to him. 36. Either on the night or shortly afterwards?— Yes ; I did not take note of the night. 37. In the House when Mr. Hutcheson made the speech ?—Yes. 38. You heard nothing there about the holding of the hand ?—Mr. Hutcheson used his hand to show me how the hand was held. 39. This was the first time you heard it ?—From Mr. Hutcheson. 40. If he made it in his speech you heard it ?—Yes. It was the first occasion when he spoke to me on the matter at all. 41. How do you put it now ?—ln the conversation we had he told me then, and I believe that is the first time. He might have been reading to me what he said in his speech. 42. It was news to you, although you had previously heard his speech ?—Quite so. 43. There was nothing said as to the name of the steamer or kind of steamer : you knew the sort of steamer he was in ?—Yes. 44. Did he make any stipulation that you should not disclose Captain Yon Schoen's name?— He told me he gave it to me in confidence—the name was Captain Yon Schoen—and that Captain Yon Schoen did not wish to be known in the matter. On the second occasion he told me he then had Captain Yon Schoen's permission to disclose his name. 45. I take it, at the first interview Mr. Hutcheson had no authority to disclose the name, but imparted it confidentially to you ?—Yes. 46. And it did not go any further ?—That is so. Mr. John Hutcheson recalled. 47. Judge Ward.] You are sworn, Mr. Hutcheson?—Yes. 48. Mr. Hanlon.] You have heard, what Mr. Millar has said, Mr. Hutcheson ? Judge Ward : Perhaps Mr. Hutcheson wishes to make his statement himself. 49. Mr. Hanlon.] Would you prefer to make a statement, Mr. Hutcheson? Judge Ward : We have Mr. Hutcheson's statement already; it is merely a reply to this particular conversation. Witness : I desire to give a most unqualified denial to the statement that Mr. Millar has made as to who was examined. I can only characterize his statement in this way, that I believe it to be an absolute untruth. That is the plain English of it. I have never had sufficient confidence in Mr. Millar to make him my special confidant; but if your Honour will permit me to bring the captain of the other steamer, owned by the same owner, he will tell your Honour that he amused himself somewhat at my expense by almost disclosing the name of Captain Jones, almost up to the time when I did get the knowledge, and has since said to me that he was perfectly satisfied that I had no suspicion as to who it was, otherwise I must have taken a clue. My attention was entirely diverted, even in the face of the Premier's remark, from the particular Captain Jones to another Captain Jones, by reason of the nature of the information supplied to me by Captain Yon Schoen. Judge Ward : All we have to do with now, Mr. Hutcheson, is your distinct contradiction of Mr. Millar. Witness : Well, the position is this: here are two members of Parliament, and one of them is a liar. I would still fortify my denial by showing the human impossibility of my disclosing that which I did not know. If I can clearly show to your Honour I could not disclose it because I did not know it. Dr. Giles : I do not know how other witnesses could prove you did not know something. 50. Mr. Hanlon.] You say what Mr. Millar narrated never took place ?—No. A conversation may have taken place, such as the amenities of political life require, but conversations such as he said I gave have an unqualified denial from me—that is, the part where he says I disclosed to him the name of Jimmy Jones. At no time within that session of Parliament at all did Ido so. 51. Do you remember having a conversation with him the night you made your speech?—l am sure I never. 52. Do you remember disclosing to Mr. Millar the name of your informant ?—Oh, that is likely. I have no particular, distinct, recollection. 53. You say you could not possibly have disclosed the name of Jimmy Jones—you did not know it ?—Yes. It is true I asked him to accompany me to the Cabinet-room to assist the case of Mr. Walley. 54. Three or four weeks afterwards ?—Yes. He says again I repeated the thing there. 55. All he says is that you said that you were at liberty to divulge the name of Captain Yon Schoen ?—All those other things are in accord with possibilities. Judge Ward: That is really all we want. 56. Mr. Atkinson.] You have known Jimmy Jones for some time?— For a great number of years. 57. Have you heard Jimmy Jones's name mentioned—you were once associated with the steamer and should have known him ?—Yes.

223

H.—26

58. Were you aware, ac iiie time in question, of the kind of steamer whose captain was concerned in this business ?—My informant told me it was another one of the coastal steamers carrying passengers on the coast of New Zealand, and which Captain Jones was never on. 59. Judge Ward.] You were acquainted with Captain Jones's literary deficiency?—l had a very strong acquaintance with it. 60. Mr. Atkinson.] All you had been informed by Captain Yon Schoen put you on the wrong scent ?—And since I think he did it purposely. 61. For greater secrecy?—l believe he wanted to deal with the case himself, and was afraid I would betray it. He wanted to deal with the principal. 62. Who was the principal?— The Premier. 63. Did you make a statement to anybody else at that time ? You could not have made the statement about Jones. Did you make the statement as to the name of your informant? Did you make that in confidence to anybody else but Mr. Millar at the same time ?—I did not speak to Mr. Millar on the night of my speech. My informant released me from the obligation of confidence the next day—or if I did tell him it might have been after some period—quite recently, after the delivery of my speech. I may have told him—probably with the permission of my informant. 64. On the night of your speech you were not at liberty to disclose it even in confidence^? —As a matter of fact, I refused to disclose it to Mr. Seddon, who ought to have been furnished with that information. 65. Mr. Hanlon.] In the next conversation you disclosed it ?—Yes. 66. Mr. Atkinson.] Did you discuss the case with anybody else the same night or before ?— Yes. I gave it in the way of a desultory conversation, without going into detail, to Mr. Pirani. 67. Did you tell him any names ? Mr. Hanlon : That does not seem to be relevant your Honour, what took place between Mr. Hutcheson and Mr. Pirani ? Mr. Atkinson: I will not press it, your Honour. Judge Ward: No. Mr. Hanlon : Those are all the witnesses, your Honour. Judge Ward: We will now adjourn the Commission; and the Commissioners will consider their report.

EBBATUM. On page 90, Question 71, " You put it on your table," should read " You put it on the table."

H.—26.

1899. NEW ZEALAND.

MARINE COMMISSION.

APPENDICES: BEING EXHIBITS LAID BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS.

INDEX.

EXHIBITS. Title. Page A. Jamea Jones's application for a service certificate, master home-trade (Premier's and Glasgow's refusals) 225 B. Telegram from Hon. Premier to Hon. Wm. Hall-Jones, re service certificate for James Jones .. 228 G. General file re Jones's case, Allman's first statement, &o. .. .. .. .. ~ 228 D. Parmar, Martin and Irvine's oomplaint as to their examinations .. .. .. .. 245 B. Allman's second statement and Jones's affidavit .. .. .. .. .. .. 247 F. Extract from New Zealand Times, Wednesday, Ist Maroh, 1899, Premier's statement .. .. 250 G. Eegulations for adjustment of compasses .. .. .. .. ... .. 250 H. In re the employment of boys in the mercantile marine .. .. .. .. .. 270 I. Captain AUman'a examination for extra master, letter from Premier, Sydney, New South Wales .. 297 J. Ministers of Marine from 1892 to 1899 (Statistics of New Zealand) .. .. .. 297 K. Captain Allman's appointment .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 298 L. Letter from Captain Yon Schoen to Mr Hood .. .. .. .. .. .. 316 M. Letter from the Premier to Mr. A. R. Hislop .. .. .. .. .. .. 316 N. James Jones's examination papers for a certificate of competency (lithographs) .. .. .. 316 O. Permits file, envelope, &c. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 317 P. Memoranda by Glasgow, Allport, and Hon. Minister of Marine .. .. .. .. 320 Q. Minister asks for information re alleged permit, Glasgow's and Allport's replies .. .. .. 320 R. Allport believes Minister authorised Jones's examination .. .. .. .. .. 322 S. Charges to Allman .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 323 T. James Jones's examination papers (master river steamer) (lithographs).. .. .. .. 324 U. Questions in examination for master home-trade, worked by Captain Yon Sohoen for James Jones (lithographs, &o.) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 324 V. James Jones's examination, examiner's report, &c. .. .. .. .. .. 326 W. In re cancellation of James Jones's certificate of competency .. .. .. .. 326 X. Minister to Glasgow, and his reply ; was intimation given to Jones that he could go up for examination .. 329 Y. Charles Q. Pope's case .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 329 Z. James Jones's certificate of competency .. .. .. .. .. .. 339 1. Copy of Yon Schoen's letter to Hood, memoranda, &c. .. .. .. .. .. 339 2. Yon Sohoen's complaints as to conduct of examinations, &o. .. .. .. .. 339 3. Hon. Premier to Mr. Houston, M.H.R. .. .. .. .. .. .. 346 4. Assistant Secretary of Marine to Captain Yon Sohoen .. .. .. .. .. 346 5. Peter Mclntyre's case (lithographs) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 346 6. Minister to Glasgow ; permit unlawful .. .. .. .. .. .. 346 7. Captain Edwin to Captain Yon Schoen .. .. .. .. .. .. 346 8. Captain Edwin to Captain Yon Sohoen .. .. .. .. .. .. 346 9. H. E. Walley's case .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 347 10. Memorandum from Hon. Premier to Captain Allman, and his reply (copy, vide Evidence, pp. 197, 198). '. 354 11. William BendalFs case .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 855 12. Hugh McLellan's case .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 365 13. Captain Marciel's report on examinations of certain candidates .. .. .. .. 373 14. Lyttelton Times report of alleged interview with Mr. John Hutcheson, M.H.R. .. .. .. 376

LITHOGRAPHS. Title. Page James Jones's application for a certificate of service (master home-trade) .. .. .. preceding 225 Deviation of compass examination papers, worked by Captain Yon Schoen for Captain Allman ~ facing 232 Plan of examination room .. .. .. ■. • • • • ■ ■ facing 246 James Jones's examination papers for certificate of competency (master home-trade) .. .. facing 316 Envelope as received by Mr. Allport .. .. .. .. . • . • preceding 317 James Jones's examination papers for certificate of oompefcency (master river steamer) ~ facing 324 James Jones's examination papers for certificate of competency (master home-trade), questions worked by Captain Yon Sohoen .. .. .. .. . ■ • • • • preceding 325 Casualty return, s.s. " Tui" .. .. •• •• •• •• •• facing 330 Charles Q. Pope's examination papers .. .. .. • • • • • • facing 338 Peter Mclntyre's examination papers .. .. ■ • • • • • • • facing 346 William BendalPs examination papers .. '.. .. •• ... .. preceding 365 Hugh MoLellan's examination papers .. .. .. ■ • • • • • facing 372

Exn. 2a.

7,} Z/y ' /t // . • / _. - . z^ 0^^ I

APPLICATION v-9 Kill! A CERTIFICATE OF/^S^VICE

Rotation No. j

(A.) NAME, ETC., OF APPLICANT.

(B.) PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES, ETC.

CERTIFICATE NOW REQUIRED.

/, ID.) DECLARATION TO BE MADE BY APPLICANT. «,„„ vfVTiri' !'- i-iv person who mikes procures to be made, or assists in making any false representation for tSie purpose of obtaining, for 1A - L UXA, - J - ' ' ' bimsel£ or anv ot her person, either a Certificate of Competency or Service, is for each offence liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour. % Bo bmh) beciate that the particulars contained in Divisions (A), (B), (C), and (E) of this form are correct"and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the certificates enumerated in " Division (]■') and sent with this form are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the * persons whose names appear on them. . _ \ And I make this declaration conscientiously believing it to be true. S\jr (~-r Signature of Applicant. uoa was mad. in my presence this /jL.Tl!!Il_day of„ _Jz2?£k&L-- -. iWs- f-.lntor of Customs. X /

/\ Christian Name. N; i; i t a. i ! j 6 % Sutnanie. Adclrcas, stating Town, Street, and Number of Houde. I c/__..__ J)ate of Biitli. Whei'o born. Year. i /jloiitli." -- « Day. <Jfyt I ✓ Town, 7. 4 fuaa/ , Country. ■(/{Ja/eo.

■ L „ ii Ml I'T Particulars of previous Ci rtificate. i ! I Grade oC previous Certificate : i Master, \ ! Fii-st Mute, or only TiUtte. , Number of i'uud Ticket (if any), f Number. .._»•-.. 3/4 k> ! WWe'SrfjDv of Co.uiV t -' i; » iTli? y ur Service, i _" ; 7 10. _ J_ 12. .'

Stat- whether Master or Mote's Certificate is required, and whether ' Mercantile Maiine Office (Customhouse) to which it is to be sent. ,1 f or Foreigii-goingSliiporiome-trw!pP«wspngerSbii>. //' ,-.

(E.) LIST OF TESTIMONIALS AND STATEMENT OF SERVICE FROM FIRST GOING TO SEA.

(77k , Tentimuiiinls to be iium we,I consecutively, accora 'inij to the iiuiiibir given in Culumn Id below.) Service of Applicant. 5 [ ,,..'- »; , Time ~ ! :! in each Ship, "a l'ort of Registry '5 I Ship's Name. iiml D,vte ]> atl / Where trading. 2 ! j Oflk-ial Number. ' , j of ,,,- ■5 \ llank ton, - Tcrmiiifc. 3 mw,c °- lion. H . I fiient. i ,; ° i , ; 1 = i 15. j / 16. 17. Itf. i lit. 2(1. 21. -I:'.. -2H. 1 -U. c/fn+*~ t)$ffJi\ fiftsi jtjttil $*— / ' fly ' iA P Total service at sea ... ... /f) — "^ i:iitialti -, of Verifier.* I I" - ! §| I l§ ! i 25. 2o. i V i I ! — i *» J yw<rU~ trjL. Time served lor which certificates are now produced ... ... *J\ L// *»rl J Time served for which no certificates are produced ... ' 11 I "~" / —.^™_«__^—. » This application, accompanied by the testimonials and previous certificates, if any, is to bo forwarded to the Secretary of Marine Department, Wellington. The new certificate and the testimonials will be delivered to the applicant at the place named in Division (C) above. * The initials of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office to be placed in this column opposite the services verified.

H.—26

225

EXHIBIT A. Sib, — Peafcherston Street, Wellington, 14th May, 1895. This is to certify that Captain Jones has served in my employ as master of the steam-tugs " Duco " and " Mana " for a continuous period of eight years. From entries in my books I find that between September, 1886, and December, 1894, Captain Jones's sea-going service as master of the above-mentioned tugs amounts to over three years and two months. Duringthe twenty-six years that Captain Jones has been in the employ of my late father, Captain W. E. Williams, and in that of myself, he has given every satisfaction, being always strictly sober and attentive to his duties, and I find him a most trustworthy and competent navigator and shipmaster. Yours, &c, The Hon. Minister, J. H. Williams, Marine Department, Wellington. Owner, steam-tugs " Duco " and " Mana." [Explanatory notes shown within parentheses are alterations which have been made by the Marine Department and by the Collector of Customs.] This is to certify that Captain James Jones's service in the New Zealand coastal trade as master of the steam-tugs " Mana" and " Duco," between the 7th January, 1887, and the 28th December, 1894, amounts to " three years five months and nine days." The following is a correct and minute statement of Captain Jones's "service at sea" in the above-mentioned steamers, as shown by the entries in my books : —

Total servioe at sea (1887-94), 3 years 5 months 9 days. J. H. Williams, Owner, s.s. " Duco " and " Mana," or--- 29— H. 26.

Ship's Name. Date of Commencement. Date of Termination. Where Trading. S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana S.s. Mana .. S.s. Mana S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (Jones) .. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. 7/1/87 20/3/87 2/6/87 13/1/88 17/7/88 1/9/88 14/11/88 17/4/89 25/6/89 28/9/89 15/2/90 23/4/90 3/6/90 16/8/90 28/10/90 18/12/90 (30/12/90) 23/1/91 28/2/87 27/4/87 18/6/87 3/4/88 31/8/88 10/10/88 2/2/89 2/5/89 6/8/89 18/12/89 19/3/90 17/5/90 7/7/90 11/9/90 2/12/90 29/12/90 (30/12/90) 25/3/91 (23/1/91) 4/7/91 26/9/91 22/11/91 11/12/91 (3/12/91) 29/1/92 (13/1/92) 2/4/92 30/6/92 8/9/92 (17/11/92) 26/10/92 Mths. Days. 1 21 1 7 0 16 2 21 1 14 1 9 2 18 0 15 1 11 2 20 1 4 0 24 1 4 0 26 1 5 0 11 0 (1) 2 2 0 (1) 1 4 0 15 1 5 0 8 0 (1) 0 17 0 (5) 0 28 0 16 1 7 0 (1) 1 1 . _ o 11 Wellington, Palliser Bay, Cook Strait. Wellington, Port Underwood, White Rock. Wellington, Cook Strait, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti. Wellington, Waikanae, Otaki, Kapiti. Wellington, Wairau, Cook Strait. Wellington, White Rook, Pelorus, Palliser Bay. Wellington, Terawhiti, Palliser Bay. Wellington, French Pass, Palliser Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Cook Strait. Wellington, Terawhiti, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti. Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Cook Strait. (to Orongorongo). Wellington, Ohau Bay, Te Kamora, Cook Strait. S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (Jones) .. 31/5/91 11/9/91 17/10/91 3/12/91 Wellington, Terawhiti, Oterangi, Cook Strait. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, French Pass. Wellington, Terawhiti, Port Underwood. *-(struck out).-' Wellington, Te Kamora Bay, Ohau Bay. (Terawhiti). Wellington, Terawhiti, Mana Island. Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Cook Strait, Wairau. (Ditto Otaki). Wellington, Otaki, Kapiti, Mana. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. 12/1/92 (9/1/92) 5/3/92 14/6/92 1/8/92 (17/11/92) 25/10/92 S.s. Mana (no reeordl S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Mana (JoneB) .. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. S.s. Mana (Jones) .. 3/12/92 (1/12/92) (5/12/92) 20/1/93 (9/12/93) 27/3/93 31/12/92 (1/12/92) (5/12/92) 31/1/93 (15/12/93) 25/4/93 Wellington, Palliser Bay, White Rook. (to Terawhiti). (Wellington to Terawhiti). Wellington, Picton, Cook Strait. S.s. Mana (Lawton and Bendall) S.s. Mana (Leys) .. S.s. Mana (no record) S.s. Duco (Butt) .. S.s. Mana (Butt) S.s. Duco (Lawton).. S.s. Duco (Bendall).. S.s. Duco (Bendall).. S.s, Duco (Butt) S.s. Duco (Butt) .. S.s. Duco (Butt) .. 0 29 Wellington, Opunake, Guard's Bay. 11/5/93 1/7/93 24/8/93 1/11/93 19/12/93 20/1/94 25/3/94 6/7/94 (31/8/94) 1/9/94 (31/8/94) 11/10/94 20/11/94 17/6/93 18/7/93 14/9/93 23/11/93 29/12/93 12/2/94 14/4/94 18/7/94 1 6 0 17 0 21 0 22 0 10 0 23 0 20 0 12 Wellington, Wanganui, Kapiti, Ohau Bay. Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Oterangi, Terawhiti. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti, Brothers. Wellington, Palliser Bay, White Rock. Wellington, Port Underwood, Brothers. Wellington, Glenburn, Palliser Bay. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Picton. (Picton). Wellington, Cook Strait, Picton. 25/9/94 (4/9/94) 30/10/94 28/12/94 0 24 0 (4) 0 19 1 8 Wellington, Cook Strait. Wellington, Palliser Bay, Terawhiti, Ohau Bay. S.s. Duco (no record) S.s. Duco (Lawton)..

226

H—26,

The Collector, Wellington. Will you please check over with the vessel's clearances the statement of service in the " Mana " and "Duco" given in the sheet attached to Captain Jones's application. Ido not think that the particulars of service given therein can be correct, as in nearly every instance where permission was granted by this department for the vessels to go beyond the harbour it was subject to the condition that a sea-going master was to be in charge, and the Collector was informed of this at the time. Captain Jones only holds a river certificate. : 22/5/95. D. McKbllae, for Secretary.

The Secretary. Please see attached memorandum from Mr. Walker, Acting Landing Surveyor. Captain Jones does not appear to have the necessary service to enable him to get a certificate. 3/6/95. A. Laing, Acting-Collector.

Memo. Collector. No trace of ship's papers from 1887 to 30th June, 1890, can be found; but from the clearances since 1890 it appears that in nearly every case where the " Mana" and "Dueo" made outside trips Captain Jones was not in charge The exceptions are as under:-— 1890, 30th December—" Mana "to Orongorongo, J. Jones, master ; returned on 30th December. 1891, 3rd December —" Mana " to Terawhiti, J. Jones, master ; returned on 3rd December. 1892, 9th January—" Mana "to Terawhiti, J. Jones, master; returned on 13th January. 1892, Ist December—" Mana" to Terawhiti, J. Jones, master; returned same day. 1892, sth December—" Mana "to Terawhiti, J. Jones, master; returned same day. 1892, 17th November—"Mana" to Otaki, J. Jones, master; returned same day (towing " Weathersfield " to Wellington). In other instances where the vessels went outside the following masters were in charge, viz. : F. Lawton, J. Leys, William Bendall, E. Butt. There is no record in the Tide Surveyor's Eeport-book of many of the trips claimed to have been made by Captain Jones. 1/6/95. F. Walkee, Assistant Landing Surveyor.

The Collector, Wellington. With reference to the Landing Surveyor's report (attached), will you please furnish for the Premier a statement showing the trips on which Captains Leys, Lawton, Butt, and Bendall, or any master other than Captain Jones, were in charge when the vessels went outside? 3/1/96. W. T, Glasgow.

The Secretary. Statement herewith. —D. McKellae.

Statement showing Trips made by "Duco" and "Mana" during which Masters other than James Jones were in Charge from the 30th June, 1890, to 30th June, 1895.

Note.—The name of James Jones appears on the crew-list for these trips. D. MoKellae, Collector,

Vessel. Date. Destination. Master. [ana 28/1/93 27/3/93 23/4/93 11/5/93 25/8/93 11/11/93 19/11/93 19/12/93 20/1/94 25/3/94 12/4/94 6/7/94 31/8/94 8/12/94 3/1/95 18/2/95 26/3/95 19/4/95 10/5/95 24/5/95 28/6/95 Bast Coast ... Picton Oeo Eiver ... ... Wanganui ... Terawhiti Captain Lawton. a Captain Bendall. Captain Leys. Captain Butt. it »uco [ana « ... ... ... >uco » ... ... ... Palliser BayPort Underwood Picton Glenburn Picton Captain Lawton. Captain Bendall. It it it Captain Butt. H Palliser Bay and Orongorongo... Picton Captain Lawton. It if It [ana >uco a •■- ... ... Terawhiti ... Havelock Picton Queen Charlotte Sound Havelock n ft Captain Pope. It [ana It

227

H.—26

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 4th June, 1895. With reference to your application for a certificate of service as master, home trade, I have the honour to state that your statement of service has been referred to the Collector of Customs for verification, and he reports that from the records of his office it appears that the time in which you actually served as master in the home trade is not sufficient to entitle you to a certificate of service under "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894." During some of the periods shown by you the records show that Captains Bendall, Butt, Lawton, and Leys were in charge as master. Under these circumstances lam unable to issue the certificate for which you have applied, and I return herewith your river master's certificate and testimonials. . . . I have, &c, Captain James Jones, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

The Collector, Wellington. I have noted in red ink on the attached statement the names of the masters as given by you, but there are some trips shown there since the 30th June, 1890, which are not accounted for in the particulars supplied by you—that is, those against which nothing is marked in red. Can you give any information as to who was master on those trips ? 11/2/96. W. T. Glasgow.

The Secretary. I have had the files gone carefully over again, and inserted further particulars so far as could be found. As all inward papers were also searched, I can only conclude that some trips noted on Mr. Williams's list were made without permission and without report to this department. The periods embraced within the dates given as coastal service represent the time " Mana" was engaged on general harbour-work, and making the occasional trips to the places in the column " where trading." The greater proportion of those would be one-day trips, which would not mount up to any lengthy period in a year. I have made inquiry at the office of the Inspector of Steamers re any record there of permits to go outside the harbour issued prior to June, 1890, but find none recorded there. It is suggested that at that time permits were issued direct from the Marine Office, and that Jones possibly made use of them as authority, and it was not then apparently the practice to require him to enter and clear each time; that this will account for their being no record for the full period since 1887. 19/2/96. D. McKellab.

Hon. Premier. I have had a further examination made of the service set forth by Captain Jones of the " Mana " and '• Duco." Up to June, 1890, there are no records in the Customhouse to enable the service to be checked. Subsequently the trips are marked in red ink, with the result that it is found that if Jones took the " Mana " outside in many of the cases given in his list, he did so without any authority or permit from this department. A permit to act as master outside the harbour was only given to him once, in the case of the " Mana " going to the " Weathersfield " at Waikanae. On other occasions he was not in charge as master. Permits were given only on condition that a certificated master was in command. The names of these masters are inserted in red ink on the document attached. In some cases the time is much exaggerated, as will be seen by the red ink corrections. I have no hesitation in saying that the required service has not been proved, and I could not recommend the issue of a certificate. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1896. Eeply accordingly.—E. J. 5.—26/2/96. Captain J. Jones, No. 754/85, 27/2/96.

Sib,— Marine Department, Wellington, 27th February, 1896. With reference to your interview with the Premier on the subject of your application for a certificate of service as master, home trade, I have the honour, by his direction, to state that he has had the matter of your service looked closely into, with the result that he regrets to find that it appears to be quite clear that there is no power to grant you the certificate you desire.' The statement of your service furnished by Mr. Williams has been compared with the Customs records, and it appears that on many of the trips outside the harbour where you are shown as master in that statement Captains Bendall, Butt, Lawson, and Leys were masters, the permission for the vessels to go outside having been given subject to the condition that a home-trade master was employed* I have, &c, Captain J. Jones, s.s. " Duco," Wellington. Geoege Allpoet, for Secretary.

Mr. Allport. Captain Jones says he sent in a letter signed by a number of sea-captains. Letter does not appear to be attached. T. H. Hameb. 8/12/96.

Mr. Hamer. The document referred to was returned to Captain Jones, along with his other testimonials, when he was informed that the certificate could not be issued G. Allport. 8/12/96.

H.—26.

228

WiLi, Captain Jomes kindly supply letter referred to %— T. H. Hamer. 19/12/96.

Captain Jones says papers have not been returned to him.—T. H. Hameb. 21/12/96. -

EXHIBIT B. TeLSGAM from Eight Hon. the Premier to Hon. W. Hall-Jones re Service Certificate. Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Wellington. Onehunga, 19th April, 1897. I should be glad if you would have the question of issuing certificate to Captain Jones, of " Duco," settled. From the papers presented to me lam of opinion that he is entitled to what he wants, and much better qualified than Captain ,of . Captain Allman thinks that he is highly qualified. E. J. Seddon.

EXHIBIT C. Captain Allman, Chief Examiner of Master and Mates. I am instructed by the Premier to invite your attention to the statements made by Mr. J. Hutcheson, M.H.E., in a speech which he delivered in the House on the 26th August last. (See Hansard, page 276, No. 17.) These statements seriously reflect on the administration of this department, and I am directed to ask you to be good enough to furnish a report on them for the information of the Premier. For convenience I have caused the portions of the speech referred to which contain the reflections to be extracted and underlined, so that you may know the particular parts on which you are required to report. I also forward herewith copy of a letter signed by F. Farmar, J. L. Martin, and J. Irvine, and addressed to the Premier, in which a complaint is made as to the manner in which the examination was conducted at which they were candidates. Also, a further letter signed by J. L. Martin as to statements made to him by F. Lawton. The Premier is desirous of having your report on these letters. 29th November, 1898. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Eeceived this day.—Geo. Allman.—l/12/98.

Secretary, Marine. Be Mr. Hutcheson's remarks: I have reported fully to the Hon. the Premier; from your conversation this morning I gathered you had seen it. For other particulars see minutes on letters referred to. 21/12/98. . Geo. Allman. Forwarded to Premier.—2l/12/98.—W. T. G.

Part 111. [Extraot from Mr. J. Hutcheson's speech, 26th August, 1898.j The honourable member for Palmerston alluded to a certain candidate who was examined in a writing examination. He scarcely quoted the full case, Sir. lam informed by a responsible citizen that there is at the present time a captain in command of a passenger-carrying coastal steamer who was allowed to fill in his examination-papers in a private house. My informant also assured me on his word of honour that the candidate's hand was guided in the formation of every letter and figure in the examination-papers. If I were to give a vivid picture of this man engaged in the laborious task of holding the candidate's hand, I would require to be allowed the same privilege which was claimed by the Minister of Lands, and I should have to put in Hansard a sketch of the two men's hands doing the work; but unfortunately lam limited to the meagre resource of my tongue to depict the laborious process. And, Sir, this captain is in command of a vessel carrying living souls every day on the coast of New Zealand, and that is how he obtained his certificate of competency. Mr. Seddon. —It is almost impossible for it to be correct. Mr. J. Hutcheson. —Well, I asked my informant, if he were compelled by a superior authority to go and give his evidence, what would he say in the event of his being charged with the onus of proving the fact? He said, "I would ask the man to write his name, and he could not." Now, the captain's examination, Sir Part 11. Mr. Seddon.—How long since is that ? Mr. J. Hutoheson.—Quite recently, Sir. Does the Eight Hon. the Premier know of a case where a candidate for a master's certificate of competency was failed by reason of his inability to perform a mechanical and physical impossibility ? Last year a captain now in charge of one of our passenger-carrying coastal steamers came to me and complained he was failed because the examiner wrongly alleged he could not perform almost one of the last questions in his examina-tion-paper. He was given the data for a cross-bearing; he could not make the bearings cross, and the examiner promptly failed him. He came to me and complained. He said he was certain

229

a.—26

tfeftt fee vrM correct and the examiner wrong. I said, "It is a difficult Shatter'to sheet home." But a little pressure was brought to bear on the authorities, and the Eight Hon. the Premier knows that when he submitted the matter to the nautical adviser of the Government, who was instructed to test the problem and project it on the chart, he produced parallel lines, and any tiro in geometry knows that parallel lines never meet; consequently, the bearings could not cross. ****** Pact I. Sir, I will pass from that, and there is one more case I will give. In the introduction of a new style of examination, and in the use of a new instrument called the " Deviascope," the working of certain examination-papers was prepared outside the department, and certain clerical errors and erasures and faults in the figures were made by the preparer, and, strange to say, the papers of two successful candidates now in the archives of the Marine Department carry the same mistakes and erasures as the originals contain. But these candidates have got certificates, and are now licensed to adjust compasses. Sir, the proper adjustment of compasses is an exceedingly important thing. The deviation-card—a wrong deviation-card—in the hands of a captain of a steamer is as a lighted match in the hands of a child against the open mouth of a barrel of gunpowder.

The Right Hon. the Premier, per favour of the Hon. Hall-Jones. Confidential Eepobt.— Be Mr. Hutcheson's speech in the House of Eepresentatives on the 26th August, 1898. So as to put things as clearly as possible before you, it will be necessary for me to give you a full account of my experiences during the time I have been in the Government service. To simplify matters, I have classed Mr. Hutcheson's remarks into three parts—namely, Parts 1., 11., and 111., beginning at the bottom of his speech—and I will deal with the items in rotation ; the other papers put in as evidence, and of my statements I propose to call exhibits, marked A, B, C, &c. As you are aware, I received my appointment at the close of 1894, and early in January, 1895, I took up my duties in the same room with the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department. Owing to the position having been vacant some time there was an accumulation of departmental work, which I gave my attention to at once, after which I was busily engaged framing new regulations in connection with shipping matters ; consequently I did not devote much attention to examinations till near the end of the year (1895). In my early associations with this office I became acquainted with Captain Yon Shoen (teacher of navigation) for the first time in my life, although he had previously called at the Club Hotel, where I was staying, and left his card. He was in the habit of calling at the Marine Office to see the Chief Clerk, I presume, in connection with his nautical assessorship, he having been employed in that capacity from time to time. On several occasions he and I had conversations, both in the office and in the street, regarding the then new regulations relating to the examinations of masters and mates which were coming into force, or had come into force on the Ist March, 1895 (see (enclosure) Exhibit A, first page) ; also, we discussed the revised and additional examination in compass-deviation (see (enclosure) Exhibit A, first page), which was to come into force on the Ist July, 1895. It is needless to say that these conversations brought about quite a friendly feeling—at least, as far as I was concerned. I formed a very high opinion of Captain Yon Shoen, which he led me to believe was mutual. Pact I. In one of our conversations some time in May, 1895, I think it was, Captain Yon Schoen informed me he had obtained the .new guide-book on compass-deviation, and that he had the whole thing at his fingers' ends, including the deviascope. (Note : The deviascope is a model representing a vessel entirely built of wood, consequently there is no deviation ) For the purpose of illustrating the deviation in an iron vessel magnets are placed in various positions of the model. Being anxious to obtain the additional knowledge, and to enable me to teach the other Examiners before the Ist July, and not having a guide-book myself (at my request guide-books were ordered by the department, but they did not come or arrive in the colony till Ist or 2nd July), I arranged with Captain Yon Schoen to give me lessons, and for that purpose I attended his school every night for about one week, when I considered I had learned all that was required. Regarding the preparation of compass-deviation examination-papers, the fact is simply this : There are two ways or methods of working most of these problems—the method used at sea and the scientific method—the one is a short method and the other is a long method. I was conversant with the sea method, which is generally accepted for examination purposes of this kind, but I was not very well aquainted with the scientific or long method, so I asked Captain Yon Schoen to work me a set of papers for my own use and guidance. The questions I provided myself (see (enclosure) Exhibit B); they were copied from the only Board of Trade questions I had (see (enclosure) Exhibit C). The Board of Trade answers to these questions I sent to the Government Printing Office, to get blank copies printed (see (enclosure) Exhibit D), and it got mislaid at that time. The answers on the papers lost corresponded with those shown on (enclosure) Exhibit B. The other portions of examinations are contained in the Deviascope Handbook (see (enclosure) Exhibit E, pages 42 and 43), from which exhibit Exhibit Fis taken from. Afterwards I gave

H.—26

230

Captain Yon Schoen a copy. The remaining portion of the examination, both questions an 4 answers, are contained in (enclosure) Exhibit G, pages 17 to 46. You will observe that the books alluded to are public to every one, and are procurable now at several stationers in town. Having received tuition from Captain Yon Schoen, naturally friendship ripened to some extent. He invariably intercepted me on my way from the Buildings at lunch-time, and after 5 p.m., and frequently accompanied me to my hotel, where we generally had refreshments together at my expense, and talked on various matters —deviation of the compass in particular, next his admiration for the present Government, whom he knew I had a great regard for. After all this teaching and learning business, much to my surprise Mr. Pirani asked a question in the House on the 26th July, 1895, concerning compass-adjustment. Subsequently an Act was passed (a. very necessary one) and regulations made. The regulations adopted were identical with those in force in Victoria, which provided that adjusters should pass or had passed a stated examination, and that they should be employed in turn. When the regulations came into force Captain Yon Schoen held the necessary qualifications, and the other adjusters, Captains Strang and Bendall, had not. On representations to the Minister the regulations were suspended for six months to enable these men to study for the examination required. Subsequently both men passed. I gave them questions from Exhibit C, and most of the problems are worked the short or sea method. After this the three adjusters, Captains Strang, Bendall, and Yon Schoen, were notified in turn by the Collector when their services were required. This system appeared to work well for a time till about June, 1897, when the shipmasters asked that the regulations be altered so as to enable them to select their own adjuster, which was granted. Since the regulations have been altered Captain Strang has left Wellington, and another adjuster, Captain Gifford, has started business. He and Captain Bendall do nearly all the compasswork now. To condense what I have written in explanation to Part I. simply amounts to this: I went to school to learn something I did not know, and I mistook Captain Yon Schoen for a friend. No doubt it is disappointment that has evoked, his displeasure. (End of Part I.) Pact 11. Going back to my early experiences as regards examination in Wellington is as follows :—rTowards the end of January, 1895, I called and saw Captain Edwin, and we went over the new regulations (see Exhibit A) together, with the result that we found that, although the style of problems had not been altered very much, the rules had become far more stringent regarding accuracy. I therefore instructed Captain Edwin—and the other Examiners afterwards—to put the brake on gradually, which he did, with the result that near the end of the year there were complaints made by candidates about examinations, and Captain Edwin in particular. From the date of these complaints I took a more active part in examinations, having more time at my disposal, and I made several suggestions to improve the state of affairs, which were adopted. In the case mentioned by Mr. Hutcheson, Captain Edwin made a mistake in the figures when setting the chart problem; the result of this mistake was that the question given was an impossible one. Captain Edwin did not detect his error, and he failed the candidate wrongfully —by mistake on his part. To rectify this mistake the candidate was allowed to proceed with his examination from the point where he was failed, by your orders, which was only right and proper. The condensed explanation of Part 11. is that a wrong question was accidently set. (End of Part II.) Pabt 111. Part 111. no doubt refers to Captain Jones, of the " Duco." To enable Jones to get a coastal certificate I suggested to the Hon. Hall-Jones that he might be allowed to go up for examination for the certificate required, knowing that he already held a certificate of competency as river-master, which was obtained at Wellington some years ago; subsequently permission was given, and Jones was duly informed. Some little time afterwards I met Jones near the wharf; he informed me he was studying at Captain Yon Schoen's school, and that he was coming up for examination shortly. Soon after this Jones put in his papers, and was told by Captain Edwin to come up next morning a little after 9 a.m. next day. I made out the necessary examination-papers in the examination-room. Captain Edwin came in soon afterwards, and Jones arrived at 10 a.m., the appointed time. Both Captain Edwin and I conducted the sight-tests, after whksh Jones took his seat, and we gave him E.X.N. 9 E. papers to work. I took my seat at another table, and Captain Edwin was preparing to leave the room when Jones gave me an envelope—-whether it was open or not I cannot remember ; the envelope contained examination-papers. I showed them to Captain Edwin, and he said, " Destroy them." I was destroying them, and had destroyed part of them, when Captain Edwin left the room in a hurry. Just at that moment Jones interposed and said, " For God's sake, captain, don't destroy them, I did them all myself; so help my God." He pleaded and pleaded about losing his billet, his wife and family, and other things; and in a weak moment I gave way. The papers I had destroyed I supplemented by others, which are on the file now in possession of the Hon. HallJones (see Exhibit N). The remaining portion of the papers that Jones gave me are herewith attached, and correspond with the ones on the file, and are marked (enclosure) Exhibit H, Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, and are in the handwriting of Captain Yon Schoen. Up to the time that Jones gave me the papers alluded to I had not the slightest or remotest idea his education was so limited, although a capable coasting captain.

231

H.—26

After Captain Edwin left the examination-room in the morning he did not return to it till 1 o'clock, neither did I see him during that time. When Captain Edwin did return Jones had gone. Captain Edwin, so far as I know, has no knowledge of my having accepted the papers Jones brought into the room. I regret very much that I was not outspoken or candid enough to tell you (when you asked) the whole truth—that I had only destroyed part of the papers. I am not writing this full explanation with a view of justifying my conduct. I know I did wrong, and no living being could feel it now more than I do. I must say I never thought Captain Yon Schoen would lay such a trap, if such was intended at that time, which has criminated himself and perhaps sacrificed his old friend, Captain Jones. This brings my narrative down to about the middle and towards the end of 1897, at the time when Captain Gifford started in business in opposition to Captain Yon Schoen. Several candidates failed during the above-mentioned period, where or what school they came from I did not know. Shortly afterwards Captain Yon Schoen met me in the street in a very friendly way, and asked me to let his men pass in preference to the other teacher's men. I told him all the men were treated with every consideration, and that no one—he being their teacher—knew it better than he did. Then he made an allusion to make it worth my while to pass his men. I told him he had said enough; that I would not do such a thing if he gave me the whole of New Zealand. Since that time I have endeavoured to avoid him as much as possible, but one day just prior to the opening of last Parliament we met. He asked me if his men—who were then under examination—would pass. I said, Yes, if they did their work. His reply to this was, "If they don't pass I will see Pirani about it; he has his knife into the Government." Dp to the time Captain Yon Schoen attempted to bribe me I had no idea as to his real motive and his real character. I have stated the whole Jjacts as well as I can remember, and leave the whole matter in your and your colleague's hands, feeling sure you will not damn my reputation for life through being sold by a man who professed friendship. If I had not been soft-hearted, perhaps it would not have occurred. I feel that it is necessary to inform you that I think the probability is that Jones and perhaps Captain Edwin will not admit anything under any circumstances. On the next page, sir, you will find the matter outlined as regards possibilities or probabilities, which I trust will not eventuate. 13/12/98. Geo. Allman. .

If an inquiry were held, and if Mr. Hutcheson's statements were proved (leaving myself out of the question altogether), the position, in my opinion, would be as follows : — (1.) Jones would lose both of his certificates. (2.) He would be publicly disgraced. (3.) He would be deprived of the means of earning his living. (4.) Captain Yon Schoen would be found guilty, as explained on the application form (enclosure), Exhibit I. (5.) The Crown would then have to prosecute Captain Yon Schoen. (6.) Captain Yon Schoen would certainly be convicted, and most likely would be sentenced to gaol for any period up to fourteen years, with or without hard labour ; fourteen years, I understand, is the extreme penalty of the law in such cases. 13/12/98. Geobge Allman. If, on the other hand, Mr. Hutcheson's statements were found to be incorrect, — (1.) Captain Yon Schoen would be found guilty, as explained in paragraph 4. (2.) The Crown would still be bound to prosecute, as explained in paragraph 5. (3.) The result would be exactly the same, as explained in paragraph 6. Note.—There is sufficient evidence contained in Exhibit H, Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, to furnish ample proof to convict Captain Yon Schoen in both cases, without calling any witnesses. I presume Captain Yon Schoen has no idea that these proofs are in your possession. 13/12/98. Geoege Allman. Placed before me, 16/12/98.— R. J. S.

The Hon. the Minister of Marine. I have gone carefully through these papers and noted contents, and am shocked at what is therein disclosed. Captain Allman's conduct, according to his own admissions, is reprehensible in the highest degree. I advise that you should place these, with the other papers, before the Secretary of Customs, who is head of the Marine Department, and he will report, and suggest, no doubt, what course should be followed. The matter is urgent and should be dealt with without delay. 17/12/98. E. J. S. Mr. Glasgow,—For recommendation, please.—W. H.-J.—l7/12/98. (Urgent.)

Exn. 1. (Seal.) (A.) —Regulations relating to the Examination of Mastees and Mates in the Meecantilk Maeine. (With Appendices.)

H.—26

232

(B.) —Eepeoduotiqns of Examination-papebs on Compass-deviations, worked by Captain Yon Sohoen for Captain Allman; see insets.

Exn. Ba. (C.) —examination-papeb. (SeaL) DEVIATION OP THE COMPASS. Issued by the Board of Trade. (Problems included in Syllabus of Examination for Compass-deviation and for Extra Master's Certificates.) Port of , this day of , 18 . Question 31. —(a.) Assuming the direction of the ship's head whilst building to be N.N.E. magnetic, and the co-efficient C to be + 5° 00. Eequired the value of co-efficient B with its proper sign, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. Question 31. — (b.) Assuming co-efficient B to be + 20° 00', and co-efficient C to be — 3° 00. Eequired the direction of the ship's head whilst building, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. Question 61. —Having taken the following compass bearings of a distant object, find the object's magnetic bearing, and thence the deviation: — (a.) Magnetic bearing required : —

(b.) With the deviations as above, construct a curve of deviations on a Napier's diagram, and give the courses you would steer by the Standard Compass to make the following courses, magnetic:— Magnetic courses, W.S.W., N.N.W., E.N.E., S.S.E. Compass courses required, (c.) Supposing you have steered the following courses by the Standard Compass, find the magnetic courses made from the above curve of deviations:— Compass courses, W.N.W., N.N.E., E. by S. £ S., N.N.W. Magnetic courses required, (d.) You have taken the following bearings of two distant objects by your Standard Compass as above, with the ship's head at E. by N. J N., find the bearings, magnetic :— Compass bearings, N. £ W. and W. f S. Magnetic bearings required, Question 62. —Assuming the deviations observed with ship's head by compass to be as follow, determine the value of the co-efficients A, B, C, D, and E, and from them construct a table of deviations for ship's head by compass on every alternate point from north, round by east and south, to north again. At North, deviation 14° 00' E. At South, deviation 11° 00' W. „ N.E., „ 1° 27' W. „ S.W., „ 15° 03' E. „ East, „ 23° 42' W. „ West, „ 24° 42' E. „ S.E., „ 30° 45' W. „ N.W., „ 21° 09' E.

Ship's Head by Standard Compass. Bearing of Distant Object by Standard Compass. Deviation required. Ship's Head by Standard Compass. Bearing of Distant Object J by Standard Compass. Deviation required. North N.E. East S.E. N. 18° W. N. 25° W. N. 20° W. N. 7°W. South S.W. West. N.W. N. 4° E. N. 8° E. N. 6° E. N. 4° W.

Ship's Head by Compass. A B C D E Deviation. North. N.N.E. N.E. E.N.E. East. E.S.E. S.E. S.S.E. South. S.S.W. ■ : S.W. W.S.W. West. W.N.W. N.W. I N.N.W.

Rotation No. EXAMINATION-PAPER. __ 'DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS.

Eotation No.

MiXXI OA.

EXAMINATION-PAP-ER.

"DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS.

(Problems included in Syllabus of Examination for Compass Deviation and for Extra Master's Certificates.) Part of , this_ _day of , 189

Question 31.- — (a.) Assuming the direction of the ship's head whilst building to be Sv S? £~> magnetic, and the co-efficient C to be *"T~ o ~Z, £> Required the value of co-efficient B with its proper sign, assuming that B and 0 resulted altogether from sub-permanenij magnetism. // Question 31. —(fe.) Assuming co-eflficient B to be "/" & *, c> 3 and co-efficient C to be —-— J ,„ <i> Required the direction of the ship's head whilst building, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. m Signature of Candidate : _ 127-96] fo.VEK.

DEVIATION OF THPJ COMPASS— continued.

Question 61. —Having taken the following compass bearings of a distant object, find the object's magnetic bearing, and thence the deviation:— (a.) Magnetic bearing required:—

(b.) With the deviations as above, construct a curve of deviations on a Napier's diagram, and give the courses you would steer by the standard compass to make the following courses, magnetic : — *~I Magnetic courses, 4/ Zts . /y // /*!> -£ A . "f 4 <jip Compass courses required, B$V/ifjY. A/MjfclV. Mlf£. /3'/u jt . (c.) Supposing you have steered the following courses by the standard compass, find the magnetic courses made from the above #urve of deviations : — Compass courses, /cJ A /£/l<£. £A,tf/& 9. % k r Magnetic courses-required, A/.yt'/v*M A!.*jfc£ M/J'W. (d.) You have taken the following bearings of two distant objects by your standard compass as above : with the ship's heacLat 7i6» ™ » Ec bearings, magnetic : : — Compass bearings, yffi YZs and /f * Magnetic bearings required, /V/ 3 s*~ °*' rV\ /V, fB*Vf. M4"S. jr. zf w. ft., r£. jy< 4° yy' ' —— — #./#• yr- //.zf.w. /v.io'W. Myvr. /v.i'F. w.8 m &. m£*£~ jsti**. Signature of Candidate :_

Ship's Head Bearing of bv Distant Object by Deviation required. Standard Compass. Standard Compass. J_ . _ i North yfy$y<> //*'£2 N.E. t&Jsu* 78° £ East yi 2 _, /Z" £ s.e. * 7h y y& \ o Ship's -Head Bearing of by j Distant Object by Deviation required. Standard Compass, j Standard Oompn.ss. South i 4 C2, l "* S.W. ' ?? % % \ 75' W. West # 7t> %> /3* \fV. N-W. ?, J" \S

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Exn. Ba.

■Juestion 62.— Assxtming the deviations observed with ship's head by compass to be as follow, deter-mine the value of the co-efficients A, B, C, D, and B, and from them construct a table of deviations for ship's head by compass on every alternate point from north, round by east and south, to north again. <=*l_- * At North, deviation /4>>, f c> At South, deviation // " <**-> , NJfl, „ /-' t?** n S.W., „• /4-~*f%> „ East, „ Z/.,4ZAj , West, „ 4" 2 ~%> „ S.E., „ ? „. N.W., „ <Z,/~#9 £> tvvr iia" jxs-' *£s'£K' ±r^' 7l— ■—• -» — 41+ X &V~ A~±i a (h) ■ ~ L-——— —

Signature of Candidate: : [OVEB.

/J'JO'' —__ 3 g - 7___________, _-• - XT A ! ' A B G ' Ship s Head , , __ . by Compass. tf /* ' -J-) " A' + /l°30 -J- 5*4* + a*30' Deviation. 4. 7 a 20 ( —■ /2 "___f. __ ■//* &~~s $ o xi y^FTs-' 1 •— — 1 North. O 4 /_ so: © N.N.E. 4/ 4 X/ 32 *4 4 6 ~~ N.E. Lf- L— /7 74 9 ~S7D 4 .-T 4^ E.N.E. [4- /«/W X/ |4 4 474 4 ii East. /J- O © E.S.E. '>+ /' (Hf'LxX Xf- 4 47!— 4 _ J 1 i ; *_„; 8.E. i+/*W , L_/7 7.— <T0 — -T 4>«" i+O SO ff\« (ft'£; 4- o x; i 7*45" 'if 4- «±__£2 __. // 2 2 4 3 g gf^ X -I*^___ll___ © /•*,<) Yf 'r- O.'il- /_£* -fy'M' 4, i —_T 4.3 4-i" ~77F sr ol>'' t XX 4 _ — 0 XA 30* 3^'V* 4 4<3°4X 4 ** £* / x 0 30'4^'V> 4. jO/MrS (j A "_- // j . - 4 o *ii\t3'35'ft 1 I 4 x_____r — 4.3" 4 X S.S.E. ~|.. JtS^ft-' 0 30 South. + /'*>_>■' o "- /* 30 o 4- 0 J0-; //• 4z- ■«_. XI' Xi 1 — 4 44 — _4 X _. IFTr S.S.W. js\—-/f 33+4 6 + 0 *!: 3" ££'£ 4--4 _l_ J2i* Zi ' ____L_i7 SL~J?7 S.W. + jo/HT* + ty y - 9 s-o + f 4 © ifo$"£ ff' 9 '! 1 8 sit y~Jr£ ■ ~S7 7^s ' ~+i*Hf r +AX XI - 4 4 6 -f /"O-tf-t + ZA l\. © O - o *V4_IV? '/ W.S.W. - o 3o\ Z4 6 4l/M 4 1 4 4 _JL_£f. West. — 5?" /T' - 7/3 3 __ J) 0 6 - ~xT-&i 4- ° *- + 1°0if'± XX M'& 4 47—4 6 4-a j _h> '•*• 7J+ S £t.j— i"iX7S Q /S\+ // Ji|— 4 -j 1 i ! So xi %h°4i'£r\ W.N.W. N.W. "o " At*Cf£i N.N.W. !• + o A/ /£-0 3 4 + 44 /. 0 3 I 42- _£ 4- /#<• <?j

DEVIATION OF THE COW?ASB-~conHnued.

—zrsvsr-x?— -:rrr--~jS7--^^-^^r.r^^^lLrJji^--^, 1 AT", ■ Bgaa .. ffiTi . , nfflffl| Question 69.-/$// %* X & •//? a fc ship, being on the Equator -m longitude £?~z> ~ <£> *£j-££s Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, /<fs "5# /s -x Eequired the sun's true azimuth. /,/ - Atom f

Signature of Candidate:

Bxn, Ba.

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Question 70. — /vs/ 'So , about £»/o & //-/ mean time at ship, in latitude £$? *? /€> J , longitude if , -1> ** 4* & ~?=» Name some of the principal stars that would be in good position for determining the error of your compass. JiTi. 3</0"~ML £a. zyi *fZ)r sdiuj. 6si it-// \LL-^— t : — > r M T. $■■ AT /if tH-ei-*- tj, ...Z — 'JiJ J of (Ja-adidtii-f ." ~~~~~~

[ov»a

DEVIATION OF THE GOMl y ASBr—c<mtinve.i,

Questim 2 &'4J!h at ship, in latitude "$?.*•?& & \ ■ longitude </ /~" ■*? J~~ & ■ Correct mean time at Greenwich.by . "9 V / 9^ ~ 4~%1 <$ o . The star <%. L&r?/£xv*l bore by compass f? J/ -°& ft Bequired the deviation of the compass, the variation being Jo * cy MM^^^/ OMeefo'oro 02.—With the ship's head -£> by compass, heehng to /" p the heeling error was found to be £/v £ Bequired-the probable heeling error with ship's head ; "-r »b7 c _ compass, and heeling <Q A*J -J / J Signature Ar a

______ — .--^A^— -JL—JL—. . —— / 7 • nrirT»T J * l ' M *' a '"* W "' lll,l^!rjniMllll!mi~^-— " * M.h9>. &?* /s* o /TV ~ *» fa-Tl- z sz'3\~ ti\* VIA. /4 ££ _j. _ c , q-yqtt v

ot*srt. ■ %. M | | , .11... ■■in,,.,,,, ~i,i!,.,„.,, /i J\ dee ■W^ , =• o- /ro s-/ s^ > Ay.7 a

233

H.—26

Question 69.— 1877, 20th March, a.m. at ship, being on the Equator, in longitude 58° 50' W. Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, 19 dys. 23 hrs. 46 mins. 48 sees. Required the sun's true azimuth. Question 70. —1877, 28th June, about 3 hrs. 10 mins. a.m., mean time at ship, in latitude 39° 10' S., longitude 35° 40' E. Name some of the principal stars that would be in good position for determining the error of your compass. Question 72.— 1877, 28th June, a.m. at ship, in latitude 39° 12' S., longitude 35° 45' E. Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, 27 dys. 12 hrs. 54 mins. 00 sees. The star, a Centaur, bore by compass N. 89° 00' W. Eequired the deviation of the compass, the variation being 30° 30' westerly. Question 92. —With the ship's head S.E. by compass, heeling to starboard 7°, the heeling error was found to be 4° 00' easterly. Eequired the probable heeling error with ship's head S. by W., by the same compass, and heeling 5° to port. Signature of Candidate : .

Exn. 14c. (Seal.) (D).— DEVIATION OP THE COMPASS. Answers to Pkoblems in Syllabus. Note. — This sheet to be returned with the examination-papers. Issued by the Minister of Marine. No. 31.—(a) (b) No. 61. —(a) Magnetic bearing required ; North South N.E. S.W. East West S.E. N.W. (*) ' I 1 1 i » - I L - • Pi I A No. 62.—C0-efficients A B C D and E Ship's Head. Dcv». | Ship's Head. Dcv". | Ship's Head. DeV. No. 69.— A.T. Ship Dec" Eg" T. J 3 - — Arc I. Arc 11. 2 2 True Azimuth By Towson. Arc I. Arc. 11. True Az. No. 70.— M.T. Green. E.A.M. © Sid. Time of Obs". A.T. ShipEEnq n T. E. of Mer. — W. of Mer.— No. 72.—Sid. Time of Obs n M.T.S. Star's E.A. A.T.S.EEnq n T Star's H. Z Star's Dec" True Az. Compass Error Dev n By Towson True Az. Compass Error Dev 11 , No. 92.—Heeling Error

(E).—Handbook to Beall's Compass Deviation, \ 30-H; 26,

H.—26

234

(F).— Deviascope Examination Questions cob Ordinaey Master's Cektificate. (For Examiner's Use only.) [Note for Examinees. —This form is in no case to be shown to the oandidate,but is intended for a guide to the Examiner how he is required to conduct the examination. The first eighteen (18) questions must be answered and illustrated correctly on the deviascope, otherwise the candidate is to be rejected; and, in addition, the candidate must answer and illustrate correctly ten (10) out of the twenty (20) questions which are marked with an asterisk. This is not to debar the Examiner asking all the questions on the form, and which the candidate is really supposed to know. The first eighteen (18) questions and ten (10) asterisk questions answered correctly and illustrated shall be the minimum number of questions which a candidate for an ordinary master's certificate must answer satisfactorily. The questions which the candidate has not answered or illustrated correctly are to be underlined in ink by the Examiner, and this form, together with the candidate's curve of deviation (on Napier's diagram) taken from the deviascope, is to be forwarded to the Marine Department along with the examination-papers. The candidate, when operating on the deviascope, is to be allowed full control of the instrument, provided the Examiner thiDks he ia competent to take charge of it.] 1. Clear away all magnets and iron from the model. 2. Set the north point of the dumb-card on stand to correct magnetic north. Swing ship round, and show that there is no deviation. 3. What condition of the iron of a ship will produce — D ? 4. Swing ship's head to N. 8., enter divided beams, and show what deviations they produce, and compensate —D, ship upright; then remove globes again. 5. Eemove divided beams, and show that continuous fore-and-aft iron also produces — D. 6. What condition of the iron of a ship will produce + D ? 7. Show first of all that divided fore-and-aft iron produces + D. 8. Eemove divided fore-and-aft beams from the deck, enter continuous transverse beams for representing coefficient + D, clamp them with the tangent-screws, and show deviations. 9. What do you understand by the term sub-permanent magnetism of an iron ship ? and state when and how it is acquired, and which is the sub-permanent red and which is the blue pole, and why it is called sub-permanent magnetism. 10. Supposing ship were of iron, and she were built with her head on the stocks in a S.W. by S. direction, what would be the horizontal direction of the red pole, and also the blue pole, of the sub-permanent magnetism of the ship ? and insert the magnets numbered 1 and 2, painted all red and all blue, in the radial grooves on the deck to represent them, and show effect on north and east. Note. — The Examiner should then remove magnets 1 and 2 from where the candidate has placed them, and insert them into some other of the radial grooves on the deck, and then put the question, viz., — 11. Tell me the direction her head was on during the time of her building on the stocks. 12. Place the sternpost in position, and note effect. 13. Have you any reason for placing the sternpost in position with ship's head at east (or west) ; why not at north (or south) ? Note. — The Examiner will now point out that all the disturbing forces are in position affecting compass, ship upright. 14. Swing ship's head round, and find correct magnetic bearing from (a) eight equidistant compass bearings, (b) from cardinal points, (c) from north and south points, (d) from east and west points, and thence the deviations. 15. Prove the correctness of your observations by dumb-card on stand. 16. Construct curve of deviations on Napier's diagram. 17. Show how magnetic direction of ship's head can be found by " pelorus," and thence the deviation. 18. Show how ship can be put north (or south), east (or west), or any other magnetic point, when at sea (or in harbour), for adjusting the compensating magnets. Note. — The candidate must answer and illustrate the first eighteen questions correctly. * 19. Show how you can determine the deviation of the compass by reciprocal bearings. * 20. Place the ship's head correct magnetic north by dumb-card on stand or by "pelorus," and compensate coefficient C. * 21. Place the ship's head east, correct magnetic, and compensate sternpost by vertical bar, and coefficient B by a permanent magnet. * 22a. If the part of B, due to induced magnetism in vertical soft iron, as well as the part due to sub-permanent magnetism, are corrected by a magnet alone, as is generally the case, what is frequently the consequence on the ship changing her magnetic latitude and hemisphere ? * 22b. How should each of these two parts of B, then, strictly speaking, be compensated? * 23. Which are the only safe means for finding out the exact position on board ship where the Flinders bar should be placed ? * 24. Swing round to south and west and show results, correcting half of residual error on these points (if any). * 25. Bring ship's head north, and place quadrantal brackets in position. * 26. Compensate at north-east by globes. * 27. Swing round again and show residual deviations (if any) on the principal eight points. * 28. State at what distance, as a general rule, the magnets and soft-iron correctors should be placed from the compass needles, and what would the consequence be if they are placed too near the needles. * 29. Describe clearly the three principal causes of the heeling error on board an iron ship. 30. Head her north, and then east, and test whether tube for heeling corrector is immediately under centre of compass card. 31. Head north again, remove globes, heel over, say, 20 degrees, and show effect of beams.

235

H.—26

5" 32. Place the magnet for representing and producing heeling error from sub-permanent magnetism into tube, and show deviation. * 33. On what courses does the heeling error vanish, and on what courses is it the greatest? Swing ship's head round, and show effect. * 34. To which side of the ship, in the majority of cases, is the south point of the compass drawn in the Southern Hemisphere ? and show by the model what effect this has on the assumed position of the ship when she is steering on northern, and also on southerly, courses. * 35. The effects being as you state, on what courses would you keep away, and on what courses would you keep closer to the wind, in order to make good a given compass course ? * 36. Compensate the heeling error by vertical magnet, but first lift globes on again, and show how beneficial they are for compensating the heeling error arising from vertical induced magnetism in continuous transverse or vertical iron. 37. Heel over again other way, and observe if the heeling compensation is correct. If not correct, halve the residual error by moving the magnet up or down as required. 38. Lift globes off again for a moment, and show effect. * 39. Place the magnet for compensating the heeling error into position by means of the " dipping needle," ship perfectly upright, and verify this method of adjusting the heeling-error compensator by heeling the model over, port and starboard. * 40. Remove altogether the heeling apparatus, the globes, magnets, &c, and slip in divided athwartship beams, &c, and show the effect on heeling error produced by co-efficient — D. * 41. Remove beams, &c, and explain what is meant by " retentive magnetism." * 42. Supposing ship to have been steering in a north-west direction for a long time, insert one of the magnets painted all red to represent the polarity of the retentative magnetism in its respective radial groove on the deck, and show the effect produced in altering your course to north. 43. Why is knowledge of the magnetic dip and the earth's horizontal force important in dealing with compass-deviations ? 44. Describe the meaning of the term " vertical force "of the earth. Where is it the greatest and where the least ?

(G). —Supplement to Towson's Peactical Information on the Deviation of the Compass.

(H).—Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4. (See Exhibit U.)

(I).—See Exhibit U.

The following remarks have no connection whatever with Mr. Hutcheson's statements: — During 1896 the question of granting Captain Jones, of the " Duco," a certificate of service as master in the coastal trade was brought under notice and considered. From time to time Captain Yon Schoen took a prominent part in it. You will, perhaps, remember that he and Jones interviewed you. You sent for me to give particulars ; I had none to give, not having personally seen Jones's papers. A day or so afterwards you sent me Jones's papers. In the envelope was a memorandum to this effect: "Can you do anything for this man?" After examining Jones's papers, 1 replied on same envelope that I did not think so. My object in mentioning this incident is that some days afterwards Captain Yon Schoen showed me the same envelope, and inferred that I had blocked the way. I told him it was not so, and that I considered Jones as good a coasting master as there was in New Zealand. From this date up to the time of your departure for England I did not hear any more on the subject until the Hon. Hall-Jones told me he had a communication from you on Jones's behalf. Knowing Jones personally as a good seaman and captain, and well capable of doing any coastal work, I suggested to the Hon. Hall-Jones that he might be allowed to go up for examination. Gbo. Allman. I returned Mr. Jones's papers and certificates, envelope and all, to Mr. Jones.—E. J. S. Placed before me.—l6/12/98.—E. J. S.

The Hon. the Minister for Marine. I have gone carefully through these papers, and am shocked at what is therein disclosed. Captain Allman's conduct, according to his own admissions, is reprehensible in the highest degree. I advise that you should place these papers before the Secretary Customs, who is the head of the Marine Department, and he will report, and suggest, no doubt, what course should be followed. Prompt and decisive action is necessary. Attach these to the other papers. 17/12/98. R. J- S. Mr. Glasgow,—For recommendation, please. —W. H.-J.—l7/12/98. (Urgent.)

Hon. Minister of Marine. 1. I have the honour, in accordance with your instructions, to report as follows on Captain Allman's memorandum on Mr. Hutcheson's charges : — 2. Captain Allman's admissions that he was obliged to place himself under Captain Yon Schoen's tuition in view of the new regulations governing examinations in the use of the deviascope is fatal to his standing as Chief Examiner. If Captain Yon Schoen could so master

a,—26.

236

the details of these regulations as to understand what was required from candidates in reply to the questions stated, the inability of the Government Examiner to do the same without tuition raises a serious doubt, to say the least, of his competency. In any case, he has made a serious mistake and indiscretion in seeking assistance from a teacher of navigation whose pupils would come before him for examination. 8. There is the further admission that he got Captain Yon Schoen to work a set of papers for his (Captain Allman's) own use and guidance—that is, to work out the answers to questions copied from a Board of Trade examination-paper. The Chief Examiner should be able to work out answers himself to any problems. 4. Captain Allman does not meet the insinuation clearly involved in Mr. Hutcheson's remarks —namely, that the candidates' answers are copied from the working-out of certain examinationpapers prepared outside the department, errors, &c, being the same in both. Captain Allman either has not seen the significance of the charge, or he has not seen his way to meet it directly. It is scarcely necessary to comment on Captain Allman's explanation with reference to the candidate whose paper contained a question put by Captain Edwin on obviously wrong premises. The most serious charge in Mr. Hutcheson's speech is that relating to the issue of a certificate to James Jones, at present master of the " Duchess." Captain Allman admits that he accepted answers, which were not written in his presence, but elsewhere. He has reported that James Jones passed his examination, whereas, as a matter of fact, no examination had taken place. The plea put forward is that he acted out of compassion, and on the earnest entreaty of Jones. This, however, really aggravates the offence from a departmental point of view, for no one who displays such a lamentable want of backbone, as well as principle, is fit for the position of Chief Examiner. This offence overshadows in importance any question as to competency in connection with the circumstances referred to in the second and third paragraphs of this memorandum. Were the question only one of competency, resignation might be allowed; but, under the circumstances connected with the Jones certificate, I regret that I cannot suggest this course, especially as the question of cancelling the certificates must be faced. It would, in my opinion, be more difficult to cancel the master's certificate if the officer upon whose false representations it was issued is simply allowed to resign. . It is therefore with very great pain and regret that I feel it to be my duty to report that, in my opinion, Captain Allman has been guilty of conduct which renders him unfit to continue in the Civil Service, and if this view is sustained by the Government I see no alternative but his dismissal. If adequate ground for less harsh treatment, but still sufficient to meet the gravity of the offence, could be put forward, I would only be too glad to consider it. At present Ido not see any other alternative. The Civil Service Act allows an inquiry to be held if any accused Civil m servant denies the truth of any charges brought against him. I think Captain Allman should have the section of the Act pointed out to him. He can scarcely venture now to deny the truth of the charge in the matter of Jones; but, notwithstanding, I think he should be definitely asked whether he desires a formal inquiry. In the meantime he should be suspended. (W. T. G.) This course may save complications hereafter. Captain Allman has drawn attention to section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," which makes it a misdemeanour to make or assist in making any false representation for the purpose of obtaining a certificate, and he suggests the prosecution of Captain Yon Schoen. lam very doubtful whether an indictment could be framed. Captain Yon Schoen has undoubtedly aimed at getting a certificate for Jones in an improper way, but whether he has personally made false representations is a matter of grave doubt. As to Jones, so far as I can see, he made no secret of the facts, and made no false representations. The false representation which obtained the certificate for Jones was that of the Government Examiner, who reported that Jones had passed the examination. lam of the opinion that Jones's certificate must be cancelled, but this should not be done without legal advice. In the event of dismissal being decided on, it will be necessary to consider the very serious question whether it is not the bounden duty of the department to go further, and to order a prosecution of Captain Allman under section 82. The view which, the Board of Trade may take of the circumstances must not be lost sight of. The disclosure which will be inevitable will damage the reputation of New Zealand certificates, and abstinence from prosecution may be construed to imply that this is not an isolated case, and that the department is afraid of further disclosures. It is, however, scarcely necessary at the present stage to give a definite opinion as to the advisability of prosecuting. 17th December, 1898. ' W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Mr. Glasgow,—Kindly see Mr. Eeid in re legal position.—W. H. -J.— lB/12/98.

Hon. Minister. I have seen Mr. Eeid, who has very kindly discussed the general question of procedure without going into details. The following is my further recommendation after this interview. Ido not wish it to be understood that Mr. Eeid is responsible for what I state, as there is nothing in writing between us. The following steps appear to be necessary : (1.) Suspension. (2.) An inquiry under section 26 of " The Civil Service Act, 1866." Mr. Reid thinks that this is required, notwithstanding the fact that Captain Allman does not deny the truth of the accusation. (3.) Formulation by the department of charges. (4.) Transmission of a copy of the charges to Captain Allman (see No. 23, Civil Service regulations). (5.) The appointment by the Governor of a Board of two persons to make inquiry. Section 4of " The Civil Service Act Amendment Act, 1871." Mr. Eeid expressed the opinion that the proceedings should not be too precipitate, as it might possibly be advisable to have the papers of all the candidates passed by Captain Allman examined

237

H.—26

by an expert, with the view of discovering whether or not there are more cases. This course might be desirable, but there are two difficulties in the way : First, I am at present unable to suggest any suitable expert who is not an Examiner ; and secondly, the examination would take so much time that the suspension which should take place at once would be unduly prolonged. I think that it is improbable that other cases of this kind exist. In the meantime Mr. Allport will look through the papers and see whether any irregularity is noticeable. I suggest Mr. J. C. Martin as one of the Board. The other should be a nautical man, I think, if possible, but at present lam unable to name any suitable person. The question of cancellation of certificates and of prosecuting any person or persons must be held over until after the inquiry. 19th December, 1898. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Mr. Allport. Referring to Mr. John Hutcheson's speech in the House in August last, in which he comments on the circumstances under which, presumably, Captains Bendall and McLellan obtained certificates of competency in compass deviation, I have to ask you to be good enough to put in writing your recollection of confidential statements made to you by Captain Yon Schoeu bearing on the examinations in question. 20th December, 1898. W. T. Glasgow. (Names not mentioned by Mr. Hutcheson.)

Secretary, Marine Department. Please see reply attached. —George Allport.—2o/12/98.

Secretary, Marine Department. In reply to your memorandum of this date, asking me to state in writing my recollection of confidential statements made to me by Captain Yon Schoen bearing on the examinations of Captains Bendall and McLellan in compass-deviation, I have to state as follows :— One day Captain Yon Schoen called at this office, and in course of conversation he stated that the mode of conducting examinations in Wellington was becoming worse, and that something ought to be done to place them on a better footing. On my asking him ia what way they were improperly carried out, he at first did not appear inclined to give any particulars, but afterwards said that he would show me that there were good grounds for his statement if I would take the information confidentially. On my saying that I would accept the information as confidential, he went away and brought a book to me. He said that he had prepared certain papers for Captain Allman for the examination in compass-deviation, a copy of which was in the book, and that he had good reason to believe that Captains Bendall and McLellan had been given these papers to copy at their examinations instead of doing the work themselves ; that if the work in his book were compared with their papers the working of the questions would be found to be identical, including the copying of some errors which he pointed out in the book. He left the book with me, and after he had gene I compared the work with the papers, and it appeared to me to be identical. Captain Yon Schoen afterwards called for the book, and when I gave it to him he asked me if I was satisfied that he was correct in believing that the work had been copied from a paper of which his book was a copy. As near as I can recollect, I replied that I was sorry to say that I was. 20/12/98. George Allport.

Captain Yon Schoen. I would be much obliged if you will- inform me whether Mr. Allport's statements are correct. Would you be so good as to return this paper to-morrow with your reply on it ? 20/12/98. W. T. Glasgow.

Secretary, Marine Department. The attached statements of Mr. Allport are correct.—George yon Sghoen.—2l/12/98.

Captain Yon Schoen. 1 presume that under present circumstances the information which you gave to Mr. Allport is no longer confidential. Please state whether you agree in this. 21/12/98. W. T. Glasgow.

Secretary, Marine Department. Agreed.—George yon Schoen.—2l/12/98.

Secretary, Marine Department. In response to your request for an explanation of my reasons for not informing you sooner of the information which Captain Yon Schoen gave me regarding the alleged improper passing of Captains Jones, Bendall, and McLellan, I have to state that when Captain Yon Schoen, in the course of conversation in my office, alleged that the mode of conducting the examinations in Wellington was getting worse I asked him in what way, and after some hesitation he said that he would show me that there were good grounds for his allegation if I would take the information confidentially and treat it as such. As it did not strike me at the time that the information which he intended to give was of the nature that it turned out to be, I said that I would treat what he said as confidential, and he then went away and brought some papers and a book. He then told me of the part he had taken in connection with the preparation of the papers for Jones, and that he had supplied Captain Allman with a copy of the compass-deviation work which was in his book, and which, he believed, had been given to Captains Bendall and McLellan to copy from when they

238

H.—26

went up for examination. He left the papers and book with me so that I might compare them , with the examination-papers and satisfy myself whether such was the case or not. After he had left I compared the work, and when he came for the documents he asked me whether he was not correct. I said that I was sorry to say that I believed he was. I also said that, as I had promised to treat the information as confidential, I should feel in honour bound compelled to do so, but that I considered that he should agree to its being communicated to the Secretary of the department. This he would not agree to, giving as his main reason that he would never do anything that would injure Jones, who had been a pupil of his. On different occasions when I saw him afterwards I endeavoured to get him either to communicate the information to the Government or to release me from the promise to keep it confidential, but without success. As soon as I read the statements made in the House by Mr. Hutcheson, I knew that Yon Schoen must have supplied them to him ; and I then saw him and told him that as he had done so he must either communicate what he knew to the Government, or I should consider myself released from the promise which I had given him and inform the department of what I knew. He promised to think over it, and the next day he told me that he had informed Mr. Hutcheson that he was willing to see the Premier and communicate the information to him, but he repeated that he would not furnish proof of Jones's case without a promise that his certificate should not be interfered with. Shortly afterwards he saw me and told me that Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, who was willing to receive the information from him without touching Jones,whose name had not, however, he said, been mentioned to the Premier, but only his case referred to, and that he was expecting to be sent for any day. This is the history of the matter up to the date I told you of what I knew. On that morning I found, on going out of your office, where I had been with papers, that Captain Allman had asked Mr. Grix to give him Jones's papers; and as I then thought that he probably wished to destroy them, and as I had not heard that the Premier had seen Yon Schoen, I considered that I was justified in telling you what I did. I admit that I made a mistake in giving Yon Schoen the promise that I did, and should not have done so had I known at the time the nature of the information he was about to communicate; but, having given it, I felt that I should do a discreditable thing if I broke it, and in consequence, much as it was against my own peace of mind, I felt bound to keep it until I got an opportunity of being released from it. At the same time, I did what I could to keep the evidence intact by initialling each examination-paper on the back, and locking them up to prevent their being abstracted or tampered with. I may add that, if I had decided to tell you what I knew as soon as the information was given to me, Captain Allman would, no doubt, have denied its truth, and Yon Schoen might also have denied that he had told me anything, as at that time he was very emphatic that he was not at the time prepared to go further, in which case, having no other evidence than my own word, I might have been considered the fabricator of statements for the purpose of injuring Captain Allman. 21/12/98. Geoegb Allpokt. Hon. Minister of Marine, —For your information.—W. T. Glasgow.—2l/12/98. Seen.—W. H.-J.—2l/12/98. This is pure fabrication on the part of Yon Schoen, or he has been misinformed. Mr Jones's name was not mentioned, nor was anything whatever said about certificates or the interfering therewith. I obtained from Mr. Hutcheson the name of his informant, and said I would send for him. On consideration I altered my mind, and, from what has taken place, it is a good job I did, as I have asked Mr. Hutcheson to give me his recollection of what transpired at the interview. J. 5.—26/12/98.

Mr. Allport. Referring to your memorandum dated the 21st instant, I have to ask you to be good enough to give further information, as follows: (1.) Details, so far as you can remember, of what Captain Yon Schoen told you of the part he had taken in connection with the preparation of the papers for Jones. (2.) The date, as near as possible, of the conversation with Captain Yon Schoen in which he gave information about the Jones case, and those of Bendall and McLellan. (3.) The date, as near as possible, on which you told Captain Yon Schoen that he must release you from your promise to treat what he had. said as confidential. (4.) The date, as near as possible, on which Captain Yon Schoen told you that Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, and that he (Captain Yon Schoen) was expecting to be sent for. (5.) The date, as near as possible, on which you informed me of the confidential information given to you by Captain Yon Schoen. 28/12/98. W. T. Glasgow.

Secretary, Marine Department. In reply to your memorandum of this date, I beg to state as follows :— 1. As near as I can recollect, Captain Yon Schoen stated that Captain Jones came to him and, after telling him that the Minister of Marine had, after consultation with Captain Allman, agreed to allow him to be examined for a home-trade master's certificate without being in possession of a mate's certificate, he asked him to work out a set of papers for him, as he could not do the necessary writing himself. He said that he worked out a set of papers, held Jones's hand while he copied them, and gave him the questions for the work on separate sheets of paper. He said that Jones took the copies away for the purpose, as he understood, of getting the Examiners to accepi them instead of his doing the work in the examination-room. 2. As near as I can remember, it was about the beginning of this year that Yon Schoen gave me the information about Jones, Bendall, and McLellan.

239

H.—26

3. It was very soon after the date of Mr. Hutcheson's speech in the House (26th August, 1898) that I saw Yon Schoen and told him that he must release me from my promise to treat the information as confidential. lam not sure whether it was as soon as I saw the. purport of his remarks in the newspapers, or whether it was when the number of Hansard containing the full report of the speech came out. 4. It was a few days after I told Yon Schoen that he must release me from my promise to keep the information confidential that he told me that Mr. Hutcheson had seen the Premier, and that he (Yon Schoen) was expecting to be sent for—that is, early in September. 5. It was either a day or two before or a day or two after the Prince of Wales' Birthday that I informed you of the information which had been given to me by Yon Schoen. The Premier and the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones were down in Canterbury at the time. You said that you must tell them as soon as they returned. 28/12/98. George Allpobt. Seen by Right Hon. Mr. Seddon.—29/12/98.—W. T. G.

Hon. Minister of Marine. I confirm Mr. Allport's statement in last paragraph (5). I lost no time in bringing the matter before you on your return from the South. I think the Premier was absent then, but you saw him about the matter, as far as I can remember, about a week after I had spoken to you. My memorandum to Captain Allman requiring a report from him is dated the 29th November, 1898. This was written by verbal direction of yourself and the Premier. Captain Allman's report is dated the 13th December, 1898. 29/12/98. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine.

Dear Sib, — Premier's Office, Wellington, 26th December, 1898. During the investigation in respect to the examination of masters and mates, and which you referred to in your speech in the House, one of the officers has made the following statement: " That Captain Yon Schoen had seen him during the session and had told him that Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.8., had seen the Premier, who was willing to receive the information from Captain Yon Schoen without touching Jones, whose name had not, however, Yon Schoen said, been mentioned to the Premier." Seeing that I gave no such promise as to Jones, or as to any other person who had obtained certificates —in fact, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates or interfering therewith was never mentioned—will you kindly oblige by giving me your recollection of what took place at the interview ? Yours, &c, John Hutcheson, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. R. J. Seddon.

Dear Sir,— Boulcott Street, 27th December, 1898. Your memorandum bearing yesterday's date came to hand this evening. While asking me for my recollection as to what took place at a certain interview, you say, " In fact, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates or interfering therewith was never mentioned." I also am bound to state that, to the best of my belief, such subject was never mentioned. And, further, I can positively assure you that I never made such statement to Captain Yon Schoen, as here, again, so far as I can recollect, the question of certificates was not mentioned between us. Yon Schoen, while expressing the greatest solicitude for his clients, seemed to rely for safety on being able to preserve his incognito, and even until this day he has not disclosed the name to me. I only discovered some few days ago the identity of the man in question; and, while I regret to find he is one who I have always regarded as a friend, yet I am in honour and duty bound to repeat that indemnity was not asked for by me, nor offered by you, nor did I leave Captain Yon Schoen to believe such was so. I am, &c, Right Hon. R. J. Seddon, Premier. John Hutcheson. The Secretary, Customs, —Attach this to the file of papers. Mr. Hutcheson bears out my recollection of what took place, and confirms what I mentioned on Mr. Allport's memorandum in respect to Captain Yon Schoen's statement. —R. J. S.—2B/12/98.

Hon. Minister of Marine. Premier's Office, Wellington, 27th December, 1898. As requested by you before your departure for Home, I have carefully gone through these papers, and indorse the course recommended by the Secretary. Nothing but a full investigation will meet the case; otherwise a doubt is cast upon the genuineness of the certificates which have been, issued. On reading Captain Edwin's explanation as to the examinations of" Captains Bendall and McLellan, some doubt arises in my mind as to whether or not the charges as drafted in this case against Captain Bendall are too strong, and as to whether the evidence on the papers warrants the reflection which is unmistakably cast upon them ; for in their case we have only the statement of Captain Yon Schoen to Mr. Allport, in which the former stated that he (Captain Yon Schoen) had supplied Captain Allman with a copy of the compass-deviation work which was in his book, and which he believed had been given to Captains Bendall and McLellan to copy from when they went up for examination. Captain Edwin says, "Bβ examination of W. Bendall and James McLellan, your statement that the papers of William Bendall are almost verbatim with the answers given in Towson's book is quite correct, and I think it will be found to be much the same with the papers of most of the candidates for examination in the syllabus; and this is because the candidates learn the answers to all the questions word for word, and when filling in their papers they will not willingly

H.—26

240

depart from the exact words of the answers given in Towson's book. The above remarks apply also to the examination of James McLellan." Captain Edwin further states, " Both William Bendall .and James MeLellan gave most satisfactory evidence by the use of the deviascope that they had carefully made themselves acquainted with its working and its application to the written questions of the examination." I think it would be well if the papers of other captains who have been up for examination were looked into, in order to see if what Captain Edwin alleges is correct, as the result of such an examination might throw further light upon the subject ; and, seeing that Captain Edwin was coexaminer with Captain Allman in respect to the examination of Captain Jones and Captains Bendall and MeLellan, and has signed the certificates, it would appear to me that his conduct should, in connection with such examination, be also made the subject of inquiry. Mr. Allport's conduct in connection with this unfortunate affair is also reprehensible, for he is the next officer to the Secretary controlling the Marine Department, and the information conveyed to him by Captain Yon Schoen, even though confidential, was of such a grave character—the lives of persons and property being at stake—that he should have communicated the nature thereof to his superior officer, the Secretary of the department, even though he had withheld the name of his informant; for, had it not been that the matter was brought up in the House by Mr. Huteheson, the member for Wellington, the information would, according to his own showing, have still been kept back from the head of his department and the Ministry, and the alleged wrongdoing have continued for an indefinite period. Mr. Allport, in his memorandum, does not state that the information given to him by Captain Yon Schoen after Mr. Hutcheson had made his speech was given in confidence. Mr. Hutcheson made his speech on the 26th August last, but the date is not given by Mr. Allport upon which he states that he told the Secretary of Marine what he knew. I think that date should be fixed, for I presume that immediately the Secretary was in possession of the information he placed the matter before you as Minister of Marine, and commenced to make the necessary investigation. I note that Captain Allinan's explanation is dated the 13th December. The Secretary, with his departmental experience, will be best able to judge as to what should be done in Mr. Allport's case. He admits that he had come to the conclusion.that there had been a wrongdoing, and very properly and very carefully places in safe keeping the papers and evidence of the same, but at the same time refrained from placing the matter before the head! of his department and the Minister in charge thereof, who really ought to have been the first to have been acquainted with what was alleged to have been going on. No time should be lost in appointing the Board. I quite approve of the appointment of Mr. Martin, as recommended by the Secretary, but I fear there will be a difficulty in obtaining another member of the Board within the Civil Service who has nautical experience; and, seeing that expert evidence may be called, to avoid delay it would probably be as well to appoint the head of one of the departments to act with Mr. Martin, and also to ascertain whether those selected are prepared to act forthwith. In respect to Captain Yon Schoen, it is perhaps worth while to await developments, for, in my opinion, there is sufficient on the papers to warrant my coming to the conclusion that he coached Captain Jones, prepared the papers for him, and knew the object for which they were to be used. He subsequently attempted to stipulate—knowing a certificate had been obtained by fraud—that it should not be cancelled, because Mr. Jones was a pupil of his ; that, if Captain Allman is to be believed, he promised to " make it worth his while " if Captain Allman passed his other candidates, which he quotes when he gave the information to Mr. Allport confidentially, and he must have known that this placed Mr. Allport in a false position; and he also sought to obtain an interview with me, perhaps with the same object in view. The object he had in view, however, is obvious, and I sincerely hope that his conduct will be brought under review by the proper authorities. R. J. Seddon. (Urgent.) Mr. Glasgow,—Kindly lay the whole matter before the Solicitor-General for his recommendation as to the course that should be taken.—W. H.-J.—7/1/99.

Hon. Minister. Referring to the Premier's memorandum, dated the 27th ultimo, in which he approves of my recommendation as to the course to be taken in the matter of Captain Allman, I have to inform you that further action was stayed by direction of the Premier on account of a suggestion made verbally by the Solicitor-General that it would be better, first of all, to submit the papers of candidates examined by Captain Allman to an expert to ascertain whether there is evidence of further irregularities, and, if so, to what extent. In consequence of this it was arranged, with the Premier's approval, to bring Captain Marciel to Wellington for that purpose. Captain Marciel will be in a position to report on Monday, the 9th instant. The Solicitor-General was apparently disposed to think that the circumstances warranted prosecution of the parties concerned, a course which might be considered when the extent of the delinquencies was discovered. In the meantime it has occurred to me that time might be saved if the possibility of prose- . cuting in the only case about which there is absolute certainty that certificate was obtained through dishonest means were considered. So far as I can see, if a charge-were laid against Captain Allman under section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," the only evidence will be that of Mr. Allport, who could only state what Yon Schoen said to him—namely, that Captain Jones came to him and, after telling him that he had obtained permission to be examined for a home-trade master's certificate, asked him to work out a set of papers for him, as he could not do the necessary writing himself; that he worked out the papers, held Jones's hand while he copied them, and gave him the questions on separate sheets o£ paper. He said that Jones took the copies away for the purpose, as he understood, of getting the Examiners to accept them instead of

241

H,—26

requiring him to do the work in the examination-room. This would have to be verified by Yon Schoen, who might or might not support Mr. Allport. Yon Schoen might consider that he was open in some way to be implicated, and might therefore choose to he reticent as to what he said to Mr. Allport. Jones's papers could be placed before the Court, but the difficulty would be to prove the charge that Jones did not write them in the examination-room. Captain Edwin could not be brought as a witness, because a charge would have to be laid against him as well as Captain Allman. If Yon Schoen is called as a witness, I presume that would prevent the department from laying a charge against him, and if the department find ground for laying a charge against him I think it is not possible to call him as a witness against Allman. So far, therefore, as the charge against Allman is concerned, I do not see where the evidence to support it can come from, and if the jury acquits, the department will be in a more difficult position than at present to deal with him under the Civil Service Act. As to laying a charge against Yon Schoen under the Shipping and Seamen's Act, there is no doubt that he has conspired with Jones to obtain a certificate improperly, but he has not personally made any "false representations," so far as I can see. The difficulty seems to be that Allman, Yon Schoen, and Jones are all guilty in this matter, the first named especially; but if an information is laid against one the evidence of one or both of the others is necessary, and the question is, would they be compelled to give evidence which might incriminate them ? If they abstain from giving evidence, the charge will, it appears to me, fall to the ground. The evidence derived from an inspection of Jones's papers is no doubt very strong, but it is, I think, ineffective without the examination of Jones or Yon Schoen. If Jones could be got to admit that he could not write anything more than his own name, and if he could be examined on the clear indications of pencil marks on the papers, something might be brought out. 7/1/99. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. In any case, Captain Edwin's evidence would be very doubtful in view of his written explanation.—W. T. G. Mr. Glasgow,—We should be guided by the opinion of the Crown Law Officer as to the course to be taken. I expected a statement of the case would have been submitted to the Solicitor-General before now. Kindly prepare this statement as early as possible.—W. H.-J. —7/1/99. Lay this and the other papers before Mr. Eeid for his recommendation.—W. H.-J.

The Solicitor-General. The allegation is that James Jones did not write the answers to some of the questions in his examination for a home-trade master's certificate in the examination-room before the Examiners, and that Captains Allman and Edwin falsely certified that Jones had passed his examination. That Jones brought the answers already written out to the examination-room, and some of these answers were accepted by the Examiners as valid. The proof is as follows: — The writing of the answers does not correspond with Jones's signature. That Captain Yon Schoen informed Mr. Allport some time ago that he (Yon Schoen), worked out papers for Jones, and held the latter'shand while he copied them. That Captain Allman admits that Jones brought answers already written out to the examination-room, and that some of these were destroyed, but others were accepted. Captain Edwin, who signed the certificate conjointly with Captain Allman that Jones had passed his examination, states that Jones brought the written answers to the examination-room, but he (Edwin) believed they were torn up. He saw some of them torn up. Under the circumstances, can an information be laid against Captains Allman and Edwin under section 32 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," or against James Jones, or Captain Yon Schoen; or can any or all of these persons be proceeded against under any other Act for using fraudulent means to obtain the certificate which James Jones is now possessed of. 7/1/99. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. [The examination of Jones took place on the 19th July, 1897.]

Having considered the within memorandum and the papers accompanying the same, which were before me to-day, I think these disclose the elements of criminal offences under the 32nd section of " The Shipping and Seaman's Act, 1877," on the part of Captains Allman, Jones, and Yon Schoen. On the facts admitted by Captain Allman in his confidential report of last month, I think his breach of duty as a public officer in assisting in the fraudulent obtaining by Jones of his certificate as a master constitutes an offence of a grave nature. Assuming Allman's statement to be correct as regards Captain Edwin, it would seem he has only been guilty of negligence as an Examiner; at all events, there is no evidence on the papers before me which shows otherwise. I think the papers should at once be submitted to the Crown Solicitor to take such proceedings under the enactment above referred to as he deems advisable, whether op the evidence now available or such other evidence as may be procurable. It may be necessary to ascertain whether any one of the incriminated parties is prepared to disclose fully what took place, so as to make the case as complete as possible. There would be no use proceeding with any of these cases upon insufficient evidence, nor unless there was a reasonable prospect of conviction. The 32nd section of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," makes the offences there provided for misdemeanours, and the latter, under section 289 of the same Act, are punishable by fine or imprisonment, with or without hard labour. As the examination of Jones took place on the 31— H. 26,

242

H.-26

19th July, 1897, the time has gone by within which proceedings could be taken summarily underthe above enactment. : . , . : ■. . The Crown Solicitor should be asked to report to the, department before any proceeding is taken. 9/1/99. : : W. S. Ebid. Mr. Glasgow. (Urgent). —Eefer to Crown Solicitor accordingly.—W. H.-J.—lo/1/99.

Opinion re Charges under "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." In this matter I have perused the file of papers, and I understand that I am asked to advise as to whether or not a criminal prosecution will lie against all or any of the persons implicated. There are two possible offences which should be considered in reference to the circumstances of this case : (1.) A charge of conspiracy. (2.) A charge laid under section 32 of the Shipping and Seamen's Act of 1877. 1. As to (1), I am clearly of opinion that the facts so far ascertained do not justify the laying of an information for conspiracy. Without going into the question as to whether the various definitions of conspiracy under the Code apply, it is sufficient to say that in all cases there must be proof of a concerted scheme agreed upon by the persons charged, and preceding the commission of the offence. No such proof appears on the facts submitted, and it seems unlikely that any such evidence would at any time hereafter be available. It would be competent under this head, of course, to lay a charge against the two (Captains Allman and Jones) who were present in the examination-room when the matter was arranged. It seems clear (on Captain Allman's statement) that there was an agreement by them to obtain the certificate applied for in a fraudulent manner ; but here, again, it would evidently be useless to lay a joint information against the two. There is practically no evidence (Captain Edwin's being entirely insufficient) to prove the offence beyond that of the two persons who would stand charged. But any written or verbal statement made before trial by Captain Allman would not be admitted as against Mr. Jones ; also, no statement so made by the latter would be admissible against Captain Allman. The evidence of conspiracy, therefore, is practically nil. 2. The next question (2) arises as to whether a prosecution could be sustained under section 32 of the above-mentioned Act. No question of concerted action arises here, and the case against, each individual is to be considered separately. It is to be assumed that the charge would be sustained against any one by proof that he had actually made or had been an accessory to making a false declaration with a view of obtaining the certificate. But in each case to succeed there must be proof: (a.) That a representation was made", (b.) That the purpose of such representation was to induce the issue of the certificate, (c.) That such representation was wilfully false. Taking the cases separately, I am of opinion as follows: — 1. That in the case of Captain Jones there is no evidence of any representation being made. by him which was wilfully false. It is possible that he may have made a false statement to Captain Allman as to the way in which the papers produced by him had been prepared, and if by such a false statement Captain Allman was induced to report that the candidate had passed, an offence would exist. This, however, is not the position as at present disclosed. There is on the file ho evidence against Captain Jones at all. The only information as to his conduct is that contained in Captain Allman's written statement, and that which is indicated by Mr. Allport's recollection of Captain Yon Schoen's conversation with him. Both statements are, of course, inadmissible against Jones. (I refer to the question of each person implicated being personally called as a witness against the other later on). lam satisfied, therefore, that it would be futile to make any charge under section 32 against Captain Jones upon the material disclosed on the file. 2. As to Captain Yon Schoen: Again the question depends mainly upon the insufficiency of evidence available. If it were proved that Captain Yon Sehoen had himself prepared questions and answers with the view of their being fraudulently represented to the Examiner as being the work of Captain Jones, and assuming that this were done with the object of getting his pupil passed, he would come within section 32. If this be the true conclusion as to Captain Yon Schoen's actions, the proof of it would depend entirely upon evidence (if any) given by Captain Jones, and upon the verbal statement made by Captain Yon Schoen to Mr. Allport. Jones's evidence would probably not be available, and the case would then hinge solely upon the verbal statement made to Mr. Allport. Manifestly this would be insufficient. 3. As to Captain Allman : This case stands upon a different footing in respect of proof from that of the other two. Without reproducing detail, I think that Captain Allman's report (submitted to the Minister) amounts to an admission that he has made a false representation within the meaning of section 32. The nature of what took place in the examination-room both before and after Captain Edwin left, the condition of the examination-papers, &c, and Captain Allman's statement, all show that the so-called examination was a sham. Nevertheless, if there was nothing else except what occurred in the examination-room, there would have been a sham examination, but no false representation in the criminal sense. Captain Allman was not deceived by any statement made by Jones, but fraudulently consented to pass him virtually without examination. But it is plain that after the so-called examination had concluded a false representation was made: (1) In the certificate signed by Captains Allman. and Edwin, dated the 19th July, 1897, stating that Captain Jones had passed in colour-test, navigation, and seamanship; and (2) in the Examiners' authority for the delivery of a certificate of competency. This representation, coupled with proof that the examination was really a nullity, in my opinion, contains the elements of an offence under section 32, and makes a primd facie case against Captain Allman. The nature of the proof available deserves special consideration, both in respect of Captain Allman's case and the others.

243

H.—26

As to Captain Allman's report to the Minister, I am of opinion that this, although marked " confidential," is admissible as against Captain Allman. Without it no prosecution against him could be sustained. The question as to the propriety of using admissions made, under the present circumstances, is obviously a matter upon which the authorities are entitled to exercise a discretion. In the same case Captain Jones's evidence would be admissible against Captain Allman if the former chose to give it; but in the first place he could refuse to open his mouth, upon the ground that he might criminate himself (and in all probability he would be advised to adopt this course), and in the second place the evidence of any one of the three witnesses against any other or others would be treated as the evidence of an accomplice, and a jury would, as a matter of law, be directed not to convict unless such evidence was substantially corroborated. The latter remark, of course, as before indicated, applies to any proceedings against Mr. Jones or Captain Yon Schoen, as well as against Captain Allman. I have in this memorandum dealt with the matter entirely from the point of view of criminal process. 3. There is, in my opinion, no evidence of any criminal charges as against Captain Edwin. 4. There is, in addition to the possible charges above considered, the further question as to whether Captain Jones is liable, under section 32, for having fraudulently made use of a certificate to which he is not justly entitled. This offence involves proof that the certificate was fraudulently obtained by Jones ; and this rests solely upon the testimony of Captains Allman and Yon Schoen, no admission having been made by Jones ; but here, again, the same diffieuty arises : that it is not possible to say whether any, and, if so, what evidence would be given by them in Court. Wellington, 12th January, 1898. Hugh Gully, Crown Solicitor. The Solicitor-General, —Kindly say if you concur in this opinion.—W. H.-J.—l3/1/99. I do. I think it sets out the position fully, and enables the Government to come to a conclusion as to the course to be taken.—W. S. Eeid.—l3th January, 1899. Eeceived, 13th January, 1899.— W. H.-J. Mr. Glasgow.—Please see minute on your recommendation of even date.—W. H.-J.—l7/1/99.

Hon. Minister. I beg to submit the following remarks on Mr. Gully's opinion with reference to the case of Captain Allman:— It is clear that, if a charge under section 32 is laid against Captain Allman, a conviction can only be expected if his report to the Government, in which he makes admissions of guilt, is submitted to the Court. If Captain Allman had not made those admissions, it is probable that no criminal proceedings could have been taken. There is no doubt that when Captain Allman was asked to report with reference to the statements made by Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.E., he made a clean breast of it, and admitted without reserve that he had acted wrongly in the matter of James Jones. If he had been warned he might have taken a very different course. It is therefore a delicate matter for consideration whether his written admissions should be made the basis of criminal proceedings against him. It is, of course, the case that the department knows that there are witnesses who, if they would speak the truth, would substantiate the charges without reference to the written admissions of Captain Allman; still, in the event of these being silent in Court, the whole case would appear to rest on the said admissions, obtained without previous warning as to their use in support of a criminal charge. This appears to me to be the only objection to the Court proceedings, except that a freak of the jury, out of sympathy either for Allman or Jones, might lead to an acquittal in spite of the admissions. Under the circumstances, if the whole matter had not originated in Parliament, I would have considered that the alternative of a Civil Service inquiry would have been preferable to that of a criminal action; but, in view of the real origin, possibly the latter course is one which becomes desirable. Of this, however, I think the Government is in the best position to judge. 13th January, 1899. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Mr. Glasgow. As the Crown Law Officers are of opinion that there is a,primdfdcie case against Captain Allman under section 32 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," action should at once be taken accordingly; and, as Captain Yon Schoen and Captain Jones appear to have assisted in making the false representation, an information should also be laid against them. The matter to be placed in the hands of the Crown Prosecutor. 17/1/99. W. H.-J.

Hon. Minister Marine. Beferbing to the Crown Solicitor's report, dated the 12th instant, on the legal aspects of the questions involved in proceedings against the persons implicated in the obtaining of a certificate by James Jones by fraudulent means, also to the interview between yourself, Hon. Mr. Walker, Hon. Mr. Thompson, and the Crown Solicitor (Mr. Gully) yesterday afternoon, at which Mr. Gully confirmed the opinion expressed in his report above referred to, I have now to request Ministerial authority for the directions given verbally by you this morning to Mr. Gully and myself, which I understand to be as follows: " That informations are to be simultaneously laid against Captain Allman, Captain Yon Schoen, and James Jones individually under section 32 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," and that if Mr. Gully should, on further consideration, deem such course

H.—26

244

advisable, that a joint information should also be laid charging the persons named above with conspiring to obtain Jones's certificate by fraud." W. T. Glasgow. 17/1/99. Informations to be laid against Captains Allman, Yon Schoen, and Jones. The nature of the charges, whether for conspiracy or false representation, or both, should be left to the Crown Prosecutor.—Wμ. Hall-Jones.—l7/1/99.

Department of Trade and Commerce, Wellington, Hon. Minister. 13th January, 1899. The accompanying letter from Captain Allman, in which he resigns his appointment, should have been addressed to the Minister of Marine, and not to the Secretary. Under the present circumstances it would not be possible to accept the resignation, and it would perhaps be advisable to delay reply for a day or two pending a decision as to what course should be taken. I do not know what can be in Captain Allman's mind when he refers to " the usual terms and conditions." He surely cannot be under the impression that the provisions for compensation are applicable. The claim for £200 for inspecting lighthouses is, under all the circumstances, very extraordinary. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. It is very desirable to decide at once upon the course to be taken. —W. T. G. Mr. Glasgow.—See paper herewith.—W. H.-J.—l7/1/99.

Secretary of Marine. 118, Wellington Terrace. Please accept my resignation of the various positions I hold in the Government service on the usual terms and conditions. I also herewith send in a claim for £50 per annum for four years as Inspector of Lighthouses, making a total of £200, which I expect to receive at an early date. An answer to both these matters will oblige as soon as possible. 13/1/99. George Allman.

Hon. Minister. Eefebeing to a letter from Captain Allman, in which he resigns his appointment in view of the informations which are about to be laid against him, it will be necessary to inform him that his resignation cannot be accepted, and also that his claim for remuneration for inspecting lighthouses cannot be entertained. It will also be necessary to place him under suspension pending the decision of the Court, or the result of such other action as it may be deemed advisable to take. 17/1/99. W. T. Glasgow. Captain Allman to be suspended pending result of inquiry into the charges made against him. —W. H.-J.—l7/1/99.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 17th January, 1899. I have the honour to inform you that I have placed your letter of the 13th instant, in which you resign your appointment, before the Minister of Marine. I am directed by the Minister to inform you that your resignation cannot be accepted, as an information has been laid against you in connection with your report on the examination of James Jones in July, 1897, for a home-trade master's certificate. Informations have also been laid against Captains Yon Schoen and James Jones. In consequence of the action which has been taken, I have been directed to inform you that you are to consider yourself under suspension from and including this date. I have, &c, Captain George Allman, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 17th January, 1899. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that it has been decided to lay an information against Captain Allman, the Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, in connection with his report on the examination of James Jones for a home-trade master's certificate. As you also signed the report, the Minister has directed that you are to be relieved of your duties as Examiner of Masters and Mates in the meantime. I have, &c, Captain E. A. Edwin, E.N., Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 17th January, 1899. Eeferring to the interviews which you have had with the Minister of Marine on the subject of taking proceedings against Captain Allman and others in connection with the examination of James Jones, I have been directed by the Minister to request that informations may be laid against Captain Allman, Captain Yon Schoen, and James Jones. The nature of the charge, whether for conspiracy or false representation, or both, is left to you. I have, &c, H. Gully, Esq., Crown Prosecutor, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

245

H.--26

EXHIBIT D. Dear Sir,— 14th November, 1898. Concerning the charges of gross irregularities in the examinations of masters and mates, made by me in the Financial Debate, I strongly desire that you will at once send for Mr. Glasgow; Secretary Marine Department, who, I have reason to believe, is in possession of such information as will enable him to corroborate the principal charges I made. In fulfilment of your statement to the House (see Hansard, p. 316), and in order to allay a feeling of deep distrust gaining ground among the officers of the mercantile marine, I look with confidence to your probing this matter to the very bottom. Should you discover my statements to be substantially correct, I trust you Will act with that promptitude and thoroughness which has always characterized you; if not, then no injury can ensue to any individual, as I have religiously refrained from giving the matter any publicity. Hoping to hear from you on the subject in due course. I remain, &c, The Eight Hon. Premier. John Hutcheson. For Secretary of Customs. — I wish to see you in reference to this matter. —R. J. B.— 26/11/98.

580/1899. —Maeine Depabtment. Date of Paper : 25/10/1898. Date when Registered: 13/3/1899. From whom, and subject: —P. Fannar and J. L. Martin, Wellington. Complain as to manner of their examination and their being failed. Minutes : Pile.—G. A. 14/3/99. Sib,— Wellington, 25th October, 1898. We, the undersigned, crave your kind indulgence in the following complaint:— Yesterday we presented ourselves, according to instructions, for examination, Mr. Farmar as first mate, foreign; Mr. Martin as second mate, foreign; and Mr. Irvine as first mate, home trade. We found three Examiners ready to examine us—Captains Edwin, Allman, and Major Sir Arthur Douglas, Bart. The examination-room was very small, and we were jambed elbow to elbow at two small tables. We were not permitted, on finishing a paper, to take it up to the three Examiners, but were ordered to keep our seats, and if we required anything to sing out. This extraordinary request was exceedingly annoying and disturbing to all of us. The Examiners were, as far as we could judge from what we saw and heard, quite incompetent to look over the work; They were apparently not only unable, to do any part of it themselves, but they were amongst themselves in their effort to find out from the Board of Trade answer-sheets whether bur work was right or wrong, and so noisy that it was an utter impossibility for us to concentrate our mind upon the work we were engaged in, and upon the successful solving of which our living depended upon, especially as Messrs. Farmar and Martin had been lately failed by Captain Edwin in a previous examination. It took the three Examiners from fifteen to twenty minutes to decide whether Mr. Farmar's work was right or wrong, and similar in the case of Mr. Martin. Then the continuous knocking at the door of the examination-room as the Examiners went backward and forward from one room to another was very disturbing. In fact, we might just as well have tried to pass our examination in the main street. Once or twice, when almost goaded into desperation, not being able to concentrate our mind upon our work, we were on the point of respectfully declining to go on with our examination under such adverse circumstances, but we all held our peace and bore it all, intending to seek justice from you, Sir, when all was over. The result was that both of us failed. And now, Sir, we humbly petition you to inquire into this matter, and, after having satisfied yourself that our grievance is just, then, Sir, will you kindly annul our examination of yesterday and allow us to be examined afresh without payment of further fee, and by some other competent Examiner who will not try and revenge himself on us for having dared to write to you regarding this matter. : We are, &c, , F. Fabmab, c/o Laery and Co., Wellington. James L. Maetin, Oldham House, Taranaki Place. The Bight Hon. B. J. Seddon, P.C., &c, Premier of New Zealand.

I, the undersigned, being one of the candidates examined, passed my examination yesterday as mate for the home-trade. I corroborate all that has been said by Messrs. Farmar and Martin, and beg to state that, if my examination had been one for the foreign-trade, I don't think I could have passed it in that room crowded with Examiners and the unseemly noise prevailing. J. levine, c/o Harbourmaster, Wanganui. The Secretary, Customs.—This refers to the matter which I wish to see you about, and which has been brought under my notice by Mr. J. Huteheson, M.H.8.—8. J. S. Bight Hon. Premier.—Please see papers herewith, M. 2314/98. I will attend whenever you send for me.—W. T. Glasgow.—2B/11/98. Sir Arthur Douglas. —As you assisted in conducting these examinations, I would like to have your remarks on this letter.—Geoege Allman.—l7/12/98. The Secretary, Marine Department. —This letter has been referred to me, but I must decline to discuss with unsuccessful candidates the question of either my competence or bond fides as an Examiner.—Aethue P. Douglas.—l 9/12/98. Beferred to Captain Allman.—ln connection with my memorandum to him dated the 29th November last.—W. T. Glasgow.—2o/12/98.

H.—26

246

Secretary, Marine.—This letter, like the contents of similar epistles, is a tissue of lies from beginning to end. For size of room please see plan attached.—Geobgk Allman.—2l/12/98. Hon. Premier.—For your information. Under present circumstances it is perhaps inadvisable to go further into these complaints.—W. T. Glasgow.—2l/12/98. I quite agree.—E. J. S.—2l/12/98. (Plan of examination-room see inset.)

Sib, — Oldham House, Taranaki Place, Wellington, 15th November. Since Mr. Farmar and myself wrote re our examination for a first- and second-mate's certificate respectively, I have the honour, Sir, to inform you that whilst Mr. Frank Lawton (now A.B. on board the s.s. " Queen of the South ") was being examined for a mate's certificate in the hometrade service, the examiner held a lengthy conversation with him, in which he asked him if he knew either of us, and, if he did, to ascertain which of us it was that had written the Premier about the Examiners, and to tell us that he would have passed our work had it not been for Major Sir Arthur Douglas, who was master of the situation. Now, Sir, do you not think it an awful thing for a Government Examiner to pass a candidate's work and entitle him to a certificate, then employ him as his agent to inform other candidates that had previously failed that, had it not been for Major Sir Arthur Douglas, he would have passed him, or else he had been illegally failed, for that is what it really means. Sir, I now beg of you to do something for me, as lam a married man, and have to shovel coals now to eke out a living for myself and family while being so detained, and my home is in Dunedin. Hoping to get a reply soon. I remain, &c, Right Hon. Mr. Seddon. James L. Martin. Captain Allman informed me that he would have to see Sir A. P. Douglas before replying. Sir A. P. Douglas on leave ; will not be back for ten days.—W. T. G.—3/12/98. Et. Hon. the Premier. Captain Edwin and I were in the examination-room all the time Mr. Lawton was there. Neither of us had any conversation with him outside the actual examination then taking place. As a matter of fact, I had no knowledge of this correspondence till the Ist December. The statements made are false.—Gbo. Allman.—l7/12/98.

Office of Minister of Public Works, Wellington, 29th June, 1899. Mr. Glasgow.—Please send by bearer, for Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones, the file of papers in reference to a complaint made by Mr. John Hutcheson that some persons who went up for examination as masters and mates were not allowed sufficient time to finish their papers. H. Haeman, for Private Secretary. , Hon. Minister. —I think that this must have been a verbal complaint. There is no written complaint from Mr. Hutcheson. Ido not know of the case referred to. The time is prescribed in the regulations. I send papers M. 96/2645, in which P. Mclntyre alludes to some dispute with Captain Edwin, but, so far as I know, Mr. Hutcheson had nothing to do with this. I send two papers with which Mr. Hutcheson has had connection, but they do not seem to bear on the special point. M. 89/2185, M. 99/580.— W. T. Glasgow.—29/6/99.

Jlyt/ST^

/9 . (y ~~fi • n / / O

247

H.-i-26

EXHIBIT E. Sir,-" Wellington, Ist March, 1899. I have now to acknowledge receipt of your letter No. 566/99, dated yesterday, enclosing statement of certain charges of breach of duty on my part in connection with the examination of one James Jones, of Wellington, mariner, for a certificate of competency of master of a home-trade ship, and I understand that I am desired to state whether I admit or deny the truth of these charges, and, further, whether I desire to furnish you with any reply to them. (For charges see Exhibit S.) I desire to avail myself of your invitation to reply to these charges. It will be necessary for me to repeat here the substance of the fully detailed report furnished by me confidentially to the Minister of Marine, Mr. Hall-Jones, on the day of last. The additional facts which I desire to submit to your consideration are rather matter of extenuation than of defence to the specific charges, a copy of which you have been good enough to enclose to me. You will understand, therefore, that what I am about to state must be read in conjunction with and in explanation of the terms of the confidential report I have just referred to, and I shall endeavour to avoid repetition here of what may be found in that report. (Exhibit C.) It will be necessary to say a word by way of introductory explanation of the essential facts of this case. During the year 1896 the question of granting Captain Jones, of the " Duco," a certificate of service as master in the coastal trade was brought under the notice of the Marine Department, but not under my notice. For this purpose an application was sent in by Captain Jones for such a certificate, accompanied by declarations as to his sea-service. As you are aware, the declarations accompanying this application were false in many important respects. It was stated in these declarations that Captain Jones had been outside the Wellington Heads for over three years, and you are also aware that, upon reference to the Collector of Customs at Wellington, the statements made in these declarations were plainly shown to be false, and that in numerous instances, when Captain Jones had been outside the Heads for a few hours, it was put down as eleven days, and in some instances twenty-one days. The declaration, in fact, was apparently a deliberate attempt to mislead the department as to Captain Jones's sea-service. I need not amplify these statements, since you are well aware that they are true, and that you yourself recorded to the Minister of Marine a long report stating that the declarations were not true, and that, consequently, the certificates applied for by Captain Jones should not be granted. This was in the year 1896. After the Minister of Marine had been furnished with your minute as to the conduct of Captain Jones regarding this false declaration, and after you had informed the Minister that the certificate applied for should not be granted, I received a message from the Premier that he desired to see me, and that I was to come up to the Cabinet-room to see him there. I obeyed, and there I found Captain Jones and Captain Yon Schoen along with the Premier. The Premier asked me for particulars of the case, but I said I had none to give him, not having myself actually examined the papers, and knowing, as I did, that he had your minute on the papers, I could give him no further information than he already possessed. A few days afterwards the Premier sent me Jones's application, along with all the other papers, including the false declaration I have referred to. On the envelope containing these papers was a memorandum signed by the Premier: "Can you do anything for this man?" After examining the papers sent me, and finding your minute that the declarations were incorrect, I replied to the Premier on the same envelope that I did not think so. Some days afterwards Captain Yon Schoen met me, and showed me the same envelope which had been sent me by the Premier, and which still contained his note and my reply. He then informed me that I had blocked, the way to Jones getting his certificate, and said that he considered the Premier's remark to me upon the envelope was an equivalent for an order to me to pass Jones. This was all in the year 1896. There was then a considerable interval. I mentioned the matter to Mr. Ward, who was then Minister of Marine, and I told him that the declaration made by Captain Jones had been proved to be false, and full of lies, arid that the matter had been brought before me several times, but that I did not see my way to do anything. Mr. Ward replied, "Do not have anything to do with it," and tell' Jones "to go about his business," or words to that effect. I did not hear anything more about the matter for some time, until the Hon. Hall-Jones, who had taken Mr. Ward's place as Minister of Marine, spoke to me about the matter. This was in 1897. He spoke to me several times about it, and said he thought it was a hard case, as Jones had done much sea-service. I replied to Mr. Hall-Jones that the Act would not permit the claim he made for sea-service to be admitted. The next important incident in this matter happened just prior to the Premier's departure to England from Auckland —it would be about the end of April or beginning of May. I received a message from Mr. Hall-Jones that he desired to see me in his office. I went to his office, and he mentioned this matter again, and said he had received a communication from the Premier on Captain Jones's behalf. The communication was a telegram from the Premier to Mr. Hall-Jones, and the latter handed the telegram to me to read. It was dated Auckland, and, so far as I recollect it said, " See that Jones gets his certificate before I return." If these were not the exact words they were certainly its purport. The Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones and I then had a long conversation about the matter. I admitted that Jones was an excellent seaman and knew his duties, being a good practical man, but I pointed out to the Minister that the Act plainly prevented the granting of a certificate upon Jones's actual sea-service. He asked me if there was any other way of getting the certificate. I then explained to the Minister that the application of Captain Jones was for a home-trade service certificate as master; that the condition upon which such a certificate would be granted was entirely in the hands of the Government of the colony, since its effect was limited to the coastal waters of New Zealand in my opinion.

Hi—26

248

I then explained to the Minister that under the existing law, in the absence of the necessary sea-service, Captain Jones would have to pass an examination to be set by me. I then said I would hunt up the regulations and see if I could find any clause which would meet Captain Jones's case. The Minister approved of my doing so. A week, or perhaps ten days, later I saw Mr. Hall-Jones again at his office, and I told him that I was of opinion that Captain Jones might be permitted to sit for his examination under clause 26 of the 1895 regulations, which provides that " Service in a tug-boat employed partly within smooth and rough waters would count as sea service for a master or a mate in the coastal trade, and for the purpose of obtaining a coastal certificate." My reason for recommending this was that, I knew Captain Jones had a river certificate of competency. I stated this to Mr. Hall-Jones, and he said he would consider the matter. Some days later I again saw Mr. Hall-Jones in his office, and this matter was mentioned. I then pointed out to Mr. Hall-Jones that it would be necessary for him, as Minister of Marine, to give an order to the department to grant permission for Jones to go up for his examination, as he did not hold the mate's certificate. You are aware that the regulations do not provide that the Minister can dispense with a mate's certificate; but, as Captain Jones had been outside the Heads really in the position of captain for a long period and on many occasions, and had sometimes been as far as Picton, and as I believed the Minister was anxious that Captain Jones should be passed, I recommended Mr. Hall-Jones to,dispense with the mate's certificate in this case. He consented to dispense with the certificate, and 1 then pointed out to him that he would have to give an order to the department authorising the department to permit Jones to sit for his examination for a coastal master's certificate. After I left the Minister's room I saw you at your office. I told you what had transpired, including the fact that I had recommended the Minister to permit Jones to sit for his examination. You told me that you thought I was foolish to do so; but I replied to you that, from what had happened upstairs, I knew that the Premier and Mr. Jones, the Minister, were anxious that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination, and that an order would be sent down by Mr. Hall-Jones to the department giving him permission to sit. In the evening of that day I was in the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, Mr. Allport's, room, and I explained to him that the Minister and myself had arranged that Captain Jones should be permitted to sit for his examination, and that an order would be sent out accordingly. While I was there the messenger came down and handed Mr. Allport a document, whereupon Mr. Allport said, " Here is the order you were talking about." He then read it out, and, as far as I recollect, it granted in express terms authority for Jones to sit for his examination. It ran as follows: "Jones, 'Duco'—Permit examination." On the day following the receipt by Allport of this order you were unfortunately absent from duty, and Mr. Allport acted in your place in this matter. On the authority of the order he had received from Mr. Hall-Jones, he wrote the Collector of Customs, Wellington, stating permission had been given to Captain Jones to sit for his examination. I may mention that Allporb knew that Captain Jones had not the required mate's certificate, and the Collector of Customs also knew the same fact. The Collector of Customs in turn wrote the Examiners, Captain Edwin and myself, the authority to examine Captain Jones for a master's coastal certificate. Both Captain Edwin and myself knew that Jones had not the required mate's certificate. On receipt of instructions in this way, the examination proceeded. The detail of what was done at this examination has been fully given in the confidential report I have given to Mr. HallJpnes. I would add that the actual coastal master's certificate granted to Captain Jones was signed by yourself as Secretary of Marine, and a memorandum of delivery of the certificate written upon the certificate itself was signed by the Collector of Customs. To yourself, the Collector of Customs, my co-examiner Captain Edwin, the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, and myself, the fact was well known that there was no regulation in existence authorising the dispensation of a mate's certificate. This fact was also well known to the Minister, Mr. Hall-Jones. Each of the officers I have mentioned, therefore, knew that the Minister had ordered the dispensation of this condition, and I would therefore beg to summarise the circumstances extenuating my conduct as follows: (a.) That I was of the opinion Captain Jones was an excellent seaman, and was an experienced shipmaster, so that no danger would arise from his possessing a certificate which made him a coastal master. (6.) That I was plainly led to understand that it was the desire of the Hon. the Premier and the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones that Captain Jones should get the certificate he applied for. (c.) That each and all the officers I have mentioned were more or less aware of the same fact, (d.) That the irregularities which took place in connection with his examination were due partly to my consideration of Captain Jones's qualification, and partly by my desire to carry out the almost express wishes of my Minister, (c.) Ido not desire to inculpate any of my fellow-officers, but as I understand the letter now under reply is merely preliminary to my dismissal, I must point out that each and all of my fellow-officers were aware of the fundamental irregularity which the Minister himself had permitted in dispensing with the requisite mate's certificate, and as I found each of these gentlemen willing to overlook this irregularity for the apparent purpose of carrying the Minister's wishes into effect, I was weakly perhaps induced to fall in with these wishes and facilitate, as I did, Captain Jones's obtaining the certificate of a coastal master. I feel that this is not a justification for my conduct, but in view of my tenure of office, and of the responsibilities:of a wife and family which lie upon me, I was induced to do that which I now very much regret. On the assumption that my Minister contemplates my immediate dismissal, I desire to point out that I have already been placed upon my trial; my reputation, which until the present has been unsullied, has been damaged, if not destroyed, and I shall, in the event of dismissal, be without occupation or means of livelihood, while I have to maintain a wife and family. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Geqrqe Airman,— 2/3/99

249

H.—26

Eeceived at noon, 2nd March, 1899.—W.T.G. deferred to Hon. Minister of Marine.—W. T. Glasgow.—2/3/99. . The Premier was away on his trip to England from April to September, during the time the suggestion was made by Captain Allman that Jones should go up for examination and the time of the bogus examination. —W. H.-J.

Sir,— , . Wellington, 6th March, 1899. I beg to support several of the statements made in the letter I wrote you on the Ist instant, in reply to yours of the 28th February regarding my connection with the examination of James Jones for a master's home-trade certificate. Your letter reached me on Tuesday, the 28th ultimo, and I. was required to furnish my reply by mid-day on Thursday. This time was altogether insufficient to enable me to obtain evidence in support of my statements, or, indeed, to properly express the defence I have to rely Upon in answer to the charges made against me. I beg further to claim the right of asking you to attach to my letter of the Ist instant the enclosed declaration of James Jones, so that the declaration and my letter may be read together. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. George Allman. Forwarded for information of the Minister of Marine.—W. T. Glasgow.—6/3/99.

In the matter of " The Justices of the Peace Act, 1882," and its amendments. I, James Jones, of the City of Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare, as follows : — 1. That I know Captain Allman, who was Nautical Adviser to the Government and Principal Examiner of Masters and Mates. 2. That I was present in the office of the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones early in the month of July, 1897, having gone to his office to obtain from him an order authorising me to be examined for a master's certificate. 3. I stated to Mr. Hall-Jones that I understood that I could not go up for a master's certificate until I got a mate's certificate, and that I had not a mate's certificate ; and Mr. Hall-Jones replied, " I will fix that all right, and you will come back again in a week's time and get your ticket." I said, " For the practical part I can do anything, but I'll be hanged if I can do the writing." I then said to Mr. Hall-Jones, "It will be no use for me to go to Captain Allman and tell him I have permission to sit unless you give me an order telling Captain Allman that he was to allow me to sit for the master's certificate. Mr. Hall-Jones then rang his bell, and the messenger came in. He told his messenger to go for Captain Allman and tell him he wanted to see him. The messenger did so, and Captain Allman came upstairs in a few minutes. I waited in the room. When Captain Allman came in Mr. Hall-Jones told him that he was to allow me to go up for my certificate, and that he, Mr. Hall-Jones, was going to dispense with my having a mate's certificate. He said to Captain Allman that he would give him an order, and Captain Allman said it must be an order to the department. Mr. Hall-Jones then said he would give an order to the department. I saw nothing handed by Mr. Hall-Jones to Captain Allman, but Mr. Hall-Jones wrote something on a piece of paper there. I left the room, leaving Captain Allman with Mr. Hall-Dones. 4. The first time I saw the Hon. the Premier after I got my home-trade master's certificate, on the 19th July, 1897, was after he had returned from England. He and some other gentlemen were on board the " Duchess " one day. I did njot know the other gentlemen, but I knew Mr. Seddon. I asked them to come and have a whisky. Mr. Seddon and the other gentlemen came into the stern-cabin. I put down the glasses, and Mr. Seddon remarked about the size of the tumblers. Mr. Seddon said, " I fixed that all right for you, old man. I put my foot down, as I was determined I would accomplish what you asked me to do in spite of the lot of them." I told him I was very much obliged to him, but it was no use talking about that now. This was all that was said about the matter then. I then left them with the whisky, saying they could enjoy themselves. 5. As regards my relations with Captain Allman, I declare that, except what was done through the agency of the Premier and Mr. Hall-Jones, there was no arrangement of any kind between Captain Allman and myself that he should pass me for my master's examination. I never suggested to him before the examination for my master's certificate that he should pass me, nor did I attempt, except through the Ministers, to bring any influence to bear upon him. I had, in fact, no conversation with Captain Allman at any time with regard to my,master's examination. I.have to admit that I told Captain Allman in the examination-room, when I produced the papers to him and he began to tear them up, that I had done them all myself, and Captain Allman took me at my word. When Captain Allman refused at first to accept the papers, I made an appeal to him, and I also told him that he knew very well that he had got his orders to pass me. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the provisions of an Act: of the General Assembly of New Zealand intituled " The Justices of the Peace Act, 1882." Declared at Wellington aforesaid this 6th day of March, 1899, before me—H. Cooper, a solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. ... James Jones. '..'■ • ;. [Nos. 2 and 3 are untrue upon almost every point. —W. H.-J.] 32— H. 26.

H.—26

250

In Executive Council. His Excellency the Governor is recommended, pursuant to the provisions of section 23 of "The Civil Service Act, 1866," to dismiss from the Civil Service of the colony George Allman, Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, and Inspector and Surveyor under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," also Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department. The grounds for this recommendation are that the said George Allman has been guilty of conduct which renders him unfit to continue in the said service, as shown by the accompanying accusation made under " The Civil Service Act, 1866," and the regulations thereunder, and the said George Allman's reply thereto, dated the 2nd March, 1899, in which the truth of the said accusation is not denied, and also in his report addressed to the Eight Hon. the Premier, dated the 13th December, 1898, which reply and report are hereto attached. Wμ. Hall-Jones, Minister having charge of the Marine Department. Marine Department, Wellington, 3rd March, 1899. Eecommendation approved in Executive Council upon the grounds stated, and the said George Allman dismissed accordingly.—Banfukly, Governor. In Council, 4th March, 1899.—Alex. Willis, Clerk of Executive Council. Hon. Minister. —Letter to Captain Allman herewith for your approval; also Gazette notice for signature.—W. T. Glasgow.—6/3/99. Approved.—W. H-J.—6/3/99.— Captain George Allman, No. 617-99.—6/3/99.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 6th March, 1899. I have the honour to inform you, by direction of the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, that your letter of the Ist instant, in reply to my letter of the 28th ultimo, together with your memorandum, dated 13th December last, addressed to the Premier, has been placed before the Governor in Council, who is of opinion that you have been guilty of conduct which renders you unfit to continue in the Civil Service, and has accordingly dismissed you from the service under the power contained in section 23 of " The Civil Service Act, 1866." I have, &c, Captain George Allman, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

EXHIBIT P. [Extract from New Zealand Times, Wednesday, Ist Maroh, 1899.] The Mabine Scandal.—The Pbemieb's Statement. Press Association, Dunedin, Tuesday. The Premier has authorised the Press to make the following statement on his behalf in reference to the charge circulated that he was a party to Captain Jones going up for his master-mariner's examination without previously having obtained a mate's certificate. " I neither spoke to the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones about Captain Jones's examination, nor did I write to him. I went away to England in April, and the examination took place in July. The first I knew of Captain Jones or his examination was after Mr. Hutcheson, senior member for Wellington, had made his speech in the House. The evidence given by Mr. Allport in the Magistrate's Court was incorrect. The Minister of Marine was summoned by the defence, and would have given evidence. There was no direction for Jones's captain's examination. Counsel for Crown entered a, nolle jprosequi against the express wish of the Minister to go on, and thus prevented the Minister of Marine clearing himself of the imputation that he had given a direction or interfered in the slightest way."

EXHIBIT G. Obdee Papee.—House op Eepeesentatives, Feiday, the 26th Day of July, 1895. 31. Mr. Pieani to ask the Minister of Marine, Whether the Government grant licenses to adjusters of compasses of iron ships, and, if so, on what conditions, and what qualifications are required of candidates for such licenses ? If such licenses are not issued, will the Government take such steps as may be necessary to make provision for licensing adjusters, so as to insure that the compasses of all iron vessels shall be adjusted by persons who have proved their competence for the work ? Hon. Minister. At present adjusters of compasses are not licensed, and to license them would require an amendment of the Act. Prior to 1877 the law required that adjusters of compasses should be licensed by the Minister; but "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," following the law in the United Kingdom, put the responsibility of seeing that the compasses are adjusted on the owner, and the Government Surveyor is required to obtain a certificate from the owner that he is satisfied that the compasses are properly adjusted. In Victoria adjusters of compasses are licensed. I have a copy of the Victorian regulations. I understand that this is the case in New South Wales also. Captain Allman, Nautical Adviser, is of opinion that the law should be altered to give the necessary authority to license, Returned from Minister to-day.—G. A,—B/8/95. W, T, Glasgow, Secretary.

251

H.—26

Captain Allrnan, —I shall be glad to have your remarks.—W. T. Glasgow.—24/7/95. I think it is very necessary that competent compass-adjusters should be licensed. It is the law in Victoria. Please see attached regulations from the Victoria Government Gazette of Ist November, 1889.—Geo. Allman.—24/7/95.

Secretary Marine Department. By the repeal of the whole of section 169 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," there is now no power to compel the adjustment of the compasses of iron ships. Ido not think that it was intended to repeal subsection (3) of the above section, which provided for the adjustment of compasses, and it was not until the other day that it was observed that it had been done. It would be advisable to make provision for adjustment in the Bill to amend the Shipping and Seamen's Act which is now being drafted, and at the same time provision could be made for licensing adjusters if this is to be done. Geoege Allpobt. 14th August, 1895.

Hon. Minister. I think the repeal of the last subsection of section 169 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," was an oversight, or else it was omitted in the Act of last year to re-enact the provision requiring owners to have compasses properly adjusted. This should be put right in the Bill to be introduced this session, and also provision made for licensing persons to adjust compasses. 15th August, 1895. W. T. Glasgow. File.—G.A.—26/7/95. Approved.—W.P.E.—l9/8/95. This has been provided for in the Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Bill.—G.A. —28/9/95.

Sib,— 9th August, 1895. Will you please write to the different Marine Boards in Australia for the latest information concerning adjusters of compasses for the use of the Marine Department. Secretary Marine. Geo. Allman. Mr. Allport,—Please draft letter.—W.T.G.—lo/8/95.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z., 12th August, 1895. The law on the subject of the adjustment of the compasses of iron ships in this colony is the same as that in the United Kingdom, but the question of altering it in the direction of providing that adjusters must be licensed by the Government is now under consideration, and in connection with the matter I shall feel obliged if you will furnish me with information as to the law on the subject in your colony, and forward me a copy of any regulations which you may have bearing on the adjustment of compasses. I have, &c, Secretary, Marine Board, Sydney, N.S.W. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 12th August, 1895. The law on the subject of the adjustment of the compasses of iron ships in this colony is the same as that in the United Kingdom, but the question of altering it in the direction-of providing that adjusters must be licensed by the Government is now under consideration, and in connection with the matter I shall feel obliged if you will furnish me with information as to the law on the subject in your colony, and forward me a copy of any regulations which you may have bearing on the adjustment of compasses. I have, &c, Secretary, Marine Board, Brisbane, Queensland. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, N.Z., Wellington, 12th August, 1895. The law on the subject of the adjustment of the compasses of iron ships in this colony is the same as that in the United Kingdom, but the question of altering it in the direction of providing that adjusters must be licensed by the Government is now under consideration, and in connection with the matter I shall feel obliged if you will furnish me with information as to the law on the subject in your colony, and forward me a copy of any regulations which you may have bearing on the adjustment of compasses. I have, &c, Secretary, Marine Board, Melbourne, Victoria. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, N.Z., Wellington, 12th August, 1895. The law on the subject of the adjustment of the compasses of iron ships in this colony is the same as that in the United Kingdom, but the question of altering it in the direction of providing that adjusters must be licensed by the Government is now under consideration, and in connection with the matter I shall feel obliged if you will furnish me with information as to the law on the subject in your colony, and forward me a copy of any regulations which you may have bearing on the adjustment of compasses. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Secretary, Marine Board, Port Adelaide, South Australia.

H.—26

252

Draft Clauses for Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Bill. Certificates of competency for engineers of steamships plying within restricted limits shall be of two cl&sses, one of which shall be called a " river engineer's certificate," and the other a "marine engine-driver's certificate." A river engineer's certificate shall entitle the owner thereof to serve as engineer of any steamship plying within river or extended river limits, including lakes or other inland navigable waters. A marine engine-driver's certificate shall entitle the owner thereof to serve as engineer of a steamship which is only authorised to ply in harbours, rivers, and lakes, or other inland navigable waters, and which is fitted with non-condensing machinery the area of cylinder or combined area of cylinders of propelling machinery which does not exceed 200 circular inches. Every ship built wholly or partially of iron shall have her compasses properly adjusted by an adjuster licensed by the Minister. Provided that the Minister may, by warrant under his hand, exempt any vessel or class of vessels plying within restricted limits from being required to have their compasses adjusted. The Minister may from time to time make, alter, and revoke regulations for the licensing of properly-qualified persons to be adjusters of compasses, and may prescribe the examination to be passed by applicants for such licenses, and fix the fees to be paid for the adjustment of compasses, and may also make, alter, and revoke regulations for the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation-tables. Mr. Mowatt, —Will you please look through these draft clauses and say what alteration, if any, you think they require to meet what is wanted? —G. Allpoet.—22/8/95. I have looked through the clauses. See memo, attached.—W. M. Mowatt.—23/8/95. *

Memorandum from the Chief Inspectoe of Machinery, Wellington, to the Secretary, Marine Department. Sir, — Office of the Chief Inspector of Machinery, 23rd August, 1895. Clause 24, Shipping and Seamen's Act, which includes steamers plying within restricted limits, will, I understand give the Minister power to make regulations to modify the examination for marine engine-drivers' certificates. I think it might be advisable to insert after " combined area of cylinders" the words " of propelling machinery which does not exceed 200 circular inches." Be Compasses : It would not be advisable to exempt all vessels plying within river limits, but I think it would save trouble if the Minister had power to exempt those on which it is not necessary to have compasses; otherwise, if we were to strictly carry out the law, every little steam launch would require to have a compass, and also to have it adjusted. At present there are Dumbers of very small launches plying within river limits on which compasses are not required. Yours, &c, W. M. Mowatt, Principal Engineer Surveyor.

Sib,— Sydney, 28rd August, 1895. In reply to your letter of the 12th instant, I have the honour, by direction, to forward by book-post a copy of the Navigation Act of New South Wales, and to refer you to the 105 th section thereof, page 30, which gives the Board power to make regulations for the surveying of ships for the adjustment of compasses, and also refer you to page 49, in which are set out the regulations that are in force here at the present time. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Board, Wellington, New Zealand. (Unsigned), Secretary.

Sic, — Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, 23rd August, 1895. Adjustment of Compasses. —l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, asking for information on the above subject, and, in reply, beg to inform you that section 123 of " The Marine Act, 1890 " (a copy of which I believe you have), provides as follows : — " 123. It shall be the duty of the owner of every ship or of his agent to see that such ship is properly equipped, and no sea-going ship shall be deemed to be properly equipped unless-r--(1.) .... (2.) .... (3.) She is provided with compasses properly adjusted from time to time to the satisfaction of the Board, and in accordance with regulations made by the Board." A copy of such regulations, together with certain amendments and alterations, is forwarded for yoμr information. ... I have, &c, J. Geo. McKie, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Sic, — Marine Board Office, Brisbane, 6th September, 1895. In reply to yours of the 12th ultimo, asking for information respecting the law in this colony on the subject of compass-adjustment, I have the honour to inform you that, as far as possible, the Imperial regulations are followed. No one, however, is allowed to adjust compasses without a license from the Board. Only two such licenses have been issued. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. L. A. Pethebiudge, Secretary.

253

H.—26

Sir, — Marine Board Offices, Port Adelaide, 3rd September, 1895. Adjustment of Compasses. —l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter on the above subject, dated the 12th instant, and, in reply, to inform you that the law in this colony provides that it is the duty of the owner of every ship to see that such ship is properly equipped; and no ship is deemed to be so equipped unless, inter alia, if built wholly or partly of iron, she has her compasses properly adjusted from time to time, to the satisfaction of an adjuster of compasses appointed by the Board, and according to such regulations as may be made by the Board. The regulations referred to are contained in the Marine Board Handbook, pages 50 and 51, a copy of which was supplied to you when it was issued last year. If, however, you require any additional information I shall be pleased to furnish it. I have, &c, T. N. Stephens, President. The President, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Memorandum from the Seobetaby, Marine Department, Wellington, to Captain Allman, Nautical Adviser, &c, Marine Department. With reference to clause 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," I shall feel obliged if you will be good enough to draft regulations for licensing adjusters of compasses. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 12th November, 1895. Please see draft of regulations attached, which I think would be advisable to submit to the Principal Engineer Surveyor for his remarks thereon.—Geo. Allman.—27/11/95.

Memoeandum from the Secbetaby, Marine Department, to the Peincipal Engineee Sueveyoe, Wellington. . • r Hebewith I forward draft of the regulations which it is proposed to make for licensing adjusters of compasses and for the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation-tables. As some of the regulations will affect the engineer surveyors in carrying out their duties in the survey of steamships, I shall be glad if you will peruse them, and make any remarks you may see fit. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 27th November, 1895. I have perused the draft regulations attached, and clause 21 is the only clause which in any way affects the engineer surveyors, and I see nothing in this clause to which any objection can be taken.—W. M. Mowatt, Principal Engineer Surveyor.—3/12/95.

Eegulations foe Adjustment of Compasses. In pursuance and exercise of the power and authority conferred upon me by section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," I, Joseph George Ward, the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, do hereby make the following regulations for licensing properlyqualified persons to be adjusters of compasses, prescribing the examination to be passed by applicants for such licenses ; fixing the fees to be paid for the adjustment of compasses ; and making regulations for the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation-tables. Begulations. 1. Licenses without Examination. —Any person holding a certificate as an extra master in the mercantile marine, or who, while holding a certificate of a lower grade, shall have passed the examination in the Syllabus of the Laws of the Deviation of the Compasses of Iron Ships, or who holds a commission not lower than that of lieutenant or navigating lieutenant in the Eoyal Navy, shall be entitled to receive a license as an adjuster without further examination, subject to the approval of the Minister. 2. Licenses by Examination. —Any person holding a certificate of any grade (other than that of extra master) in the mercantile marine, or being of a lower rank than that of lieutenant or navigating lieutenant in the Eoyal Navy, must pass the examination in the Syllabus of the Laws of the Deviation of the Compasses of Iron Ships before any license as an adjuster can be issued to him. 3. Examination Fee,, &c. —Any person holding a certificate of any grade, whether for the foreign or home trade, who wishes to pass an examination in the Syllabus of Examination in the Laws of the Deviation of the Compasses of Iron Ships, can at any time be examined at Wellington upon filling up the usual form of application, and paying to the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office the fee of £1. If the candidate passes the examination successfully, a note to that effect will be duly made upon the certificate held by him. No part of the above-mentioned fee will be returned. General. 4. (a). Every application for a license as an adjuster shall be made in writing to the Secretary of the Marine Department; (b). Every applicant must submit with his application his certificate and a satisfactory certificate of conduct and sobriety during the twelve months immediately preceding the date of his application.

H.— 26

254

5. A fee of £1 will be a license. 6. The license will be issued by the Secretary of-the Marine Department at Wellington and shall be in the form prescribed in Schedule IV. 7. The holder of a license shall have authority to examine, adjust, and compute the error of compasses, and transmit tables of such errors to the masters, owners, or agents of vessels of which the compasses have been examined and adjusted as herein required, and such licenses may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister. 8. The master, agent, or owner of any vessel requiring that the compasses of such ship shall be examined and adjusted under the provisions of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895" or any Act amending the same, shall make application for such examination and adjustment to the Collector of Customs at that port. 9. Every application, as aforesaid, shall be in writing, and shall state the date and time when such examination and adjustment is desired, and also the place where the vessel in respect of which application is made will be lying immediately prior to proceeding to the swinging-buoys or place of adjustment. Every such application must be lodged at the Customhouse at least twenty-four hours before the time therein specified for the examination and adjustment of the compasses of any vessel. 10. The amount of adjustment fee shall be based according to the net registered tonnage and as prescribed in the schedule of fees attached hereto. 11. A list of the names of the adjusters duly licensed by the Minister shall be compiled by the Collector of Customs at each port, and the names shall be arranged on such list in the alphabetical order of the surnames of such adjusters, and on the receipt by the Collector of Customs of any application for the services of an adjuster he shall, by notice in writing under his hand, require the adjuster standing next in order for duty on such list to attend on board the vessel in respect of which application is made, and such adjuster shall, on his being so notified, proceed on board in such time as shall cause no delay to such vessel, and duly examine and adjust the compasses thereof in accordance with the regulations for the time being in force. 12. In the event of any adjuster not attending on board any vessel in respect of which he may have received the notice prescribed in clause 11 in these regulations, or should any adjuster be unable from any cause to comply with any direction given in accordance with these regulations, it shall be competent for the Collector of Customs, as hereinbefore provided, to notify the adjuster next in order for duty, and such adjuster shall proceed and perform the services as by these regulations required. 13. Any adjuster receiving a notice from the Collector of Customs to adjust the compasses of any vessel, and being unable to do so, shall immediately notify the Collector of Customs to such effect. 14. Every adjuster shall register with the Collector of Customs the address to which notices may be forwarded in conformity with these regulations, and any subsequent change in any such address shall be immediately reported to the Collector of Customs by the adjuster. 15. The adjusters shall be paid such fees or remuneration by the master, owner, or agent as may be from time to time approved of by the Minister. 16. The error of the standard compass must not exceed one point on any given compass point. 17. Periodical Adjustment. —The compasses of every foreign-going vessel and home-trade vessel, either steam-vessel or sailing-vessel, built wholly or partly of steel or iron, shall, at least once in every twelve months, be properly examined, repaired (if necessary), and adjusted, and their errors ascertained by an adjuster duly licensed by the Minister: Provided that, should the compasses of any such vessel have been previously examined and adjusted at any port or place not being within the limits of the Colony of New Zealand, by any person (being duly authorised for that purpose by a competent authority recognised as such by the Minister) within the said period of twelve months, the certificate of such person may be accepted by the Engineer Surveyor as sufficient evidence of the correctness of such compasses, and satisfactory evidence of such examination and adjustment and of the good condition of such compasses shall be produced by the master of any vessel on demand being made by the Engineer Surveyor. 18. Exemptions. —The foregoing regulations shall not apply to vessels which the Minister may, by warrant under his hand, exempt any vessel plying within restricted limits. 19. Certificate by Officers. —At the periodical survey of any vessel the compasses of which have been examined and adjusted as herein provided within the six months immediately preceding the date of such survey, the certificate, as prescribed in Schedule I. hereto, shall be forwarded to the Engineer Surveyor, signed by the master and mate, one of whom at least must have made the previous, and is going to make the next, voyage in the vessel; if, however, such certificate cannot be so signed, then the compasses of such vessel shall be readjusted, the errors ascertained, and evidence thereof (as required by the 21st regulation hereof) shall be transmitted to the Marine Department, Wellington. 20. Place and Mode of Adjustment. —Where the compasses of any vessel to which these regulations apply are to be adjusted, such vessel shall be taken to the swinging-buoys laid down for such purpose in any port, or, at the option of the master or other person in charge thereof, such ship may be swung for the adjustment of compasses in any harbour by means of distant objects or by azimuth or amplitude of the sun. 21. Adjustment Tables,'dc. —A duly licensed adjuster shall, on completion(or as soon afterwards as possible) of the examination and adjustment by him of the compasses of any vessel, deliver to the master, owner, or agent of such vessel a table in the form set out in Schedule 11. hereto, and also a Napier's diagram, showing the deviation of the starboard compass of such vessel. There shall be attached to the aforesaid table a declaration by the adjuster that the compasses are in good order and condition. A duplicate of such deviation forms and diagrams are to be handed to the

255

H.—26

Engineer Surveyor by the adjuster at that port. The Engineer Surveyor, after having inspected and approved of the above-mentioned form and diagram, shall forward them to the Marine Department, Wellington. 22. Compasses not satisfactorily Adjusted. —Where in any ease the Marine Department consider the deviation of the compasses of any vessel have not been satisfactorily ascertained, the department may order such vessel to be again swung and the compasses thereof re-adjusted, and the errors ascertained. 23. Bepairs, So. —Where at any time any vessel has undergone at any port in New Zealand alterations or repairs necessitating the removal or addition of any plates, beams, &c, from or to the hull, boilers, funnels, masts, &c, or if the Engineer Surveyor has reason to believe that the compasses of any ship are unreliable, then, notwithstanding any regulation herein to the contrary, the compasses thereof must be adjusted and the errors ascertained prior to such ship proceeding to sea : Except in the case where there are no licensed adjusters available ; then the Engineer Surveyor shall advise the Secretary, Marine Department, who may grant permission, if he thinks it is expedient, to such vessel to proceed to any port in New Zealand where the services of a licensed adjuster can be obtained. 24. Southern Hemisphere. —Where the compasses of any intercolonial or home-trade vessel are unadjusted for the Southern Hemisphere, such compasses shall be adjusted, and the errors ascertained in the manner herein required as soon after the arrival of such vessel as practicable. 25. Standard Compass. —Every foreign-going and home-trade vessel wholly or partly constructed of iron or steel shall be provided with a standard compass, placed in a suitable position ; the said compass shall be furnished with appliances for taking accurate observations and bearings. 26. Compass-error Begister-book. —The equipment of every foreign-going and intercolonialtrading vessel surveyed at any port in New Zealand shall include a compass-error register-book, printed according to the form on Schedule 111. hereto, in which shall be recorded the errors of the standard compass (such errors being ascertained by taking observations as often as practicable), and shall also, at the same time, note therein the different points of the vessel's head and the approximate position of the vessel; such register-book shall be produced to the Engineer Surveyor on demand, and when so produced shall be initialled by him. 27. Compass Unadjusted. —The master of any vessel to which these regulations apply who shall take, or attempt to take, any such vessel to sea, or engage in trade or in the carriage of passengers, before the compasses of the vessel under his command shall have been duly adjusted as herein required, shall be deemed to have committed a breach of these regulations. 28. Penalty. —lf any person shall be guilty of any wilful or negligent act of commission or omission contrary to any provision contained in these regulations, he is liable to a penalty not exceeding £50. Table of Fees. Vessels not exceeding 200 tons net registered tonnage, £1 10s. Vessels exceeding 200 tons and not exceeding 700 tons net registered tonnage, £2 2s. Vessels exceeding 700 tons and not exceeding 1,200 tons net registered tonnage, £3 3s. Vessels exceeding 1,200 tons and not exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage, £4 4s. Vessels exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage, £5 ss.

Hon. Minister. I recommend that these draft regulations be submitted to the Crown Law Officers for revision. 6/1/96. W. T. Glasgow. Approved.—J.G.W.— 9/1/96. For Solicitor-General accordingly.—For the Law draftsmen. —W.S.E. Eevised as in red. The forms in the schedule should be sorted afresh, so as to run con-secutively.—-Fred. Fitchett.—l6/1/96. Draft regulations sent to printer.—G.A.—20/1/96. Hon. Minister.—l recommend that the accompanying regulations for licensing adjusters of compasses be approved and signed.—W. T. Glasgow.—3o/1/96. Approved.—J.G.W.—ll/2/96. Copy of regulations sent to Gazette. —G.A. —14/2/96. Form of license sent to printer, also compass-card.—G.A.—l9/2/96.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand, 6th December, 1895. An Act having been passed during the recent session of Parliament in this colony requiring the adjusters of compasses of iron ships to be licensed by this department, regulations are now being prepared for the issue of the necessary licenses, and the question has been raised as to whether a shipowner should be allowed to employ any licensed adjuster he may please, or whether the practice in force in Victoria of keeping an alphabetical list of the licensed adjusters, and employing each one in turn in the order of which his name appears on the list, should be adopted

H.—26

256

here. Before coming to a decision in the matter, I shall feel obliged if you will let me know the reasons which induced your Board to make the rule at present in force in Victoria, and how it has been found to work. I have, &c, Secretary, Marine Board, Melbourne, Victoria. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib — Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, 24th December, 1895. Compass Adjusters. —-I am in receipt of your letter of the 6th December (received on the 17th instant), requesting to be furnished with imformation as to the working of the regulations in- force in Victoria relating to the adjustment of compasses, and beg to reply as follows : — In 1889 the regulations marked " A " were passed, and provided that the Board should license certain persons as adjusters, and fixed a schedule of fees not to be exceeded by adjusters, who could be employed by an owner or master direct without reference to this office; this system, however, was found to work very unsatisfactorily, and a searching investigation thereinto, on complaint, was made by a committee which in its report to the Board stated, inter alia, that—" During the course of the committee's investigations into this matter it has been ascertained that a system obtains at this port under which the adjusters, in their competition for business, accept less remuneration for their services than is provided in the schedule of fees attached to the Board's regulations; it is submitted that such a system is not to be commended, leading as it does to irregularities, and in order to terminate what, in the opinion of your committee, is a reprehensible practice, it is recommended that the fees for the adjustment of compasses should be reduced, and that the regulations should be so amended as to require that applications for services of adjusters should be made direct to the Marine Board, accompanied by the amount of fee therefor, and that the adjusters in turn receive their directions for the adjustment of compasses from the Secretary of the Board." As a result, Begulation 15 of (A) was repealed, and in lieu thereof amended regulations were introduced, taking effect from the Ist October, 1890, and since that date there has been no reason to believe other than that the matter of adjustments is now properly attended to. An owner applies to this office for the services of an adjuster, tendering the prescribed fee at the same time. There were three, but now two adjusters suffice for the work of the port. A register is kept of applications made, and the adjusters are in turn allotted to vessels—the fee is fixed and is paid to the adjuster from this office, consequently there is no opportunity for the adjusters to undercut each other, to the very serious detriment of the work to be performed. In appointing adjusters for the port, applications are called in the usual manner though press, &c, numbers are reduced by ballot, and such candidates are then required to present themselves to the Government Astronomer for examination prior to the issue of a license. The present system works smoothly, and I attach for your information, if of use to you in inaugurating a new system in your colony :—(1) Form of license; (2) Form of application for the services of an adjuster; and (3) a copy from the page of a register kept to record applications and the services of adjusters. I shall be very glad if I can furnish you with any further information on the subject—or any other at any time. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. J. Geo. McKie, Secretary.

[Extraot from New Zealand Gazette of 20th February, 1896.] Regulations fob Adjustment op Compasses. ,-.-.;•- Marine Department, Wellington, 13th February, 1896. In pursuance and exercise of the power and authority conferred upon me by section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," I, Joseph George Ward, the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, do hereby make the following regulations for licensing properlyqualified persons to be adjusters of compasses, prescribing, the examination to be passed by applicants for such licenses, fixing the fees to be paid for the adjustment of compasses; and do hereby also make the following regulations for" the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation tables. J. G. Wabd.

Begulations. 1. Licenses without Examination.- —Subject in each instance to satisfactory evidence of good character, and to the payment of a fee of £1, any person shall be entitled to receive a license as an adjuster, without examination, who— (1.) Holds a license as an adjuster from the Board of Trade or any other Board or authority recognised by the Minister as satisfactory ; or (2.) Holds a certificate as extra master in the mercantile marine, or a commission not lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Eoyal Navy; or (3.) Gives satisfactory evidence that, being the holder of a certificate as master (other than extra master) or as mate in the .mercantile marine, or of a commission lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Royal Navy, he has passed the examination prescribed by the Board of Trade, or any other Board or authority as aforesaid, in the syllabus of the laws of the deviation of the compass in iron ships, and in the means of compensating or correcting it. 2. Licenses by Examination.— Any person who holds a certificate as master (other than extra master) or as mate in the mercantile marine, or who holds a commission lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Royal Navy, shall be entitled to receive a license as a.n adjuster upon

257

H.—26

passing the hereinafter-mentioned examination in the syllabus of the laws of the deviation of the compasses of iron ships. 3. Examination, Fee, &c. —Any such person as last aforesaid who wishes to pass an examination in the syllabus of examination in the laws of the deviation of the compasses of iron ships, and in the means of compensating or correcting it, can be examined at Wellington upon filling up the usual form of application and paying to the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office the fee of £1. The examination shall be conducted by the Principal Examiner of Masters and Mates, and shall be held at such time and place as he appoints. If the candidate passes the examination successfully a note to that effect will be duly made upon the certificate held by him. No part of the above-mentioned fee will be returned. 4. License, Fee, &c. —Every application for a license as an adjuster shall be made in writing to the Secretary of the Marine Department. Every applicant must submit, with his application, his certificate, and satisfactory evidence of good conduct and sobriety during the twelve months immediately preceding the date of his application. 5. A fee of £1 will be charged for a license, and must be paid before the license is issued. 6. The license will be issued by the Secretary of the Marine Department at Wellington in the form numbered 1 in the schedule hereto, and it shall not be lawful for any person to act as an adjuster unless he holds such license. 7. The holder of a license as an adjuster shall have authority to examine, adjust, and compute the error of compasses, and transmit tables of such errors to the masters, owners, or agents of vessels of which the compasses have been examined and adjusted as herein required, and such licenses may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister. 8. Adjustment of Compasses, Fees, &c. —-The master, agent, or owner of any vessel requiring that the compasses of such ship shall be examined and adjusted under the provisions of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," or any Act amending the same, shall make application for such examination and adjustment to the Collector of Customs at the port in which the vessel is lying. 9. Every such application shall be in writing, and shall state the date and time when such examination and adjustment is desired, and also the place where the vessel will be lying immediately prior to proceeding to the swinging-buoys or place of adjustment. Every such application must be lodged, at the Custom-house at least twenty-four hours before the time therein specified for the examination and adjustment of the compasses of any vessel. 10. The amount of adjustment fee shall be based according to the net registered tonnage, and as prescribed in the table of fees numbered 2 in the schedule hereto. 11. A list of names of the adjusters shall be compiled by the Collector of Customs at each port, and the names shall be arranged on such list in the alphabetical order of the surnames of such adjusters ; and on the receipt by the Collector of Customs of any application for the services of an adjuster he shall, by notice in writing under his hand, require the adjuster standing next in order for duty on such list to attend on board the vessel in respect of which application is made, and such adjuster shall, on his being so notified, proceed on board in such time as shall cause no delay to such vessel, and duly examine and adjust the compasses thereof in accordance with the regulations for the time being in force. 12. In the event of any adjuster not attending on board any vessel in respect of which he may have received the notice prescribed in clause 11 in these regulations, or should any adjuster be unable from any cause to comply with any direction given in accordance with these regulations, it shall be competent for the Collector of Customs, as hereinbefore provided, to notify the adjuster next in order for duty, and such adjuster shall proceed and perform the services as by these regulations required. 13. Any adjuster receiving a notice from the Collector of Customs to adjust the compasses of any vessel, and being unable to do so, shall immediatedly notify the Collector of Customs to such effect. 14. Every adjuster shall register with the Collector of Customs the address to which notices may be forwarded in conformity with these regulations ; and any subsequent change in any such address shall be immediately reported to the Collector of Customs by the adjuster. 15. The adjusters shall be paid such fees or remuneration by the master, owner, or agent as may be from time to time approved of by the Minister. 16. The error of the standard compass must not exceed one point on any given compass point. . ' 17. Periodical Adjustment. —The compasses of every foreign-going vessel and home-trade vessel, either steam-vessel or sailing-vessel, built wholly or partly of steel or iron, shall, at least once in every twelve months, be properly examined, repaired (if necessary), and adjusted, and their errors ascertained by an adjuster : Provided that should the compasses of any such vessel have been previously examined and adjusted at any port or place, not being within the limits of the Colony of New Zealand, by any person (being duly authorised for that purpose by a competent authority recognised as such by the Minister) within the said period of twelve months, the certificate of such person may be accepted by the Engineer Surveyor as sufficient evidence of the correctness of such compasses ; and satisfactory evidence of such examination and adjustment, and of the good condition of such compasses, shall be produced by the master of any vessel on demand being made by the Engineer Surveyor. 18. Exemptions. —The foregoing regulations shall not apply to vessels plying within restricted limits which the Minister may, by warrant under his hand, exempt. 19. Certificate by Officers. —At the periodical'survey of any vessel the compasses of which have been examined and adjusted as herein provided within the six months immediately preceding the date of such survey, a certificate, in the form numbered 3 in the schedule hereto, shall be forwarded 33— H. 26.

H.—26

258

to the Engineer Surveyor, signed by the master and mate, one of whom at least must have made the previous, and is going to make the next, voyage in the vessel. If, however, such certificate cannot be so signed, then the compasses of such vessel shall be readjusted, the errors ascertained, and evidence thereof, as required by the 21st regulation hereof, shall be transmitted to the Marine Department, Wellington. 20. Place and Mode of Adjustment. —Where the compasses of any vessel to which these regulations apply are to be adjusted, such vessel shall be taken to the swinging-buoys laid down for such purpose in any port, or, at the option of the master or other person in charge thereof, such ship may be swung for the adjustment of compasses in any harbour by means of distant objects or by azimuth or amplitude of the sun. 21. Adjustment Tables, &c. —The adjuster shall, as soon as possible after completion of the examination and adjustment by him of the compasses of any vessel, deliver to the master, owner, or agent of such vessel a table in the form numbered 4 in the schedule hereto, and also a Napier's diagram showing the deviation of the standard compass of such vessel. There shall be attached to the aforesaid table a declaration by the adjuster that the compasses are in good order and condition. Duplicates of such deviation forms and diagrams are to be handed to the Engineer Surveyor by the adjuster at that port. The Engineer Surveyor, after having inspected and approved of the above-mentioned form and diagram, shall forward them to the Marine Department, Wellington. 22. Compasses not satisfactorily adjusted. —Where in any case the Marine Department consider that the deviation of the compasses of any vessel has not been satisfactorily ascertained, the department may order such vessel to be again swung, and the compasses thereof readjusted, and the errors ascertained. 23. Repairs, &c. —Where at any time any vessel has undergone at any port in New Zealand alterations or repairs necessitating the removal or addition of any plates, beams, &c, from or to the hull, boilers, funnels, masts, &c, or if the Engineer Surveyor has reason to believe that the compasses of any ship are unreliable, then, notwithstanding any regulation herein to the contrary, the compasses thereof must be adjusted and the errors ascertained prior to such ship proceeding to sea. Except in the case where there are no adjusters available, then the Engineer Surveyor shall advise the Secretary, Marine Department, who, if he thinks it expedient so to do, may grant permission to such vessel to proceed to any port of New Zealand where the services of an adjuster can be obtained. 24. Southern Hemisphere. —Where the compasses of any intercolonial or home-trade vessel are unadjusted for the Southern Hemisphere, such compasses shall be adjusted and the errors ascertained in the manner herein required as soon after the arrival of such vessel as practicable. 25. Standard Compass. —Every foreign-going and home-trade vessel, wholly or partly constructed of iron or steel, shall be provided with a standard compass, placed in a suitable position ; and the said compass shall be furnished with appliances for taking accurate observations and bearings. 26. Compass-error Register-booh. —The equipment of every foreign-going and intercolonial trading-vessel surveyed at any port in New Zealand shall include a compass-error register-book, printed according to the form numbered 5 in the Schedule hereto, in which shall be accurately recorded the errors of the standard compass (such errors being ascertained by taking observations as often as pracbicable), and also accurate notes of the different points of the vessel's head and the approximate position of the vessel. Such register-book shall be produced to the Engineer Surveyor on demand, and when so produced shall be initialled by him. 27. Compass unadjusted. —The master of any vessel to which these regulations apply who takes or attempts to take such vessel to sea, or engage in trade or in the carriage of passengers, before the compasses of the vessel have been duly adjusted as herein required, shall be deemed to have committed a breach of these regulations. 28. Penalty. —lf any person is guilty of any wilful or negligent act of commission or omission contrary to any provision contained in these regulations, he is liable to a penalty not exceeding £50. SCHEDULE. No. I.— Form of License. (Reg. 6.) [Seal of Marine Department.] License as an Adjuster of Compasses, issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895." ,of , is hereby lioensed as a duly qualified adjuster of compasses, in pursuance of seotion 4of " The Shipping and Seamen's Aot Amendment Act, 1895." Marine Department, Wellington, this the day of ,18 . , Seoretary. Note.—The holder of this license must produoe it whenever asked to do so by a Oolleotor of Customs, Engineer Surveyor, or a master, owner, or agent requiring his servioes. This license may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister. No. 2.— Table of Fees. (Reg. 10.) & s. d. Vessels not exceeding 200 tons net registered tonnage .. .. .. .. 110 0 Vessels exceeding 200 tons and not exceeding 700 tons net registered tonnage .. ..220 Vessels exceeding 700 tons and not exoeeding 1,200 tons net registered tonnage.. ..330 Vessels exceeding 1,200 tons and not exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage .. 4 4 0 Vessels exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage .. .. .. .. ..550 No. 3.— Certificate re Compasses. (Reg. 19.) , the undersigned, hereby certify that the oompasses of the steamer " " are in all respects to satisfaction. know the errors and can apply them, Dated at , this day of , 189 , , Master. , Mate.

259

H.—26

No. 4.— Deviation Card, (Reg. 21.) Table of Corrected Courses for the Compass on board the s.s. "," Captain, as ascertained by swinging at, on, 18.

Signature of Operator : , Lioensed Adjuster of Compasses. [Note. —For deviations see other side.] Table of Deviations for Every Point of the Compass for which the Steering Courses are given on the other side, to facilitate the Ascertaining of the Correct Bearings of Objects from the Vessel. Note.—When a bearing is taken to any objeot not right ahead, the direotion of the ship's head must be read at the same time, and the bearing of the object correoted by the deviation corresponding to the direction of her head. Observe.—When the deviation is easterly, it must be added towards the south to all bearings on the east half of the oompass, and towards the north to bearings on the west half (that is, towards the right in all oases); westerly deviation to be added towards the south on the west half, and towards the north on the east half (that is, towards the left in all cases).

I, , hereby declare that I have this day examined the compasses of the " ," that the same are in good order and condition, and that the above deviations bave been oorrectly ascertained in the harbour [or at the swinging buoys laid down for that purpose]. Port of , this the day of , 18 . (Signed) Licensed Adjuster of Compasses.

No. 5.—Compass-error Register-book. (Reg. 26.)

(Circular.) Memoeakdum for Collectoes of Customs. With reference to clause 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," which provides that the compasses of every iron ship shall be adjusted by a licensed adjuster, I forward herewith, for your information and guidance, copies of regulations which have been made as to the adjustment of compasses and the licensing of adjusters. Collectors' attention is particularly called to clauses Bto 14 inclusive of these regulations. The name of every licensed adjuster will

To make a Course Magnetic. Steer by the Compass. To make a Course Magnetic. Steer by the Compass. North N. by E. N.N.E. N.E. by N. N.E. N.E. by E. E.N.E. E. by N. East E. by S. E.S.E. S.E. by E. S.E. S.E. by S. S.S.E. S. by E. South S. by W. S.S.W. S.W. by S. S.W. S.W. by W. W.S.W. W. by S. West W. by N. W.N.W. N.W. by W. N.W. N.W. by N. N.N.W. N. by W.

Ship's Head by Com- Deviation Direction of pass. _-.»•__-_ Deviation. Ship's Head by Com- r«__i_*i«- Direction of pass. .Deviation. Devia tion. North .. N.byE. N.N.E. .. N.E. by N. N.E. .. N.E. by E. E.N.E. .. E. by N. East E. by S. E.S.E. .. S.E. byE. S.E. S.E. by S. S.S.E. .. S. by E. South .. S. by W. S.S.W. S.W. by S. S.W. .. S.W. by W. W.S.W. W. by S. West .. W. by N. W.N.W. N.W. by W. N.W. .. N.W. by N. N.N.W. N. by W.

Date. Time. Head. Lat. Long. Decl. Obs. Azi. True Azi. Error. Var. Dev.

H.—26

260

be supplied to the Collector for the port at which the adjuster resides, in order that he may be able to keep the list required by regulation 11. It is intended that the fees for adjustment shall be collected by the adjusters themselves. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 20th Eebruary, 1896.

The Principal Engineer Surveyor, Wellington. With reference to clause 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1895," which provides that the compasses of every iron ship shall be adjusted by a licensed adjuster, I forward herewith for the information and guidance of engineer surveyors twelve copies of regulations, which have been made as to the adjustment of compasses and the licensing of adjusters. The attention of engineer surveyors is particularly called to clauses 23 and 26 inclusive of these regulations. 25th February, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, 4th March, 1896. Compass-adjustment System in Victoria. —ln response to your letter of the 6th December, I forwarded, under date the 24th December, certain data in connection with the above subject. Care was taken to reply as fully as possible to your request, and, as the letter may have miscarried, would you kindly inform me if it has been received, and oblige. I have, &c, J. Geo. McKie, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Sic, — Marine Department, N..Z., Wellington, 13th March, 1896. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th instant, and in reply to state that your communication of the 24th December last was duly received, and I regret that through an oversight the receipt was not acknowledged at the time. I beg to express to you the thanks of this department for the valuable information as to the adjustment of compasses in Victoria which was supplied, and I enclose for your information two copies of the regulations for adjustment in this colony which have recently been made. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Board, Melbourne, Victoria. D. McKellar, for Secretary.

Sir,— Auckland, 11th March, 1896. I beg to acknowledge the receipt of " Eegulationsfor Adjustment of Compasses," three in number, being extract from New Zealand Gazette, of the 20th February, 1896. I have, &c, T. C. Tilly, The Secretary, Marine Department. Examiner of Masters and Mates.

Sic,— Marine Board Office, Brisbane, 28th March, 1896. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of yours of the 18th instant, forwarding copies of regulations for the licensing of adjusters of compasses, &c, in New Zealand, for which please accept the thanks of this Board. I have, &c, L. A. Pethebeidge, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Shipmasters' Association of New Zealand. Sir, — Wellington, 17th September, 1896. As there seems to be some misapprehension in the Shipping Act re the adjustment of wooden steamships' compasses, I wouki strongly urge that this clause should be amended to include steam vessels built of wood. I have adjusted two of these lately, and the compasses of both, before compensation, were anything but reliable—one of them being two points and a half and the other not less than four points out—and I am of opinion that all steam vessels, whether built of wood or iron, ought to have their compasses adjusted periodically. I have, &c, Eobebt Strang, Licensed Adjuster. W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary of Marine.

Captain Allman. It appears to me that the cases referred to in this letter, together with the evidence at the inquiry into the wreck of the " Marramarra," point to the desirability of requiring compasses of wooden steamers to be adjusted. I shall be glad if you will consider the matter further. 21/9/96. , W. T. Glasgow. Before considering this matter further I should like to know the opinion of the Law Officers as to whether clause 4, section 1, " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," includes steamships built of wood. —Geo. Allman. —22/9/96.

261

H.—26

Hon. Minister. Section 4 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," provides that any "ship built wholly or partly of iron "is to have her'compasses adjusted. There is some doubt as to whether the words quoted cover steamers, the hulls of which are constructed of wood. The point is whether the engines and boiler are to be taken into account. I recommend that the Crown Law Officers be asked to advise. If wooden steamers cannot be brought under this section, then an amendment of the law seems to be required. 23/9/96. W. T. Glasgow. Approved.—W. H.-J.—24/9/96.

The Solicitor-General. Will you please advise as to whether steamships, the hulls of which are built of wood, are required by section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," to have their compasses adjusted by a licensed adjuster—that is, whether the fact of their boilers and engines being of iron bring them within the provisions of this section as being " ships built partly of iron " ? The expression used may refer only to the hulls. 25/9/96. W. T. Glasgow.' I think the expression used in the Act above quoted only extends to cases where the hull of the vessel is built " wholly or partly of iron," and that the fact of boilers and engines being of iron would not bring the vessel within terms of section 4.— W. S. Eeid. 25/9/96. For Captain Allman's information.—W. T. Glasgow.—26/9/96. Seen.—Geo. Allman. —28/9/96.

Secretary, Marine. If you will allow me, I would like to have an interview with Captain Tilly, Examiner of Masters and Mates at Auckland, concerning the adjustment of compasses of wooden steamships ; he is an experienced adjuster, and his opinion would be of value. 28/9/96. Geo. Allman.

The Collector, H.M. Customs, Timaru. With reference to section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895 " and to my Circular No. 670/85 of the 25th February last, I have to state that it would appear from the compass-card and diagrams forwarded to this department that only one sailing-vessel has been swung for the adjustment of her compasses since the Act came into operation. As the section of the Act and the regulations quoted above apply to all vessels, whether steam or sailing, which are built wholly or partly of iron or steel, you should be careful to see that their provisions are indorsed. 23rd October, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Similar letters were sent to the Collector, H.M. Customs, at Oamaru, Invercargill, Dunedin, Christchurch, Nelson, Wellington, Napier, and Auckland.

Memobandum from Collectob of Customs, Auckland, to Seceetaky, Marine Department, Wellington. Refebbing to your memorandum M. 96/1901 No. 492-88 of 23/10/96 : It has been impossible to comply with the regulations at this port, as owing to the frequent and sometimes continuous illness of the only licensed adjuster of compasses, Captain Tilly, there has been no one to do it. Possibly, Captain Eobertson, Harbourmaster at Onehunga, may pass and make himself qualified, but he does not intend to work for no fees, and such would be unjust to him. Captain Clayton does not intend to qualify, as his eyesight is not so good as it was. Captain Worsp, lately surveyor of Associated Underwriters, decides he will not qualify for license. And the only other applicant is a Captain Fernandez, and it is questionable whether he will pass the examination successfully. Thus far we are unfortunate in Auckland, but from no departmental neglect or oversight. • Alex. Eose, Collector. 3/11/96. File—W. T. G.—2B/11/96.

[Extract from the Evening Post, Friday, October 23, 1896.] The regulations issued by the Marine Department of New Zealand for the adjustment of compasses on board vessels belonging to the colony and for the licensing of adjusters properly qualified for the work, have come under the notice of the Nautical Magazine, published in London, which points out that the regulations provide for the appointment of an engineer surveyor to certify the correctness of the compasses who may perhaps know nothing of the deviascope and Napier's diagram. Surely (adds the writer) the New Zealand Shipmasters' Association ought to have this flaw removed, or the new regulations may land some of its members on the rocks.

H.—26

[Extract from the Evening Post, Saturday, October 24, 1896.] The remarks of the Nautical Magazine respecting compass adjustment in New Zealand, which appeared in cur yesterday's issue, do not, it seems, correctly represent the matter. The regulations do not require the Engineer Surveyor to certify the correctness of compasses. This is done by the licensed adjuster, who sends copies of his diagrams and deviation-cards to the Engineer Surveyor, in order that that officer may note that the vessel has been swung. It is necessary that he should have this information in the case of steamers, as passenger certificates cannot be issued until the Engineer Surveyor is satisfied, amongst other things, that the compasses have been adjusted by a licensed adjuster. In the case of sailing-vessels the cards are sent to that officer for convenience sake, so that he may forward them to the Marine Department along with those for steamers. When the diagrams and cards are received by the department they are submitted to the Nautical Adviser for examination.

Hon. Premier. I becommend that the accompanying letter be sent to the Agent-General, correcting a mistaken impression on the part of the Nautical Magazine as to the New Zealand regulations governing the adjustment of compasses. W. T. Glasgow. 30/10/96. Sib, — Premier's Office, Wellington, New Zealand, 30th October, 1896. The attention of the Government has been called to the remarks on the regulations for the adjustment of compasses in New Zealand, which appeared in the Nautical Magazine for September last. These remarks do not correctly represent what is meant by the regulations, as it is stated that they provide for the appointment of an Engineer Surveyor to certify the correctness of compasses. This is not so, as under the regulations it is the duty of the licensed adjuster, who makes the adjustment, to prepare and sign the compass-cards and deviation tables, copies of which he then forwards to the Engineer Surveyor. This is done so that that officer may note that the vessels have been swung, as it is necessary that he should know that the compasses have been adjusted, because, in the case of steamships, passenger certificates cannot be issued until the Engineer Surveyor certifies that he has surveyed the vessels, and that, amongst other things, their compasses have been adjusted by a licensed adjuster. In the case of sailing-vessels the cards and diagrams are sent to that officer for convenience sake, so that he may forward them to the Marine Department along with those for steamers. When they are received by the department they are examined by the Nautical Adviser. I think that it would be advisable that you should communicate this information to the editor of the magazine referred to, with a view of its being published. I enclose for your information two copies of the regulations mentioned. I have, &c, W. C. Walkeb, for the Premier. The Agent-General for New Zealand, London.

Westminster Chambers, 13, Victoria Street, London, S.W., 16th February, 1897. Adjustment of Compasses in New Zealand. —Eeferring to the Hon. Minister's letter (Marine), No. 555-88, M. 96/1901, of the 30th October last, I beg to state that immediately on its receipt I communicated the particulars contained therein to the editor of the Nautical Magazine, at the same time requesting that the information might be published in the next issue of that periodical. It was not, however, until the February number appeared that I found my letter was inserted, and it will be seen at page 163 of the magazine for that month, of which I herewith transmit a copy. W. P. Beeves. The Hon. the Premier. File—W. T. G.—29/3/97.

[Extract from the Evening Post, Monday, 23rd November, 1896.] The Secretary of the Marine Department (Mr. W. T. Glasgow) was interviewed on Saturday by a deputation from the Shipmasters' Association, consisting of Captains Woster, Banks, Croker, Bate, Marchall, Bowling, and Kennedy (secretary), who protested against the enforcement of the Act of last session requiring the foreign-going sailing-vessels, built wholly or partly of iron, should have their compasses adjusted before leaving New Zealand ports. The deputation asserted that the regulation was unnecessary, and that if it was enforced shipowners would be put to needless inconvenience and expense. Mr. Glasgow, in reply, pointed out that it was not within the power of the department to interfere with an Act of Parliament, but he promised to lay the representations of the deputation before the Government, so that if necessary some amendment might be made in the law next session.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Tuesday, 24th November, 1896.] A deputation representing the Shipmasters' Association has interviewed the Secretary of the Marine Department, to protest against the enforcement of the Act which provides that foreigngoing sailing-vessels, built wholly or partly of iron, should have their compasses adjusted before leaving New Zealand ports. Mr. Glasgow said that the department could not interfere with an Act of Parliament, but he promised to lay the representations of the deputation before the Government.

262

H.—26

263

[Extraot from the Evening Post, Tuesday, 24th November, 1896.] We are requested to explain that the deputation which waited on the Secretary for Mariae on Saturday, in reference to the regulation requiring foreign-going vessels to be swung for compass adjustments, was one composed wholly of masters of English vessels in port, and was introduced by the Hon. B. Richardson.

[Extraot from the Evening Post, Friday, December 11th, 1896.]

If further proof is necessary in support of the statements made in another column that the Customs authorities in other parts of the colony do not- insist upon the compasses of deep-sea vessels being readjusted, we may take a case cited by Captain Worster, of the " Waitangi," now in Napier, in a letter to Captain Kennedy, Secretary of the local branch of the Shipmasters' Association. Captain Worster points out that the barque " Andes" was recently allowed to leave Napier for London without any such regulations being carried out. Again, the ship " Pleione " left Nelson without the Customs authorities insisting upon such a course. When a deputation waited upon Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Under-Secretary for Marine and Customs, in respect to this matter, that gentleman promised that such regulations would be uniformly observed in all ports of the colony. This is certainly not done, and it is manifestly unfair that shipmasters trading from Wellington should be the only sufferers.

The S.S. " Rangatiba." In connection with the demand of the Customs authorities for fresh adjustment of the compasses of the s.s " Rangatira," the commander of the ship on the 9th instant addressed to the Collector the following letter: — Dear Sib,— 9th Deoember, 1896. I am in reoeipt of your memorandum of this date, and beg to protest respectfully against any interference with the compasses of my ship. 1 have myself passed the highest examinations in England in compass adjustments, and have my own regulated to suit myself—viz., in such a manner a 1! to leave only fractional errors when in Channel on the outward passages. Moreover, I understand from jour memorandum that the Act has been in foroe sinoe February last, and would po.nt out that my ship has been lying in the roadstead for two months and a half, during which time no notice was given me of the recessity of an official surveying, when it might have been done without any inconvenience or detention. My ship is to sail at noon to-morrow, and I hereby give notice that I will hold you responsible for any and all expenses incurred through demurrage or any other cause arising from your action. Allow me also to point out to you the fact that it is impossible for.a man to adjust a compass at one port in an efficient manner when that compass is destined to guide the mariner all round the world. Careful comparisons have to be made of the errors in various places, especially on the magnetic equator. After studying my compass for ovpr six years, am I to have the result of my labours destroyed on account of the wrong wording of an Aot, which every official to whom I have spoken acknowledges was, in their opinion, never intended to deal with British vessels in the Home trade. I am, &0., Geo. Bueton, Lieut. K.N.R., Collector of Customs, Wellington. Extra Master, Jr. Brother Trinity House. Captain Burton and the agents of the ship were much concerned at the attitude of the authori-, ties, who alleged that they had no alternative but to insist upon compliance with the provisions of the statute and regulations. Eventually the difficulty was surmounted by Captain Burton paying the necessary fees and obtaining an appointment as " adjuster," for which he has all the qualifications, and thus being permitted to depart without any interference with the compasses of his ship. We are informed that the rule that was enforced against the " Rangatira " is not insisted upon in any other part of the colony, and, if this be so, he would appear to have just cause for complaint on that ground alone. If, again, the regulations under the Act in respect of European liners are vexatious and oppressive, without any corresponding advantage, as is alleged, they should be amended forthwith. It appears to be a matter that should have the attention of the Chamber of Commerce. This morning we learn that a similar difficulty has arisen in regard to the steamship " Star of England." This vessel is ready to go to sea a full ship, and was timed to leave at noon to-day; but now Captain Reid is under notice from the Customs authorities that his ship must be " swung" and her compasses adjusted. Captain Reid protests against his compasses being interfered with; objects, also, on the ground of risk to vessel in swinging her; and protests against the loss that will be caused by the delay in the departure of the vessel.

The Secretary, Marine Department. In accordance with your instructions that I should report on the bringing of foreign-going vessels under the regulations for the adjustment of compasses I have to state that I never contemplated the bringing of foreign-going vessels under the regulations for adjustment of compasses ; this work is done for them at Home by competent adjusters under the regulations* of the Board of Trade, and the masters of these vessels are competent to undertake the calculation required for ascertaining any change which may subsequently occur. As it was essential for the safety of the public in New Zealand that better provision should be made with reference to the adjustment of compasses in this colony, .the regulations at- present in force were gazetted, and are on the same lines as those in the Australian Colonies and of the Board of Trade as far as passenger steamships are concerned. lam of opinion that it is not desirable that owners of foreign-going vessels should be obliged to have the compasses adjusted in New Zealand, unless there has been considerable or extensive damage to the ship, necessitating repairs or alteration, I sincerely trust

H.—26

264

that the Act will not be enforced as regards these foreign-going vessels. At the same time I think all vessels engaged in the intercolonial and coastal trades, where applicable, should comply with our regulations concerning the adjustment of compasses. Geo. Allman. 7/12/96. * The difficulty is one connected with the Act, and cannot be amended by regulations.— W. T. G.

Hon. Minister. Adjustment of Compasses of Ships. —With reference to the accompanying memorandum from Captain Allman, suggesting that the law as to requiring compasses to be adjusted by a licensed adjuster should not be enforced in the case of foreign-going ships, I have to state that I think it is probable that if attention had been called to the matter when the Bill was before the House the operation of the law would have been confined to home-trade and intercolonial ships. The matter appears to have escaped the notice of the Shipmasters' Association and other persons skilled in nautical matters, and no comment was made. It is no doubt a serious responsibility to advise the Government not to enforce a law which has been passed by the Legislature, or, rather, set aside its application to certain cases clearly within its operation; but the circumstances warrant consideration, and I submit the remarks of the Nautical Adviser for the favourable consideration of the Government. I think I should make it clear that the grievance is principally in connection with traders between the United Kingdom and New Zealand, which are not required by the Board of Trade to have compasses adjusted unless they are passenger steam-vessels. The masters adjust their own compasses, which do not vary very much from year to year, and they look upon interference with them in a colonial port in this matter as a very great grievance. There is also the case of ships belonging to foreign countries—America, Germany, &o. It seems out of place to apply a colonial law to such vessels, at least so far as their compasses are concerned. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 9th December, 1896. For Cabinet.—W. C. W.—lo/12/96. In Cabinet. —12th December, 1896. Eeferred to Minister of Marine.—A. Willis, Secretary.

The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. Be so good as to inform Captain East that the Minister has decided to issue a regulation empowering the department to grant a license to the master of a foreign-going ship to adjust compasses. It is a condition of such appointment that the certificate of a master so licensed is accepted only for the vessel he commands. The necessary formalities to give effect to this are now being drawn up, and a form of license will be sent to you in an hour or so. 15th December, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. With reference to my memorandum of this date I forward herewith, for your information and guidance, copy of the new regulations which have been made providing for the licensing of the masters of foreign-going ships to adjust the compasses of their own vessels. You will observe that these special licenses are to be issued by Collectors, and that a fee of 10s. is to be charged for each license. I also enclose a copy of the form of license and certificate referred to in the regulations. Forms made up in books will be issued as soon as they are printed. 15th December, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Further Regulations for Adjustment of Compasses and Licensing of Adjusters. In pursuance and exercise of the power and authority conferred upon me by section five of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," and of all other powers and authorities me enabling in this behalf, I, William Hall-Jones, the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, and of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," and its amendments, do hereby make the following additional regulations for the purpose of the aforesaid section five, and do hereby declare that such regulations shall form part of and be read with the regulations made under the same section on the 13th day of February, 1896, and gazetted on the 20th idem (hereinafter called " the principal regulations "). Begulations. 1. Subject in each instance to satisfactory evidence of good character and to the payment of a fee of 10s., any person who holds a certificate as master and is in actual command of a foreigngoing ship (not being an intercolonial trading-ship) may receive, without examination, a special license as an adjuster of the compasses of such ship. 2. Such license may be issued by any Collector with the previous approval of the Minister. 3. Such license shall apply only to the ship named therein, and shall continue in force so long only as the licensee is in actual command of such ship.

265

H.—26

4. Such license shall be in the following form : — Special License as an Adjuster of Compasses for the Ship [Name of ship] , A.8., being the master in actual command of the ship , is hereby licensed as an adjuster of the compasses of that ship, but of no other ship. This license may be suspended or cancelled at any time by the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, and shall continue in force so long only as the lioensee is in actual command of the said ship. Dated at , New Zealand, , 189 . , Collector of Customs. 5. It shall not be necessary for the licensee to specially adjust the compasses before sailing, if he is satisfied that they are then in fact satisfactorily adjusted, and a certificate under his hand in the following form shall be sufficient evidence that the compasses are in fact satisfactorily adjusted:— This is to certify that at this date the compasses of the ship are satisfactorily adjusted. Dated at , this day of , 189 . A.8., Licensed Adjuster of the Compasses of the said ship. 6. The principal regulations are hereby modified in so far as they conflict with these regulations. Given under my'hand, at Wellington, this fifteenth day of December, one thousand eight hundred and ninety-six. Wμ. Hall-Jones,

Memorandum for Collectors and Officers in Charge of Customs. (Circular.) Marine Department, Wellington, 18th December, 1896. Adverting to previous instructions to you to see that the law respecting the adjustment of the compasses of ships built wholly or partly of iron is enforced, I have to state that, in consequence of strong representations made at this port regarding the adjustment of compasses of steamers and sailing-ships trading between the United Kingdom and the colony, it has been decided to license the masters of foreign-going sailing-vessels and cargo-steamers, other than intercolonial traders, to make the adjustment of their own compasses. I enclose copies of the regulations for your information and guidance, and I have to request that you will be careful to see that they are strictly enforced. You will observe that the licenses are to be issued by Collectors after having obtained the approval of the Minister to do so. If there is not time to obtain such approval by letter, you. should, on being satisfied as to the character of the applicant, ask for it by telegram addressed to me. On the arrival of a vessel it will be advisable that you should notify the master that the adjustment will be required before he leaves, so as to give him time to obtain a license and to do what is necessary. Books of license-forms will be sent to you as soon as they are printed ; in the meantime you should write out the licenses that may be required. Printed forms of the certificate referred to in the regulations will also be sent. You will observe that these new regulations do not apply to intercolonial and home-trade ships, which will be subject to the regulations of the 13th February last; neither is it intended that they are to apply to steamers holding passenger certificates issued by the Board of Trade, as the fact that they hold such certificates is proof that their compasses have been adjusted in the United Kingdom, and it is not required that fresh adjustments shall be made in the colony. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Shipmasters' Association of New Zealand, Wellington, Bth June, 1897. I have the honour to forward you the following list of subjects which will be brought under your notice by the deputation which is appointed to wait upon you on Thursday afternoon, the 10th instant:— Licensed Adjusters. —First. That masters of vessels are desirous of being allowed to choose their own licensed adjusters of compasses, in the same manner as they choose their own licensed pilots. This is a very important matter, and a concession in this direction would be much appreciated by those who have the responsibility of managing their ships. Light on East Gape. —Second. That, in the interests of shipping, a light placed on the Bast Cape would be of much more benefit than on Cape Kidnapper. Gape Palliser Telephone. —Third. That it would be often of great service if ships could be reported by telephone from Cape Palliser when the light is exhibited. Somes Island Light. —Fourth. If it is proposed to take any steps towards improving Somes Island light, or if anything is to be done to make the approach to this port safer for shipping. Port Underwood Telephone. —Fifth. That masters of vessels having to take shelter in Port Underwood complain that the present telephone-station in Ocean Bay is of but little service to them, owing to the difficulty of landing at that place during southerly gales; whereas had the station been at Oyster Bay a landing could at all times be effected. Buoy off Steeple Bock. —Sixth : That the Harbour Board propose to lay down a large buoy on a shoal-patch off the Steeple Bock. This masters of vessels fear would be a source of danger unless some means were taken to light the " buoy " and so indicate its position at night. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. A. Kennedy, Secretary. Captain Allman.—Please see me re this Mopday morning, 10.30 a.m.—W. H.-J.—ll/6/97. 34— H. 26 r

H.—26

266

Mr. Glasgow—Please look through regulations and see where alteration will be required to allow adjusters to be selected by captains.—W. H.-J.—ls/6/97. Hon. Minister.—Nothing further is necessary than to cancel regulations 8, 9, 11, 14. See copy herewith.—W. T. Glasgow.—l 7/6/97. Draft of amended regulations sent to printer.—G. A.—24/6/97. Hon. Minister.—Order herewith making new regulations and revoking the former ones. It was considered desirable to do this in order that the regulation allowing masters of foreign-going vessels to adjust their own compasses might be embodied.—W. T. Glasgow.—l/ 7/97.' Order signed by Minister, and copy sent to Gazette. —G. A.—s/7/97.

[Kxtraot from New Zealand Qazette of Bth July, 1897.] Regulations fob Adjustment of Compasses. Marine Department, Wellington, sth July, 1897. In pursuance and exercise of the power and authority conferred upon me by section 4 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895," I, William Hall-Jones, the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, do hereby make the following regulations for licensing properlyqualified persons to be adjusters of compasses, prescribing the examination to be passed by applicants for such licenses, fixing the fees to be paid for the adjustment of compasses; and do hereby also make the following regulations for the adjustment of compasses and the transmission of deviation tables; and Ido hereby revoke the regulations for the adjustment of compasses which were made by warrants dated the 13th February, 1896, and the 15th December, 1896, and published in the New Zealand Gazette of the 20th February, 1896, and the 17th December, 1896. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Regulations. 1. Licenses without Examination. —Subject in each instance to satisfactory evidence of good character, and to the payment of a fee of £1, any person shall be entitled to receive a license as an adjuster, without examination, who— (1.) Holds a license as an adjuster from the Board of Trade or any other Board or authority recognised by the Minister as satisfactory ; or (2.) Holds a certificate as extra master in the mercantile marine, or a commission not lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Boyal Navy; or (3.) Gives satisfactory evidence that, being the holder of a certificate as master (other than extra master) or as mate in the mercantile marine, or of a commission lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Royal Navy, he has passed the examination prescribed by the Board of Trade, or any other Board or authority as aforesaid, in the syllabus of the laws of the deviation of the compass in iron ships, and in the means of compensating or-correcting it. 2. Licenses by Examination. —Any person who holds a certificate as master (other than extra master) or as mate in the mercantile marine, or who holds a commission lower than lieutenant or navigating-lieutenant in the Royal Navy, shall be entitled to receive a license as an adjuster upon passing the hereinafter-mentioned examination in the syllabus of the laws of the deviation of the compasses of iron ships. 3. Examination, Fee, &c. —Any such person as last aforesaid who wishes to pass an examination in the syllabus of examination in the laws of the deviation of the compasses of iron ships, and in the means of compensating or correcting it, can be examined upon filling up the usual form of application and paying to, the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office the fee of £1. The examination shall be conducted by the Examiners of Masters and Mates, and shall be held at such time as they appoint. If the candidate passes the examination successfully a note to that effect will be duly made upon the certificate held by him. No part of the above-mentioned fee will be returned. 4. License, Fee, d~c. —Every application for a license as an adjuster shall be made in writing to the Secretary of the Marine Department. Every applicant must submit, with his application, his certificate, and satisfactory evidence of good conduct and sobriety during the twelve months immediately preceding the date of his application. 5. A fee of £1 will be charged for a license, and must be paid before the license is issued. 6. The license will be issued by the Secretary of the Marine Department at Wellington in the form numbered 1 in the schedule hereto, and it shall not be lawful for any person to act as an adjuster unless he holds such license. '7. The holder of a license as an adjuster shall have authority to examine, adjust, and compute the error of compasses, and transmit tables of such errors to the masters, owners, or agents of vessels of which the compasses have been examined and adjusted as herein required, and such licenses may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister. 8. The amount of adjustment fee shall be based according to the net registered tonnage, and as prescribed in the table of fees numbered 2 in the schedule hereto. 9. The adjusters shall be paid such fees or remuneration by the master, owner, or agent as. may be from time to time approved of by the Minister,

267

H.—26

10. The error of the standard compass must not exceed one point on any given compass point. Intercolonial and Home-trade Ships. 11. Periodical Adjustment. —The compasses of every intercolonial vessel and home-trade vessel, either steam-vessel or sailing-vessel, built wholly or partly of steel or iron, shall, at least once in every twelve months, be properly examined, repaired (if necessary), and adjusted, and their errors ascertained by a licensed adjuster : Provided that should the compasses of any such vessel have been previously examined and adjusted at any port or place, not being within the limits of the Colony of New Zealand, by any person (being duly authorised for that purpose by a competent authority recognised as such by the Minister) within the said period of twelve months, the certificate of such person may be accepted by the Engineer Surveyor as sufficient evidence of the correctness of such compasses ; and satisfactory evidence of such examination and adjustment, and of the good condition of such compasses, shall be produced by the master of any vessel on demand being made by the Engineer Surveyor. 12. Exemptions. —The foregoing regulations shall not apply to vessels plying within restricted limits which the Minister may, by warrant under his hand, exempt. 13. Certificate by Officers. —At the periodical survey of any vessel the compasses of which have been examined and adjusted as herein provided within the six months immediately preceding the date of such survey, a certificate, in the form numbered 3 in the schedule hereto, shall be forwarded to the Engineer Surveyor, signed by the master and mate, one of whom at least must have made the previous, and is going to make the next, voyage in the vessel. If, however, such certificate cannot be so signed, then the compasses of such vessel shall be readjusted, the errors ascertained, and evidence thereof, as required by the 15th regulation hereof, shall be transmitted to the Marine Department, Wellington. 14. Place and Mode of Adjustment. —Where the compasses of any vessel to which these regulations apply are to be adjusted, such vessel shall be taken to the swinging-buoys laid down for such purpose in any port, or, at the option of the master or other person in charge thereof, such ship may be swung for the adjustment of compasses in any harbour by means of distant objects or by azimuth or amplitude of the sun. 15. Adjustment Tables, &c. —The adjuster shall, as soon as possible after completion of the examination and adjustment by him of the compasses of any vessel, deliver to the master, owner, or agent of such vessel a table in the form numbered 4 in the schedule hereto, and also a Napier's diagram showing the deviation of the standard compass of such vessel. There shall be attached to the aforesaid table a declaration by the adjuster that the compasses are in good order and condition. Duplicates of such deviation forms and diagrams are to be handed to the Engineer Surveyor by the adjuster at that port. The Engineer Surveyor, after having inspected the abovementioned form and diagram, shall forward them to the Marine Department, Wellington. 16. Compasses not satisfactorily adjusted. —Where in any case the Marine Department consider that the deviation of the compasses of any vessel has not been satisfactorily ascertained, the department may order such vessel to be again swung, and the compasses thereof readjusted, and the errors ascertained. 17. Bepairs, &c. —Where at any time any vessel has undergone at any port in New Zealand alterations or repairs necessitating the removal or addition of any plates, beams, &c, from or to the hull, boilers, funnels, masts, &c, or if the Engineer Surveyor has reason to believe that the compasses of any ship are unreliable, then, notwithstanding any regulation herein to the contrary, the compasses thereof must be adjusted and the errors ascertained prior to such ship proceeding to sea. Except in the case where there are no adjusters available, then the Engineer Surveyor shall advise the Secretary, Marine Department, who, if he thinks it expedient so to do, may grant permission to such vessel to proceed to any port in New Zealand where the services of an adjuster can be obtained. 18. Southern Hemisphere. —Where the compasses of any intercolonial or home-trade vessel are unadjusted for the Southern Hemisphere, such compasses shall be adjusted and the errors ascertained in the manner herein required as soon after the arrival of such vessel as practicable. 19. Standard Compass. —Every intercolonial and home-trade vessel, wholly or partly constructed of iron or steel, shall be provided with a standard compass, placed in a suitable position ; and the said compass shall be furnished with appliances for taking accurate observations and bearings. "20. Compass-error Register-book.- —The equipment of every intercolonial and home-trade ship surveyed at any port in New Zealand shall include a compass-error register-book, printed according to the form numbered 5 in the Schedule hereto, in which shall be accurately recorded the errors of the standard compass (such errors being ascertained by taking observations as often as practicable), and also accurate notes of the different points of the vessel's head and the approximate position of the vessel. Such register-book shall be produced to the Engineer Surveyor on demand, and when so produced shall be initialled by him. Foreign-going Ships. 21. Subject in each instance to satisfactory evidence of good character, and to the payment of a fee of 10s., any person who holds a certificate as master, and is in actual command of a foreigngoing ship (not being an intercolonial trading-ship), may receive, without examination, a special license as an adjuster of the compasses of such ship. 22. Such license may be issued by any Collector with the previous approval of the Minister. 23. Such license shall apply only to the ship named therein, and shall continue in force so long only as the licensee is in actual command of such ship.

H.— 26

268

24. Such license shall be in the following form : — Special License as an Adjuster of Compasses for the Ship [Name of ship], A.8., being the master in actual command of the ship " ," is hereby licensed as an adjuster of the compasses of that ship, but of no other ship. This license may be suspended or cancelled at any time by the Minister having charge of the Marine Department, and shall oontinue in force so long only as the licensee is in actual command of the said ship. Dated at , New Zealand, ,189 . , Collector of Customs. 25. It shall not be necessary for the licensee to specially adjust the compasses before sailing if he is satisfied that they are then in fact satisfactorily adjusted ; and a certificate under his hand in the following form shall be sufficient evidence that the compasses are in fact satisfactorily adjusted:— This is to certify that at this date the compasses of the ship " " are satisfactorily adjusted. Dated at , this day of ,18 . A.8., Licensed Adjuster of the Compasses of the said Ship. 26. Compass unadjusted. —The master of any vessel to which these regulations apply who takes or attempts to take such vessel to sea, or engage in trade or in the carriage of passengers, before the compasses of the vessel have been duly adjusted as herein required, or, in the case of a foreign-going ship, before he has given the certificate mentioned in clause 25 of these regulations, as the case may be, shall be deemed to have committed a breach of these regulations. 27. Penalty. —lf any person is guilty of any wilful or negligent act of commission or omission contrary to any provision contained in these regulations, he is liable to a penalty not exceeding £50 SCHEDULE. No. I.— Form of License. (Beg. 6.) [Seal of Marine Department.] License as an Adjuster of Compasses, issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Aot Amendment Aot, 1895." ,of , is hereby licensed as a duly qualified adjuster of compasses, in pursuance of seotion 4of " The Shipping and Seamen's Aot Amendment Act, 1895." Marine Department, Wellington, this the day of , 18 . , Secretary. Note. —The holder of this license must produce it whenever asked to do so by a Collector of Customs, Engineer Surveyor, or a master, owner, or agent requiring his services. This license may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister. No. 2.— Table of Fees. (Reg. 8.) £ s. d. Vessels not exoeeding 200 tons net registered tonnage .. .. .. 1 10 0 Vessels exceeding 200 tons and not exceeding 700 tons net registered tonnage .. ..220 Vessels exceeding 700 tons and not exceeding 1,200 tons net registered tonnage.. ..330 Vessels exceeding 1,200 tons and not exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage .. 4 4 0 Vessels exceeding 2,000 tons net registered tonnage .. .. .. .. ..550 No. 3. — Certificate re Compasses. (Beg. 13.) , he undersigned, hereby certify that the compasses of the steamer " " are in all respects to satisfaction. know the errors and can apply them. Dated at , this day of , 189 . , Master. , Mate.

No. 4.— Deviation Card. (Reg. 15.) Table of Corrected Courses for the Compass on board the s.s. "," Captain, as ascertained by swinging at, on, 18.

Signature of Operator : , Licensed Adjuster of Compasses. [Note. —For deviations see other side.] Table of Deviations for Every Point of the Compass for which the Steering Courses are given on the other side, to facilitate the Ascertaining of the Correct Bearings of Objects from the Vessel. Note.—When a bearing is taken to any object not right ahead, the direotion of the ship's head must be read at the same time, and the bearing of the object corrected by the deviation corresponding to the direction of her head.

H.—26

269

Observe.—When the deviation is easterly, it must be added towards the south to all bearings on the east half of the compass, and towards the north to bearings on the west half (that is, towards the right in all cases); westerly deviation to be added towards the south on the west half, and towards the north on the east half (that is, towards the left in all cases).

I, , hereby declare that I have this day examined the compasses of the " ," that the same are in good order and condition, and that the above deviations have been oorrectly ascertained in the harbour [or at the swinging buoys laid down for that purpose]. Port of , this the day of , 18 . (Signed) Lioensed Adjuster of Compasses.

No. 5.— Compass-error Register-book. (Reg. 20.)

The principal Engineer Surveyor, Wellington. sth July, 1897. With reference to my memorandum, No. 733/85, of the 20th February, 1896, I have to inform you that the regulations for the adjustment of compasses therein referred to have been revoked, and that fresh regulations, of which copies are enclosed, have been made. You will observe that it will not be necessary, under the new regulations, for adjusters to register at the Customhouse, and that it is left to the owners to employ any licensed adjuster he likes. It is also provided that a candidate can be examined by the ordinary Examiners of Masters and Mates, instead of by the Principal Examiner, as was the case under the former regulations. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Friday 11th June, 1897.] The Shipmasteks' Association.— Deputation to the Minister fob Public Woeks.—Adjustment of Compasses. A deputation representing the Shipmasters' Association, and consisting of Captains Kennedy, Wheeler, Post, Downie, Smith, Sinclair, and Grant, waited upon the Minister for Public Works yesterday afternoon to discuss with him a number of matters of vital importance to shipowners, eea-captains, and the public. Sir Eobert Stout introduced the deputation, saying that they had no personal ends to serve, but were actuated with a desire to benefit the colony in the suggestions which they were about to make. The Question of Adjusters. •■ Captain Downie opened the ball by impressing upon the Minister the advisability of allowing shipmasters to appoint their own adjusters of compasses. A similar course was adopted in the Old Country, and he thought that it was desirable here. The Government adjusters might be competent men, but it was possible that they might not always have the confidence of the shipmasters. There were instances in which their computations of errors in the charts were not correct, and if they had been implicitly relied on the ships using them would have got into serious trouble. Mr. Hall-Jones : Is that quite recently, since the adjusters have been licensed ? Captain Downie : Yes, within the last few months. There is a strong feeling that this should be remedied, and that we should be allowed to select our own adjusters. :. The Ministeb pointed out that in appointing Government adjusters they had followed the lead of New South Wales. Captain Downie interrupted to say that he had recently had a sample of New South Wales adjustment. He had been appointed to bring the " Dingadee " over from Sydney after she had met with an accident. The compasses were adjusted before starting, but when he got 300 miles out he

Ship's Header Com- Deviatlon Directi on o Deviation. Ship's Head by Compass. Deviation. Direction of Deviation. North .. N.by B. N.N.E. .. N.E. by N. N.E. .. N.E. by E. EiN.E. .. E. by N. East E. by S. E.S.E. .. S.E. byE. S.E. .. S.E. by S. S.S.E. .. S. by E. South .. S. by W. S.S.W. S.W. by S. S.W. .. S.W. by W. W.S.W. W. by S. West .. W. by N. W.N.W. N.W. by W. N.W. .. N.W. by N. N.N.W. N. by W.

Date. Time. Head. Lat. Long. Decl. Obs. Azi. True Azi. Error. Var. Dev.

it.—26

270

found that the adjustment which had been given him before leaving was seven degrees out oi truth. Mr. Hall-Jones said the reason of the appointment of Government adjusters was the. incompetent way in which the work had been performed previously. It was found in cases that incompetent men had done the work and charged very low fees. It was thought that good men should be taken on even at a higher fee. The opinion which he had obtained from the Nautical Adviser of the Government did not agree with what Captain Downie had just stated. Still, the deputation were the men who were principally affected. It was at Captain Allman's suggestion that the alteration was made, and he would consult with him on the subject before giving a definite expression of opinion.

Memorandum for Collectors and Officers in Charge of Customs. (Circular.) Marine Department, Wellington, 9th July, 1897. Adverting to my circulars, Nos. 670-85, of the 20th February, 1896, and 130-88, of the 18th December last, I have to inform you that the regulations for the adjustment of compasses therein referred to have been revoked, and that fresh regulations, of which copies are enclosed, have been made. You will observe that it will not be necessary, under the new regulations, for adjusters to register at the Customhouse, and that it is left to the owner to employ any licensed adjuster he likes. It is also provided that a candidate can be examined by the ordinary Examiners of Masters and Mates, instead of by the Principal Examiner, as was the case under the former regulations. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

The Examiner of Masters and Mates, Customhouse, Auckland. 13th July, 1897. Herewith I forward, for your information and guidance, copies of new regulations for the adjustment of compasses, by which you will observe that candidates for examination for licenses as adjusters may be examined by any Examiner of Masters and Mates, instead of by the Principal Examiner only as heretofore. The papers will be sent from Wellington in each instance, when applied for. George Allport, for Secretary. Similar letters to Examiners of Masters and Mates at Lyttelton and Port Chalmers.

EXHIBIT H. Order Paper.—House of Eepbesentatives, Friday, the 26th Day of July, 1895. Question 17. Mr. Joyce to ask the Minister of Marine, What opportunities are afforded to good-conduct boys of the industrial schools to enter the mercantile or other marine services of the colony? 'Will the Minister arrange for the use and occupation of the Lyttelton Orphanage buildings by good-conduct youths of Burnham and other kindred schools who may be desirous of becoming seamen ? And will the Minister consider the advisability of procuring a suitable sailingvessel for making periodical visits to the various islands and distant stations of the colony, on which vessel such youths may be alternately trained to the profession of the sea? Captain Allman. Be so good as to state your opinion as to the advisability of a training-school and a training-vessel. See Mr. Joyce's question. W. T. Glasgow. Please see remarks attached.—Geo. Allman. 24/7/95.

Sir,— V Concerning a training-school and a training-ship for boys wishing to enter the mercantile marine service of the colony, I wish to remark there is very little opening in the mercantile marine service of New Zealand for boys, as the Shipping and Seamen's Act of last session only allows certificated able seamen and ordinary seamen to man our local ships. If boys are employed on board ship it is at the owner's or master's option, and it is not likely that shipowners or masters will incur any more expense in manning their ships than the law compels them to ; consequently our local ships do not carry boys. Therefore Ido not see any necessity for schools on shore or train-ing-ships to educate boys to become sailors when there is no possibility of their obtaining employment in the colony. If arrangements could be made with the Imperial Government to take thirty or forty of these lads annually from this proposed training-school or ship for service in the Eoyal Navy the affair is workable, not otherwise. George Allman. Secretary, Marine.—24/7/95.

Hon. Minister. You will see by the accompanying memorandum from the Nautical Adviser that, owing to the Act of last session, which requires a ship to have a full complement of crew, all of which are to be rated as A.B.s or ordinary seamen, there would be little hope of boys getting employment. If kept on board a Government training-ship until, say, eighteen years of age, they might be rated as ordinary seamen, but this would materially enhance the cost of the undertaking.

271

H.—26

From 1874 to 1880 a training-school and training-ship in connection therewith existed at Kohimarama, near Auckland. This institution was given up because it was found that most of the boys did not take to the sea, but found occupation on land. I understand that the first part of the question will be commented on by the Education Department. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Boys entering Maeine Seevice. Mb. Joyce asked the Minister of Marine, What opportunities are afforded to good-conduct boys of the industrial schools to enter the mercantile or other marine services of the colony ? Will the Minister arrange for the use and occupation of the Lyttelton Orphanage buildings by good-conduct youths of Burnham and other kindred schools, who may be desirous of becoming seamen ? And will the Minister consider the advisability of procuring a suitable sailing-vessel for making periodical visits to the various islands and distant stations of the colony, on which vessel such youths may be alternately trained to the profession of the sea ? Mr. Sbddon said he had received the following memorandum from the Nautical Adviser, Captain Allman : " Concerning a training-school and a training-ship for boys wishing to enter the mercantile marine service of the colony, I wish to remark there is very little opening in the mercantile marine service of New Zealand for boys, as the Shipping and Seamen's Act of last session only allows certificated able seamen and ordinary seamen to man our local ships. If boys are employed on board ship it is at the owner's or master's option, and it is not likely that shipowners or masters will incur any more expense in manning their ships than the law compels them to; consequently our local ships do not carry boys. Therefore I do not see any necessity for schools, on shore or training-ships to educate boys to become sailors, when there is no possibility of their obtaining employment in the colony. If arrangements could be made with the Imperial Government to take thirty or forty of these lads annually from this proposed training-school or ship for service in the Eoyal Navy the affair is workable, not otherwise." He was of opinion that it would be a useless expenditure, and an expensive experiment besides, to have training-ships. It had been tried in Victoria, and he had no hesitation in saying, from his experience when there, that the experiment was a failure. And so it would be in this colony.

Order Paper.—-House of Bepresentatives, Tuesday, the 17th Day of September, 1895. Question 15. Mr. Buddo to ask the Government, Whether, in view of Captain Allman's advice that the Shipping and Seamen's Act does not allow lads to be employed on New Zealand mercantile sea-going vessels, they intend to take any steps to amend the Act, so as to allow New Zealand boys to take their part in what is very likely to be the great factor in the future of New Zealand—the sea-carrying trade of Australasia? Hon. Minister. I attach further remarks from Captain Allman. He thinks the Act should be amended, but considers it a difficult matter to deal with, and one requiring much consideration. I question whether it would be wise to introduce any amendment this session. 16th September, 1895. W. T. Glasgow.

Captain Allman. Would you like to make any further remarks for information of the Minister ? Would you advise an amendment of the Act of last session ? W. T. Glasgow 16/9/95.

The Secretary, Marine Department. The Shipping and Seamen's Act of 1894 does not prevent or prohibit boys from being employed on board vessels in the New Zealand or intercolonial trade. If the masters or owners of vessels desire to employ boys they can do so; the matter is quite optional, and the result is that in the majority of cases vessels are manned according to the scale in the First Schedule of the above-mentioned Act, and no boys are carried, particularly in sailing-vessels. There is no mention, or provision made for the employment of boys on board ships engaged in the coastal or intercolonial trade in the Act, that I am aware of, unless an apprentice is to be considered as such, which are only allowed to count on sailing-ships. The definition of a certificated able seaman is a person who can produce documentary evidence of having served four years at sea employed on deck. The definition of the ordinary seaman is a person who has served a term at sea less than what is required for an able seaman, unless he passes an examination for an able seaman, which the Act provides for. [Note. —-Boys usually after eighteen months' or two years' sea-service are considered qualified for ordinary seamen, but naturally much depends on the boy's age and robustness.] An apprentice usually goes to sea at the age of fourteen or fifteen, and is bound either to the master or owner of a vessel for a terni of four years, and in most cases apprentices have to pay a premium of about £40 for the term of their indenture. Apprenticeship oh board ship is decreasing rapidly since the introduction of steam-vessels, particularly in New, Zealand; and, this being the case, it would seem necessary that other methods were required to enable our, boys.toigo to,sea in OUr Ships. ,-..:.,,., .:• U- - ■.'■,. ~■: : '"...'." I '.',<-"| '/,... Concerning boys, not intending apprentices, who are ■anxious to go,to sea and become seamen, this is how the matter stands at present; If a boy wished to go to in a coastal' or intercolonial

272

H.—26

trading-vessel, and he cannot get or find a master or owner kind and considerate enough to employ him on board ship, he must leave the colony and graduate elsewhere until he becomes an ordinary seaman, and then he may return to New Zealand and ship in that capacity if he can get employment. I think the Act should be amended in some way to make provision for the employment of boys on board ship. It is a difficult matter to deal with, and will require very great consideration: the same difficulty appears to exist amongst the shipping of Great Britain. I was informed four or five months ago, on .good authority, that the master of a locally owned sailing-ship bound for London from this port advertised for one or two boys for the voyage, and over thirty boys presented themselves on board next day for employment. Geo. Allman. 16/9/95.

Legislative Council. —Exteact from the Minutes of the Laboub Bills Committee, held on the 10th Day of October, 1895, upon the Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Bill. On the motion of the Hon. Mr. Montgomery, it was resolved, " That Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary of the Marine Department, be requested to supply information from the various Acts respecting the engagement of boys on vessels in the Australasian Colonies and in the English maritime service." Wμ. T. Jennings, Chairman. (Information required for Committee meeting on Tuesday, 15th October, at 11 a.m.)

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 14th October, 1895. I have the honour to report as follows with reference to the bearing of the various Acts on the employment of boys on vessels in the Australian Colonies and in the English marine service. In England the only provision with reference to boys is that they shall not be employed on fishing-vessels under the age of sixteen unless as apprentices. The minimum age at which a boy can be apprenticed on a fishing-vessel is thirteen. There is no restriction as to boys oh vessels other than fishing-vessels, except that boys under the control of Boards of Guardians cannot be sent to sea until they are over twelve years of age. The Australian Colonies have no provisions with reference to boys, except in the case of South Australia, where boys can be apprenticed only if over thirteen years of age. In New Zealand the minimum for an apprentice, if bound by any person other than his parent, is twelve, but there is no limit in other cases. I think I should remind the Committee that in England and the Australian Colonies there is no law requiring ships to carry a specified number of certificated seamen, and consequently there is room for the employment on board vessels of boys not being apprentices. I may state that a naval training-school, to which boys were sent by Magistrates, was established at Kohimarama, Auckland, in December, 1874, and remained under the control of this department until October, 1880, when it was transferred to the Education Department as an industrial school, as it was not found to be a success as a naval training-school. I attach a return showing the callings to which boys were apprenticed during the time the school was under this department, from which it will be seen that out of the sixty-four apprenticed only thirty-six were to the sea. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The Chairman, Labour Bills Committee, Legislative Council, Wellington.

Ebtuen showing callings to which boys were apprenticed from the naval training school at Kohimarama, from its establishment in 1874 until it was handed over to the Education Department in 1880 :— Seamen, 36; storekeeper, 1; servant and messengers, 3; gardener, 1; clerk, 1; farmers, 16 ; stock-farmers, 4 ; confectioner 1; farmers and nurserymen, 1: total, 64. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 14th October, 1895.

Hon. Mr. Ward. 14th October, 1895. When giving evidence before the Labour Bills Committee of the Legislative Council, Captain Allman was asked to state his opinion as to what could be done to encourage boys to go to sea. He was not prepared on the spur of the moment to make any suggestions, but he has since embodied them in the accompanying memorandum, which is, I think, worthy of careful consideration. I have not had time to give Captain Allman , s suggestions much attention, and I prefer in the meantime to forward them on to you, with the suggestion that they should be sent to the Hon. Mr. Montgomery. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 14th October, 1895. I have the honour to report that I have given considerable attention to the subject of the training of boys for the sea, in consequence of certain remarks made in both branches of the Legislature bearing directly and indirectly on the practical working of the Shipping and Seamen's Act passed last year. It has been urged that the effect of this measure is to shut out from all chance of following a seafaring life the many young lads who, in a country having the large seaboard that New Zealand

273

H.—26

has, naturally have an inclination to follow this calling, and that in consequence our mercantile marine, now and in the future, must inevitably be manned solely by "foreign " labour—that is, by men who do not claim New Zealand as their home. The contention i 3 undoubtedly a sound one, and would be sufficiently serious to cause concern were there no way out of the difficulty. Fortunately, however, I think there is, and one, too, which will not necessitate any drastic amendment of the Act now in force. The proposal which has been made for. the equipment of a training-school ship does not, however, meet with my approval, for the very sufficient reason that, while involving a very large annually recurrent expenditure, it would of necessity fail in its object, because under the present law no provision whatever is made for the employment of boys, each vessel being compelled to carry its complement of men according to its tonnage. Were this otherwise, however, I could not support the suggestion of a training-ship on account of the poor results compared with the expenditure which followed not only our own experiment in Auckland in this direction, but also that of New South Wales, having regard to the primary object in view—that of facilitating the employment of boy 3on board ship. Without taking into consideration the initial expense of establishing a training-ship school, I find that the cost of the boys at Auckland per head was approximately £20 per annum, while I also notice that of the twenty-two who left the ship in one year only eight went to sea; thus two-thirds of these boys were forced into occupations for which they were not originally intended. Unsatisfactory as this may appear from the point of view of those who wish such lads to be trained for the "sea, the statistics relating to the New South Wales training-ship " Sobraon " (successor to the "Vernon") are much less favourable. According to the report issued in August last, that training-school has been established twenty-eight years. The total expenditure last year was £9,364 11s. 4d., and the cost per head, calculated on the daily average aboard (340), was £26 4s. 2d.; while calculated on the year's enrolment (521) it was £17 2s. 3d. No mention is made in the report of the number of boys who went to sea (if any), the whole tenor of the report going to show that the boys leaving the ship for the most part were apprenticed to farmers and others engaged on shore. The reformative value of these and kindred institutions is, of course, not in question—l am merely referring to them in relation to their usefulness for attaining the primary object of their establishment. However, as I have shown, a training-ship could not now attain even the poor results of the Auckland experiment, because our shipowners and masters have no inducement to carry lads in addition to the number of able seamen they are compelled to take. Qnless some action is taken, therefore, a seafaring career must be beyond all boys who are unable to go to other colonies or countries in order to be put on a ship's articles. New Zealand, as far as lam aware, is the only country where the State stipulates that each vessel shall carry a certain complement of able seamen in proportion to its tonnage, the general practice being to leave the shipowners and Government surveyors to judge whether a vessel is " sufficiently manned." How, then, can we prevent our vessels being manned entirely by "foreigners" (non-New-Zealanders), and afford an avenue of employment for those of our lads who desire to follow a seafaring life, while at the same time complying with the provisions of our own legislation ? I have thought out a scheme by which I think this can be done without causing any great expense or undesirable friction. Obviously, if the State compels a shipowner- to employ as much adult labour as he requires to work his ship, he will not carry lads in addition unless some inducement is offered to him. To provide this I would suggest that a bonus should be offered to the master or owner of any ship owned or registered in New Zealand of £12 per head for every lad carried in addition to the complement of able seamen provided by law. The bonus of £12 should be for one year's service, to be followed by a bonus of £6 for the second year. The total sum paid in respect of each boy would thus be £18 for two years, as compared with the £20 per annum, or more, involved if a training-ship school were established. The shipowner would be required to place the boy on the ship's articles in the ordinary way, and to pay him the usual wages of £1 per month for the first year (thus absorbing the bonus), and to pay the difference between £6 (the second year's bonus) and the ordinary wages for a boy in his second year's service on board ship—say, £1 10s. — it being, of course, assumed that a boy in his second year would be well worth this sum. In other words, the bonus would for the first (year) practically amount to the boy's wages, the shipowner providing his maintenance for his services, and in the second year the shipowner would get a second year's service on the terms of a first year's service. At the expiration of the second year the lad would be qualified to ship as an ordinary seaman on any vessel, and could, if fairly diligent, at eighteen years of age go up for his examination, and become an able seaman at the end of his first year as an ordinary seaman, thus escaping one year of the usual term. To facilitate the employment of boys on board steamships I would propose that a slight amendment be made in the present Shipping and Seamen's Act, permitting two ordinary seamen to rank as one able seaman, in the proportion of two ordinary seamen to three able seamen, and four ordinary seamen to seven able seamen, where that number or over are employed. If some such amendment as this were not made there would be no possibility of finding employment for the lads after their term of two years had expired, and the bonus paid by the Government would be practically thrown away. Provision, of course, would have to be paid for withdrawing the bonus, or any part of it, in the event of a boy leaving a ship before his first or second year had expired. To further facilitate the employment of these lads their names could be taken by the Marine Officer at each port, or, if considered desirable, by the local agent of the Labour Bureau, the choice or selection, of course, resting with the shipowner or master. It might also be necessary to insist that the lads shall be over fourteen and under seventeen years of age. The scheme should be restricted to the sons of colonists, and to vessels owned or registered in the colony, but its application should extend to all ports. Thus we should have practically training-ships'all over New Zealand instead of at one port, and masters of vessels would not be put 35— H. 26 ?

274

H.—26

to the inconvenience of waiting for boys to be sent down or up to them, and the cost of passage would be saved. Assuming that a training-ship were procured it would have to be located in one port, and would, almost of necessity, supply the needs only of that port, and, considering the small number of boys that would be engaged under such circumstances, it would scarcely be worth while amending the Act for the purpose. If, however, some scheme on the lines I have suggested were adopted, a hundred boys could be found employment of a permanent character at a cost of £1,200 for the first year and £600 for the second, while in no. year would the expenditure exceed £1,800 if a hundred boys were annually drafted into our mercantile marine—a number we can hardly expect to be absorbed annually for several decades to come. In conclusion, I may say that I have refrained from going into much detail, contenting myself with outlining a scheme which I think might be made workable and serviceable. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine. Geo. Allman. Eeferred to Cabinet. -J. G. Ward.—2l/10/95. In Cabinet.—27th October, 1895. Eefer to Minister of Marine to advise.—A. Willis, Secretary.

Hon. Minister. The Labour Bills Committee of the Legislative Council has requested Captain Allman to furnish them with a copy of this memorandum. As it was considered in Cabinet, possibly Government might wish to treat as confidential. For my part, Ido not see any objection. 19/9/96. W. T. Glasgow. To be treated as confidential.—W. H. -J.— l/10/96. Returned from Minister.—G.A.—9/10/96.

Sm, — Marine Department, 25th September, 1896. With reference to the request of the Committee that Captain Allman should produce to it a report drawn up by him on the question of the employment of boys at sea, I have been directed by the Hon. the Minister of Marine to scate that the report referred to is a departmental document, and has been under consideration in Cabinet. The Minister regrets, therefore, that he does not see his way to authorise Captain Allman to hand it to the Committee. There would, however, be no objection to Captain Allman being examined on this question, and stating his views on it for the information of the Committee. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The Chairman, Labour Bills Committee of the Legislative Council.

[Extract from Hansard.] New Zealand Boys Joining Mercantile Marine. Mr. Buddo asked the Government, Whether, in view of Captain Altaian's advice that the Shipping and Seamen's Act does not allow lads to be employed on New Zealand mercantile seagoing vessels, they intend to take any steps to amend the Act so as to allow New Zealand boys to take part in what is very likely to be a great factor in the future of New Zealand—the sea-carrying trade of Australasia ? It was very evident that the Nautical Surveyor had been criticizing very fairly the Shipping and Seamen's Act of last session, which ignored the question of the employment of ordinary seamen. The House only dealt with the necessary number of able-bodied seamen required for the safety of our sea-going vessels, and the Shipping and Seamen's Act had practically taken away any encouragement it could give to the young lads of the colony to enter the mercantile service; therefore it was not doing its duty to the youth of the colony. He trusted that this matter would be seen to, and that the Act would be so amended that it would be an encouragement to the lads of the colony to enter upon a sea-going life. Mr. Ward said the Shipping and Seamen's Act of 1894 did not prevent or prohibit boys from being employed on board vessels in the New Zealand or intercolonial trade. If the masters or owners of vessels desired to employ boys they could do so—the matter was quite optional—and the result was that in the majority of cases vessels were manned according to the scale in the First Schedule of the Act he had named, and no bojs were carried, particularly in sailing-vessels. There was no mention of or provision made for the employment of boys on board ships engaged in the coastal or intercolonial trade in the Act that he was aware of, unless an apprentice was considered as such, and these were only allowed to count on sailing-ships. The definition of " a certificated able"seaman" was a person who could produce documentary evidence of having served four years at sea, employed on deck. The definition of an "ordinary seaman " was a person who had served a term at sea less than what was required for an able seaman, unless he passed the examination for an able seaman which the Act provided for. Boys usually after eighteen months' or two years' sea-service were considered qualified for ordinary seamen; but, naturally, much depended on the boy's age and robustness. An apprentice usually went to sea at the age of fourteen or fifteen, and was bound either to the master or to the owner of the vessel for the term of four years; and in most cases apprentices had to pay a premium of about £40 for the term of their indenture. Apprenticeship on board ship was decreasing rapidly since the introduction of steam-vessels, particularly in New Zealand, and, this being the case, it would seem necessary that

275

H.—26

other methods should be used to enable our boys to go to sea in our ships. Concerning boys, not intending apprentices, who were anxious to go to sea and become seamen, this was how the matter stood at present: If a boy wished to go to sea in a coastal or intercolonial trading-vessel, and if he could not get or find a master or owner kind and considerate enough to employ him on board ship, he must leave the colony and graduate elsewhere till he became an ordinary seaman, and then he might return to New Zealand and ship in that capacity if he could get employment. He thought the Act should be amended in some way to make provision for the employment of boys on board ship. It was a difficult matter to deal with, and required very great consideration. The same difficulty appeared to exist among the shipping of Great Britain. He was informed four or five months ago, on good authority, that the master of a locally-owned sailing-ship bound for London from this port advertised for one or two boys for the voyage, and over thirty boys presented themselves on board next day for employment.

Sib, — Dunedin Chamber of Commerce, Dunedin, 23rd January, 1896. I have the honour, by direction of my Committee, to inform you that they entirely concur with the resolution forwarded to you in November last by the Canterbury Chamber, recommending that the Government "give effect to the recommendation by Mr. J. B. March to establish a training-ship for New Zealand boys, provided such training-ship is not to be used as a reformatory, but is made available for youths of good character only," and expressing the opinion that a reformatory, if established, " should be in a separate vessel, and in another port." I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. Petbb Babe, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 29th January, 1896. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23rd instant on the subject of the establishment of a training-ship for New Zealand boys, and in reply to inform you that this communication will be brought under the notice of the Minister of Marine on his return to Wellington. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Secretary, Dunedin Chamber of Commerce, Dunedin.

Naval Teaining-school, Kohimaeama.—Statement of Cost for Four Years. Year 1876-77 ... ... ... 80 to about 90 boys ; cost, £2,382 15s. Id. „ 1877-78 ... ... ... 79 „ 90 „ „ £1,970 15s. 4d. „ 1878-79 ... ... ... 70 „ 80 „ „ £1,623 4s. 9d. „ 1879-80 64 „ 75 „ „ £1,585 19s. 7d.

Hon. Minister. A tbaining-ship fitted up would probably cost over £2,000. The experience of Kohimarama showed that the cost of maintenance would be about £20 per boy. Kohimarama was not a success, partly owing to the institution being a reformatory. In a memorandum dated 14th October, 1895, herewith, Captain Allman suggests an alternative scheme which is well worth considering. It is to the effect that the Government should offer a bonus to the master or owner for every lad carried in addition to the full complement of the crew. The total for each lad would not be more than £18 per annum, and the Government would be saved the initial cost of the training-ship. Captain Allman's memorandum is well worth perusal. 18/2/96. W. T. Glasgow. Referred to Cabinet.— J. G. Wabd.—l9/2/96. In Cabinet, 28th February, 1896. The matter is now being dealt with.—A. Willis, Secretary. Hon. Mr. Ward. Please see Cabinet minute, 28/2/96 : " The matter is now being dealt with." lam not aware as to how it is being dealt with. Do you remember ? W. T. Glasgow. 21/5/96.

Obdee Papee.—House op Repeesentatives, Tuesday, the 26th Day of June, 1896. Question 27. Mr. R. Thompson to ask the Minister of Marine, Whether the Government will, during the present session, introduce a Bill to amend the Shipping and Seamen's Act, so as to encourage shipping companies to employ a reasonable number of boys as apprentices on each vessel? Captain Allman. I think this is a question on which you might express an opinion. 25/6/96. W. T. Glasgow.

Be Mr. Thompson's question, it is a very difficult one to answer. The most practicable way to encourage shipping companies or masters to employ boys as apprentices or otherwise would be to offer a small bonus. In October last I reported on the training of boys for the sea, the application

276

H.—26

of which should, I think, be confined to sailing-vessels of 20 tons register and over; personally, I am very much in favour of State-aided boys for the-sea, provided they are New-Zealanders, and also that they have passed and hold a Sixth Standard State-school certificate. 26/6/96. Gbo. Allman.

Hon. Minister. The Act of 1894 prescribed a certain number of able and ordinary seamen to be carried in proportion to tonnage. A complaint was made that this proportion of adult seamen was sufficient to man the vessel, and hence the employment of boys was discouraged. To remedy this the Act was amended last year to permit of two boys to be carried instead of one ordinary seaman in ships which carried five certificated seamen. This applied to sailing-vessels of over 200 tons. Practically, therefore, there is no encouragement for the carrying of boys on any steamers and on sailing-vessels of and under 200 tons. Captain Allman's remarks are appended hereto. While I consider the encouragement of boys being employed on ships very desirable, I am not prepared on the spur of the moment to suggest what course should be adopted. The matter might be submitted to the Labour Bills Committee. W. T. Glasgow. 26/6/96.

[Extraot from Eansard No. 5, 26th June to 30th June, 1896.] Shipping and Seamen's Act. Mr. E. Thompson asked the Minister of Marine, Whether the Government will, during the present session, introduce a Bill to amend the Shipping and Seamen's Act, so as to encourage shipping companies to employ a reasonable number of boys as apprentices on each vessel ? His reason for putting the question on the Order Paper was that his attention had been called to the fact that since the Shipping and Seamen's Act was passed our boys were being shut out from becoming seamen. Although the Act was amended last year to a certain extent by providing that two boys might be substituted for one ordinary seaman, that did not meet the case. No boys were now employed in the service, and the result was that any of our boys who wished to become sailors must leave the colony and go elsewhere to get on to vessels. This was a most unfortunate position in a maritime colony like New Zealand, and he hoped the Government would get this law altered. They did not know what might happen any day that might make it necessary that our young men should be trained to a seafaring life. It was therefore necessary that our youth should have the opportunity of learning to become seamen. He trusted the Government would see the necessity of bringing in an amendment to the Act, so that our boys would be enabled to take to a seafaring life. Mr. Hall-Jones did not think the position was quite as the honourable gentleman had stated. The Act of 1894 provided that a certain number of hands should be carried. It was afterwards said that, the ships then being fully manned, boys were not required. He believed, in consequence of this, last year an alteration was made in the Act, under which two boys could be employed instead of one seaman, it being open to owners of ships or steamers to take on two boys instead of one ordinary seaman, and he believed this had been done in several cases. As he was desirous of affording our lads facilities for entering our mercantile marine, he would give the matter very careful consideration, and see if any further alteration in the law was desirable.

[Extracts from the Herald (Melbourne), Thursday, 10th September, and Monday, 14th September, 1896.] British Jack Tar—ls He Decaying ?—The Cadet System—A Young Gentleman's Academy. As the poor are always with us, it is only proper that efforts should be made to afford some of their sons an opportunity of adopting a sea life under circumstances favourable to success and calculated to make them good seamen. As already shown, this is done in England to some extent through the instrumentality of privately-conducted training-ships, such as the " Empress," on the Clyde. There are, however, a good many scions of well-to-do, and even "country " families, who develop a weakness for the " briny," and are content to indulge their fancy by throwing in their lot with the mercantile marine. Of course, they design to become full-fledged quarter-deck or bridge-officers almost at a bound. Possibly the youngsters themselves might not, in some cases, object how to learn how to reef, steer, knot, splice, and so on, or even to do a little of the drudgery of shipboard service before essaying the higher flights ; but many of their families mistakenly object to such a course, and insist on their sons and brothers being conducted by a royal road to gold lace and a master's certificate. Well, for such "young gentlemen" whose people are prepared to pay for it, there are the means offered of satisfying their bent in the way they prefer. On the Thames, at Greenhithe, is moored the training-ship "Worcester," and on the Mersey there is the " Conway." These two vessels are " run"—if a training-ship at anchor can be said to be run at all —on almost identical lines. At any rate, they run before the fanning wind of fairly fat fees contributed by the friends of the young gentlemen who go aboard them for training. According to their prospectuses, they are " designed to train and educate young gentlemen with a view to their becoming captains and officers in the merchant service." Each has an influential and potential committee of management headed by a Koyal duke, admirals, city and shipping magnates, and other great people, as patrons or honorary members of their associations. There is a strong teaching staff attached to each of these ships, headed by the orthodox chaplain, and including university graduates, naval instructors, instructors in navigation, and, very properly, teachers of French, German, and Spanish. Altogether these training-ships appear to be places eminently

277

H.—26

calculated to turn oat " kid-glove " and " parlez vouing " officers for the mercantile marine. Yet it is openly stated there are already half-a-dozen holders, of master's certificates for every British ship to be commanded, and holders of mates' certificates in proportion ; and one London shipowner, being recently approached in favour of appointing one of these " spic and span " young gentlemen, replied, with more heat than politeness, " Hang it, Sir, I want seamen to command my ships—not gentlemen." But then he was one of the old school of shipowners, and one who had been to sea himself, and, besides, he did not own a line of stately passenger steamers. No doubt most of the families who send their " hopefuls " to the " Worcester " or " Conway " reckon with considerable foundation on the influence they may possess themselves, or that attaching to the training-ships, to push the fortunes of their youngsters in some of the great steamship lines. Too often promotion in the mercantile marine, like kissing, goes by favour. But as to the terms and other conditions attaching to training on the "Worcester "or "Conway." In the first place the money payment required is sixty guineas per annum, and, in addition to this, the parents or friends have to supply an outfit of articles enumerated and obtainable at prices quoted which amount in the aggregate to £13 2s. lid. This outfit is a most elaborate one, including a pair of kid gloves, three dozen paper collars, a sponge and a bag, and so on, and it has to be renewed as required. The Committee of the ship, however, provides the uniform, consisting of caps and badges, uniform suits, pilot trousers, and working-jackets. It may be safely taken that the annual fees and cost of outfit for a " Worcester " boy, which have to be defrayed by the friends, amount to not less than seventy guineas. The return made to those who can afford this expenditure is certainly very ample from the purely pecuniary point of view, though whether the system is calculated to turn out the stamp of seamen England is admittedly becoming short of is quite another question. There is a very wide curriculum, both technical and general, but the subjects are mainly such as are necessary or useful to ship-officers. There is, for instance, a refreshing absence of classics, but modern languages are prominent. Clearly a boy on the " Conway " gets a good general education, and can do—if he chooses. Among the prizes are cadetships in the Eoyal Navy, and, by order of the Board of Trade, two years' service on these ships is reckoned as one year at sea. Here are two at least of the royal roads to rank or certificate. Then the Queen herself takes an interest in the boys, and gives two prizes annually. One is a binocular and £35 for an outfit for the boy who comes out best in the examination for the cadetship, and the other is a medal awarded to the boy selected by vote of his shipmates as possessing the qualities which make the best sailor, viz.;—" Cheerful submission to superiors, self-respect and independence of character, kindness and protection to the weak, readiness to forgive offence, desire to conciliate the differences of others, and, above all, fearless devotion to duty, and unflinching truthfulness." Boys are not received under the age of thirteen, nor over sixteen, and the minimum course is two years, at the expiry of which it is said " the leading shipowners will give preference to the cadets of the institution and receive them as apprentices without premium." It is recommended, however, that boys should not leave the ship till they are sixteen, so that three years is evidently regarded as the full and proper term, so that to go through it to the best advantage the parents have to pay about 210 guineas without reckoning incidentals, and then the lads have to enter upon their apprenticeship in the mercantile marine if they have not secured one of the cadetships in the Eoyal Navy. A noticeable regulation is "Corporal punishment is only administered to boys whose names have been struck off the good-conduct list or for first offences of a very serious kind." Evidently there is not much work for the rope's end aboard these training-ships. Such a course of instruction may be very useful in a preparatory sense, but it is not quite the thing calculated to produce the hardy British seaman. Years ago such well-known liners as Green's and Money-Wigram's carried youngsters who were gorgeous in brass buttons and gold bands. They were calied " middies," and parents paid high premiums. They lived aft, and were essentially poop apprentices, but they at least had practical training, and even had to work all mizzen sails themselves under direction of a petty officer. It does not appear that there is any such practical training on board either the " Worcester " or the " Conway." We have now outlined the two systems in training-ships—the "Empress" for poor men's sons, and the "Worcester" and "Conway" for the sons of well-to-do people. If we are seeking to make first class A.B.s, and that is what England wants, the "Empress " appears to be by far the better school.

The Bkitish Tab. To the Editor of the Herald. Sir, —The subject you have taken in hand to ventilate is one upon which grave issues may oneday depend, but, thanks to His Excellency our Sailor Governor, this vital question is receiving the attention it deserves. You must pardon me if I criticize your article with regard to the cadets of the " Conway " and " Worcester " training-ships. In the matter of training for the merchant service, there is no royal road, and I do not think there is any justification to condemn these ships and say its boys receive no practical training. Whatever their training may be on board when at anchor in the Mersey or on the Thames, it certainly does fit and qualify them for the position they have to take up when they go to sea for the first time. As you stated in your article, two years' service aboard these ships counts as one year sea-service. It is after these two years that the boy has to learn to hand, sail, reef, and steer, when he has been bound to one or another sailing ship, which period generally consists of four years. During this time he has to keep his watch, tar down, scrub decks, paint ship, and one and every duty just the same as any other man or boy aboard. Favourable opportunities are afforded by the officers for practical work in navigation, but the classes held are

H.—26

278

taken out of his watch below. At the end of three years he is able to take his regular trick at the wheel and the look-out, and by this time knows the responsibilities of such work. I have served my time at sea in ships generally officered by men from either the " Conway " or " Worcester." They were gentlemen, and were all good seamen. Some bluff old skippers may condemn this kind of seaman. Mr. Editor, the better the ship aft the better will be the ship for'ard. If good men are required to man the ships of the mercantile marine and form a reserve for the Eoyal Navy, means must be taken whereby the end may be accomplished. Under the existing system matters are decidedly upside down, and the sailor of to-day, as a rule, neither cares for the Royal Navy nor the merchant service. Why should he ? What is the cause ? First, there must be harmony between the Naval authorities and the shipowners, proper training grounds provided, and inducement offered to both owners and recruits who are intended for our future Eoyal Navy reserve. Though I have left the sea, lam proud of the fact that I was, and am still, ever ready to serve, should occasion demand, as A Beitish Sailor. To the Editor of the Herald. Sic, —I have read with interest your series of articles upon the above subject, and I take the pen now because I think I can supplement your article upon the "Worcester " and " Conway," the Marine Officers' Training Colleges. Your representative winds up his last paper with the statement that there appears to be no practical training on board either ship. Seeing that the majority of the managing committees of both vessels are retired commanders of ships of the very highest class in the merchant service, this assertion might well provoke surprise. But the statement is an error which I can explain only by supposing the writer was not told the material fact that the cadets on passing out are encouraged to complete their training by entry into the two well-known ships "Hesperus" and "Harbinger," both trading to Melbourne, and owned by the firm of Messrs. Devitt and Moore, of London, a firm which is, I believe, an offshoot of the celebrated Blackwall Fleet of Messrs. E. and H. Green, established at Blackwall in 1613, nearly 283 years ago. These two sea training-ships are very commonly known as Lord Brassey's ships, through the active interest which his Lordship has taken in them, and to his having induced the owners to modify and improve the training given on board. Let me tell you something of the " Harbinger," due here in a few days. She is commanded by Captain Corner, a Eoyal Navy Eeserve lieutenant, and a gold medallist of the E.H.S. He has under him six mates, surgeon, purser, and a naval instructor, the latter officer, a lieutenant E.N., lent by the Admiralty, through our Governor's influence. In addition to her crew, mostly R.N.E. seamen, she carries a large number of midshipmen for training. The number last voyage was forty-five. Now, the great bulk of these young gentlemen come direct from the " Worcester " and the " Conway," and are en route to the P. and 0., the Orient, the Cunard, the White Star, and all the great mail services. The directors of these great employs, so far from thinking the system deficient in practical training, are now insisting on all candidates for their services coming through these ships. As you say, in Green's and Wigram's the midshipmen had to work the mizzen ;so they do in the "Harbinger," with the addition that they have "school " every day, in which to keep up their theory of navigation and to enlarge their knowledge under the direction of a naval officer who has no duly on board besides teaching the cadets. What more practical course could they go through ? They are at sea in a first-class merchantman, working her alongside of her seamen and under the eye of officers who lay themselves out to see that they learn all that is theoretical or practical in a seaman's calling. As a result the cadets of these two ships are found in every first-class service. One of them, Captain Niblett, is now a post-captain in the Eoyal Navy, and when H.M.S. " Northampton " was fitted out as a trainingship for seamen for the Eoyal Navy, and a special man was wanted for this particular duty, this " Worcester " boy was picked out. No small credit to the system, and he is not the only example of " Worcester "or " Conway " cadets rising to command in the Navy. Captain Mclnistry, E.N.E., of the White Star E.M.S.S. " Majestic," is another who has risen in the mail services. The commander of H.M.S. " Worcester "is himself an old cadet. He passed from the " Worcester " into Green's service as a midshipman, and rose to be chief officer, and is well-known in Melbourne. Thence he passed into the Marine Telegraph Laying Company's service, and then Captain Wilson-Barker, E.N.E., became one of the most scientific merchant seamen of the day, and was a Fellow of several learned societies. When Captain Smith, of the " Worcester," retired, Captain Wilson-Barker was chosen to succeed him. The other day the Army and Navy Gazette had a paragraph to the effect that the smartest middy on one of the great line of battleships was a cadet from one of these two ships. Thus I think that I have shown you some reasons for the belief held by the P. and 0. directors and the other mail-service managers that the very best combination of theoretical and practical education for navigating officers ever supplied in the history of Great Britain is to be found by those who send their sons to, firstly, the "Worcester" or " Conway," and, secondly, to finish in the "Hesperus" or " Harbinger." Your reporter will find work for his graphic pen if he will visit these ships when they reach Melbourne for the forthcoming wool-season, and one is about due now —the " Harbinger."— I am, &c, Blackwall. To the Editor of the Herald. Sik, —In recent issues of your journal appear reports of various interviews with Captain Bennett, of the "Loch Vennachar." In one of those interviews, the apprentice question was the one most prominently under discussion, and the worthy Captain seemed to think that the decadence (as he alleged) of the British seaman could, in a measure, be traced to the indifference some shipowners showed to the carrying of apprentices. He spoke of the advantages to be derived from binding one's self for a term of years, and specially mentioned the system as carried on in the Loch line. I served an apprenticeship of four years in one of the Lochs, in which four apprentices

279

H.—26

were carried, and I can safely say that no effort was ever made to teach one of us anything, unless what we could scramble around and pick up for ourselves. Navigation was never mentioned, and even the commonest rudiments of seamanship we had very little chance of learning. Plaiting three-yard sennit, polishing brass, greasing down, tarring rigging, striking the bell, and holystoning, however necessary they may be, can never make a sailor, but this comprised the sum total of the nautical knowledge at our disposal, and for which a £10 premium had been paid. I have only seen one of my apprentice-mates since, and he was engaged poisoning dingoes for the South Australian Government, so the decadence or otherwise of the British seaman evidently didn't concern him.—l am, &c, Ex-Appkentice. To the Editor of the Herald. Sir, —I do not think our sailors have altered so much, but the training is very different. The same grit is there if required, and put to the test, as of old. He is no longer expected or required to perform the same kind of duties he was when I first went to sea; steamers are built of iron and steel, and the rigging mostly consists of wire, wire hawsers, iron blocks, even steered by machinery, carrying very little square sails, mostly fore and aft canvas, that can be managed from the deck, steam-winches, anchor weighed with the use of machinery and other causes, that old-fashioned style of setting and reducing sail is no longer required; being roused out to the call, " hands on deck," in the middle of the watch below to short-sail or about-ship is not required. In old times surveys were very imperfect, charts not over reliable; consequently captains had to depend more on seamanship. Now lighthouses abound everywhere on the coast, and steamers can make in moderate weather direct course from port to port, notwithstanding adverse winds. The law of storms is better understood. In old times ships were detained for weeks with adverse winds, the crew suffering any amount from hardship, all the time beating about. This hard training-school rendered men far better sailors, as well as careful navigators. In old times sailors were very poorly paid, £2 per month for A.B. only, and less, wretchedly fed, accommodation below miserable, often wet bunks, treated very badly, so that, whether our sailors are degenerating or not at the present time, they certainly are treated more like men than so many cattle. In time probably electricity will take the place of steam —who knows ? —and other improvements yet unknown. The reason of so many foreigners entering the British service, in my opinion, is principally owing to higher pay and better general treatment; and probably another cause, the demand for British seamen is increasing rapidly. The number of war vessels are and must increase, owing to the British possessions all over the world. Most of these possessions require men-of-war for protection, wherever the British ensign is hoisted or does business. One thing rather amused me in reading the particulars as to the bills of fare supplied now to what it was like in my time. In those days luxuries were, I may say, unknown; butter, fresh bread, pickles, &c, no matter how long you were at sea, were not visible. No change in diet took place—salt beef and pork, biscuits like flint, quantity of sugar and tea, rice, and pea-soup, and plain duff on different days. As to the manner the food was prepared is better left unsaid; tables were not used, and in very bad weather the cook would probably be unable to light the galley fire. Without going into further detail, it is plainly to be seen that a seaman's life on board one of the large steamers of the present day is paradise compared to the sailing ships of the old time, and you cannot blame our sailors for bettering their position. —I am, &c, Old Salt. To the Editor of the Herald. Sib, —In reference to the British sailor question, which the Hon. T. Brassey and yourself have been inquiring into, I have read what Captain Bennett has said on the subject, and I agree with him so far as he goes; but I submit that he fails to touch on the principal reasons why there is such a scarcity of capable British seamen. The principal reason is the low rate of wages prevailing, especially in sailing ships —viz., £2 15s. per month. Just imagine it, Is. 10d. per day, for being at the beck and call of a lot of bumptious officers (many of them callow youths), night and day, living on coarse fare in an uncomfortable den, with two chain cables on the floor, a windlass inside and a capstan overhead, with the watch on deck tramping about, pulling and hauling every time the head sails have to be trimmed, herding with alotof Dutchman and Dagoes, who never (if they are in sufficient numbers) cease to sneer at everything British, which makes it very uncomfortable for the unfortunate Britisher who happens to be among them. Can you wonder that the best men take the first opportunity of getting into a steamer, where the conditions of life are much better as well as the wages, or taking the first job they can get ashore ? I know from personal experience that the humblest job ashore, where a man has two-thirds of the time to himself, is preferable to being an A.B. on a windjammer. The reference to apprentices in your interview with Captain Bennett does not apply to any great extent to the question under discussion. Their object is to fulfil the necessary conditions to entitle them to an examination for a certificate under Board of Trade rules; in other words, to qualify for officers. There are some who, for want of influential friends and other reasons, find their way to the forecastle, but they are comparatively few, and need not be considered. British deep-water sailors are drawn principally from the fishing-boats and coasting-vessels around the British coast. They generally go deep-water while still in their teens, when going foreign has a sort of romantic charm for them, which it loses after a voyage or two under present conditions. They are then on the look-out for something more suitable for a white man. There is a reason for all this. It is the direct result of that glorious British institution, " freedom of contract." The British shipowner buys his sailors as the British, merchant buys his goods, in the cheapest market; hence the influx of Dutchmen, Dagoes, and Lascars. The remedy : Let the British Government revive the old law making it compulsory to employ, say, three-fourths at least, of Britishers in each ship's crew, exclusive of officers, in conjunction with a minimum wage of, say, £4 per month for A.B.s, and you may depend on it there will be plenty of good

H.—26

280

British seamen available to man the ships. Many changes could, with advantage, be made in the ordinary routine on board ship on long voyages, which would make the life less harassing and more attractive to decent men, without loss to the owners or interfering with necessary discipline. The traditions of the service are bad, and too strictly adhered to in these advanced times.—l am, &c, ' Ex-Sailor.

The Inspector-General of Schools. Has the Government power under the Industrial Schools Act to compuisorily place lads on ships as apprentices? W. T. Glasgow. 24/9/96.

The Secretary, Department of Customs and Marine. Please see section 59, " Industrial Schools Act, 1882." There is power in the case of inmates of industrial schools. My experience leads me to believe that fitting occasions for its exercise are not likely to be frequent. I send you my file—Education 96/444-188 —which may perhaps throw some light on the question. I send also Education 95/405-131. 25/9/96. W. Jas. Habens.

Oedee Papbe.—House op Repbesentatives, Tuesday, the 29th Day of Septembee, 1896. Question 1. Mr. Buddo to ask the Government, If tiiey would take into consideration the question of apprenticing orphan or industrial-school lads of good character on merchant vessels, giving a premium for two years, and afterwards applying to the Imperial authorities to have the lads admitted to the Australian squadron for service in Australian waters only, in order to provide for the training of a New Zealand seafaring population ? Hon. Minister. In 1895, in reply to a letter from the Master of the Burnham Industrial School, Captain Baker, of H.M.S. " Katoomba," stated that no boys could be received on board Her Majesty's ships from establishments of a reformatory nature. It appears to me that this objection would be fatal to any effort in the direction suggested by Mr. Buddo. 2/10/96. W. T. Glasgow.

Hon. Mr. Walker. The following is the law in Great Britain and the Australian Colonies respecting apprentices on board ship: — Great Britain. — There is no law requiring vessels to take apprentices. The only requirement of the law is that, when they are taken, they are to be properly indentured before a Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine, who retains duplicates of the indentures. New South Wales. —The law is the same as that of Great Britain, except that apprentices must not be under twelve years of age. Queensland.- —The law is the same as that of Great Britain. Victoria. —The law is the same as in Great Britain. South Australia.- —The only difference between the law of this colony and that of Great Britain is that in South Australia an apprentice must not be less than thirteen years of age. Marine Department, Wellington, 2nd October, 1896. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

(Telegram.) New Zealand Natives Association desire you bring under notice Government importance of training-ship in New Zealand. You are acquainted with fact. E. Foed, Auckland. Hon. Jennings, Parliament Buildings, Wellington. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones.— J. McK.—9/8/97. Mr. Glasgow. —Please file with other papers on same subject.—W. H.-J.—9/8/97.

[Extracts from Hansard, Wednesday, 24th November, 1897.] House of Representatives, Wednesday, 24th November, 1897. Teaiking-ship. Me. Rolleston asked the Colonial Treasurer, Whether, in view of the strong expressions of opinion from all parts of the colony, it is desirable that provision should be made for the establishment of a training-ship in New Zealand, thus opening up fresh avenues of employment to our youths, extending our marine, and enabling New-Zealanders to take their share in the defence of the Empire ; and will he place a sum upon the supplementary estimates for the purpose ? He put this question upon the Order Paper in the hope that the Government would see fit to reconsider what he was told was at the present time their view with regard to the establishment of a trainingship. This question had caused a good deal of interest throughout the colony. No less than twenty-nine Borough Councils had expressed strong opinions on the subject, as well as twelve Harbour Boards and five Chambers of Commerce. There was no doubt the position of New Zealand pointed distinctly to its being in the future a maritime power, and it had now constantly increasing mercantile marine. It was said—he did not know exactly that the figures could be relied on, but he believed they were approximately true —that some £200,000 a year was paid in

281

H.—26

wages to seamen, and that largely the payments were made to foreigners. It would be seen that it would be a considerable advantage to tbe country if they could keep this money in the colony, and if they could at the same time open up an avenue for our youths of this character. He hoped the Government would be able to tell them that they would do something when they framed the supplementary estimates. It was in accordance with the course they were taking in promoting technical education. As he had said, the position of New Zealand pointed pre-eminently to the advisableness of training our youth in maritime pursuits, for the purposes of mercantile marine, for the purposes of deep-sea fishing, for the purposes of defence, and in every way. Mr. Seddon might say that to a great extent he concurred in all that had been stated by the honourable gentleman. He admitted, that this would be an advance on the present condition of affairs—that this branch of technical education would certainly be enhanced if we had a trainingship—and he also admitted it would be opening up fresh avenues of labour for the youths of the colony; but he did not concur in the statement made by the honourable gentleman that the intercolonial shipping trade was largely done by foreigners. It was quite true they had a number of ships coming here from the Mother-country and foreign countries, but they did not belong to the intercolonial trade. At the same time it must be borne in mind that the emoluments—and that really went to the root of the matter —were so small that parents would not let their boys go to sea, as the boys could do better on shore. Take, for instance, the attempt they made to get their Colonial youths into the Imperial fleet. The whole thing resulted in failure, and why ? Because they gave something like 7d. a day. Well, they would not get a strapping youth of fifteen or sixteen years of age at 7d., and, besides that, to be brought under rigorous discipline. His parents would not allow him, and the boy did not wish to enter into such an avenue of life. It was mooted that they should arrange with the Imperial authorities, when the " Pylades" w r as here, to get that vessel. He made inquiries as to the cost, and he found that the cost would be £8,500 a year. He said the colony could not afford that; and besides, discussing the matter with seafaring men, they advised that small sailing-vessels would be required to be kept in the Harbour of Wellington and. other harbours, so that boys could be taught that which very few were now taught—that they could be made real sailors, of whom there were very few to-day. Then, it was urged that it could be used as a training-ship for the " incorrigibles," the waif-boys of the colony. For his own part he knew that the training-vessel in Victoria was not a success; and the training-ship they had in New Zealand at Kohimarama was not a success—in fact, it was abandoned. It was probably in the wrong place. But he did not wish the Government to be rushed into an expenditure in connection with this matter hurriedly. What he wanted to do was to have time to consider it, and if they were going to adopt a scheme of this sort to insure its success. That could only be done after careful investigation. He might tell the honourable gentleman that the fullest investigation would be made, and, when they were in a position to do so, he would be only too happy to tell the honourable gentleman and the House the course they intended to take in respect to it.

Naval Tbaining-ship. Mb. Mills asked the Premier, If it is the intention of the Government to provide a naval trainingship for the youths of the' colony, and to take into consideration the many natural advantages offered as a station for such a vessel in Picton ? The Premier had practically covered the ground of this question in his reply to a previous question ; but this was not a matter merely of local importance, for it had been very widely discussed from Auckland to Dunedin during the past few months. He would ask the Premier if he would give the question further consideration later on, and see if something could not be done in modifying the proposals. He thought, at any rate, that a start might be made at a much less cost than £8,000, and it would, he believed, be in the interests of the colony as a whole. Mr. Seddon said the Government would give the matter the fullest consideration. They had received a recommendation from Captain Allman so far back as October, 1895, that the Government should offer bonuses for each lad carried in addition to the crew required by the present law. This proposal had been carefully worked out, and, though it did look somewhat pretentious, still there was something in it which might lead to getting our boys on to the ships and steamers in the colonial service. So far as that phase of the question was concerned, it had the good wishes of the Government. He must say this : that he remembered the time when the Victorian Government made a trial of one of those boats, and it was not a success, and he had not yet heard that trainingships established in the other colonies had been successful. It was quite true that the attempt to utilise H.M.S. "Wolverine" had been found unworkable, and. a change was made. Those who appeared to thoroughly understand the question suggested that they should get a merchant vessel in Wellington Harbour—a sailing ship—not too large, and have her rigged, so that the boys might be got to work on the ship and learn to be real seamen, and there were very few now in existence. These boys, so trained, would be readily accepted by both the merchants and Imperial vessels. However, he would go into the matter very carefully.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, of Wednesday, Bth September, 1897.] Some one in authority on board H.M.S. " Pylades " has written to the Lyttelton Times favouring the scheme for the establishment of a training-ship in New Zealand waters, and pointing out that the vessel is just the one for the purpose. Among other things, the writer points out that the " Pylades " is quite sound, has good engines, which will be a necessity for getting in and out of harbours, and on her arrival in England she will only be relegated to the dust-heap, as with the modern cruisers now required, and with the many training-ships in use at Home, she will be absolutely useless to 36— H. 26.

H.—26

282

the British Admiralty. He then goes on to say:—"Of course there will be many points to be decided upon; but I think one of the wisest courses to be pursued would be that the ship should be placed under the Admiral's command, but permanently stationed in New Zealand waters, the officers and training instructors being also supplied and paid for by the Imperial authorities. The colony would then have the payments for tbe boys, and the payment for the new lot of officers and men required from Home every three years to pay, and the Admiralty would also pay for the maintenance of the ship. One thing should be settled at once, and that is that the ship does not belong to any one town, but to the colony; and that, being officered by the Imperial Navy and under the command of the Admiral, she would not be at the call of any one person in the colony. At Home at the present time we have the " Northampton " and two corvettes continually cruising round the United Kingdom, taking in boys and training them for the Eoyal Navy. After a certain time of training they are drafted to the other ships of the navy, and so a continual stream is being kept up of lads entering what is, without doubt, the finest service in the world. On similar lines, I would suggest that your training-ship should be run by the Admiralty, only with the one exception that the colony paid the cost of the boys' keep and pay, and the passages as before mentioned, that sum being made a lump one and paid direct to the Admiralty. I know that the movement will have the strong support of the other towns mentioned, and no doubt other places would join in with yourselves in aiding in this good step towards helping Great Britain in her defence of Greater Britain."

[Extract from the Evening Post, Saturday, 12th June, 1897.] A Jubilee Peoposal. The feverish desire to jubilate that has overtaken the English-speaking world because of the approaching completion of the sixtieth year of Her Majesty's reign has been productive of a larger crop of ridiculous proposals, from the inane to the insane, to fitly celebrate the occasion, than has perhaps ever yet marked any notable event in English history. Like every other English-speaking community, Wellington has had to submit to intrusion upon its notice of many suggestions that have savoured more or less of childishness or flunkeyism, and which are only saved from open ridicule because their authors pronounce them demonstrations of loyalty and devotion to the Crown. For our part, we have opposed any celebration that means senseless expenditure of public money upon idle show, and in this regard we find ourselves in not familiar company. It is not usual for this journal to range itself upon the side of the Trades and Labour Council; but with the Council's formal resolution protesting against any expenditure of the taxpayers' money for purposes of wasteful public jubilation we are in entire agreement. Let there be some tangible and enduring mark of the occasion by all means—such as the Hospital Operating Theatre—and public rejoicing, too, with flags and bonfires and fireworks by those who can afford and are willing to pay for them ; while those who cannot look on and enjoy the show and cheer, as we doubt not those present will, and as we would have them do if it be their inclining, but not otherwise. All the same, we hope that the honest desire of the people may be to cheer for the Old Country and for the gracious lady who, as a constitutional monarch, has for so many years so worthily represented it. But we value freedom more than effusive and insincere expressions of loyalty, and if there be any present who cannot honestly perceive cause for bawling jubilation in the circumstance that Her Majesty has reigned for sixty years, let them be silent without anxiety lest they be branded as disloyal subjects by the Jingo flunkeys, so much in evidence, who are discrediting the movement, while making of themselves an aggressive nuisance. However, our purpose just now is to present to our readers, in hope that it may find favour, the latest Jubilee proposal that has come to us. A correspondent, then, has addressed us in these terms: "I am not quite certain what is intended to be done at Wellington; might I, therefore, suggest a proposal which I have not yet seen brought forward in any other part of the colony in connection with this subject—namely, ' a training-ship for boys in New Zealand.' Ido this the more readily as it is from the capital city that a proposal of this nature should, I think, emanate. I will not weary your readers by going into details, or by enlarging on the good results likely to be brought about by the establishment of a suitable training-ship, not only to the colony at large but more especially to the boys themselves, who would thus have the privilege of being trained and educated for Her Majesty's Eoyal Navy and the mercantile marine. I would, however, point out that the present time appears a most favourable opportunity for applying to the Admiralty authorities for a suitable ship for the purpose, and I think there is every reason to believe the request would be granted." Although this is a new suggestion, and we think a very excellent one, in the way of Jubilee celebration, it is a proposal that on more than one occasion has been put before the public of late years in the interests of the friendless, indigent, or vagrant lads of the country. Some three years ago, writing from memory, Mr. Praser, a leading lawyer of Dunedin, on his return from an extended visit to Australia, wrote to the Otago Daily Times a series of extremely interesting articles descriptive of the work and play of the boys of the training-ship " Sobraon "in Sydney Harbour, and presented to his readers many valid reasons in support of a similar institution in this country. Since that time, during the parliamentary session of 1895, a valuable paper upon the subject, entitled " A Nautical School-ship or Training-ship for Boys in New Zealand," was laid upon the table of the House. Its author was Mr. J. E. March, Superintendent of Settlements, who, just returned from an official visit to New South Wales, where he had inspected the village settlements of that colony, had been greatly impressed in favour of the " Sobraon " system.

In his report Mr. March describes the " Sobraon " as a roomy ship, having good accommodation for five hundred boys, with admirable arrangements for their training, supervision, and comfort, The boys are drawn from the class who, without being criminal, are known to our Magistrate

283

H.—26

as''uncontrollable " orphans, deserted children, first offenders, and generally vagrant youngsters. In this country the care of such boys falls upon the community in some more or less unsatisfactory way, but the net result is that society pays, and the boy does not get the best chance by any means of becoming later a valuable citizen. In Sydney, instead of being maintained in vagrancy by the "charitable aid," sent to a so-called industrial school, or perhaps being compelled to confinement among criminals, the boy who cannot be controlled or is homeless, finds himself one of the company of the ship " Sobraon." There he goes through a regular school course, is imbued with habits of cleanliness, industry, and diligence, systematically drilled, and encouraged in observance of moral and honourable conduct. We have not space to-day to enlarge upon the work of the nautical school-ship at Sydney, but we may say that during its existence over three thousand boys have passed through it, and of these 92 per cent, have turned out to be " as respectable and industrious men as any members of the general community." In the report under notice Mr. March says, " I think that if representations were made to the Imperial authorities there would be no difficulty in obtaining for the colony one of Her Majesty's men-of-war now obsolete." We think so too, and feel certain that if the Premier were just now to prefer such a request to Mr. Chamberlain that gentleman would be only too glad to comply with it. But what to do with our ship, and how to keep it if we get it ? That is an aspect of the subject we will deal with later.

[Extraot from New Zealand Times, Thursday, 3rd December, 1896.] Scheme for Training Seamen. Melbourne, 2nd December. Following up the suggestion made by Lord Brassey some time ago, the Steamship-owners' Association is considering a scheme for training able seamen for the local mercantile marine. The scheme is not matured yet, but it contemplates the reception of two youths on board each of the intercolonial steamers, to be under the direct control of the captain and officers, and not to be put to menial work. They are to be received for one year, and, as there are sixty steamers in the intercolonial trade, it is thought a superior class of seamen will thus be trained, and the status of the craft raised, besides which the foreign element now so prominent might be eliminated.

Sic, — Otago Harbour Board Office, Dunedin, 10th September, 1897. I have the honour, by direction of the Otago Harbour Board, to draw your attention to a circular which has been issued as a result of the public meeting held in Christchurch affirming the desirableness of establishing a training-school ship in this colony, and at the same time to express the hope on the part of this Board that the Government will do all in its power to further such an important object as the establishing of a training-ship. I am, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. W. Mirams, Acting Secretary. Mr. Glasgow.—Please acknowledge receipt.—W. H.-J. 14/9/97.

Srft, — Marine Department, Wellington, 14th September, 1897. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 10th instant, drawing attention to the question of providing a training-ship for this colony. I have, &c, The Secretary, Otago Harbour Board, Dunedin. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir,— Town Clerk's Office, Dunedin, 24th September, 1897. I have the honour to inform you that the City Council of Dunedin was recently approached by the chairman of a committee appointed by a public meeting in Christchurch, with a request for the Council's sympathy and assistance in obtaining a suitable training-ship for New Zealand, the reasons adduced in favour of the proposal showing that, as the colony, from its geographical position, should become a maritime power, the establishment of such a ship would have the effect of opening up fresh avenues of employment for our youth, of extending our marine, and of enabling New-Zealanders to take their share in the defence of the Empire. The City Council, having taken the matter into consideration, resolved that the Government be requested to take the necessary steps to establish a training-ship for the colony, and I have accordingly to ask that you will bring the proposal under the favourable notice of the Government with the view of having the same carried into effect. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. Wμ. B. Taylor, Town Clerk.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 29th September, 1897. 1 have the honour, by direction of tbe Minister of Marine, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th instant, asking that the Government may provide a training-ship for the colony. I have, &c, The Town Clerk, Dunedin. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

H.—26

284

Obdee Papek.—House of Representatives, Feiday, the Ist Day of Octobeb, 1897. Question 2. Mb. Mills to ask the Premier, If it is the intention of the Government to provide a naval training-ship for the youths of the colony, and to take into consideration the many natural advantages offered as a station for such a vessel in Picton. Hon. Minister. There has been for some time much agitation for the establishment of a training-school, especially since it has been hinted that H.M.S. "Pylades" could be obtained for the purpose, the Imperial Government sharing the cost of maintenance. If the object is to train lads for service in the navy, no doubt it would be very desirable to have a vessel like the " Pylades," in which the training would be special with that object in view. But if training for mercantile marine service is contemplated, it appears to me that no institution or school is required, but something in the direction indicated by Captain Allman in a memorandum which was submitted to Cabinet in October, 1895. Captain Allman's suggestion briefly is that Government should offer a bonus for each lad carried in addition to the crew required by the present law. This proposal is carefully worked out by Captain Allman, and, although it may not look so pretentious or appeal so much to the unthinking as a ship or institution visibly embodying the work of training, it is well worthy of consideration as a scheme which would relieve the Government of initial cost of a ship or institution, and would be the most economical plan for getting lads trained for a seafaring life. As to Mr. Mills's suggestion that Picton offers special natural advantages as a station for such a vessel, I take it that the Government would not restrict the vessel to one locality, but would require her to cruise round the coast. 28/9/97. W. T, Glasgow, Secretary.

[Extracts from the New Zealand Times, Wednesday, 29th September, 1897.] Those who are persuaded that it would be a wise thing to secure for the colony, for use as a training-ship for boys, H.M.S. " Pylades," will regret to find that Ministers do not view the idea with favour. In answer to the request of a deputation, the Premier has declined to favourably consider any such proposal. He advances as the reason for his refusal, that the money might be put to better use in providing separate establishments for children left to the care of the State, so that there should be no chance of innocent boys and girls being housed with those of the criminal classes. This is a very good contention so far as it goes, but it does not deal with the real question at issue. We have undoubtedly a large number of lads who would be delighted to go on board a training-ship, there to qualify either for the Eoyal Navy or for the merchant service. Eealising as we do that great benefit would accrue from the adoption of any scheme that would solve the problem of what we are to do with the hardy and venturous among our youth, to whom a sea life would be eminently satisfactory, we cannot help an expression of regret that the Eight Hon. the Premier cannot see his way to support a proposal which has found much favour with a very large number of our people.

The Peoposed Teaining-ship.—The Pebmiee Disappboves of the Peoposal. A deputation, introduced by Mr. Joyce, and consisting of Messrs. Hutcheson, Crowther, G. J. Smith, B. G. Allen, Tanner, Lewis, McKenzie, Scobie Mackenzie, Millar, and Mills, waited on the Premier yesterday evening, and asked what steps it was proposed to take to provide a training-ship for the colony. The Premier intimated that the annual cost of such a ship would be £8,000, and he could not see that there would be an adequate benefit for such an expenditure. He considered that the money could be more advantageously spent in providing suitable institutions for dealing with the different classes of neglected and orphan children.

The Melrose Borough Council has decided to co-operate with other bodies with reference to he question of establishing a training-ship in New Zealand.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Friday, Ist October, 1897.] Teaining-ships. As there appears to be considerable misapprehension touching the uses to which training-ships are put in the Old Country, and seeing also that much ignorance is displayed in the discussion of the subject, we propose to lay some of the facts before our readers, in the hope that those of them who have not become utterly discouraged by the Premier's attitude may take heart of grace and once again approach the head of the Government armed with such information as may convince him that there are sound reasons why Ministers should favour the proposal for the establishing of a training-vessel in these waters. Let us first of all repeat that the Admiralty will have nothing to say to any proposal which aims at founding a reformatory-vessel. In the Motherland there are many such ships, supported by the school boards or certain societies which exist for the plucking of the outcasts from the very gutter. Let us take, for example, the " Shaftesbury," which is stationed in the Thames. In connection with this ship there are playing-fields ashore and a big swimming bath. On board the lads are taught the "three E's," bootmaking, carpentering, knotting and splicing, music, rowing and steering, cooking, &c. After varying periods—averaging three years —these boys, who mostly turn out well, are drafted to trades on shore, on to fishing smacks, some into the Army as privates or band boys, while some of them emigrate. Occasionally some of the very pick of the boys get into the mercantile marine. A ship which would answer all

H.—26

285

the purposes of a floating reformatory could be purchased very easily and almost at any time. The " Alameda," for example, which was brought here and dismantled for the purposes of a coalhulk, would have been the very thing. The vessel was thoroughly sound and seaworthy. It could have been kept at anchor with all gear standing, and the interior so arranged as to enable the work of a reformatory to be carried on successfully. But what would suit with a "floating Burnham " would never do with a training-ship partly maintained by the Admiralty. And let us say, in passing, that the " Conway " —a vessel that has been mentioned—is not in point. That ship, lent by the Admiralty, and which is the Mersey, is wholly maintained for the training of officers for the mercantile marine. The cost of educating a lad on the " Conway " is considerable, the number of students is limited, and admission may be said to be open only to the sons of well-to-do parents. The " Worcester" is a vessebof the same pattern and maintained in like fashion. The "Britannia" establishment, consisting of two vessels, stationed at Dartmouth, is used entirely for the training of officers for the Eoyal Navy, but the establishment is to be removed at an early date to the shore, where a Eoyal naval college —on the Italian system—will be set up. All over tbe Kingdom training-ships for the reception of boys intended for service as seamen in the Eoyal Navy have been established, and the system.is being enlarged year after year. These ships are entirely in the hands of the Admiralty, and the physical standard set up is so high that only the finest specimens of boyhood can possibly enter the vessels. The moral standard is likewise exacting, with the result that Britain has continually passing from out these training-ships into her regular navy young fellows of whom the nation has cause to be proud. The applications for admission to the training-ships have been so numerous that, to enable the Admiralty to pass a larger number through, the period of training has been shortened; but, so that the service should not suffer, the age of the boys who may be received has been raised. But the demand is so great for these boys on the warships that the system is being enlarged considerably. There are to be found on Her Britannic Majesty's ships seamen hailing from foreign countries, and it is to avoid this as much as possible that the training of British-born boys is being so largely encouraged. Why, then, should not we see to it that the ships which are to protect these colonies are manned by our own lads ? We are of opinion that the Premier has over-estimated the cost, for it should be borne in mind that the Admiralty will not only maintain the vessel, but officer it and maintain it in a thorough state of efficiency. The only cost to this colony would be the food and clothing of the boys—and perhaps not even the whole of this would be demanded; and, besides, the setting up of the ship in these waters would be a further pledge of our desire to assist in upholding the supremacy of Britain on the seas. The cost of part maintenance of the " Pylades," for instance, could be placed to our credit as a further contribution towards the Australasian Auxiliary Squadron, and would be most highly esteemed by the Imperial Government; for it would soon prove an example which other colonies would follow. And then there is the consideration of how much good would be effected; of how many bright, healthy, and spirited lads would be given an opportunity to become members of the grandest service in the world; instead of seeking an outlet for their love of adventure in other and less reputable ways. Many boys, who at the present lead aimless lives and finally fall away into bad habits, would gladly avail themselves of the opportunity which an Imperial training-ship would offer them, and we should be doing them and the country a service if we could but succeed in persuading the Admiralty to grant us the use of the " Pylades," and thus enable us to establish her as a school for the British Navy.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Monday, 11th Ootober, 1897.] Bitheb through stupid prejudice or inability to understand the benefits to be derived from the establishment of a training-ship in New Zealand waters, the chance of securing H.M.S. " Pylades" for such purpose appears to have passed away. The Premier has stated it as his opinion that it would be far better to spend the amount necessary for part maintenance of a training-ship in keeping apart the neglected children of the criminal class from those who, innocent of any wrongdoing, have to be provided for by the State. But we would point out that a training-ship opens up the means to this very end —so far, at least, as boys are concerned. We know, also, that whatever good intentions the Government may have, children are being mixed up in the so-called reformatories or industrial schools every day, and the last condition of these will be worse than the first. Take, for example, what was done by order of the Magistrate only the other day in Wellington. A young girl, who was charged with and convicted of associating with abandoned women, was ordered into one of our industrial schools—where there are hundreds of children whom this one girl may corrupt at her will. It is a positive disgrace to the colony that such things should be possible. That they go on unchecked we are all too well aware. And had the citizens of Wellington and in other parts of the colony insisted upon the establishing of a training-ship for the Eoyal Nayy —with classes for the mercantile marine—there would have been at once a chance for a large number of boys, both in and out of the industrial schools of the colony, to accept service on board the vessel. Lads of good character, of sound bodies, and with a desire to become members of an admittedly splendid service, would have been provided for by the Imperial Government, and the only cost to this colony would have been, perhaps, their food and clothing. The Admiralty would have provided the ship, instructors, the cost of equipment, &c. Yet, in the face of this knowledge, nothing is being done ; no effort is made to secure for this colony what would in course of time prove a great boon to hundreds of boys and the way to the manning of the Australasian Squadron with Australasia's own sons. Some people, with whom it should be different, seem to have but the faintest knowledge of the advantages offered by the Admiralty to boys who desire to follow the sea in Her Majesty's service.

H.—26

286

We will suppose a training-ship established in New Zealand. Boys having the written consent of parent or guardian would be permitted to join, provided always that they could show ability to read or write, produce a certificate of birth that they are between the ages of fifteen and sixteen and a half years, and pass the strict medical examination. Malformation, chronic disease, deafness, defect of vision, bad teeth, or feeble constitution, of course, disqualify applicants. Those boys who are accepted would remain for a year or two on the training-ship. A gratuity is given each boy on entering, and a further one on his obtaining the rating of first-class boy. The pay of this rating is 7d. a day, and he can remit Bs. a month to his parents. When he is eighteen years of age he is rated as an ordinary seaman, at Is. to Is. 3d. a day. After passing an examination, the ordinary is rated as able seaman, and then leading seaman, with pay of Is. 7d. or Is. 9d. a day, and an allowance if re-engaged after twelve years. Extra qualifications carry extra pay, and as he increases in rank as a petty-officer, so do his pay and allowances increase, till, as a chief petty-officer, he may be receiving between 3s. and 4s. a day, or more, and he can retire on a pension aggregating £63 17s. 6d. a year, and carry off a good-conduct medal, with a gratuity of from £10 to £20, on retirement, according to his character and length of service. Promotion is possible from that of warrant to commissioned officer. Whilst on naval subjects, it may interest readers to know that there is really no truth in the statement made in a recent cable message, setting forth that the great lock-out (strike is an inappropriate term) of engineers is likely to throw back the work of construction of ships of war to such an extent that the supremacy obtained in the last decade may be jeopardised. As a matter of fact, it is open to Britain to entirely rebuild the whole navy in three years, and it is well known that the shipyards of the United Kingdom can turn out in any one year more ships than all the other nations put together. False issues are being raised every day concerning the contest between the operative engineers and their employers. And this statement concerning the cheek that may be given to the building of war-vessels is on a par with that of foreign manufacturers reaping the benefit of the labour difficulty at present existing in the Old Country. The responsibility for the locking out of tens of thousands of men rests with the Federation of Employers, and it is at their door that the charge must be laid of crippling the shipbuilding industry in Britain—if the charge will lie in any case. By concerted action in locking out the men all over the country the employers are endeavouring to " smash the unions." Even if they succeed, the struggle will only recommence when the men deem that a more convenient season has arrived.

[Extraot from the New Zealand Times, Monday, 27th September, 1897.] A Teaining-ship for New Zealand. If, owing to difference of opinion as to whether any British warship which might be granted for the use of this colony by the Admiralty should be used as a training-ship for the Australasian Auxiliary Squadron or as a reformatory vessel, the opportunity is lost of securing H.M.S. " Pylades," it will be cause for sincere regret. We would again point to the fact that it is impossible that the Admiralty could accede to any request for the use of a warship for other purposes than those of training lads for the navy or mercantile marine. It is quite possible that a proviso could be made which would enable the Government of New Zealand to take a certain number of boys for training for our merchant service ; but the bulk of them would undoubtedly be required to qualify for service on the ships of the Australasian Squadron. It is well known that, to enable any boy to enter the navy at Home, he must first of all be admitted to one of Her Britannic Majesty's training-ships, and though he may be poor and friendless, nay, a homeless waif, his character must have no taint of criminality. Therefore, to talk of a training-ship in connection with boys who have been committed to a reformatory through criminal conduct is entirely out of the question. And it is right that it should be so. The ships of the British Navy are manned by the very pick of the lads available for service. Morally and physically they have to come up to a high standard ; consequently, it is an honour to any boy to be considered worthy to don the Queen's uniform on one of her ships of war. In a former article we argued that it would be much more ageeeable to colonists to have the ships which are to defend our coasts and our trade manned by our own seamen. There are hundreds of boys of an adventurous spirit, who would gladly qualify for the "finest service in the world ;" boys, let it be added, who would, in this way, find an outlet for their energy and love of adventure which, if denied to them, might manifest itself in a less desirable manner. We have the testimony of the officer in command of H.M.S. " Pylades" that that vessel is sound, her engines good, and that she is in every way fitted for the purposes of a training-ship. The question, then, is : Are we to lose the present most favourable opportunity for securing a suitable vessel because some people believe that nothing but a re-formatory-ship is needed by the colony ? A ship suitable for reformatory purposes—that is, a stationary vessel on which lads might, and we have reason to believe could, be reformed and led into a better mode of life—can be obtained at any time. It may be many years before we again have the opportunity of securing a training-ship equal in value to the "Pylades." Besides, there is the additional inducement, that in the establishing and maintenance of a training-ship we should have the assistance of the British Admiralty; while in the matter of a reformatory vessel, the Home authorities would render us neither aid nor encouragement. The other day, at Auckland, an old naval man, Mr. G. S. Budge, for twenty years in Her Majesty's service, was interviewed by a representative of the Herald, and in the course of a most interesting conversation he showed how valuable the possession of a warship might be made to the colony. He is of opinion that such a vessel could be utilised as a training-ship for boys, and educate them as seamen fit for service either in the Boyal Navy or merchant service, and also for a naval reserve gunnery-ship for New Zealand Naval Reserve men. " I mean," he added,

287

H.—26

" by ' New Zealand Naval Eeserve men ' any mercantile seaman in intercolonial or coastal waters who goes through a course of drill on our training-ship on the same lines as the Eoyal Naval Eeserve training gunnery ship ' President,' at the West India Docks. They would complete a specified number of gun-drills, and pass for a New Zealand naval reserve certificate and capitationpay, in accordance with the conditions and regulations of the Eoyal Naval Eeserve at Home—or much the same lines. Of course there would be a difference in the course of gun-drill, and possibly our capitation would be a little more encouraging. Thus we would have men at hand who could at any moment be drafted into any armed cruiser that might be selected to protect our shipping interests in the hour of danger, should such hour come." Mr. Budge was of opinion that both the " Pylades " and " Eapid " would be suitable vessels, and when asked as to what class of boys he expected would be found entering the training-ship, he said there would be no difficulty in obtaining plenty of the right class, and good respectable lads at that. Commenting editorially on the interview, the Herald remarks, " The question of what class of recruits should be looked to for supply in the event of such an institution as a training-ship being established appears to have come up at all meetings that have been held in connection with this movement, and there are some who seem to have entertained the idea that the training-ship might be utilised to some degree for reformatory purposes. No greater blunder could be perpetrated than in allowing it to be tainted in any way with the savour of criminality. We have other means of dealing with our youthful criminals without being forced to the necessity of using the training-ship for this purpose ; and if it is to be made attractive to the best class of lads, and to not do dishonour to the service in the navy, it must be scrupulously preserved from any taint of dishonour, and made a place to which it will be esteemed an honour to belong. By maintaining its character to a high degree no difficulty will be obtained in filling the training-ship with recruits, and it may become one of the most interesting and popular institutions in the colony." The foregoing remarks of our Auckland contemporary exactly bear out our own contentions, and it is for those who have, up to the present, taken an interest in this question to make urgent representations to the Government on the subject. There is every reason to believe that the Premier will, along with his colleagues, take the matter up in thorough earnest; but until proper representations are made to the head of the Government he will naturally hesitate to move. It was stated some little time since that a deputation would likely wait upon Mr. Seddon, but since that intimation was made it has come out that there is a difference of opinion as to the scope of a training-ship and the class of boys to be chosen. We have endeavoured to show that, if we are to secure the " Pylades " for the colony, it cannot be done if there is to be any attempt at converting her into a floating Burnham. At the same time we would point out that, once established, a training-ship would afford the authorities the opportunity which as a people we regret we do not now possess—namely, of keeping respectable but unfortunate lads away from the contaminating influences which follow upon their having to herd in so-called industrial homes with those of the criminal classes.

[Extraot from the New Zealand Times, Thursday, 23rd September, 1897.] Oub Boys. To the Editor. Sib, —Just five years ago I placed before the public of this city a scheme which would go far towards tiding over the difficulty which is ever agitating the public mind—what to do with some of our boys. I quoted from the Government Blue Book at Home the enormous amount of good that was being done by training-ships, and as the subject is just now being freely discussed, I crave space to reproduce a few particulars. I find there are at Home about a score of training-ships; some are maintained by voluntary contributions, others by State and county aid; two or three are used exclusively for the training of officers. The general objects of these training-ships for ordinary seamen are to take hold of homeless, destitute, neglected, and orphan boys, and those in danger of being contaminated with vice and crime, and educate them to become forecastle hands. As an instance of the good effected by training-ships, 92 per cent, of the boys drafted into the ship " Empress," stationed in the Clyde, are doing well. The percentage of "getting on" or "doing well " all round shows that the education and the moral training given have resulted most favourably, while the whole objects contemplated have been more than carried out. The cost of feeding, educating, and clothing these lads during their probation on board averages about £20 per annum all told. This cannot be considered an extravagant sum when we learn how much permanent good is done to the boys themselves, while the beneficial effects resulting to the nation are immeasurable. Training-ships are, in fact, nurseries for seamen, for only a small proportion of the boys afterwards engage in other pursuits, the majority going to sea in various capacities. The article concludes : " We boast of several practical institutions in the way of schools, but there are none which produce such excellent and encouraging results as the twenty-one training-ships round our coasts, where seafaring education and discipline cannot fail to be of advantage in whatever vocation the boys educated on board may follow. After a careful perusal of the reports, we have come to the general conclusion that more training-ships are required, and we have every confidence that they will be supplied by our mercantile and shipping community, whose policy should be to encourage and support vessels on which our future seamen can be so instructed as to maintain our place as the first maritime Power in the world." Now, sir, these remarks have a special application to our part of the world. We possess a mercantile navy alone of no mean proportions, and it must expand. We have a small fleet for our protection. If we had, say, a training-ship to each of our four large ports, the good that must accrue cannot be estimated. Ships are continually being dismantled act Home which could be devoted to such a purpose. I see there, is one to quit

H.—26

288

our shores shortly. It will share the fate of many others ; it is being urged that it be retained for a training-ship. Our Premier would be conferring a vast service to the colony in this alone were he to accomplish it. A few thousands per annum spent in this way would be viewed by any one having any regard for the future of this the Britain of the South as money well spent, and the sooner we see a few such ships hovering round our coasts, training to good the scores of boys who, if left to work out their own end, will cost the colony a big item, without returning a quid pro quo, the better. Now is the time for the people's representatives to show them how much they are in earnest when questions arise which so largely affect the well-being of the colony. Let us watch them. Thanking you, sir, in anticipation,—l am, &c, E. Bezar. Wellington, 18th September, 1897.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Thursday, 16th September, 1897.] A citizen has asked us to define our position with regard to obtaining a vessel from the Admiralty for use as a training-ship for boys. He asks: "Do you want a floating Burnham, a navigation school for preparation for the mercantile marine, or an Imperial training-ship? " Our answer is, that if we could obtain all three we should, indeed, be pleased and gratified; but, as that is impossible, we are prepared to accept that which may be deemed to be in the best interests of the lads of this colony. A " floating Burnham "we most decidedly object to. No one who has watched the working of our miscalled " reformatory " system would wish to see repeated on board ship the hideous failure of Burnham. What is really needed is a place where the innocent shall not be herded with the guilty. Do we not know from the reports of the Supreme Court cases heard here lately, that a girl who, though young in years, was old in sin, had been sent to Burnham, there, perhaps, to poison the minds, it may be of a hundred other girls! And what is true regarding the girls is true of the boys. Some unfortunate father or mother leaves behind three or four children totally unprovided for. These children are ordered to the Burnham School. The same day that these unfortunate little ones are sent to Burnham it may happen that a number of the criminal classes are sent to the same institution. Is this either fair or just ? In a country such as ours, and with such an immense seaboard, there are hundreds of boys who have a desire to "make the sea their home," and we can imagine no better prospect for lads with a spice of adventure in them than a place in the finest service in the world. Therefore, we say that the chance ciff obtaining the " Pylades " for the purposes of an Imperial training-ship should not be lost. Possibly an arrangement could be entered into with the Admiralty to permit a certain number of our lads being trained for the mercantile marine, and the " Pylades" is eminently suited for such service. In any case, it would be well to lay the matter before the Premier and solicit his assistance. If this can be done while the " Pylades "is in port, the advice of her commander might be obtained, and, with that to guide our citizens who are interested in this matter, a satisfactory arrangement might be made for the bringing of the whole question under the notice of the Admiralty. Whatever is to be done should be done at once.

[Extraot from the Evening Post, Tuesday, 14th September, 1897.] Beformatory- or Training-ship? It is not very long since we commented in these columns on the work done by the New South Wales reformatory-ship " Sobraon," and availed ourselves of the opportunity to suggest, as we have done on previous occasions, the possibility of founding a similar institution here in New Zealand. In addition, however, to the scheme for a reformatory-ship, there is another for the establishment of a training-ship in which boys who of their own or their parents' demerit have come under the charge of the State should have no part. We cannot possibly have anything directly to urge against such a proposal. The training-ship, always in our waters, would doubtless, if it kept up a supply of boys, help to nationalise and man our Auxiliary Squadron. It would give an outlet to such youths as found it impossible to settle down to any life other than a roaming one. Many other benefits might, we have no doubt, be derived from it, but, although it would probably prove a useful thing for the community, we are inclined to doubt whether it would be anything like filled. There is so much more scope for out-of-door work and for adventure, or at least what would seem adventure to the over-civilized youngsters of an old-world city, in this new land. It is more than possible, therefore, that colonial boys and parents would not make such use of a training-ship as some of its ardent supporters imagine. However that may be, the chief point to bear in mind is that an effective reformatory is, in our present circumstances, of more importance than a naval school to feed the fleet or the squadron. We should, of course, like to have both the reformatory- and the training-ship ; but if the Government does not think that possible we, for our own part, cannot hesitate to say that the choice should lie with the reformatory. • The present system of dealing with the one hundred and seventy odd children who come within the grasp of our industrial schools yearly is far from satisfactory. ; The work done in connection with the Government schools at Auckland, Burnham, and Caversham, or at the private schools in Auckland, Wellington, and Nelson, cannot be said to compare very favourably with that done by the " Sobraon." We cannot help feeling that such an institution in our midst would prove of very great help to the police and educational authorities of the colony. There would, we fear, be little danger of an insufficient supply of boys for the ship, since there were no fewer than 853 on the industrial school rolls at the end of 1895, 311 of whom were actually in the schools, while as many as 217 were boarded out. We notice also that 232 were at service, and there is no reason why a more systematic method of apprenticeship and service such as that connected with the *' Sobraon " should not be adopted in connection with a school-ship if we had one. Our minds

289

H.—26

have been much exercised lately with the evil effects of the criminal neglect of parents, and there seems to be a crying need of reform generally, both in the classes on the rolls of industrial schools and those who only just miss being there. A reformatory, if it is to really fulfil its functions, must make a complete change in the boys sent to it—must, in the strictest sense of the word, reform them. Can we say that much is done in that way under existing arrangements ? Can we show results that are fit to be classed in the same category with those that have been and may be produced under the training-ship system ? Now is the opportunity to do our best for the unfortunate waifs and strays of humanity who are to be found in Burnham, Caversham, and such institutions. There seems to be a reasonable hope that the Government can procure the " Pylades " as a permanent training-ship in New Zealand waters ; and, if it can, we would ask the public to think well whether it would not be better to convert her into a reformatory such as the "Sobraon" rather than into an ordinary training-ship, which will very possibly fail to obtain enough patronage to justify her existence. If we can have both ships, well and good; but if such an expense could not be met, then it seems to us that the need which should be first satisfied is that of a floating reformatory.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Tuesday, 14th September, 1897.] It is understood that a deputation will wait upon the Premier to urge upon him the taking in hand the proposal to secure for New Zealand the services of H.M.S. " Pylades " as a trainingship for such of our youth as may desire to enter the service of their Queen in Australasian waters. The vessel would, as we have already pointed out, remain the property of the British Admiralty j and would cruise round the coasts of New Zealand. The ship would be maintained by the Admiralty, and the remainder of the cost would be a joint affair between the British and New Zealand Governments. We trust the deputation will be successful in enlisting the sympathy and support of the Premier in the matter, as the proposal has everything to commend it to the earnest consideration of all well-wishers of our boys. The results obtained from the training of the boys of Britain have been really excellent, and thousands of lads owe it to the discipline maintained on board the vessels that they are now smart, well set-up and manly fellows.

[Extract from the New Zealand Times, Monday, 13th September, 1897.] Those interested in the work of procuring a suitable vessel for the purpose of a training-ship should take advantage of the presence of H.M.S. " Pylades " in port to make such representations to the Premier that he may be induced to communicate at once with the Admiralty on the subject. We have already seen that some one in authority on board the warship has written to a contemporary pointing out the suitability of the vessel and making suggestions as to her maintenance on this station. The letter in question was republished in the Times a day or two since, and it would be well if those of our citizens who recognise the necessity for a training-ship in New Zealand waters were to at once move in the matter. The members of the Chamber of Commerce and those of the Harbour Board might take the matter up, and it is quite possible their efforts would be attended by the happiest results. One point we would especially urge, and that is that Wellington should be the headquarters of the system which would, need to be inaugurated in connection with the maintenance of the vessel, and for the reason that it is the geographical centre, whither boys could be sent without inconvenience, and from which the vessel could be most conveniently worked. The officer who wrote on the subject from the "Pylades" has pointed out that the vessel should remain the property of the British Admiralty, who would be responsible for her efficient working, the cost of maintenance to be shared by the Home and New Zealand Governments. In this way the boys trained on the " Pylades" would be available for the ships of the Australasian Auxiliary Squadron, and by and by we should have the satisfaction of knowing that our coasts were being defended by our own sailors. As there appears to be some doubt as to the class of lads chosen for these training-ships, we may as well point out at once that none but those possessed of a clean record and a full bill of health would be accepted. This does not mean that no waifs or strays would be taken. Many a boy might be saved from the evil courses which invariably follow upon neglect if there were training-ships on to which they might be sent. The criminal amongst the juvenile population would not, of course, be accepted. Unlike our so-called "reformatory" schools—where the good, bad, and indifferent are unfortunately mixed up—-these training-ships can only be expected to accept lads of a decent character. This rule is followed at Home, where thousands of bright and healthy boys who have a fancy for the sea are taken on to the training-vessels and turned out as smart and efficient young men, fit even to grace the finest service in the world, as the British Navy has been properly called. If the matter be at once properly represented to the Premier, it is highly probably that the consent of the Admiralty will be obtained, and that instead of the " Pylades " going Home to be broken up she will be made excellent use of in this colony.

Oedbe Papbb.—-House of Bepkesentatives, Thursday, the 11th Day of November, 1897. Question 3. Mr. E. Thompson to ask the Government, Whether it is their intention to have the Shipping and Seamen's Act amended this session, so as to permit our boys to learn to be sailors ? Hon. Minister. The Act of 1894 prescribed the minimum number of seamen to be carried in proportion to tonnage. The Act of 1895 allowed the substitution of two boys for one seaman in the 37— H. 26.

290

H.—26

case of vessels carrying not less than five able seamen. This practically excluded boys ori vessels of 200 tons or less. The Act of 1896 provided that sailing-vessels carrying at least four able seamen must carry boys or apprentices in proportion to the tonnage in addition to the minimum number of seamen prescribed by law, but the Collector of Customs has discretionary power to exempt from this provision. I think the difficulty is that the minimum is sufficient to man the vessel, and there is therefore no inducement to carry boys or apprentices in addition. W. T. Glasgow.

(Telegrams.) Marine Department, 11th November, 1897. Please wire whether sailing-vessels trading to your port are carrying apprentices or boys as required by section 18 of " Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," and whether you have exempted any from the requirements of that section. Collector of Customs, Auckland. W. T. Glasgow, Wellington. [Same to Collector of Customs, Christchurch.]

' The Secretary of Customs, Wellington. 11th November, 1897. Sailing-vessels trading to this port are carrying apprentices or boys as required by section 18 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896." Have not exempted any E. Patten, Collector Christchurch.

Secretary, Marine, Wellington. 13th November, 1897. Section 18 " Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," has not been enforced here, as I understand it is not done so in other ports, although, on reference to ship's articles, I find all vessels carry an ordinary seaman on intercolonial articles. Alex. Eose, Collector of Customs, Auckland.

Marine Department, Wellington, 11th November, 1897. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. I have to request that you will let me know whether sailing-vessels trading to your port are carrying apprentices or boys as required by section 18 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896," and whether you have exempted any from the requirements of that Act. ' W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Memorandum from the Collector of Customs at Wellington to the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Eeferring to your memorandum (No. 153/93) of 11th instant, I have to state that there are very few sailing-vessels trading to this port of a tonnage bringing them within the terms of section 18 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896." Those that do have, I believe, complied with the Act. I have granted no exemptions under the concluding paragraph of the section above quoted. D. McKellar, Collector. 12/11/97.

(Telegram.) Wellington, 16th NovemEer, 1897. Please wire whether sailing-vessels trading to your port are carrying apprentices or boys as required by section 18 of " Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," and whether you have exempted any from requirements of that section. Collector Customs, Dunedin. W. T. Glasgow, Wellington.

(Telegram.) 17th November, 1897. The only vessels trading regularly here which come under provisions of section 18, " Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," are the "Ocean Eanger " and "Annie Hill." The "Ocean Banger" has at present five A.B.s and one O.S. She requires one apprentice or boy to make complement complete, and, as she is at present in harbour, I shall see that she has one before clearing. The "Annie Hill" carries four A.B.s and one O.S. She is required to carry four A.B.s and one apprentice or boy. No exemptions granted here. Secretary, Marine, Wellington. C. W. Chamberlain, Collector, Dunedin.

Memorandum for Collectoes and Officers in charge of Customs. (Circular.) Marine Department, Wellington, 24th November, 1897. The attention of Collectors is called to the provisions of section 18 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," on the subject of apprentices or boys to be carried by coastal or intercolonial sailingvessels, and they are requested to be careful to see that the provisions are carried out. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Memoeandum from Collectob of Customs at Invercargill, to the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. In acknowledging the receipt of your circular letter No. 297/93, of the 24th ultimo, re the employment of apprentices or boys to be carried by coasting and intercolonial sailing vessels under the provisions of section 16 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896."

291

H.—26

When this Act came into force I drew the attention of Mr. Waterston, shipowner, Invercargill, to this section of the Act, and, after a very long discussion with him, it resolved itself into this : that this section would be strictly enforced, and that he must carry one apprentice or boy on his vessel the " Annie Hill," then at the Invercargill Wharf. He then said, " Very well; if you insist, I shall discharge one of the A.B.s now onboard, and instead of carrying five A.B.s, I shall comply with the Act of 1894 and carry the stipulated number of A.B.s, which would be four." Under these circumstances, I saw that I should be doing an injustice to this man then on board by insisting that he should be discharged to make room for a boy. I then exercised my right of giving an exemption in this case under section 18 of the Act of 1896. Several similar cases have come under my notice, and have all been met with the same reply. What class of vessel does this exemption apply to ? Your circular states that the provisions of this section is to be carried out. I should like to have definite instructions in such a case as the one cited by me. There appears to be a doubt as to the interpretation of section 10 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1896," as to whether this section applies to home-trade ships. Will you please give me your reading of this section ? Ist December, 1897. J. Johnston, Collector.

Hon. Minister. Section 18 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896," enacts that any sailing vessel engaged in the coasting or intercolonial trade, and carrying at least four certificated A.B.s, shall, in addition, carry apprentices or boys as follows : One to a vessel of 100 tons and less than 500, two to a vessel of 500 tons and less than 1,000, three to a vessel of 1,000 tons and over : Provided that this section shall only apply to sailing-vessels, but shall not apply to any such vessel to the extent exempted from time to time by a Collector of Customs. Th 6 Collector at Invercargill found that the " Annie Hill," 121 tons, had no boy. By the scale of the Act of 1894 she must have four A.B.'s. As a matter of fact, she carried five A.B.s; and when the Collector insisted on a boy being shipped, the owner, Mr. Waterson, said he would have to discharge one A.8., and only carry the minimum of four, if he was obliged to carry a boy. The Collector thought it was his duty to grant the exemption from carrying a boy under these circumstances, so long as five A.B.s were carried. lam at a loss to know under what circumstances the Collector was expected to use his power of exemption, but it appears to me that he has acted rightly in this case. 23/12/97. D. MoKbllae, for Secretary. Action by Collector approved.— E.J. S., 24/12/97.

Marine Department, Wellington, 29th December, 1897. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Invercargill. In reply to your memorandum No. 117 of the Ist instant, I have to state that as the carrying of an apprentice or boy on board the " Annie Hill " would have led to a man being dispensed with, your action in exempting her from doing so, so long as she carries five able seamen, is approved. As regards the last paragraph of your memorandum I have to state that section 10 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896," applies to home-trade vessels. D. McKellar, for Secretary.

Sib, — Auckland, 18th January, 1898. In going to clear the barque " Wenona " outwards for Melbourne, vid the Thames, the Collector of Customs refused to grant the clearance till she carried two boys, or apprentices, in addition to the number of seamen required by the Shipping Amendment Act of 1894. According to this Act the number of men required to be carried was increased. Now there is no reduction, while two extra are added. The accommodation for seamen and officers on board ship was made in conformity with the then requirements of the Board of Trade; to enlarge cabins now is nearly next to impossible, as the beams, hatches, &c, were arranged in accordance with the size of the cabin. The indenture forms sent for apprentices are binding them to the master, and not to the ship. The master may be changed at any time, and may be a long time before getting charge of another vessel. It is nearly impossible to get any one to bind himself surety for an apprentice, knowing well the colonial youth will clear out as soon as he fancies he is worth more wages. There is an objection to carrying boys without- being apprenticed; if the boy is found not worth keeping, the master may pay him off in another colony, leaving him penniless. I would suggest that matters might be left as at present —the most of the vessels carrying one boy, who, if found willing to do his work, the master teaches him in every possible way, and his wages are increased in a very short time till up to that of an ordinary seaman. You will see the difficulty about accommodation. So, if imperative that two boys are carried, could not an A.B. or ordinary seaman less do? The impression among shipowners here is that New Zealand laws are not binding excepting on New Zealand registered vessels. So the intention is to transfer the registry to an Australian port. I may add, in conclusion, that I am willing to show my books that this vessel has not paid her owners a penny for over two years, and will want £500 for re-coppering shortly. It may be said, " Why not raise the freights ? " Easier said than done, with any rise of freight there are any number of foreign vessels paying less wages and not subject to such restrictions who would

H.—26

292

immediately take present rates ; but local shippers prefer locally.owned vessels if freights equally low. Hoping you will give the matter your serious consideration, for if owners are to be subjected to such restrictions a New Zealand owned sailing vessel will be a thing of the past soon. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. D. Eoss.

Marine Department, Wellington, 27th January, 1898. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Auckland. Herewith I forward copy of a letter which has been received from Mr. D. Eoss, of Auckland, complaining of the barque " Wenona " being required to carry two boys, and I have to request that you will state whether the difficulty of providing accommodation for the boys alleged by Mr. Eoss really exists, and also that you will make any remarks on his letter that you may see fit. D. McKellar, for Secretary.

Memoeandum from the Collectob of Customs at Auckland to the Seceetaey, Marine Department, Wellington. Eefekking to your memorandum M9B/168, 27/1/98: Undoubtedly there is the difficulty of providing the accommodation for the boys, as the vessels are built substantially, and provide the accommodation and space required by " The Imperial Merchant Shipping Act, 1894." My experience is that boys will not be bound to these intercolonial traders, only in very few instances, as " apprentices." If they ship as boys, to enable masters to comply with our late Shipping Act Amendments, the master leaves them in some Australian port, because in Australian ports they keep to the rules, &c, of "The Imperial Shipping Act, 1894." Besides, the boys become O.S.— i.e., ordinary seamen—in no time, and earn £2 10s. to £4 as such, whereas, as boys only, they get £1 a month or for the run across to Australia, where they are dropped, and the vessels come again to New Zealand, not being required to ship any boys. My own opinion, after forty years' experience, is that we have too many laws and requirements in matters of shipping, until one of our industries, such as New Zealand shipping, is oppressed by too many restrictions, and is likely to become crippled and cease to pay even reasonable profits or even maintenance to the owners. Such is in many instances the case, and is becoming more obvious day by day. Mr. Boss's complaint is justified, and his statements are moderately just and to the point. 17/2/98. Alex. Eose, Collector.

Bin,— Auckland, Ist March, 1898. In my letter of the 19th January, to which I received no reply, I inquired if it is imperative to carry less apprentices or boys, whether a seaman less could be dispensed with, besides the expenses of paying and feeding so many men. The accommodation is insufficient. I beg to bring the matter again before you. Hoping to get a favourable reply at your earliest convenience. I remain, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. D. Eoss.

Hon. Minister. It is quite clear that the carrying of a man less than the law prescribes, so as to accommodate boys, cannot be allowed. There is no doubt hardship and difficulty in extending in some of the vessels the space for carrying the crew. It is therefore a question whether the Collector should in his discretion grant the exemption specified in section 18 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1896." There is the risk, however, of the Act requiring boys to be carried becoming a dead-letter if these concessions are granted. 4th March, 1898. D. McKellab, for Secretary. The law must be adhered to.—W. H.-J.—sth March, 1898.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, Bth March, 1898. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to acknowledge the receipt of your letters of the 18th January last and the Ist instant, in which you ask that the requirements of the law as to the barque " Wenona" carrying two apprentices or boys may be dispensed with, or, that if insisted on, that the vessel may be allowed to carry one seaman less than the number prescribed by " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894," and in reply I am to state that the Government do not see their way to sanction any departure from what the law requires in the case of this vessel. As regards the impression amongst shipowners that the transfer of registration to Australia would exempt a vessel from the New Zealand law as to manning, I would point out that such an impression is erroneous, as the law on the subject applies to all vessels engaged in the coastal and intercolonial trade, irrespective of where they are registered. I have, &c, D, Eoss, Esq., Auckland. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

293

H.-26

Marine Department, Wellington, Bth March, 1898, The Collector, H.M. Customs, Auckland. With reference to your memorandum of the 17th ultimo I forward herewith, for your information, copy of a letter which has been addressed to Mr. D. Eoss on the subject of the boys or apprentices to be carried on the " Wenona," W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir,— Marine Department, Wellington, 20th March, 1897. Concerning our conversation on the subject of training boys for the sea in the British mercantile marine, and in accordance with your request, I herewith give you a rough sketch of my ideas on the matter. It has been recommended in the report of the Committee appointed by the Board of Trade to inquire into the manning of British merchant ships that training-ships for boys should be established at the public expense for the purpose of increasing the number of available British seamen : the Boyal Navy to have at all times the first claim upon the services of those so trained, who should, however, be free to obtain employment in the mercantile marine or elsewhere when they are not required for service in the navy. This recommendation appears to me to be all very well in theory, but the question of importance is: will shipowners employ these lads without some inducement offered ? Training-ships, as most people know, are exceedingly costly, owing to the initial expense of establishment and the annual recurrent expenditure. In my opinion, the cheapest and most effective way of training boys for the sea would be for the British Government to pay a small bonus to shipowners for apprenticing lads for two years' service. My contention is that every sailing-ship employed in the foreign trade should be used as a training-ship to a certain extent. According to the Board of Trade return for the year 1895, there were 16,105 vessels employed in the coastal and foreign trades of Great Britain. These vessels employed 240,486 persons, out of which 28,077 are Lascars and Asiatics, and 32,335 foreigners. These figures concerning the British mercantile marine are very startling, and I have no doubt that you will be surprised to learn that the same proportionate figures apply to New Zealand as far as foreigners are concerned. I think the manning of British and colonial mercantile marine ships by Britishers is of as much importance to shipowners as it is to the Government. Therefore, any practical scheme that is brought forward by the latter should, in my opinion, be heartily responded to by the shipowners, and they should be prepared to make some sacrifice for the safety and efficient manning of their vessels. In the event of a European war breaking out, the probability is that the 32,335 foreigners already mentioned would leave their present employment and return to their own countries. It has often occurred to me what a splendid naval reserve Great Britain is training for her neighbours on the Continent of Europe. Looking at these figures from a manning point of view in the merchant service, the withdrawal of 32,335 men from the service would necessitate laying up at least 2,300 vessels, allowing fourteen men to each ship. The scheme that I propose, that should take the place of training-ships, is as follows—viz.: A bonus should be offered by the Government of Great Britain to the masters or owners of foreign-going British registered or owned sailing ships, of over 500 tons register, of £12 per head: not to exceed two lads in each ship in addition to the complement of able and ordinary seamen required. The bonus of £12 should be for one year's service, to be followed by a bonus of £6 for the second year. The total sum paid in respect of each boy would thus be £18 for two years, as compared with about £15 per annum or more involved if training-ships were established. The master or owner would require the lad to be indentured to them for two years (or put on the ship's articles in the ordinary way), and to pay him the usual £1 per month for the first year (thus absorbing the bonus), and to pay the difference between £6 (the second year's bonus) and the ordinary wages for a boy in his second year's service on board ship—say, £1 10s. a month—it being of course assumed that a boy in his second year would be well worth that sum. In other words, the bonus would for the first year practically amount to the boy's wages, the shipowner providing his maintenance for his services, and in the second year the shipowner would get a second year's service on the terms of the first year's service. At the expiration of the second year the lad would be entitled and qualified to ship as an ordinary seaman on any vessel, if over seventeen years of age, and could also, if fairly diligent, if over eighteen years of age, go up for his examination and become an able seaman at the end of two years' service. (Please see regulations for examination of A.B.s attached.) If no examination were passed the individual would require to serve one year at sea as an ordinary seaman, in addition to the two years provided for, before being entitled to the rating of an able seaman. Provision, of course, would have to be made for withdrawing the bonus, or any part of it, in the event of the boy leaving the ship before his first or second year had expired. To further facilitate the employment of these lads their names could be registered at the mercantile marine offices at each port, the choice or selection, of course, resting with the shipowner or master. It might also be necessary to insist that the lads shall be over fifteen and under seventeen years of age, and have passed a certain school test, medical examination, form-vision and colour-vision tests. The scheme should be restricted to the sons of British subjects and to ships owned or registered in the British Empire, and its application should be extended to all its ports. Thus we should have, practically, training-ships all over the globe, instead of at a few Home ports. If some scheme on the line I have suggested were adopted, three thousand boys could be found employment of a permanent character at a cost of £36,000 for the first year, and £18,000 for the second; while in no year would the expenditure exceed £54,000 if three thousand boys were annually drafted into the foreign-going portion of the British mercantile marine. The number of boys stated should make ample provision for shrinkage.

H.—26

294

After these lads had completed two years' sea-service some scheme might be formulated so that they could serve for a month on a gunnery- or drill-ship with a view of their joining the Eoyal Naval Reserve. If this system of training boys for the sea were adopted it would become more attractive, and I feel assured that we should have British ships manned by British seamen, instead of as at present by a large proportion of foreigners and Negroes. In conclusion, I may say that I have refrained from going into much detail, contenting myself with outlining a scheme which I think might be made workable and serviceable to the Empire. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington. Geo. Allman, Nautical Adviser. Copy to be filed in Marine Department. Original with Premier.—W. Crow, P. 5.—25/4/98.

Ordeb Paper.—House op Eepresentatives, Tuesday, the 4th Day of July, 1899. Question 8. Mr. E. Thompson to ask the Government, Whether they will favourably consider the necessity of amending the Shipping and Seamen's Act, with the view of enabling our boys to learn to be sailors ? The Minister. The Act of 1894 prescribed the minimum number of seamen to be carried in proportion to tonnage in the case of intercolonial or coastal sailing vessels and steamers. The Act of 1895 allowed the substitution of two boys for one ordinary seaman in the case of sailing vessels in intercolonial or coastal trade carrying not less than five able seamen. This practically excluded boys on such vessels of 200 tons or less. The Act of 1896 provided that sailing vessels in intercolonial or coasting trade, carrying at least four able seamen, must carry boys or apprentices in proportion to their tonnage, in addition to the minimum number of seamen prescribed by law, but the Collector of Customs has discretionary power to exempt from the provision. There is no provision for compelling boys to be carried on steamers. (See Eight Hon. Premier's answer to a similar question put by Mr. Thompson last session, in Hansard, Vol. CI., p. 240.) Marine Department, Wellington. 5/7/99. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Question 35. Mr. E. Thompson to ask the Government, Whether they propose to amend ! he Shipping and Seamen's Act so as to enable New Zealand boys to learn to be sailors on our coasting-steamers and sailing-vessels ? Hon. Minister. The Act of 1894 prescribed the minimum number of seamen to be carried in proportion to tonnage. The Act of 1895 allowed the substitution of two boys for one seaman in the case of vessels carrying not less than five able seamen. This practically excluded boys on vessels of 200 tons or less. The Act of 1896 provided that sailing-vessels, carrying at least four able seamen, must carry boys or apprentices, in proportion to their tonnage, in addition to the minimum number of seamen prescribed by law, but the Collector of Customs has discretionary power to exempt from the provision. I think the difficulty is that the minimum is sufficient to man the vessel, and there is, therefore, no inducement to carry boys or apprentices in addition. Marine Department, Wellington. 5/7/99. W. T. Glasgow, per G.A.

British Seamen for British Ships. (Extract from Journal of the Department of Labour of February, 1899.] So long as the British Empire continues to be a maritime and colonial empire, based on sea trade and naval power, all who value their citizenship must recognise that " the prosperity, strength, and safety of this United Kingdom and Her Majesty's dominions do greatly depend on a large, constant, and ready supply of seamen, and that it is therefore expedient to promote the increase of the number of seamen and to afford them all due encouragement and protection."* Nevertheless, the number of British seamen in the mercantile marine is diminishing year by year, and appears likely to dimish still more rapidly in future.! In 1847 (three years after the passing of the Act from the preamble of which the foregoing quotation is taken) there were some 232,890 seamen, of whom at least four-fifths were necessarily of British nationality, "usually employed in navigating vessels belonging to the British Empire,"! and the supply was maintained by the compulsory enlistment of about ten thousand apprentices each year; so that in any given year, allowing three years for indentures, about thirty thousand apprentices were being borne on the books of British ships.§ But to-day, according to the most recent returns, the total number of seamen of British nationality of all ratings employed on vessels registered only under Part I. of " The Merchant Shipping Act, 1894" (trading vessels), is, at the most 124,813,|| and the number of young British seamen and boys (i.e., under twenty) is 4,735, a reduction of 2,274 from the number returned on the 25th March, 1891, and about 25,000 less than the estimated number of apprentices alone in any of the first ten years of the present reign.

* Merchant Shipping Act, 7 & 8 Vict., c. 112, preamble, now repealed. t Brassey, " Naval Annual," 1898, p. 105. I See evidence of Mr. G. R. Porter before the Seleot Committee of the House of Lords on the Navigation Laws in 1848. § See evidence of Mr. D. Dunbar, Mr. G. F. Young, and Captain Stirling, E.N., before the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the Navigation Laws in 1847. j| See return of Registrar-General of Shipping, presented July, 1897. He estimates that about 12 per cent, should be added to these figures to get at the total number of available seamen, whether employed or unemployed, and notes that yachtsmen are not included.

295

H.—26

Concurrently with this lamentable decrease in the personnel, the tonnage of merchant ships registered under the British flag has increased, during the same period, from 3,588,387 tons* to 10,235,000 tons.t These figures are eloquent of supineness and oblivion of our national interest in the well-being of the mercantile marine, and they become positively alarming in the light of the fact that the Eegistrar-General reports that the falling off occurs "mainly among young British seamen," and that " as sailors do not ordinarily enter the sea service after they are twenty-five years of age, this falling-off in the number of young British sailors affects the source of supply of our future petty officers and older able seamen." But, though poor in our stock of native seamen, we are wealthy in ships, and as our ships have to be manned, they are manned by foreigners instead of British sailors—a replacement which (as Lord Charles Beresford has pointed out) will render our mercantile marine a source of weakness rather than of strength in the event of the outbreak of war. Upon consideration of these circumstances the Navy League appointed a committee to endeavour to devise a practicable plan for remedying the evil, and the object of this article is to publish the committee's scheme. The problem to be solved is how to arrest the decrease in the number of British merchant seamen, and thus promote the interests of commerce and the growth of a sufficient naval reserve, and the Committee soon found that the question would be answered if means could be devised to render service in the mercantile marine attractive to British boys of good physique and respectable parentage, and at the same time make it worth the while of British shipowners to employ such boys, without compulsion or other undue interference by the State with the conduct of the shipowners' business. Concerning owners, no difficulty arose while the old navigation laws, under which the carrying of apprentices was compulsory, were in force, the obligation being regarded as some return to the State for the protection afforded to British commerce by those laws J. But with the adoption of a free-trade policy came the sweeping away of privileges and obligations alike, and the mercantile marine was thrown open to sailors of all nations. Although the unforeseen effect upon the personnel of the carrying trade was to some extent postponed by the introduction of steam and laboursaving appliances and the large stock of young sailors in existence at the time of the repeal of the laws, the question has to-day become one of grave concern to the nation and to the Empire. It must be dealt with promptly, and ought to be settled upon a comprehensive and enduring basis, in a manner calculated to win the cordial co-operation of shipowners, from whom a national service is required. Last session a tentative effort on the part of the Government to cope with the difficulty was accepted by Parliament, and a clause was introduced into the Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) Act at the instance of the President of the Board of Trade, as follows : —" On proof to the satisfaction of the Board of Trade that a British ship has, during any financial year, carried, in accordance with the scale and regulations to be made by the Board with the concurrence of the Treasury, boys between the ages of fifteen and nineteen, there shall be paid to the owner of the ship, out of the moneys provided by Parliament, an allowance not exceeding one-fifth of the light-dues paid during that year in respect of that ship : Provided that no such payment shall be made in respect of any boy unless he has enrolled himself in the Eoyal Naval Beserve., and entered into an obligation to present himself for service when called upon, in accordance with rules to be issued by the Admiralty. The scale and regulations as aforesaid may be modified from time to time by the Board of Trade with the concurrence of the Treasury. This section shall continue in force until the 31st March, 1905, and no longer, unless Parliament otherwise enact." Under this section the details of the Government proposals are left to the decision of an Executive department, but obviously the scheme to prove successful must be framed in a way acceptable to the business instincts of owners on whose ships the boys are to be trained. It is, therefore, an unfortunate coincidence that the payments to owners should bear any relation to the light-dues—an impost which is considered by the shipping community as unjust, burdensome, and obnoxious. Moreover, it is not easy to see how a remission based upon the amount of lightdues annually paid by a ship can be made into an equitable working standard, as ships trading with distant countries and visiting British ports only once or twice a year will, if they carry boys, earn only a paltry grant per annum as compared with ships engaged in a coastwise trade. Further, it seems essential to the success of any scheme that the aid of the authorities for elementary education should be secured, so that the inducements and prospects offered by the merchant service under the scheme to boys of good character and physique may be brought home to them and their parents. Again, the justice of mulcting a shipowner if his boys do not join the Eoyal Naval Eeserve may be questioned. Under present regulations boys are not allowed to join the reserve before attaining the age of eighteen, so that most of the lads in question will be free of their indentures before the opportunity for enlistment arrives. Nevertheless, the Board of Trade's proposals are a step in the right direction, and the scheme which we advocate is quite compatible with the provisions of the Act and the powers of the Executive Department. The essence of the plan which the Navy League advocates is that training for the mercantile marine at the public cost should cease to be regarded as a reformative process, open only to lads of doubtful antecedents or unfortunate circumstances. Even under the navigation laws the apprenticing of boys from poorhouses, or boys convicted of offences against the law, was far too common, and it was quite a usual sight in our seaport towns to see a trembling, half-starved urchin brought

*See evidence of Mr. G. Grabam (ib.) and of Mr. G E. Porter (ut supra). j See returns of 1897 (ut Supra). J See evidence of Mr. Dunbar (ut supra).

H.—26

296

on board ship in charge of the parish constable, as the readiest means of relieving the rates or taxes, quite regardless of his physical capacity for the life before him. The idea persists, and a training-ship for the sea is usually regarded as a kind of moral penitentiary for ne'er-do-weels. Most of the existing training-ships are managed in connection with reformatories or industrialschools, and one can hardly wonder that they are not taken advantage of to their full capacity, and do not succeed in sending a proper proportion of the boys to sea. It must also be borne in mind that these ships are largely dependent on charitable contributions, that there is no system of central control, and that the boys admitted to them are frequently the waifs and strays of crime or unfortunate previous circumstances, and, in short, not lads who might be expected as a rule to develop into good seamen, or to commend themselves to owners who take pride in their ships and men. As the main object of the proposal we make is to train up only the best type of British seamen, the necessity for offering the advantages of training to boys of respectable origin and of good physique and intelligence is insisted upon as one of the cardinal features of our scheme. Inquiries have been made amongst shipowners, and there is no reason to doubt that boys of a good class would be welcomed as apprentices by owners of good standing, provided that the cost to owners is not made too great. Another feature to which we attach great importance is the preliminary training of the boys in the ABC of the duties of a seafaring-man (e.g., the compass, steering, rowing, duties aloft, &c.) before they are actually sent to sea. There is nothing novel in this suggestion. It was made by the Departmental Committee appointed by the Board of Trade and presided over by Sir E. J. Eeed, which in 1896 reported as follows :—" The Committee are of opinion that it would be very greatly to the public advantage for the State to establish training-ships for boys, with the object and on the conditions there laid down. The Legislature has recently provided for promoting the technical education of our young people by means of grants from the Exchequer, notably in the case of the allocation in 1890 to this purpose of the proceeds of certain excise duties, and there is, we think, no branch of the technical training of boys and young men which would be more directly profitable to this maritime country, with its great naval interests, than the preparation of youths at the public expense for rendering efficient service at sea, primarily available for the Eoyal Navy, but available likewise for the mercantile marine. We think it extremely desirable that train-ing-ships or schools, with a small vessel attached, should be established at many ports round the coast, where boys intending to adopt the sea as a profession could obtain the necessary rudimentary technical instruction. These vessels or schools, teaching the most valuable national industry, would naturally fall into any general scheme of technical or secondary education, and by giving the boys naval drill as well as instruction in seamanship, would furnish a most useful recruiting-ground for the Eoyal Navy and Eoyal Naval Eeserve, and to some degree supply what in most maritime States is obtained by maritime conscription. Lads of seventeen going to sea from these schools with a certificate that they know the compass and can steer, which should be an essential part of their training, should be entitled to the rating of O.S at once." Though few persons will question the policy of encouraging boys of a respectable class to enter the mercantile marine, it is desirable to say a few words about the prospects of such boys on the completion of their period of training. We think it may safely be assumed that there is always likely to be a steady demand for well-qualified, able-bodied seamen of the class which the scheme is intended to train. But, under the present conditions of service on trading vessels, the risk of deterioration in character— partly due to the nature of the employment, and partly due to the apathy with which the British public and Parliament have regarded the merchant service for so long—has to be considered; but, with the general improvement of the conditions of service in the Eoyal Navy, there has been improvement in the character of blue-jackets, and from that one can see the standard which might be attained when the merchant-seaman's welfare becomes in part the care of the State. Upon this important subject we suggest: (1.) If the lads to be trained come straight from the discipline and influence of the public elementary schools, the present stigma on the antecedents of trained boys would be removed, the tone of the service would be improved, and the insubordination and insobriety of which shipowners complain, in the case of British seamen, would be largely diminished. (2.) If certificates of service are granted to boys trained under the scheme, and these certificates are kept indorsed during their subsequent careers, constant employment for the holder under respectable owners would be insured. (3.) Engagements for a term, and not merely for a voyage, should be encouraged by the Board of Trade. (4.) If arrangements are made for ships to be paid off on board at hours not necessarily known except in the ship itself, instead of at the shipping-office, the crew would have a chance of escaping the numerous crowd of crimps and harpies who surround the shipping - office when a ship is paid off under the present system. (5.) The establishment of sailors' homes, like Miss Weston's, should be encouraged. With these preliminary observations, we now propose to state the outlines of the scheme. Scheme. (1.) Depot training-ships to be established at suitable points round the coast of the British Isles for the preliminary training of boys in the ABC of the duties of seafaring men. (2.) The boys to be of good character and of a certain standard of physique and education, to be recommended for the purpose by teachers and managers of public elementary schools, and to enter about the age of fourteen. (3.) The boys, on entering the depot training-ships, to be indentured to a public official or officials, nominated by the Board of Trade, for a term of four years, the first to be spent on the depot-ship and the last three on ships of the mercantile marine. (4.) The boys, on entering the depot training-ships, to be bound to serve their time, and to pass as "qualified seamen" in the Eoyal Naval Eeserve. (5.) Each depot training-ship to be of a capacity to train at least three hundred boys per annum, and the essential object of the training

297

H.—26

to be to fit the boys for service before the mast; but, at the same time, every channel of promotion to smart and exceptional seamen must be open. The year to be divided into two or three terms, and boys entered in about equal numbers each term. (6.) The duties of the officials referred to in (3) to be as follows: (a) To supervise the training-ships; (b) to enlist boys under the scheme ; (c) to arouse and keep alive the interest and support of local authorities (e.g., Technical Education Committees of County Councils and elementary education authorities) for the scheme; (d) to secure a proper share of apprenticeship charities for payment of premiums to shipowners; (c) to make arrangements with respectable shipowners for shipment of the boys on completion of their term in the training-ships, and to inspect the ships from time to time; (/) to arrange what premiums are to be paid to shipowners for taking boys, and dates for payment, which should be by annual instalments; * (g) to grant certificates of service, and to look after the welfare of the boys on leaving the training-ships; (h) to keep proper registers, showing all necessary particulars of the boys' careers, character, &c. ; (i) to arrange for their training and qualifying in the Eoyal Naval Eeserve at the proper periods; (j) to arrange for proper accommodation for boys while on shore ; (k) generally to use their best endeavours to make the scheme successful. \ (7.) The payments to shipowners to be, say, £1 per month for the first year, 15s. per month for the second year, and 10s. per month for the third year. (8.) The boys, while in the training-ships, to be clothed and receive a little pocket-money at the expense of the scheme, and to receive pay from the shipowners at fixed rates while serving the last three years of their time. (9.) The scheme to be managed and the cost to be provided by the Board of Trade, acting in touch with the Admiralty, who, by contributing to the cost and accepting enlistment in the Eoyal Naval Eeserve of boys joining the depot training-ships, would secure the service of such boys for the reserve. (10.) .Facilities to be afforded to County Councils and other public bodies having the control of funds available for technical education to apply these funds to the training of boys in the proposed depot-ships. (H-) The co-operation of trustees.having the management of funds available for apprenticing deserving boys to be sought, but charitable contributions from private sources not to be invited or accepted. (12.) Sea-going training-ships might be provided in connection with the depot training-ships, and rendered to some extent self-supporting by the transport of Government stores, &c. This is a desirable, but not an essential, feature of the scheme. The Navy League have ascertained by inquiry that a 3cheme worked out upon these lines is likely to meet with the active support of Technical Education Committees of County Councils, of City Companies, of school authorities, of the Charity Commissioners, and of the better class of shipowners ; and there can be little doubt that parents will welcome a chance of embarking their children under the protection of the State in an honourable and respectable calling.—-W. L. AiNSLiB and J. H. Yoxall in the Nineteenth Century.

EXHIBIT I. Sir,— Premier's Office, Sydney, New South Wales, 29th March, 1899. In reply to your letter of the 6th instant, I have the honour to acquaint you that Captain George Allman only presented himself once for examination for an extra master's certificate, and passed on the Bth December, 1894. A copy of the Examiner's report is enclosed for your information. I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister of Marine, Wellington, New Zealand. G. H. Eeid.

Sib,— Sydney, 16th March, 1899. I have the honour to report that George Allman was examined for an extra master's certificate in December, 1894. He commenced his examination in navigation on Tuesday, the 4th, at 9.30 a.m., and finished on Friday, the 7th, at about 4 p.m. —about twenty-eight hours. I allowed him to come up each morning at 9.30, as he had to be in Wellington at an early date. He was examined in seamanship on the Bth. George Allman was only before me once for his examination as extra master. He was very quick and correct with his work. I have, &c, John H. Bedfoed, Examiner in Navigation, Marine Board. The Secretary, Marine Board of New South Wales.

EXHIBIT J. Ministers of Marine. (See page 11 of " Statistics of New Zealand, 1898.") The Hon. W. Hall-Jones has held the office since 22nd June, 1896. Hon. E. J. Seddon ... ... 3rd June, 1892, to Ist May, 1893. Hon. Sir P. A. Buckley ... ... Ist May, 1893, to 13th October, 1893. Hon. J. G. Ward ... ... ... 13th October, 1893, to 16th June, 1896. Hon. W. Hall-Jones ... ... 22nd June, 1896, to date.

* General regulations should be laid down by the Board of Trade. t The maohinery for carrying this important part of the aoheme into effect is already in practical existenoe at the numerous mercantile marine offloes throughout the United Kingdom and British possessions.

38— H. 26.

H.—26

298

EXHIBIT K. Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 23rd March, 1893. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th ultimo, in which you apply for appointment as Examiner of Masters and Mates; and in reply I have been directed by the Minister having charge of this department to state that arrangements have been made for conducting examinations which will obviate the necessity of making such an appointment. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Captain J. A. H. Marciel, Dallington, Christchurch.

Captain Marciel's application and enclosures detached, and attached to application for appointment as Superintendent of Mercantile Marine. M. 99/655. J. G. 23/3/99.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 14th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, in which you apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department; and in reply to state that your application will receive consideration, along with those of a similar nature, when the appointment is being made. I have, &c, Captain J. A. H. Marciel, Dallington, Christohurch. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Deae Me. Waed,— Tasman Street, Wellington, 20th August, 1894. Do you think there would be any opening for me in consequence of poor Captain Johnson's death? As I think I mentioned to you, I served for two years and a half in England as Board of Trade Nautical Assessor, and my varied naval experience should fit me for anything nautical. The late Mr. Ballance had intended to give me permanent work, and shortly before his death said, " I was thinking about you this morning, and must do something for you." Of course, this gives me no claim upon you, but I thought I would mention it. Trusting you will excuse my troubling you, I remain, &c, Charles S. Beoome. Mr. Glasgow,—Acknowledge receipt, and say application will be considered with others.— J. G. Waed, per W. C—22/8/94.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 27th August, 1894. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th instant, in which you apply for the position of Nautical Assessor, &c, to this department, which has become vacant through the death of Captain Johnson ; and in reply I am to state that your application will be considered, along with others of a similar nature, when the question of filling the vacancy is dealt with by the Government. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Lieutenant C. S. Broome, E.N., Tasman Street, Wellington.

(Telegram.) Wellington, 20th August, 1894. Private. —In reference to the vacancy caused by the death of Captain Johnson, will you please consider my application for the post by using your influence in the matter on my behalf ? and oblige, George Allman, Master, s.s. " Eotomahana," Auckland. Hon. J. G. Ward, Wellington.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 27th August, 1894. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your telegram of the 20th instant, in which you apply for the position of Nautical Adviser, &c, to this department, which has become vacant through the death of Captain Johnson ; and in reply I am to state that your application will be considered, along with others of a similar nature, when the question of filling the vacancy is dealt with by the Government. I have, &c, Captain G. Allman, s.s. " Eotomahana," Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

(Telegram.) Wellington, 20th August,lB94. Solicit your kind office on my father's behalf, if intended appoint successor Captain Johnson. Hon. J. G. Ward, Wellington. W. A. Kennedy, Dunedin.

Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand (Limited), Dear Sir, — Dunedin, 23rd August, 1894. I understand from our Mr. W. A. Kennedy that his father is applying for the position in the Government service rendered vacant by the death of Captain Johnson, and he asks me to say a word in his favour.

299

H.—26

I am, of course, not aware what are the particular duties required—whether scientific or otherwise—but Captain Kennedy has had a very long experience in the coastal and intercolonial service, and is thoroughly conversant with nautical matters generally, and I should be glad if you could see your way to offer him the appointment. Yours, &c, Hon. J. G. Ward, Wellington. James Mills.

Sir,— Park Street, Wellington, 24th August, 1894. By the death of Captain Eobert Johnson a vacancy is created in the Marine Department as Nautical Adviser to the Government. I have therefore the honour to apply for such vacancy. My qualifications for the office are generally known throughout this colony. I have been a shipmaster since 1856, and have held many important commands on the coast of New Zealand, and also in the intercolonial trade. I also held office as a Warden of the Marine Board and Inspector of Steam-vessels (certificates of appointment enclosed for your perusal) until that Board was abolished and the present Marine Department formed. Since that time I have been employed chiefly in the intercolonial steamers, where I have gained additional experience. lam intimately acquainted with all bar-harbours, ports, and places on the coast. I may also state that my constitution is unimpared, and my hearing, eyesight, and general health as good as ever. Hoping that my application may be favourably considered, I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. A. Kennedy.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 27th August, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of tbe 24th instant, in which you apply for the position of Nautical Adviser, &c, to this department, which has become vacant through the death of Captain Johnson; and in reply lam to state that your application will be considered, along with others of a similar nature, when the question of filling the vacancy is dealt with by the Government. I have, &c, Captain A. Kennedy, Park Street, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib,— Wellington, 22nd August, 1894. The position of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department and Principal Examiner of Masters and Mates having become vacant through the death of Captain Johnson, I have the honour to apply for the appointment. Pull particulars of my service at sea are in the possession of the department; but I may state that I have served eleven years at sea, of which three years and a half were as first officer in sailing-ships, and as navigating officer in trans-Atlantic and Chilian mail-steamers, and two years and eight months as master of foreign-going vessels, two years of which was in square-rigged sailing-vessels. I hold a certificate of competency as "master extra," and have also passed the " voluntary examination in steam." I may also state that in 1877 I established the Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools for the preparation of candidates for their examinations as masters, mates, and engineers, and I am still carrying on the same. During the time I have conducted these schools 529 of my pupils have successfully passed their examinations. I have also filled the position of Examiner of Masters and Mates in navigation and seamanship to the Marine Board of Fiji. I am forty-three years of age, a naturalised British subject, and a married man. I have, &c, The Hon. J. G. Ward, Minister of Marine. George yon Schoen. Mr. Glasgow,—Please acknowledge and place with other applications to be submitted to me. —J. G. Ward, per F. H.—22/8/94.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 27th August, 1894. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd instant, in which you apply for the position of Nautical Adviser, &c, to this department, which has become vacant tbrough the death of Captain Johnson ; and in reply I am to state that your application will be considered, along with others of similar nature, when the question of filling the vacancy is dealt with by the Government, Captain G. yon Schoen, Wellington. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Hon. Minister of Marine. The death of Captain Johnson opens the question of the appointment of his successor. I assume that it will not be necessary for me to urge that the appointment is necessary. The principal duties are those of Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, and for this I think it should be a necessary condition that person appointed should hold an extra master's certificate. It would also be desirable that he should possess a knowledge of the harbours and coast of New Zealand, in order to be able to advise the department on various points that arise out of wreck inquiries, and on proposed lighthouses, &c. This knowledge would, however, not be essential, as the person appointed would be accorded every facility for obtaining it. In order that candidates may be induced to apply who would have the personal and professional qualifications which would command the respect and confidence of shipowners, shipmasters, and seamen, and of the Government, I would suggest that the salary offered should not

H.—26

300

be lower than £400. I would like to see it fixed at a larger sum. I think applications should be invited by advertisement in New Zealand. W. T. Glasgow. 22nd August, 1894. Eeferred to Cabinet.— J. G. Waed.—27/8/94. In Cabinet, 27th August, 1894.—Suitable person to be advertised for. Eeferred to Commismissioner of Customs.—A. Willis, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 29th August, 1894. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23rd instant, with reference to Captain Kennedy's application for the position of Nautical Adviser to this department; and in reply lam to state that it is intended to advertise for applicants for the position. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. James Mills, Esq., Union Steam Ship Office, Dunedin.

Hon. Minister. Marine Department. Please state whether draft advertisement herewith meets with your approval. I have inserted the condition as to " extra-master certificate." This will shut out a great many needless applications. W. T. Glasgow. 29/8/94. Approved.— J. G. W.—l/9/94.

[Eoyal Arms.] Marine Department, Wellington, Ist September, 1894. Applications will be received at this office up to noon of Wednesday, the 26th September, 1894, for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, at a salary of £400 per annum. The successful applicant will be required to perform all such duties in connection with the Marine Department as may from time to time be determined on. Applications must be accompanied with a statement of the applicant's service at sea and copies of certificates and testimonials, and no application can be entertained from any person who does not hold a certificate of competency as master extra. By command. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Insert four times—Wellington Times, 7, 14, 21, 25; Wellington Press, 6, 13. 20, 24; Auckland Herald, 11, 15, 17, 24; Auckland Star, 10, 14, 18, 22; Christchurch Times, 8, 14, 17, 22; Christchurch Press, 10, 15, 18, 21; Dunedin Times, 11, 14, 18, 22 ; Dunedin Star, 12, 15, 17, 11; Invercargill Southland News, 12, 15, 18, 21; Napier News, 8, 15, 20, 24 ; Nelson Colonist, 10, 15, 19, 24; Auckland Observer. Mr. Glasgow.—Kindly insert in Evening Post. — J. G. Waed.—lo/9/99. Post, Wellington, 11, 15, 18, 22.

Telegrams. Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Colonist Newspaper, Nelson. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, New Zealand Herald Newspaper, Auckland. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add the following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Southland News Newspaper, Invercargill. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Evening News Newspaper, Napier. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add following footnote: " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

301

H.—26

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Otago Daily Times Newspaper, Dunedin. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add following footnote: " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Evening Star Newspaper, Dunedin. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and second proximo, and add the following footnote: " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Lyttelton Times Newspaper, Christchurch. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and third proximo, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Press Newspaper, Christchurch. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and second proximo, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Manager, Evening Star Newspaper, Auckland. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, in issues of to-morrow and second proximo, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October, 1894." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 26th September, 1894. Proprietors, Observer Newspaper, Auckland. Insert advertisement inviting applications for appointment of Nautical Adviser, &c, in your next issue, and add following footnote : " The time for receiving the above applications has been extended to noon of Wednesday, seventeenth October." W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Deae Sic, — Auckland, 17th September, 1894. Being favoured by some of the other Government departments with a share of their advertising, might we respectfully ask you Co consider our claims for an equal share with our contemporaries from your department ? Trusting you will place our name on your list, We are, &c, Weekly Standard Company (J. M. J.). Mr. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

Sir,— Wellington, 13th September, 1894. Applications having been invited for the position of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department, and Principal Examiner of Masters and Mates, &c, I have the honour to apply for the appointment. Full particulars of my service at sea are hereto attached; but I may state that I have served eleven years at sea, of which three years and a half were as first and second officer in sailing-ves-sels, and as second or navigating officer in the trans-Atlantic liner " Frisia," and the Chilian mailsteamer "Biv-Biv;" and two years and eight months as master of foreign-going sailing-vessels, two years of which was in square-rigged sailing vessels. I hold a certificate of competency as " master extra " in the mercantile marine, and also certificate of having passed the "voluntary examination in steam." I may also state that in 1877 I established the Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools for the preparation of candidates for their examinations as masters, mates, and engineers, and lam still carrying on the same. During the time I have conducted these schools 529 of my pupils have successfully passed their examinations. I have also filled the position of Examiner of Masters and Mates, both in navigation and seamanship, to the Marine Board of Fiji. I am forty-three years of age (having been born 21st April, 1851), a naturalised British subject, and a married man. Attached to this application are the following documents : (1) Certificate from the Collector of Customs, Wellington, of having produced to him for verification my certificate of competency as

H.—26

302

" master extra," and also certificate of having passed the " voluntary examination in steam " ; (2) a verified statement of my " service at sea," with appendix ; (3) letter from the Colonial UnderSecretary, forwarding letters of naturalisation (25/10/81); (4) letter of appointment as Examiner to the Marine Board of Fiji; (5) testimonial from the late Mr. W. H. Levin ; (6) testimonial from Mr. H. E. Glegg (manager, National Bank, Wellington); (7) testimonial from Mr. E. M. Simpson (manager of New Zealand Insurance); (8) testimonials from E. A. Edwin, Com. E.N. (three); (9) testimonial from W. and G. Turnbull and Co.; (10) copy of testimonial from Captain W. Bendall (surveyor to the United Underwriters' Association); (11) copy of testimonial from Mr. Lewis B. Wilson (late Assistant-Secretary, Marine Department); (12) testimonials from F. A. Krull (Imperial German Consul), (two). I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. G. yon Schoen.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 14th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 13th instant, in which you apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department; and in reply to state that your application will receive consideration, along, with others of a similar nature, when the appointment is being made. I have, &c, Captain G. yon Schoen, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sik, — Lochiel House, 17th September, 1894. I intended seeing you personally re the enclosed letter, but illness has prevented me. Captain Allman intends making an attempt to pass for extra master next Saturday in Sydney, and if successful will cable you immediately. I advised him in meantime to let you have his application, which is herewith. Kindly excuse pencil, as I have to write in bed. I have, &c, M. P. Cameron.

Dear Sir, — Napier, 14th September, 1894. Please accept copies of my testimonials and certificates. I shall endeavour to get the extra certificate in Australia, and will wire results before the 26th if possible. With kind regards, and trusting to your influence, I remain, &c, Gbo. Allman. W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

The bearer, Mr. George Allman, joined Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co.'s employ as an apprentice on board the ship " Eajpoot "in November, 1864. He served his four years in that ship, the " Soukar," and the "Varuna." In June, 1869, he was sent away as third officer of the ship " Dilawur," in which ship he served till April, 1871. In the following month he joined the ship " Dilpussund " as second officer, and served in her till she was put up for sale in February, 1874. Mr. Allman leaves Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co.'s service through the disposal of their ships. He served his time to the satisfaction of his captains. He has always been sober and attentive to his duty and to the interests of the ship he served in. I can with perfect confidence recommend him as a good officer. John Pook, Ships' Husband, For Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co. 4, Lime Street Square, London, 31st March, 1874.

To certify that Mr. George Allman has served in the ship " Dilawur" as third officer for twenty months, also as second officer in the barque " Dilpussund " for two years and eight months, during which time I found him to be a steady, sober, and efficient officer in every respect. London, 16th February, 1874. John Dray, Master, "Dilpussund."

This is to certify that Mr. George Allman served with me on board the " Dilpussund " as first mate for a period of fourteen months. During that time he conducted himself in a proper and sober manner, and gave satisfaction. John Kelly, Master barque " Dilpussund." West India Docks, London, sth November, 1875.

This is to certify that Mr. George Allman served with me for a period of two years as first mate, during which time he conducted himself in a sober and steady manner, and was at all times attentive to his duties. I can safely recommend him to any master in want of an officer. Auckland, Ist July, 1876. John Kelly, Master, barque " Dilpussund."

This is to certify that Mr. George Allman entered the employ of Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co., of Leadenhall Street, in this city, as an apprentice in November, 1864, and bad continuous employment down to July, 1876. During the whole of that period he was found to be sober, steady, and most attentive to his several duties. The last two years he served as chief officer of

303

H.—26

the barque " Dilpussund," and only left that vessel on account of urgent private affairs. We will always have much pleasure in recommending Mr. Allman as a smart officer. John Pook, Ships' Husband, 4, Lime Street Square, London, Bth May, 1877. For Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co.

I hereby certify that George Allman has served with me as second officer for a period of two years, and during that time I have always found him an active, intelligent, and sober officer, and could at all times place every confidence in him. Melbourne, 4th September, 1878. Malcolm Muir, Master, s.s. " Alhambra."

We beg to certify that Mr. George Allman has been in our service for five years, the last four as chief officer of the steamers " Claud Hamilton " and " Arawata," which position he now holds in the latter. He is thoroughly acquainted with his duties, steady, sober, diligent, and a most efficient officer. McMeckan, Blackwood, and Co. Melbourne, 14th October, 1881.

Certificate of Birth. —This to certify that my son George was born on the 7th March, 1850, and was baptized by me not long afterwards.—William Allman, M.D., D.D., Eector of Kilmacrenan. 14th March, 1877.

List of Certificates held. —Passed for second and chief officer in London. Certificate as master, No. 244, Victoria. Pilot exemptions : Port Phillip, Port Jackson, Newcastle, Auckland, Napier, Wellington, Lyttelton, Timaru, Oainaru, Dunedin, Bluff, and all other New Zealand ports.

In January, 1862, Captain Allman was sent on board Her Majesty's training-ship " Conway," at Liverpool, to learn seamanship, navigation, nautical astronomy, and the ordinary rudiments of education, and remained there till October, 1864, and on the Ist November, 1864, he was bound apprentice for four years to Messrs. Smith, Fleming, and Co., of Leadenhall Street, London, and remained in their employ as apprentice, third officer, second officer, and chief officer, trading to India, Australia, China, and Japan, up to July, 1876. When their ships were sold he entered the service of Messrs. McMeckin, Blackwood, and Co., of Melbourne, and remained in their employ up to the time the Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand purchased their fleet in 1879, in which employ he still holds a command.

This is to certify that George Allman has fulfilled tbe term of his indentures to our entire satisfaction, and we have much pleasure in stating that the captains under whom he served found him at all times steady, sober, and attentive to his duties. Smith, Fleming and Co. London, 6th January, 1869. •

The bearer, George Allman, just out of his time, joined the " Eajpoot " in Liverpool from the training-ship " Conway," and continued in the " Eajpoot" up to the time of her loss in the Bay of Bengal. Captain Gillett always spoke of Allman as a well-conducted, attentive lad, and Captain Wilkie, of the " Soukar," in whose ship he had a passage home, gave him a very excellent character. John Pook, Ships' Husband, For Messrs. Smith, Fleming and Co. 4, Lime Street Square, London, 6th January, 1869.

This is to certify that George Allman served the last nine months of his apprenticeship on board the " Varuna," under my command, and that I always found him ready, willing, and attentive to his duties ; also very steady, sober, and intelligent young man. London, sth January, 1869. John C. Clare, Commander "Varuna. "

Mr. Glasgow. I am directed by Hon. Mr. Ward to send you the attached copies of testimonials in favour of Captain George Allman, who, I believe, is an applicant for the vacancy caused by the death of Captain Johnson. F. Hyde, P.S. 17/9/94.

Sir, —■ Marine Department, Wellington, 18th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th instant, and in reply to state that if you succeed in obtaining the extra-master's certificate before the 26th instant your application will receive consideration, along with others of a similar nature, when the appointment is being made. I have, &c, Captain George Allman, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. S.S. "Eotomahana," Union Steam Ship Company (Limited), Wellington.

H.—26

304

Deae Sic, — Harbourmaster's Office, Thames, 17th September, 1894. An advertisement appears in the Herald calling applications for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates for the Marine Department. lam sorry Ido not hold an extra master's certificate, but, I may state, through no fault of mine. I have made application twice to the Marine Department to be allowed to go up for it, but I am barred by the regulations, not having been to sea for one year within the last three years; but I maintain that pilot-service should count as sea-service, more especially where a man, like myself, held a certificate of competency before taking up such a position as mine ashore. This opening wants more than what is called for, as the man who fills it requires a good knowledge of surveying as well, and you know I served some years under my brother at that. Can anything be done to remove the bar from such as myself, and allow us to become eligible for such appointments ? I enclose you a copy of my certificates and credentials, and if it were possible to do away with the extra master, or allow one a chance to go up for it, I should be satisfied, though it would necessarily take a little time. I have forwarded a copy also to the Secretary to the Marine Department, and also my views upon the matter, with a hope that I may stand a chance one way or the other. Trusting you will see your way to assist me in this matter, and that you will forgive my presumption in thus addressing you, I am, &c, T. C. Bayldon, Harbourmaster, Thames. James McGowan, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. Eeferred to Mr. Glasgow.— J. G. W., per W. C.—4/10/94.

Sic, — Harbourmaster's Office, Thames, 17th September, 1894. In answer to an advertisement in the Auckland Herald calling applications for the position of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, I take the liberty of sending you a printed copy of my various certificates and testimonials, and at once admit that I do not hold an extra master's certificate, simply because I have been barred from going up for that examination, and I think it a great hardship that this should bar my chance for the appointment. I have made several efforts, and communicated with your department on more than one occasion trying to get this bar removed in my case, without avail. Now, when an opening occurs, I find the pinch. In this appointment more is required than what is specified. A man who has a knowledge of surveying also is necessary. I have that, having served some years with my brother (D. H. Bayldon), a well-known engineer and surveyor, now in South Africa. I have also served under the Marine Department and Customs since the retirement of the Collector here in 1887, and I think some consideration in the shape of the postponement of the appointment to allow such as myself to compete might reasonably be afforded. I still am under the impression that a man like myself, who has been Harbourmaster and pilot, should be allowed the privilege of going up for this examination, as a pilot, at any rate, is as much in harness as the master of any ship. Where a man has only served an apprenticeship in the pilot-service, and so risen to be a pilot, I can understand him being debarred from trying to obtain an extra master's certificate, but in my case I held a certificate of competency before I obtained the position of Hafbourmaster and pilot here, and that is where I think the hardship comes in. If, however, the clause in the advertisement re extra master can be dispensed with, I then beg to tender my services for the appointment, and the enclosed copy of service, testimonials, and certificates can be backed by the originals, which I will forward if necessary. I hare, &c, T. C. Bayldon, Harbourmaster and Customs-waiter, H.M. Customs, Thames. W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17th instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon on that date. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain T. C. Bayldon, Harbourmaster, &c, Thames.

Hon. Minister. The regulations are very explicit, and it would be a dangerous precedent to make any exception in favour of any candidate for examination as extra master on. account of the absence of recent service .at sea. You are aware Captain Strang was debarred from examination on this ground. Captain Bayldon urges that his service as pilot should count, but the regulations stipulate for service at sea, and only allow pilot-service to count for home-trade masters' and foreign-trade first mates' certificates. As the Board of Trade accepts New Zealand certificates, we are in honour bound to insist on the regulations being carried out. As copies of applications are sent to the Board of Trade, a departure from the regulations would probably be noticed, and this might lead to withdrawal of

305

H.—26

the agreement to recognise New Zealand certificates. I think Captain Bayldon must be well aware of this. I cannot recommend the Government to entertain Captain Bayldon's suggestion that the qualification of extra master should be waived. 5/10/94. W. T. Glasgow. Eeply accordingly.— J. G. W.—6/10/94. James McGowan, No. 204-80, 9/10/94.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 9th October, 1894. With reference to Captain Bayldon's letter to you. of the 17th ultimo, in which he urges that he should be allowed to be examined for a certificate as extra master, so that he may be eligible to apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to this department, I have the honour to state that the regulations for the examination of masters and mates preclude his being examined for the certificate he desires, as he has not served at sea two years within the last six years, and six months within the last three years, service as pilot not being allowed to count as service at sea for an extra master's certificate. It is impossible to sanction a departure from the regulations, as our certificates are recognised as valid in the United Kingdom, on condition that our regulations are identical with those of the Board of Trade, and any departure from them might lead to the withdrawal of such recognition. I have, &c, James McGowan, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. J. G. Ward.

Sib, — Harbourmaster's Office, Thames, Bth October, 1894. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your memorandum of the 28th September, M. 94/1820, No. 86-80, in reply to mine of the 17th September, and I now formally apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner under the Marine Department, and enclose a printed copy of my certificates, &c. . I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. T. C. Batldon, Thames.

Sib, — Palmerston Buildings, Auckland, 17th September, 1894. In answer to the advertisement appearing in our local papers, I beg to apply for the appointment of Examiner of Masters and Mates and Nautical Adviser. I may state that, although you are aware from my papers you received some time ago that I do not hold a certificate as extra master, yet, if there be a chance of my obtaining the appointment, I would try and pass the examination here as extra master. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. M. T. Clayton.

Dbab Sir, — Palmerston Buildings, Auckland, 17th September, 1894. You will perceive that I have put in an application for the appointment at Wellington, but, as I hold a certificate for master ordinary—not extra —I suppose my application will not be considered. If you think there would be a chance if I tried to pass as extra master I will do so. lam told my age, sixty-three, would be against me. Is it the case? An answer would oblige. Yours, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Wellington. M. T. Clayton. P.S.—lf there be no chance, will you kindly burn my application?—M. T. C. Private.—Do not record.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17th instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon of that date. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain M. T. Clayton, Palmerston Buildings, Auckland.

Sib,— Palmerston Buildings, Auckland, 4th October, 1894. In answer to your letter of the 28th September, I have to thank you for receiving my application ; but, as the extended time will not be sufficient for me to work up the problem to pass as extra master, I have given up the idea. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. M. T. Clayton.

Sir, — House of Eepresentatives, 17th October, 1894. I understand that Captain Clayton, of Auckland, has applied for the position of Marine Superintendent. I have known Captain Clayton for over twenty years, and I consider that he is 39— H. 26.

H.—25.

in every way suitable for the position, and I feel satisfied that if he succeeds to the position he will perform his duties in every way satisfactory to the colony. Yours, &c., Hon. Minister of Marine. B. Mitchelson.

Ship " Oamaru," Wellington, 15th September, 1894. Eight Honoueable Gentlemen, — Seeing by an advertisement that the Marine Department are about to appoint a Nautical Adviser and Examiner, I beg to offer myself as an applicant, holding the qualifications required. Having passed for extra master at London last April at the first trial, I am well up in all the latest subjects—namely, deviation of the compass, and the practice of that useful instrument, Captain Beall's deviaseope (for illustrating the effect of iron on ship's compasses). At present am holding the position as chief officer of the " Oamaru," being thirty-one years old, and having been at sea thirteen years. I remain, &c, P.S. —I enclose my testimonials, &c. Arthub Evans.

This is to certify that Mr. A. Evans was chief officer of the Melanesian Mission vessel, the " Southern Cross," for six months, including the voyage from England to New Zealand. I always found him to be thoroughly industrious, sober, and trustworthy. I should have great pleasure in recommending him. Auckland, 15th March, 1892. James Bongard, Master.

This is to certify that the bearer, Mr. Arthur Evans, sailed with me as first mate from the 28th June, 1892, until the 2nd January, 1893. He joined the ship at Honoluu, and shipped as first mate in San Francisco. I discharged him in Queenstown, as the ship was laid up. I have always found him attentive to his duties, and very obedient and respectful. 8/2/93. Eoss Jenkins, Master, ship " Benmore," of Liverpool.

This is to certify that Mr. Evans sailed with me in the " Letterewe, "of Liverpool, on a voyage from London to Mauritius and South Australia and back to London, during which time I found him to be sober and steady, and attentive to his respective duties. I have therefore much pleasure of bearing this testimony to his character for a period of ten months. London Dock, 27/1/94. W. Gifford, Master, "Letterewe."

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 18th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 15th instant, in which you apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department; and in reply to state that your application will receive consideration, along with those of a similar nature, when the appointment is being made. I have, &c. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Arthur Evans, Chief Officer, ship " Oamaru, " Wellington.

Deab Sic, — Wellington, 21st November, 1894. As we shall most likely be leaving for England the early part of next week, I should like to know if anything has been decided on concerning the appointment as Nautical Adviser to the Government, as I should like that letter returned that was enclosed in the application before sailing. Yours, &c, A. Eyans, Chief Officer, " Oamaru." W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Marine Department. A. Evans, No. 576-80, 23/11/94.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 23rd November, 1894. Agreeably with the request contained in your letter of the 21st instant, I have the honour to return herewith the letter from Lieutenant Hamilton, which you forwarded with your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates to this department. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. A. Evans, Esq., Chief Officer, ship "Oamaru," Wellington.

Deae Sic, — Port Chalmers, 19th September, 1894. I am applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Examiner to the department, and I have taken the liberty of writing to you in the hope that you might put in a word for me. Hoping that you will pardon me for taking this liberty, I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow. Geo. Thomson, s.s. " Plucky." Certificate of Competency No. 534, Extra Examination, passed at Dunedin on the Ist May 1889.

306

307

H.—26

Sm r - Port Chalmers, 19fch September, 1894. I have the honour to apply to you for the position of Nautical Adviser and Examiner of Masters and Mates to the Marine Department. I herewith enclose copies of my certificates and testimonials, as required per advertisement. Hoping that my application will be favourably considered, I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Geo. Thomson.

Sib, —■ Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon on that date. I have, &c, Captain Geo. Thomson, Port Chalmers. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

S.S. " Wairarapa," Union Steam Ship Company, Sic,— Dunedin, 23rd September, 1894. In answer to your advertisement for an Examiner and Nautical Adviser, I beg to place before you my application for the position. I have been thireeen years in active command (ten of which on ocean-going steamers). I hold an extra master's certificate, and have passed in steam. My certificate is with the steamer's papers, and can be inspected at any time. I enclose statement of my sea-service and testimonials. Further testimonials will be forwarded from Auckland. I have, &c, The Minister of Marine, Wellington. J. L. Clack. Born in 1836; Board of Trade Extra Certificate No. 24223, issued 16/4/68; passed in steam at Bristol on 13/5/64; Commercial Code, 14/4/68.

National Insurance Buildings, 95, Queen Street, Sic,— Auckland, 24th September, 1894. I am directed by Captain J. L. Clark, of Auckland, who has made application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department, to forward you the three enclosed copy testimonials. Yours, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. W. Colbman, per E. W. C.

giE ; Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 23rd instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon of that date. I have, &c, Captain J. L. Clark, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. S.S. " Wairarapa," care of Union Steam Ship Company (Limited), Dunedin.

Magnetic Street, Port Chalmers, 22nd September, 1894. W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. I hebeby make application for the position of Nautical Adviser to Marine Department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. I hold certificate as " master extra," N.Z. 588, dated 20/11/88. Attached please find copy of testimonials and sea-service. I have, &c, Thomas Basiee. Where born, Port Chalmers; when born, 4th November, 1858 ; age next birthday, thirty-six.

g IE Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon of that date. I have, &c, W. T. Glasoow, Secretary. Mr. Thomas Basire, Magnetic Street, Port Chalmers.

Application re Nautical Adviser in the Public Service. —Name, Frederic William Cox ; age, thirtyone years; address, No. 148, Cuba Street, Wellington. g IB — 25th September, 1894. ; ; I have the honour to apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department at £400 per annum, and under the conditions as advertised in the local papers, and

H.—26

308

herewith enclose : (a) Certificate of competency as "extra master mariner" (No. 640), issued at Wellington sth June, 1890; (b) passed in steam at Wellington 21st September, 1894; (c) statement of service since going to sea; (d) certificates of discharge for the above service; (c) testimonials for ability, industry, sobriety, and general conduct. I have, &c, The Hon. Minister of Marine. ' F. W. Cox.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 25th instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until after the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon of that date. I have, &c, Captain F. W. Cox, 148, Cuba Street, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

W. and G. Turnbull and Co., Deae Sib, — Custom House Quay, Wellington, 12th September, 1894. The date advertised for receiving applications for the post of Nautical Adviser, &c, to the Government is the 26th instant, and on making inquiries I am told the examination for the extra master's certificate takes from five to six days here, thus leaving me only six days to prepare for what is really a feat of memory. This time for preparation is much too short, therefore I beg to request of you an extension of time for receiving applications for the post advertised for, say, three weeks later than the 26th instant. Hoping you can grant my request, and begging an early answer if possible, I remain, Yours, &c, D. FULLABTON, The Hon. J. G. Ward, Minister of Marine, Wellington. Master, " Oamaru." Referred to Mr. Glasgow.— J. G. Waed, per W. C—l 3/9/94. Hon. Mr. Ward, —I do not think it would be judicious to extend the time—at all events, at the instance of one candidate. If the reason became known, we might have many applications from other persons who have not at present " extra masters' " certificates, but who would apply if they thought they would be allowed time to pass. All should be put on the same footing.— W. T. Glasgow. Mr. Glasgow,—Sorry time cannot be extended. Eeply accordingly.— J. G. Waed.—ls/9/94.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 18th September, 1894. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, in which you ask that the time for receiving applications for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department may be extended for three weeks beyond the 26th instant; and in reply I am to state that the Government regret that they do not see their way to make any extension of the time. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain D. Fullarton, Master, ship " Oamaru," care of Messrs. W. and G. Turnbull and Co., Wellington.

Deae Sic,— 24th September, 1894. I beg respectfully to apply for the post of Nautical Adviser to the department and Chief Examiner of Master and Mates, in accordance with the advertisement dated from the Marine Department, Wellington, Ist September, 1894. I hold the certificate master ordinary, but could easily obtain the certificate as master extra had I a few more days at my disposal. lam iortyseven years of age, and have been engaged in the Glasgow-London and New Zealand trade since 1866, and (except two years as an officer in the same company's steamers trading to India) have been master in this trade since November, 1876. Enclosed please find testimonials from the marine superintendents of the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company (Limited). Trusting this application will meet with the esteemed approval of the Marine Board. I remain, &c, D. Fullabton, Master, ship " Oamaru." W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand. Captain Babot has known me only since he assumed the position of marine superintendent of this company here in 1884.—D. Fullaeton. Original—Please return. —D. F.

Dear Sir, — Marine Superintendent's Office, Wellington, 24th September, 1894. In response to your request, I have much pleasure in stating that I have known you intimately as a commander in our company's vessels since the end of 1884, at which time you commanded the ship "Timaru," and can testify to your competence and general knowledge of everything appertaining to the duties of a shipmaster both at sea and on land, and consider you

309

H.—26

well fitted to carry out the duties of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner, for which post I understand you are applying, and wish you success. Yours, &c, Edwin S. Babot, Marine Superintendent, Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company (Limited). Captain Fullarton, ship " Oamaru."

This is to certify that the bearer, Captain Fullarton, of the ship " Oamaru," and I have been in the same service for the last twenty years, eighteen years of which time he has been in command of the company's ships; that his character for ability and conduct during all that time, to my certaia knowledge, has been of the best description, and that therefore I have no hesitation in recommending him as a suitable man for a Nautical Adviser in everything connected with the mercantile marine. H. Andbeson, Marine Superintendent, Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company (Limited.) Lyttelton, 17th September, 1894.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 28th September, 1894. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th instant, applying for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, and to state that the appointment will not be made until the 17th proximo, as the time for receiving applications has been extended up to noon of that date. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain D. Fullarton, Master, ship " Oamaru," Wellington.

Deae Sib,— Ship " Oamaru," 29th September, 1894. Many thanks for the notice you sent re postponement of the date of receiving applications for the post of Nautical Adviser, &c, to the Government. I am very sorry the Marine Board could not have seen their way to extend the period for receiving applications when I requested it, as, on being told that they could not see their way to do so, I slacked off in preparation, as the greater part of the examination is purely a matter of committing to memory of a certain formula; and now the time is too short, as the smallest error, even to the acquiring the ship's position beyond 2" in error, means failure. I have to thank you very much for your courtesy, but, as the time is too limited to acquire the certificate you desire, my application must stand or fall on the ordinary certificate, though the extra's work is fairly familiar to me. Thanking you, • I remain, &c., The Hon. J. G. Ward, Minister of Marine. D. Fullaeton. Mr. Glasgow.— J. G. Waed, per W. C—lo/10/94.

Deae Sic, — Ship " Oamaru," Wellington, 20th November, 1894. As the ship " Oamaru " is filling up very fast, and the ship's agents state they can, and intend to, despatch the ship on the 26th or the 27th instant, may I respectfully request you to return to me the testimonials that I sent in with my application for the post of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates ? These testimonials may be useful to me on some future occasion, and if you will please accept of copies of them and return the originals you will confer a favour on Yours, &c, The Hon. J. &. Ward, Minister of Marine. D. Fullaeton. Original—Please return.—D. Fullaeton. I may state that in writing for this reference I omitted to mention the examinership, so that Captain Anderson has not mentioned it. Mr. Glasgow,—Please do as requested herein.— J. G. Waed, per W. C.—2l/11/94. Captain D. Fullarton, No. 575-80, M. 94/1820, 23/11/94.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 23rd November, 1894. Agreeably with the request contained in your letter of the 20th instant, I have the honour to return herewith the testimonials from Captains Babot and Anderson, which you forwarded with your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates to this department. I have, &c, Captain D. Fullarton, ship " Oamaru," Wellington. . W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

S.S. " Aorangi," Wellington, Ist October, 1894. I have the honour to offer myself as a candidate for the post of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, and enclose detailed account of my sea-service and copy of testimonial.

It.--26

March, 1870 : Entered as a cadet on board the Thames Marine Officers' Training-ship H.M.S. " Worcester." After completing two years' service in that ship, left in possession of a first-class certificate (this certificate is at the present time in England). May, 1872: Joined the firm of D. Currie and Co. as an apprentice, and remained in that service till December, 1884. I then joined the New Zealand Shipping Company's service as chief officer, and at the present time, and for the last eight years, I have had command of the s.s. " Aorangi."! In making this application with the ordinary master's certificate, which was obtained in London, May, 1882, I trust that you will take into consideration my service on the training-ship "Worcester." Cadets there are thoroughly taught the theory and practical part of navigation and astronomy, &c, and the certificate presented to the cadet on leaving that ship is quite equal in merit to the extra master's certificate advertised as required, and which constant employment at sea has not given me the opportunity of possessing. Should this application be successful, I beg to inform you it will be necessary for me to take the " Aorangi " back to London. I have, &c, The Minister of Marine for the New Zealand Government. J. A. Sutcliffe.

Sib, — Ponsonby Terrace, Auckland, 4th October, 1894. In reply to your advertisement in the Auckland papers, I beg to offer myself as a candidate. I have not an extra master's certificate, as you will see, but will guarantee to pass the extra master's examination within six months. lam thirty-two years of age, and I left my last vessel for employment offered me here in Auckland. I enclose copies of references for past eight years; previous references (from 1877) I have unfortunately lost. I have the original of the latest one only with me; the others are in London, but I can send for them if necessary. Trusting to receive your consideration, I remain, &c, Thomas Munday. Private references from gentlemen in the colony if required. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

Sib, — Invercargill, 12th October, 1894. A respected friend of the writer's is sending in an application to the Marine Department for the position of Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, &c. I refer to Captain Strang, of Wellington, and from my personal knowledge of that gentleman I feel sure that when he seeks after a position of responsibility he sees his way clearly to carry out all the various details and duties pertaining to the position in a thorough and efficient manner, whilst his genial and kindly manner would at all times commend themselves to whoever he had occasion to come into contact with. If, therefore, sir, you can see your way to favourably consider the application of Captain Strang, such an act on your part would be received by the writer as a great favour conferred upon himself. Yours, &c, Hon. J. G. Ward, Wellington. Jos. Johnson. Mr. Glasgow,—Attach to file.— J. G. Ward.—3/11/94.

Sir,— Wellington, 15th October, 1894. I sent in an application for the position of Nautical Adviser on the 25th September, praying for an extension of time to allow me to go up to pass for extra master. Your Hon. Ministers very graciously granted an extension, but when I made inquiries about passing I was told that, according to an Imperial regulation, I was debarred from passing for extra master, through not having been to sea for a period of six months during the last two years. I think, sir, in a case of this sort such a rule is very hard, for, although I have not been to sea during 4he last two years, I have been doing such work and have gained such experience as would help to qualify me for the position of Nautical Adviser, and, this regulation being only a time-limit, it does not in the least affect my ability as to qualify myself to be able to pass. It would almost appear as if my having been promoted so early in my career to a shore billet (a position to which 90 per cent, of shipmasters aspire to sooner or later) was to be a bar against my rising to the very top of my profession; and I would graciously beg your Hon. Ministers to look at my case in this way : that, although my not being at sea does not allow me to pass, it does not in the least hinder me from being able and fit to do so. During these same two years I have attended every nautical inquiry that has been held in Wellington, and, being a practical sailor, I believe I know the weak points of such investigations better than any Magistrate or lawyer in New Zealand. I passed my examination for master ordinary in London, and when I passed the Examiner complimented me on having passed with very great credit, and said he would have an indorsement to that effect placed on the Board of Trade Eegister. . I am well acquainted with every port in New Zealand (with the exception of Hokianga and Kaipara), and I have been on shore at every boat-landing on the East Coast, and am in touch with the whole work of the department. To show the foundation of my educational abilities, I may say that I was a scholarship boy in the High School of Glasgow, and while there I distinguished myself by carrying off the Lumsden gold medal for mathematics as the best mathematical scholar for the year 1867; and I might here say mathematics is the root and key to all navigational problems.

310

311

H.—26

I served my apprenticeship with the Albion Shipping Company, better known as Messrs. T. Henderson and Co., of Glasgow, and, with no other influence than the good wishes of the different captains I sailed under, I was gradually promoted through the different grades of third mate, second mate, first mate, and master ; and to show the confidence my owners had in me I was appointed to the command of a new ship just off the stocks, the " Lyttelton," before I was ten years at sea. In the year 1882 the Albion Shipping Company and the Shaw, Savill Company became amalgamated, and I sailed under the new flag, as will be seen by my reference from Mr. Walter Savill, for nearly two years. My experience when in command of the " Lyttelton " was pretty well all over the world, and I took Home successfully two of the very early cargoes of frozen mutton when the trade was in its infancy, and when a great deal depended upon the care and ability of the master, the appliances in those days not having reached the state of perfection they are in at present. In 18841 resigned from the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company, and was promoted to the command of one of the Union Company's steamers, which I brought out from Home, my wife and family following a few months later to settle in the colony. After being a short time on the Coast I received a shore appointment in Dunedin, and two years afterwards was promoted to Wellington as local marine superintendent. When resident in Dunedin I taught navigation in the evenings, and instructed about a dozen of the captains at present in command of the Union Company's steamers, some of them being now in command of large intercolonial boats. Since I have been in Wellington I have adjusted the compasses (to the satisfaction of the Marine Department) of nearly every one of the Union Company's fleet which passes through this port. During the time I have been on shore I have been confronted with all sorts of shipping and nautical matters, and have gained such an experience in this way as very seldom comes within the reach of masters who are always afloat. lam forty-four years of age, have had experience in wooden as well as iron ships, have commanded sailing-ships and steamers, and, my present employment being the practical side of the business, I am not afraid to tackle any sort of practical work that may come before your department; and should your Hon. Ministers see their way to waive the actual possession of an extra master's certificate in favour of my being able to do extra master's work, and should they give my application their favourable consideration, I will guarantee to qualify myself to do the work and do my utmost to fill the position with credit and honour to them and the country. I have, &c, The Secretary for Marine. Robeet Steang.

The Shipmasters' Association of New Zealand, Sic,— Wellington, 15th October, 1894. In reference to the advertisement which appeared in the daily papers, I beg to apply for the appointment of Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department. As to my qualification for the office, I may at once state that I do not possess a certificate as master extra. However, I submit that my long service in the New Zealand trade might have weight as against this special qualification. As to my services, for thirty-six years I have commanded both steam- and sailing-vessels in the coastal, foreign, and intercolonial trades, and during this time I have never had any serious casualty. I have a thorough knowledge of the coast of New Zealand, and of all matters having reference to both seamanship and navigation, and, should I be appointed, will, I believe, be able to carry out my duties to your satisfaction. I am, &c, The Hon. the Minister in charge of Marine Department. E. Wheelee. P.S.—I hold a Board of Trade Master's Certificate since 1858.

Sic,— Ship " Pleione," Wellington, 16th October, 1894. I beg to offer myself as a candidate for the position of Examiner of Masters, &c, under your Board. I have now been fifteen years with the Shaw, Savill, and Albion Company—first five years as second mate and chief mate of the ship "Halcione"; second five years, master of the barque "Glenlora"; third five years, master of the above ship; and, should my application be entertained, I would refer you to Messrs. Levin and Co., or to W. and G. Turnbull, or Captain Babot, our superintendent here. I may say I passed all my examinations in London—my master's examination before Captain Sterry on the 23rd October, 1883, obtaining command on my arrival out here in April, 1884. I may say I have had no accidents of any serious nature happen to me in my career. Trusting my application will receive your consideration, I remain, &c, Alfbed H. Saegent, Master, ship " Pleione." The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. The number of certificate, 04546. Captain Sargent states that his certificate is an ordinary master's.—G. A.—lB/10/94.

Deae Sib,— Ship " Pleione," Wellington, 17th October, 1894. I am in receipt of your memorandum of this date, and in reply state that my certificate is an ordinary master's, and I have passed all my examinations the first time. Thanking you for your memorandum, Yours, &c, The Chief Clerk, Marine Department, Wellington. AlfeEd H. Saegent.

JEL— 26

312

Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. Hon. Minister. I submit herewith the applications received for the position of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates. The advertisement was as follows :— [Boyal Arms.] Marine Department, Wellington, Ist September, 1894. Applications will be received at this office up to noon of Wednesday, the 26th September, 1894, for the appointment of Nautical Advisor to the department and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, at a salary of four hundred pounds (£400) per annum. The suooeasful applioant will be required to perform all euoh duties in connection with the Marine Department as may from time to time be determined on. Applications must be accompanied with a statement of the applicant's servicje at sea and oopies of certificates and testimonials, and no application can be entertained from any person who does not hold a certificate of competency as master extra. By command. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. N.B.—Time was extended to 17th October, 1894. There are seventeen applicants. Of these, ten do not possess the qualification stipulated for, —viz., extra master's certificate. Captain Strang, who is among the ten, appears to be very well qualified for the position in all other respects. I think, however, that it will be admitted that the Chief Examiner must have the highest certificate obtainable if the certificates issued in New Zealand are to command the confidence and respect of the Board of Trade and the other colonies. If the proposal to waive this qualification were entertained, I submit that the claims of Captain Edwin and Sir Arthur Douglas should have consideration. Of the seven candidates who are possessed of extra master's certificates, the best, in my judgment, appear to be Captain J. A. H. Marciel and Captain G. yon Schoen. The former has been nine years in the P. and O. service, is thirty-five years of age, has excellent testimonials, and, educationally, appears to be a man of superior status. Captain Yon Schoen has also good testimonials, and would no doubt be a competent Examiner. I have seen both these gentlemen, and I am of opinion that the appointment of Captain Marciel would be most advantageous to the department. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Marine Department, Wellington, 18th October, 1894. Eefer to Cabinet.— J. G. Waed.—22/10/94. Eeferred.—24/10/94.—W. T. G. In Cabinet, 24th- October, 1894.—Stand over for one month.—A. Willis, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 13th September, 1894. Applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c.: — No. la, Lieutenant C. S. Broome, E.N.; No. 2a, A. Kennedy; No. 1, J. A. H. Marciel, No. 790-79, 14/9/94 (see M. 93/284, attached); No. 2, G. yon Schoen, No. 801-79, 14/9/94; No. 3, G. Allman, No. 826-79, 18/9/94; No. 4, A. Evans, No. 827-79, 18/9/94; No. 5, G. N. Thomson, No. 84-80, 28/9/94; No. 6, J. L. Clark, No. 85-80, 28/9/94; No. 7, Eobert Strang; No. 8, T. C. Bayldon, No. 86-80, 28/9/94 (reply attached); No. 9, M. T. Clayton, No. 87-80, 28/9/94; No. 10, D. Fullarton, No. 88-80, 28/9/94; No. 11, Frederick William Cox, No. 89-80, 28/9/94; No. 12, Thomas Basire, No. 90-80, 28/9/94 ; No. 13, Thomas Munday; No. 14, E. Wheeler; No. 15, Alfred H. Sargent. Captain Strang's application and papers delivered to him, as he stated he wished to withdraw it, as he could not go up for extra master's certificate. G. A. 28/9/94. Application removed, and papers attached.—J. G.—ls/10/94.

Marine Department, Wellington, 22nd August, 1894. Applications for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c. : — No. 1, Captain George Allman, No. 599-79, 27/8/94 ; No. 2, Lieutenant C. S. Broome, E.N., No 598-79, 27/8/94; No. 3, Captain A. Kennedy, No. 601-79, 27/8/94; No. 4, Captain Yon Schoen, No. 600-79, 27/8/94; James Mills, No. 644-79, 29/8/94.

Candidates for appointment as Nautical Adviser, &c, holding certificates as master extra :— No. 1, J. A. H. Marciel, aged thirty-five years, No. 866-80, 19/12/94; No. 2, G. yon Schoen, aged forty-three years, No. 867-80, 19/12/94; No. 4, Arthur Evans, aged thirty-one years, No. 869-80, 19/12/94; No. 5, George U. Thomson, aged forty-one years, No. 868-80, 19/12/94 ; No. 6, J. L. Clark, aged fifty-eight years, No. 870-80, 19/12/94; No. 11, Frederick William Cox, aged thirty-six years, No. 871-80, 19/12/94; No. 12, Thomas Basire, aged thirty-six years, No. 872-80, 19/12/94. In Cabinet, 23rd November, 1894.—Eeferred to Hon. Mr. Ward.—A. Willis, Secretary.

Candidates for appointment as Nautical Advisers, &c, holding certificates as " masters ordinary," &c.:— No. lα, Lieutenant C. S. Broome, E.N., No. 882-80,19/12/94 ; No. 2a, A. Kennedy, aged sixtyfour years, No. 881-80, 19/12/94 ; No. 3, G. Allman, aged forty-four years; No. 7, E. Strang, aged

313

H.—26

forty-four years, No. 880-80, 19/12/94; No. 8, T. C. Bayldon, aged forty-five years, No. 879-80, 19/12/94; No. 9, M. T. Clayton, aged sixty-three years, No. 878-80, 19/12/94; No. 10, D. Fullarton, aged forty-seven years, No. 877-80, 19/12/94; No. 13, Thomas Munday, aged thirtytwo years, No. 876-80, 19/12/94; No. 14, E. Wheeler, No. 875-80, 19/12/94; No. 15, Alfred H. Sargent, No. 874-80, 19/12/94 ; No. 16, J. A. Sutcliffe, No. 873-80; 19/12/94.

Telegrams. Secretary Marine Department, Wellington. Wellington, 24th October, 1894, Understand Nautical Adviser is appointed. Post my papers here. F. W. Cox, Assistant Harbourmaster, Westport. F. W. Cox, No. 300-80, 25/10/94.

Mr. F. W. Cox, Harbour Office, Westport. Wellington, 25th October, 1894. Nautical Advisee not yet appointed. W. T. Glasgow.

W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Customs, Wellington. Wellington, 27th October, 1894. Be Nautical Adviser: It was resolved to hold applications over for a month. J. G. Waed, Invercargill.

Deae Sib,— Colonial Treasurer's Office, Wellington, 24th November, 1894. In reference to your application for the position of Nautical Adviser, I desire to inform you that, subject to your obtaining the extra master's certificate, which was a condition when the position was advertised for, the position will be conferred upon you. I should be pleased to learn that you have obtained the necessary qualification. When this has been done I will then confirm the appointment. The time to which this remains open for you is until the end of the current year. Yours, &c, Captain Allman, s.s. " Eotomahana," Wellington. J. G. Waed. Mr. Glasgow.— J. G. Waed.—24/11/94. Hon. Minister, —Please state date from which pay will commence. From date on which Captain Allman commences duty ?—W. T. Glasgow.—lB/12/94, From 19th December, 1894. —J. G. Waed.—2o/12/94. Referred to Secretary to the Treasury and to Controller and Auditor-General.—W. T, Glasgow.—24/12/94. Seen.— J as. B. Heywood.—26th December, 1894. Noted.— J. C. Gavin, A.C. and A.—lB/1/95.

Appointment of Nautical Adviser. Hon. Minister. With reference to Captain Allman's conditional appointment, I shall be glad to know whether you have any objection to its being made public. lam constantly being asked by reporters as to what has been done. I also wish to know what should be done with the testimonials of the other applicants. I would suggest that a letter be written to each stating that the appointment will not be finally made until next month, but that the testimonials are returned in case their retention should cause inconvenience. W, T. Glasgow. 26th November, 1894. Mr. Glasgow,—Nothing is to be given out in the meantime. Wait till matter settled.— J. G. Waed.—26/11/94. Captain G. Allman, No. 893-80.—20/12/94.

(Telegram.) Wellington, Bth December, 1894. W. T. Glasgow, Esq., Secretary, Customs, Wellington. Captain Allman has obtained extra master's certificate. Have necessary Order in Council prepared appointing him. J. G. Waed, New Plymouth.

Nautical Adviser to Marine Department, &c, appointed. Marine Department, Wellington, 17th December, 1894. It is hereby notified that, in pursuance and exercise of the power and authority vested by " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," Geoegb Allman has been appointed Nautical Adviser to the Marine Department, Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, and an Inspector and Surveyor under the said Act. J. G. Waed. 40— H. 26.

H.—26

314

Sir, — , Marine Department, Wellington, 20th December, 1894. Adverting to the Minister's letter of the 24th ultimo, I have the honour, by his direction, to inform you that, as you have obtained a certificate as master extra, your appointment as Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department has been confirmed, and that your salary, at the rate of £400 a year, will date from the 19th instant. I enclose your warrant of appointment. I have, &c, Captain George Allman, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

21st December, 1894. The Commissioner, Government Life Insurance Department, Wellington. I have to inform you that George Allman, aged forty-four years, has been appointed Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department at a salary of £400 per annum, and I presume that you will take the necessary steps under " The Civil Service Insurance Act, 1893," in his case. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chiet Examiner of Masters and Mates, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &c, Captain J. A. H. Marciel, Dallington, Christchurch. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sic, — . Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &c, Captain G. yon Schoen, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. . . . I have, &c, Captain George Thomson, Port Chalmers. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sic,— . Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred on Captain Allman. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Mr. A. Evans, Chief Officer, ship " Oamaru," Wellington.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser arid Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Mr. J. L. Clark, care of Union Steam Ship Co. (Limited), Dunedin.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the. honour, by direction of.the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred on Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers and certificate. I have, &c, Captain F. W. Cox, Assistant Harbourmaster, Westport. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &C, Mr. Thomas Basire, Magnetic Street, Port Chalmers. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

315

H.—26

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your, application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour,, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I .return herewith your papers. I have, &c, Captain. J. A. Sutcliffe, s.s. " Aorangi," Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, .1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this deparment, I have the honour, by direction: of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I have, &c, Captain A. H. Sargent, ship "Pleione," Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sik, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred on Captain Allman. I have, &c, Captain E. Wheeler, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates, in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain Thomas Munday, Ponsonby Terrace, Auckland,

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I have, &c, Captain D. Fullarton, ship " Oamaru," Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Captain M. T. Clayton, Palmerston Buildings, Auckland.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers. I have, &c, Captain T. C. Bayldon, Harbourmaster, &c, Thames. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

g IE) Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers and certificates. I have, &c, Captain E. Strang, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

g IE; Marine Department, Wellington, 19th December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I return herewith your papers and certificates. I have, &c, Captain A. Kennedy, Park Street, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

g IE Marine Department, Wellington, 19fch December, 1894. With reference to your application for the appointment of Nautical Adviser and Chief Examiner of Masters and Mates in this department, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that the appointment has been conferred upon Captain Allman. I have, &c, Lieutenant G. S. Broome, E.N., Tasman Street, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow.

H.—26

316

EXHIBIT L. Dbab Sic, — Trinity House, Hill Street, Wellington, 10th September, 1897. I have been waiting for you since last Thursday week, on which day you left the •' Takapuna" to take your place (as contracted upon between you and me) at the Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Wellington. I have received official information upon which I will not enlarge. Suffice for me to say " that I think you will serve your interests most" by calling at Trinity House, in Hill Street, tomorrow (Saturday) afternoon, at half-past three o'clock. I shall stay in for that purpose. Yours truly, Mr. Hood, Princes Street. Yon Schoen.

EXHIBIT M. Dear Mb. Hislop,— Premier's Office, Wellington, 12th July, 1899. I shall be glad if you will be at the City Council Chambers at ten minutes to 11 o'clock tomorrow morning. Yours, &c, E. J. Seddon. A. E. Hislop, Esq., Secretary Marine Engineers' Association, Wellington.

EXHIBIT N. of James Jones's examination papers; see insets.]

/fit 4M*~*~~-<s-J J &*6Zm>t~' 4&U<P>««*4 On Public Service Only. «ffi« »f llintsttr for fnWit Sftoike, » / * // WELIiINGTON.

fjfiTTJlyL" *&

Ml' ittvuuj **w ■for /*-*.** &/*J<Af

- "!^_ KRnMmSIFvAIIPETtNCY- AS MASTER OR I ° 11 'Bk 1» j**r . Nowe.*-2%« 6e obUiigfatttatty Mercantile Marine Offltd, froe of charge. Divisions (A.), (B.), (0.), (D.), (B.), and \ Pep«/are!wJ«isli«? miri« Applicant for Examination and handed to the Examiners, with his Testimonials, and \ \§!*|3S' firmer CtrtiflcolL i/Wll- Ko r<rfiim&mmv or gratuity whoAwer mmt be offered to or received by any officers or servants of the O Ooverniient bcyoixi'*jmjfees mentioned Regulations. Any officer, messenger, ojAermmt of the Government who accepts any presenaar gratuitjfifShl be immeaßjt&u discharged from hW~office, and any Gandfc&tte so offering money will be subject to the a Isstobb TOiDBB penaliy mentioned wtfpar. IZ« at the bqgc ct this Form. /I /<L+-cs * l The 81iip|uiigM^ ( Before fitting in tkejcJJM&red particulars the Applicant should read iarefwly the Notice on pages 3 and 4. ir /- / A rV \ fat i,. » Z/,/<i 9 J

(A.)-Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.)-Particulars of all previous Certificates (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.)-Certificate now required.

(D.)-If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If he has not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

Bedaratioa *» fee atasillf by AutpHeaisL

I-Ti-EE >;0"' T C' ;;i * '-5T person who makes, procures to be made, or assists in making, any fftlse reprcsentafcioa for the purpose of obtaining for hitosell oj; any'ather person a Gsrtifioae eiisboi of Gompetency or Serrioe, is for each ofieaoe liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour.

% "Sβ te&2 bixlait that the particulars contained in Divisions (A.), (B.), (C), (D.), and (G-.) of this oorrect and true to the* best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPEES enumerated i Division (G-.) and sent with this -Eorm are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the arsons whose names appear on them. I farther declare that the Statement (G\) contains a true and ■orrect aoooant of th/ whole of my services without exception. /*\ And-I make the same/obi tvny *^^ dayof 189 7 * Signed in the presence of thff Superintendent of the Mercanti|ejaarine / /'''U' s*k r -~<, /~/r -if Signature / / Present address. 4F4~Super£in*enden3 to p -. ?/I ■ms signed insn" presence,.and £,/ , received day of 189 7 r\ \A i?uparinteudusnt.

GEristii in Names at full lei a..-' Surname. Permanent Address, stating Town, Street, and Number of Hoi Name of Person (if any) with whom residing. y\ . 3 , 1 a / / i^rmA 7X-* S7l> (L Date of Bii Where born. Day. Month. 6 A "/ Year. „ 6 Town. 1 luntry. 8 *J \&*\

■ T •*>- \- _« " Competency," " Service," or »,i_x_ex. "IS.N.B." now or formerly. «- _.. _1 _ _br "Fore-and-Aft'or I .«-,,_, Grade. " Square " Eigged Vessels, or ZunuS other Class of Vessel. i~.ne_. jtt L 13 , __ 13 Date of fssue. H If at any time suspended or c&neelled, Btate by what Court or Authority. 15 Date. 16 Cause. 17 "J//I

i ' I Grada--18 ~—" 11 ——" •} — l?or "Fore-and-Aft" or "Square"Bigged f if Vessel*. /jf 19 M * T&crciymlt Marine Offloi to which it is to be sent. h/m C_-_ f.j_ wmii iM—iTii~i-ir-iirft»*-nri ""• '•"■•*'

f 1 f Dbv. Month ! Year. . g ft a^sWSlfc-L i xTV R_M_3-0y*K-fs&^ i Port. _ubject_Jn which he failed. ■ _ J»

-r a- z*~~?~rZU*- A^ c o .£ iCW^ c

(H.)-Certificate of Examiner.

(I.)—Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit jj£«bg ttriifjr that the particulars contained in Division (H.) aiv . This Form and the TestimoniajOfe forwarded to the Secretary, " Dated this / y? day of To the Secretary, M * <*?.£ Well.

it Sea. (The Testii 'olumn 2t :,S IfSei riee on board Ship Servii le of Applican 9 g _) 8 B o. d S5 as Ship's Name. Port of Begistry and § 2 3 5 a <D s a 0 o "3 n 32 a o _ .2 .. o I 33 Timi intl iemp] lis Sei Loved rvice. i o g 3 ■•§ 1 .s 2 ■a 88 39 P I r Big. 87 § o Official No. of Ship. _ 84 I 86 & a 38 30 29 37 fly**. _ «. O -^/ u ,3« '^J7trTty i # j %^0fyv»**~* . ijtjst jl/h li/n /yl\ i a. f 1 'j> * ,J/ /7 n/wit**~. ?/L/fy.r /* » I _? 4< '4 3 t. ■ *°n1 y* w - IM It m __ ► §*. yit{ *. 'h 7#^ / // pa v -I T< Time served for which Certi >tal Service at Sea .. iScates are now produced srtificates are produced _> 6 0 _ n * -' 1 Time served for which no C< 0

Note.— The Examiners sh&uldfill up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward this paper to tlie Secretary, Marine Dj partment, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sent with this paper to the Secretary, Man Department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the office named in Division (C), Column 20. Date and Place of Examination. Insert " Passed " or " Failed " in each Column. Sate. Please. Colour Test. Navigation. Seamanship. II Jaiieain Seamanship, state how| much further Ssa Service (if any) must be performed. 45 Hank for which, passed.. 46 40 41 42 43 44 W/f-Z>f> /txai.% fc£i>~n-<*2t-dxL^&t-

Feet. 47 Height. Inches. 4S Complexion. _49 Complexion. 49 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 SafrS£*f-*s «*** y^ Hair. 51 c lair. 61 6r Colour of dolour of r_ Eyes. S- SdiiS' - I 7

i I| S \f V <T7s - >ir " Vf -" >*- V** -as* **U* l^ill HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS. If si I "I A Vf *> jf<v *v %&j*i? t j jjv —• ■*» '-- Mt i&jte^fi

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE WHEN APBEABING FOE d , EXAMINATION for the Fis>s£ Time only. J ft*—*. *— PAPER TO TEST READING AND WRITING. \ j K*^e~^

1. The Candidate must read about twenty lines taken from the Begulatioas for Preventing Collisions at Sea. The portion is to be selected by the Examiner and varied from time to time. 2. Having read an extract as above, the Candidate is to copy hereunder as much of it as will fill the blank lines ruled below; he should then sign his name at the foot of the page, ._ _ ... -..- ; .-. . , r*r*fr « -—- — i: _ Signature of Candidate u^fcg , 1594-96] '^ff

2W s <m HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS. EXAMINATION PAPEE TO BE USED A CANDIDATE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE. At the above Port, this day of , 188 1. Express in figures— <£*C 4&>~>~? «gg<L &&&

2.—Add the following quantities together:— Z£lJlk£JL - E£ll.. ZJL&jjkSLZ. Etlll. MIIIZ.. JIIZZz. /ZIM2. I tl. B.fjZ£. 1...,.i.Z.ZZ./ "SEIZA (9H I 6 I Amwr - JifYC.Y ? f Aoswer

3. —Subtract as follows :—- -if itj> f' Acsv '! r is? y? fjf A ° swer - From. ./T.4;-J~a?.}.'.A vr<,m....it£,<k:...<>>..Jr..<*r. Take IJL&Z r . = Z£.J:.A.?..

The Candidate should sign his name at the foot of the last page.

EXAMINATION .FOB A MATE—pmHnued,

4.-^-Maltiplioation:—* Multiply gjS/'g4? by / Multiply /^^d?

s.—Drvision :—• Signature of Candidate -'^^^^^^I^J^2^£__ -©*<»•• / y / , _ , , ot_. „

Exn. 9F. •? HOME-TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS. EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOE A CEBTIPIGATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE. [All Candidates for Certificates of Competency for Home-trade Passenger Ships will be required to work out the following in addition to the questions on the Paper Exn. 9e.]

1 .—-Add together the following quantities : — £ 8. d. Tons cwt. qr. lb. /£_ *....&„ .:.'.. < ; &....>,. 5...>f../.z...i7f /£...* <£....*......£ • ../....*.....%..?..&..'<.:/ ......./V ....Q....;> Z...... ....&..r..;.&X~/~%^ (j / » ft/ • c . Answer. * y * •*** * Jmswer".

2.—Subtract the folldwing quantities :■ — & s. d. Tons ewt. qr. lb. #.&....«..:£:..„«. 4>...... \/Zjg..*..j£s:£:.*£. 2.a..:....2. I^IZz^IIZz -J-*- - —yrr O~ 9 -A £/ • <£/ • /J Answer. f <S Answer.

P>. —Multiply the following quantities by__._2L____ £ s. d. Tons cwt. qr. lb, ♦ 2 » •?...6.M..f£.:*../..:f..:.G,. :.zz:::: ; ::iir

4. —Divide the following quantities by_ ~t!l_ „ . . & s. d. Tons ewt. qr. lb, ~ZA /,.Z. .3.. • ........^.P.,.«y.d......<?.,'r..,£.. Af > « Z Answer. "

Signature of Candidate: jfcfri'fi&i /^^j^lt

1 Jq) y~ « Exn. 9q. 1 — J Port HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

£ / . In Longitude <£? f< , £> *r'O If the observed meridian altitude of the sun's lower limb were y^^ , * £? * t cz> bearing , index error tf „ to &£fez- _ , height of eye /Q feet: required the latitude. 7/f , c>. & ~/// • / o • y o Signature of Candidate J/Cfclty}

1 " 1 J ®

Examination for a Master-— continued.

-^_: .'. _.__ . j .q. '. DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS. [The Applicant must answer in. writing, on paper given him by the Examiner, all the following questions, numbering his answers to correspond With the numbers of the questions.]

1. —When taking a meridian altitude, how do you know when the buu is on the meridian; or, in other words, when it is noon? 2. —How does the sun bear when on the meridian of an observer in these latitudes (home trade limits) ? B—What do you mean by deviation of the compass, and how is it caused ? 4. —Having determined the deviation, how do you knew when it is Easterly and when Westerly? 5. —Supposing the sun when on the meridian bore by your compass Sγ <££* what would be the deviation of that compass for thejdirection of the ship's head at the time, the variation given on the chart being f *i!?~P~>*t*'7''£~~ 6.—How could you find the deviation of your compass when in port, or when sailing along a coast '1 7. —Name some suitable objects by which you could readily obtain the deviation of your compass, when sailiug along the coasts or a channel you have been accustomed to use ? 8. —The bearing of two objects when in a line with each other was found on the chart to \*&/Y &*/£■ <£e=» magnetic; but when brought in a line on board they bore yy Z£ /?. <ZL -,-' "»"" y /•=* by your compass : required the deviation 6f your compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time ? 9. —What means are there for checking the deviation of your compass by night ? 10. Supposing the North Star {Polaris} bore % your compass, what would be the deviation (approximately) of that comjjass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, supposing the variation given oa the chart.to be /£/ -'C^-c.^^pl — -y*!~ 11. —Do you expect the deviation to change; if so, state under what circumstances '( 12. —What is meant by variation of the compass, and what is the cause of it ? Signature <>/ Candidate : Data :

•9 s . *y\ .. <r*- CfO-fjt/Ct>3 <rrtfi-. ~fcnA—> -itnsf'A* &6C&t>r

r J 14MJ ■

Port ...

flotation No.

Exn. 9c.

■—->»...I —— \ y ' 6

EXAMINATION IN CHART FOB ALL GRADEB WHERE THE CHART IS USED.

[The Candidate will be required to worn.-out the following questions on either * " true "or "magnetio " chart, whichever may be handed to him by the Examiner; and also determine whether i&a chart is c, true or magnetic one, and whether it is tot the northern or southern, and eastern or western hemisphere.}

(1.) Using deviation card No.„__£_.._-, find the course to steer by compass from £Z&A 4# ; also the distance. <d^*£^£^2~j>, Aα a y ~, Answer.—Compass course j£^~*~ '/?U-C.//%,'fag- L?r ~-—' ' "--"-—»-> Distance:_ &/'^ti&^^i^^^^c Variation: JJ/ a Deviation: (2.) "With the ship's head on the above-named compass course, a [Point] [Lighthouse] bore by compass&jc/^l/f; v $ <&v' fo &-* by the same compass. Find the ship's position, i a> . -6 WU -6 --J. ft (</1/4 ABgwer—Latitude tt\.jU Ay>r. "^U^^ - Longitude :J_7^...^^-<Ct (3.) With the ship's head as above, a [-Front] [Lighthouse] bore by compass!i^^L_^^:_i!^_—, and after continuing on the same course miles it Wβ . Find the position of ship and , her distance from at the time of taking the second bearing. %¥*,. WyOr-Jl ~4>(x 8 0 f 4 Distance iQ.J^^^i!^'^

AH the foregoing questions must be answered, but this does not preclude the Examiner rom putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. . Signature '.^^^f^^A^^^M^— Date ' ? 7 878] Chart used^L_^2=^2»-=— ■ — -

"V" I \ Jy (To) } j^/j

[Chart Paper for Candidate as Master of a Home-Trade Passenc/er'Ship.] Port i. — -...

EXAMINATION IN CHART. (Additional for Masters.)

(4.) Find the course to steer by compass from to^y^/^ [see question i] to counteract the effect of a current which set /y %//s7<2 &. at the rate of &./&■ miles per hour, the ship making by log /V miles per hour, also the distance the ship would then make good in hours towards sal Cs £~ %li, .Answer.— Compass course : tf&^'^./s? rV&s'*4d ™"* " — ' 0&~ / ——' —' ~—" Distance ■ (5.) On /£ ftf /£r? £? 7 /" S£ being °ff _ 00^i a cas * * ne l ea^: the correction to be applied to the depth obtained by the lead line before comparing it with the depth marked on the chart. . • • (6.) What do you understand the small numbers to indicate that you see placed about the chart, and at what tide ? * (7.) What do the Bom an numerals indicate that are occasionally seen near the coasts and in harbours ? *• j* j _^ (8.) How would you find, approximately, the time of high water at any place, the Admiralty tables not being at hand, nor any other special tables available ? All the foregoing questions, and those oa Form Exn. 90, must be answered, but this does not #reclude the Examiner from putting any other questions o! a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require.

I y ® I >o c

"HOME TEADE" EXAMINATION PAPEES.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

Note. —This sheet to be returned with the Examination Papers. No. 1. ! No. 2, No. 3. No. 4. No. 5. 4$ 9 /./. <?<?£> 9 9.... /y £>>$** y & & 9 s Exn. 9„. i I Exn. 9/. & s. d. i No. 1. So* fr \ No. 2. 2& .£7*0 No. 3. /& • 6» * <^ No. 4. - <? Tons. cwts. /<&>' S&C7' y * qrs. lbs. £f Z y? - / No. 1. Dec" f Sy-" /+s% Lat. i __>_ INo. o. Deviation «•»* o No. 8. ,, J^ L "^ No. 10. „ ,✓__, -£ _£_?-• <o Sy ixn. Qff, No. 1. Answer—Compass course : yy «S St>* y£ Distance: y? y J?p^~€~gL*^, Variation: /£y* SS' Deviation: / y~ No. 2. Answer—Latitude: *SS& £ o & Longitude: '/ fy 4y <* ~g Exn. 9c. I No. 8. Answer—Latitude: S'* *" ° ® v» Longitude: / *r * \f 3 v «5> "^ Distance: /<_-? i I I sri. 9d. No. 4. Answer—Compass course : yy-ifi^^'* Distance: 2- 2 /'_ yb^S^ ! No. 5. Answer —Correction: X ft. in. — i [677-95

Port qf^^^Ciiia^^as^^LSt^K^

W> Earn. 16.

EX EE'S AUTHORITY FOE DELIVERY OF A CEKTIFICATE OP COMPETENCY TO AN APPLICANT WHO HAS PASSED HIS EXAMINATION.

NAME, &c. OF APPLICANT.

V™ tO tielibrt to the Person named above, the Certificate of Competency and Testimonials or otiser <*sf} Documents, forwarded to you by the Secretary of the Marine Department for him, 011 his ep**p2yn)g with the Office|3 Regulation. / _. A g? {Signature of Applicant > X / P d&n&i /0 J s I© To Me Superintendent ofHie Mercantile Marine Office at £* t . / ~~ /' ' " |jgs JfcTK.—Ai! Aulhority in ilsis form is to bo given by the Eiaminer ie mitt who pnpsee hia Examination. lt-i> then to be pwnetifed to the |i Supcrinjenilcnt of the Mercantile Murine Office at which the Applicant iias stated in bis Application (Em. 2 or 3) that Uβ wishes to receive ** lug Ccrl ifieats. This is the Qa&4MtJz-, marked /2 , reMireVi to In the depositions of. fM-id^dL^^t* the case of at thek Magistrate's Court, at Wellington, this Stipendiary Magistrate. ' Justices of the Peace.

9o "S Christian Jfaroe. Surname. fP ' S~SS2~~ e ~™'® . Surname. Whether Master, Mate, or Grade for which passed. Engineer. "^ 1 . . .-I .in ...-H--II r-in

On Public Service Only. ®ffia d pinisto for f nfclit IStorke, WELLINGTON, TH.S 18 THE ENVELOPE AS RECEIVED BY MR. ALLPORT.

317

H.—26

(Urgent.) Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 17th March, 1899. Mbmoeandum for Mr. Glasgow. Please let me know— 1. Whether there are any permits in re examination of masters and mates purporting to be or to have been issued by my authority or direction other than in the Jones's case. 2. If any, how many, and the nature of the authority in each case. 3. Has the department any regular form of permit for the above examination, when required or given ? 4. For what purposes (other than the above examination) is provision made under the Shipping Acts and regulations for the issue of permits; what forms are used; and what is the procedure for the issue of them ? Kindly let me have this information as early as possible. Wμ. Hall-Jones. Hon. Minister.—As to No. 4, do you mean permits by the Minister ?—W. T. Glasgow.— 17/3/99. By the Minister or otherwise.—W. H.-J.—l7/3/99. Hon. Minister.—Answers to 1, 2, and 3 are in the negative. I forward schedule in reply to 4, and have included licenses and exemption certificates, as well as authorities expressly called " permits."—W. T. Glasgow.—l 7/3/99.

List of Permits, &c., Issued under Shipping Acts and Regulations.

189 . Permit under "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," Section 218. Shipped by . 189 . Per s.s. " ." Pebmit Mr. to ship per s.s." " to , provided it To . is placed in a copper magazine or in a strong wooden box with copper Sailing , 189 ■ fastenings fixed or secured on an approved part of the upper deck, well Quantity: . clear of galley and funnel, and covered with a tarpaulin. , , Inspector and Surveyor. Inspector and Surveyor, The Collector of H.M. Customs,

Nature of Permit, &c. Procedure for Issue. By whom Issued. 1. Permits for passenger-steamers to carryexplosives 2. Permits for steamers to make daylight excursions Application to Inspector of Steamers, and having proper magazines Application to Inspectors of Steamers, who see that there are sufficient life-saving appliances, &c, on board Applicants make statutory declarations that they are entitled to ship, and Collectors satisfy themselves that such is the case Application to Collectors of Customs, who satisfy themselves as to compliance with rules Application to department, which satisfies itself that there is no reason for refusing Application to department, which sees that applicants are entitled to exemption under Act Application to department and possession of extra master's certificate, or passing of prescribed examination Application to Collector of Customs, who reports to department whether he sees any objection, and, if no objection, department authorises issue of license Application to department and performance of specified service or passing of examination Inspector of Steamers. Ditto. 3. Permits for seamen to sign articles without production of discharges Collectors of Customs. „ Lioenses for carriage of deok cargo Ditto. 5. Exemption from survey and from carrying certificated officers 6. Exemption from examination as thirdclass engineer Minister of Marine. Ditto. 7. License as adjuster of compasses Secretary of Marine. 8. Special license for master of foreigngoing vessel to adjust the compasses of his vessel Collectors of Customs. 9. License as colonial pilot Secretary of Marine.

H.—26

318

, 189 . Passenseb Permit fob S.S. < /• Collectoe of Customs, . To tne Collector of Customs, gg] . . Wellington, , 189 . Number of passengers : . j Pebmission has been granted to the above-mentioned steamer to make a From to . j daylight exoursion from to with not more than Extra belts. j passengers on , provided extra life-belts ara put on board; Hold clear. hold is empty, clear of all cargo and stores ; booby-hatch and Booby-hatch and companion - ladder i oompanion-ladder fitted. fitted. > Principal Engineer Surveyor.

(Seal.) Sanctioned by the Minister of Marine, in pursuance of " The Shipping Pbbmit to Sign Abtioles. and Seamen's Act, 1877." N . Pjsbmit to Sign Abtiolbs undee Section 10 of " The Shipping and jxame . . Seamen's Aot Amendment Act, 1894." Rank of Seaman: . , seaman, having made a statutory declaration under section 10 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894," that he Date of issue : . is entitled to ship, Ido hereby grant him this permit to sign articles as . , Collector of Customs. Customhouse, , 189 .

Deck Caeoo License. General License. I , Collector of Customs at , do hereby grant a general license to the steam [sailing] ship , tons net register, to carry an amount of deck cargo [live-stock] according to the regulations,* whioh is not to exoeed per cent, of the above-mentioned tonnage. Total quantity of deck cargo allowed, tons, or horses, or sheep. Signed : , Collector of Customs. Port of . Date : Conditions of General License, A general license for carrying deck cargo and live-stock to and from any port in New Zealand, and to any one port in Australia, Tasmania, Fiji, and South Sea Islands, or any island dependent on New Zealand, is only available for twelve months from date of issue, and this license, on its expiration, is to be returned to any Customhouse in the colony, and will be cancelled by the Collector of Customs, and a new license granted if required. * Clause 22 of the regulations provides that coal, cargo, or livestock i 3 not to be stowed in the vicinity of boats, rafts, or boat-davits, or pumps, so as to interfere with their working'; or in or on the forecastle, so as to interfere with the working of anchors or chains ; or near the rudder-head, or quadrant, or tiller; aad the wheel-chains must be clear of cargo.

Deck Cargo Licknsjs. Special License, Glass A or B. I , Collector of Customs at , do hereby grant a special license, Class Aorß, to the steam [sailing] ship, tons net register, to carry an amount of deck cargo [live-stock] [coal for ship's use], aocording to the regulations,* which is not to exceed per cent, of the above-mentioned tonnage. Total quantity of deck cargo [coal] allowed, tons, or horses, or sheep. Signed : , Collector of Customs. Port of . Date : Conditions of Special License. Special licenses, Class A, for carrying deck cargo and live-stook, and ooal on deck for ship's use, are only available for one foreign intercolonial, Fijian, or South Sea Island trip from any port or ports in New Zealand. Special licenses, Class B, for carrying deck cargo and live-stock, and coal on deck for ship's use, are only available from one port) to another in New Zealand, and from a final port in New Zealand to a foreign, intercolonial, Fijian, or South Sea Island port. • Clause 22 of the regulations provides that coal, cargo, or live-stock is not to be stowed in the vicinity of the boats, rafts, or boat davits, or pumps, so as to interfere with their working ; or in or on the forecastle, so as to interfere with the working of anchors or ohains ;or near the rudder head, or quadrant, or tiller; and the wheel ohains must be clear of cargo.

Deck Caego License. General or Special Licenses, Class A or B, — Deadweight. I, , Colleotor of Customs at , do hereby grant a general [or special] license, Clasa Aorß, to the steam [sailing] ship , tons net register, to carry an amount of deadweight deck cargo, according to the regulations,* whioh is not to exceed one-quarter of the total carrying-tonnage allowed on deck. Total quantity of deck cargo allowed, tons. Signed : , Colleotor of Customj, Port of . Date : Conditions. A general license for carrying deadweight as deok cargo to and from any port in New Zealand, and to any one port in Australia, Tasmania, Fiji, and South Sea Islands, or any island dependent on New Zealand, is only available

319

H.—26

for twelve months from date of issue, and this license, on its expiration, in to be returned to any Customhouse in the colony, and will be cancelled by the Collector of Customs, and a new license granted if required. Special licenses, Class A, for carrying deadweight as deck oargo are only available for one foreign, intercolonial, Fijian, or South Sea Island trip from any port or ports in New Zealand. Special licenses, Class B, for carrying deadweight as deck cargo are only available for from one port to another in New Zealand, and from a final port in New Zealand to a foreign, intercolonial, Fijian, or South Sea Island port. * Clause 22 of the regulations provides that oargo is not to be stowed in the vicinity of the boats, rafts, or boatdavits, or pumps, so as to interfere with their working ; or in or on the forecastle, so as to interfere with the working of anohors or chains ; or near the rudder-head, or quadrant, or tiller ; and the wheel chains must be kept dear of cargo. ". ■ . ''•'•;

(Seal.) Gebtificate of Exemption fbom Subvey undeb the Provisions of Section 201 of. "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." . ',:. S:S. ;"" ." Offioial No. . Port of Registry: . Owners: .. , ,'": The above steamer is hereby, in pursuance of seotion 201 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Aot, 1877," exempted from the provisions of the said Act relating to the survey of the hull, equipments, or machinery of steamships, but not further or otherwise. Given under my hand, and issued under the seal of the Marine Department, at Wellington, this day of , 189 . ;. : , Minister having charge of the Marine Department. Note.—By section 202 of the Act, a penalty pf £50 is incurred if passengers are received on board or carried in any steamship in respect of which a certificate of exemption has been issued.

■■- ■' v ■■' • ''' : ' (Seal.) ' ■. :;_■ Cebtificate of Exemption feom the Employment, of a Cebtificated . , S.S. " ." Official No. . . Port of Registry: . Owners: ,_ The above steamer is hereby, in pursuance of seotion 201 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," and subsection (2) of section 2 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act 1877 Amendment Aot, 1885," exempted from the provisions of the first-named Aot relating to the employment on such steamer of a certificated so long only as she is employed , but not further or otherwise. Given under my hand, and issued under the seal of the Marine Department, at Wellington, this day of , 189 . , Minister having Charge of the Marine Department. Note.—By section 202 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," a penalty of £50 is incurred if passengers are received on board or carried in any steamship in respect of which a certificate of exemption has been issued.

p ; (Seal.) Exemption fbom Examination as Thibd-class Engineer. g ; In pursuance, and exercise of the conferred upon me by section 6 of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act op ■ Amendment Aot, 1896," Ido hereby exempt the bearer, , from examination for a Third-c'.ass 00 • Engineer's certificate, he having at the date of the coming into operation of tha said Aot sailed and served as -™ • Engineer on board a steamship for a period of not les3 than twelve months. 2 • Given under my hand, at Wellington, this day of , 189 . c 3 * ' • ■ pq : , Minister having charge of the Marine Department.

No. 100. I No. 100. (Seal.) "The Shipping and Seamen's Act LI ™ SE As " Adjuster of Compasses (issued under " The Shipping tr ° ! and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1895 ). Amendment Act, 1895.' , of t j s hereby licensed as a duly-qualified Adjuster of License as an Adjuster of ; Corr.passss, in pursuance of section 4 of "The Shipping snd Seamen's LICENSE AS AN ADJUSTER OF , A(jt Amendment Aot| 1895- » Compasses. Marine Department, Wellington, , 189 . , 189 . I . , Secretary. Name: . ■ Note.—The holder of this license must produce it whenever asked io ■ do so by a Collector of Customs, engineer, surveyor, or a master, owner, Address : . or & g requiring his services. , Secretary. This license may at any time be suspended or cancelled by the Minister.

" The Shipping and Seamen's Act Special License as an Adjusteb of Compasses, fob the Ship Amendment Act, 1895." , being the master in actual command of the ship is Special License as an Adjusteb of hereby licensed as an Adjuster of the Compasses of that ship, but of no Compasses. other ship. This license may be suspended or cancelled at any time by the Minister «•■"'. ' " having charge of the Marine Department, and shall oontinue in force so Name . . long only as the licensee is in actual command of the said ship. Name of vessel: . Dated at New Zea i ana , , 189 . , Collector of Customs. _ Colleotor of Customs.

No. . No., ■ . (Seal.) ■ , ' " Shipping and Seamen's Act Amend- License as Colonial Pilot (issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's ment Act, 1894." Act Amendment Act, 1894 "). License as Colonial Pilot. , of , born at , on the day of , , 189 . 18 , is hereby licensed to be a Colonial Pilot, pursuant to section 31 Name: . of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act Amendment Act, 1894." Address: . This license continues in force for twelve months only, and expires Age: . on the day of 189 . License expires: . , 189 . Marine Department, Wellington, 189 . , Secretary. ■' , Secretary.

H.—26

320

EXHIBIT P. Secretary, Marine Department. As regards the examination of James Jones for a master's certificate without his being required to show a year's service whilst in possession of a mate's certificate, the attached note was given to me on the Bth July, 1897, by Captain Allman, who stated that the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones had instructed him to bring it and tell the department to give the necessary instructions for dispensing with the requirements as to mate's certificate. [See Mr. Hall-Jones's minute below.] .He said that he had suggested to the Minister that this might be done, as the certificate required was one which was only available in New Zealand, and as Jones had for a long time been master of the " Mana " and " Duco." On the same day I inserted the date which appears on the note, brought it in and showed it to you, and then gave it out for record. It was recorded [see Exhibit NJ, as you will see by the date on the top of the paper, on the 12th July, and instructions were written to the Collector of Customs on the same date. 25/1/99. George Allport.

Hon. Minister. Mb. Allport is now quite certain that the facts are as above stated. I have no very distinct recollection of having had the note in your handwriting put before me, but I cannot contradict the positive recollection of Mr. Allport on that point. W. T. Glasgow. 25/1/99.

Mr. Glasgow. This statement is without the slightest foundation. I was not aware until the other day that the regulations had not been adhered to. It is astonishing to find that a rough note made upon an envelope, signed by no one, addressed to no one, and undated, has been deemed sufficient authority for a breach of the regulations. 25/1/99. W. H.-J.

Department of Marine, Wellington, 26th January, 1899. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones. After endeavouring to recall the circumstances under which the envelope with your note on it came to be recorded lam now able definitely to corroborate what Mr. Allport has stated. It is the case that he brought the envelope to me and told me that it came through Captain Allman, who had stated, when handing it to Mr. Allport, that the Minister had agreed to allow Jones to be examined. I remember commenting on the irregularity, but I concluded that the matter had been fully discussed between yourself and Captain Allman, and I contented myself with directing Mr. Allport to make a record of the envelope. If, therefore, it is decided that Captain Allman's verbal statements aud the note on the envelope are not sufficient Ministerial authority for the memorandum which was written to the Collector, then I must accept the responsibility and submit to the censure implied in your minute of the 25th instant, which, without these further remarks from me, might hereafter be deemed to be directed against Mr. Allport. • W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Mr. Glasgow. Even with Captain Allman's statement, it is surprising that no inquiry was made as to the intention or origin of the envelope with a rough note upon it, and which referred to such an important subject; and the fact of your having commented upon the irregularity without directing that my attention should be called to the meagre authority for such an important departure is painful to me. However, I am aware that your time is fully occupied with Customs and other work, and I cannot absolve Mr. Allport from the largest measure of responsibility in the matter. 27/1/99. W. H.-J.

EXHIBIT Q. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 27th February, 1899. 1. During the recent Magisterial inquiry into the Allman case, Mr. Allport is reported to have said that an official letter was written by authority of the Minister allowing Captain Jones to be examined for a certificate as master in the home trade, although he had not the necessary qualifications as provided by the regulations. I shall be glad to have any further explanation from Mr. Allport in reference to this statement made on oath. 2. Was the alleged permit referred to before the Supreme Court during the course of the proceedings, and, if so, did Mr. Allport give any further explanation of what he had deemed sufficient authority for the breach of the regulations ? 3. During the time I have been in charge of the Marine Department has either Mr. Allport or yourself received written instructions from me, without either signature, date, or address, upon which you have taken action, even though there may have been verbal representations made by some other person ? Kindly let me have this information. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Hon. Minister. Please see memoranda herewith (from Mr. Allport and myself).—W. T. Glasgow. 28/2/99.

321

H.—26

Secretary, Marine Department. In reply to the memorandum of the Minister of Marine of this date, I beg to furnish the following explanation with regard to my evidence in the recent prosecutions in connection with Captain Jones's certificate. 1. During my evidence in Yon Schoen's case in the Magistrate's Court, in reply to a question put by Mr. Skerrett in the course of cross-examination, I stated that an official letter had been written by the Minister's direction giving permission for Jones to be examined for a master's certificate without complying with the regulations as to holding a mate's certificate. At that time I had no reason to think that such was not the case, and could not, therefore, have answered otherwise than I did, as, if I had done so, I should not have said what I then believed to be true. It was not until after I had given my evidence that I learnt that the Minister denied that the unsigned note in his handwriting about Jones had been given by him to Captain Allman with instructions that it was to be taken by the department as his authority for dispensing with the requirements of the regulations as to mate's service as stated to me by Captain Allman. Moreover, I knew that Captain Allman had, in his report of the 13th December last, referred to this permission, and in my memorandum of the 28th December I stated that Captain Yon Schoen had told me that Jones had informed him that the Minister had, after consultation with Captain Allman, agreed to allow him to be examined for a home-trade master's certificate without being in possession of a mate's certificate. I understood that the Minister had seen both these reports, and that he had not taken exception to the statements with regard to the permission for dispensing with the service. 2. When I was giving evidence before the Grand Jury, I was asked whether the Minister had authorised the examination of Jones without his complying with the regulations as to mate's service, and I replied that I had been informed, since I gave my evidence in the Magistrate's Court, that he denied having done so, and stated that he had not sent the document which the department had accepted as his authority. When giving evidence in the Supreme Court in Captain Allman , s case, I was asked by Sir Eobert Stout whether Jones held a mate's certificate at the time of his examination for the master's certificate, and I replied that he did not. 3. The only case besides that of Jones, so far as I can recollect, in which the department has received and taken action on instructions from the Minister without signature, date, or address, was that in which Captain Adamson's name was noted for employment. This was recorded on the same day as the Jones paper. 27/2/99. Geoegb Allpoet.

Hon. Minister. The cases against Allman, Yon Schoen, and Jones were heard in the Magistrate's Court on Tuesday and Wednesday, the 24th and 25th ultimo.* It was not until the previous week that I sawclearly the important bearing on these cases of the letter from this department to the Collector authorising Jones to be examined without possessing a mate's certificate. On Friday evening, the 20th ultimo, at about 5 p.m., I saw you on the subject, reminding you of Captain Allman's statement that the authority had emanated from you, and I showed you the envelope which Captain Allman handed to Mr. Allport. You expressed surprise that the envelope, as it stood, should have been accepted, but I pointed out that there was at that time no reason for doubting Captain Allman's representations, and the envelope was only regarded as confirmatory. I was anxious to get from you some definite statement, so that any evidence which might be given might qualified : otherwise, if questioned, both Mr. Allport and myself could not do otherwise than state that the Minister had authorised, and we would probably have to produce the envelope, and I pointed out that you would probably have to give evidence yourself. You said you did not think the point would be raised at all. If a plain contradiction of Captain Allman's statement had been obtained, both Mr. Allport and myself would have seized any opportunity given in examination or in cross-examination to let it be known, t The day after the trial of Yon Schoen, when I told you what had been said by Mr. Allport and myself in cross-examination, you wished to have full details in writing as to what had occurred when Captain Allman brought the envelope to Mr. Allport. I accordingly got Mr. Allport to give a narrative of the facts, which he did in a memorandum dated 25th January, 1899. On this memorandum you minuted on the same date that the statement of Captain Allman with respect to your dispensing with the requirements as to mate's certificate was " without the slightest foundation." This was the first positive assurance I had that you denied the truth of Captain Allman's statement, and accordingly both Mr. Allport and myself, when questioned by the Grand Jury, were able to state that, although the Collector had been advised by the department in accordance with Captain Allman's statement, the Minister of Marine denied that he had ever given any authority for dispensing with the mate's certificate. J With reference to paragraph marked " 2," there was no opportunity to give further explanation. Sir Eobert Stout did not refer to the matter when cross-examining me, and when crossexamining Mr. Allport he went no further than as stated by Mr. Allport. As regards paragraph 3, Mr. Allport refers to another instance, but the matter was not one of much importance. The only other case, so far as at present I can remember, in which an instruction of importance has reached me from you in what I consider an unofficial and irregular way, was that relating to remission of duty on the Governor's private supplies. The memorandum

* Thursday, 26th.—W. H.J. t This was only known to me on perusing Mr. Allport's statement of the 25th January.—W. H.-J. JAt this time the case in the Magistrate's Court was not finished, and was not until the following day.—W. H.-J.

41— H. 26.

a.—26

322

was written by Mr. Horneman, and your name was signed to it by him. In the event of my acting on this authority, I might, of course, in the course of time, get into trouble if Mr. Horneman had not correctly represented your intention or if through lapse of time you were unable to recall exactly what you had said. W. T. Glasgow, 28th February, 1899. Secretary Marine Department.

Mr. Glasgow. Is it not a fact that, when you directed my attention to Mr. Allport's letter of the 12th July, I at once emphatically denied giving any such authority.—W. H.-J.—2B/2/99.

Hon. Minister. No; I have no recollection of such denial. I left you after the interview on Friday in quite an uncertain state of mind as to what I would be able to say if cross-examined on Tuesday. I could not see that I could go further than to say that there was doubt as to whether authority had really been given. Had I understood you to give clear denial, I would not have had any uncertainty about the matter. My impression was that you were endeavouring to recall what had passed at the interview between yourself, Jones, and Allman, and that at the time you were unable to give the positive denial which you afterwards gave. You certainly did not instruct me to say in Court that you had not given the authority. Even if I had received such instructions, it is obvious that my saying so would not have been evidence unless you went into the box. You did not propose to do this.

Ist March, 1899. —■ W. T. Glasgow. This was discussed at an interview with Mr. Gully (at which Mr. Glasgow was present) on the 25th January. Mr. Gully thought it bad no bearing upon the case before the Court, and, as Mr. Skerrett was endeavouring to make a great deal of the alleged permit, it would emphasize or make it appear of more importance if either Mr. Allport were recalled or I went into the box, and said he would, by saying a few words next morning, leave the matter so that it could be reopened when before the Supreme Court, when I expected that Mr. Allport would place the whole matter of the so-called permit before the Court.—W. H.-J.

Mr. Glasgow. Will you kindly relate what led up to you going to your office and returning with the envelope which has been referred to.—W. H.-J.—l/3/99.

Hon. Minister. I went for the note in order that you might see more clearly what it might be taken to mean. I wanted you to see what effect its production in Court and before jury might have. And I also referred to the possibility of either Jones or Allman (or both), who were present at the interview, giving evidence that authority had been given by you.—W. T. Glasgow.—l/ 3/99.

The note was produced because I denied having given any authority, and requesting Mr. Glasgow to go down to get it and let me see it.—W. H.-J.

EXHIBIT E. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 9th March, 1899 , . I would like to know from Mr. Allport whether he still adheres to the statement made by him on oath in court that the official letter sent by him to the Collector dispensing with the production of the mate's certificate was written by my authority or direction. Will you kindly obtain this from Mr. Allport. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Mr. Allport. Be so good as to reply for the information of the Minister.—W. T. Glasgow.—9/3/99.

Mr. Glasgow. Please see memorandum attached.—Geoege Allport.—9/3/99.

Hon. Minister. For your information. —W. T. Glasgow.—9/3/99.

Secretary Marine Department. I have already explained in my memorandum of the 27th ultimo my reasons for believing at the time my evidence was given that it was true that the Minister had given the direction that the qualification as to holding a mate's certificate was to be dispensed with in the case of Captain Jones, and I still think that if I had stated otherwise I should not have said what I believed to be true. George Allport. 9/3/99.

323

H.—26

Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow Eeferred to Mr. Allport.—W. T. Glasgow.—l 3/3/99.

Mr. Glasgow. Please see further memorandum attached.—George Allport.—l3/3/99.

Hon. Minister of Marine. I forward Mr. Allport's reply.—W. T. Glasgow—l 3/3/99.

Secretary, Marine Department. i™ hToS uses aisraisrs ttrr z ,-s bd « re *« ■» • <•* «»- of Captain Jone, ™ S,bTniSoritv h t"'' the "»"••« «««U»». i» George Allport.

EXHIBIT S. as may be necessary ' m Council will be advised to take such further "action Captain George Allman, Wellington. __ haVe '^- T . Secretary

Charges. To George Allman, of Wellington, Master Mariner. In accordance with the provisions of "The Civil Servico Aot IBfifi •• „„j •* regulations in force thereunder, you the'said GzaZ tuil ' \ £'• md J tS amen(J ments, and the New Zealand as Nautical OldS * the Bervice of of and charged with the following breaches of dutvanS r£r Z ""* Ma !t 8 ' hereb y accused Bfttt£? rendering * unfit - i? -Sn^^ « one or other of these the law and regulations then a PP llcatlon to b « examined, under ship, was examined accordingly ' Gertlfic^te °f competency as master of a home-trade 2. Such examination was conducted by you a? cup nf fi,,, t?,™- ,• and improperly, and, as regards that part It ffi examinaton whfohv^ 8 ' n^ h f "'M Regularly, trary to the law and regulations prescribed KS r JT ? onducted m person, confix On that part of slch examinl ?onwh eh rites James Jones produced and handed to you cer an oSnm be "\ co ™need, the said " Exn. 9g " "Exn 9r " and •« TVn q™ •> e f cam papers or documents known or marked as to which the to refate but the *™»«°£ forms in the handwriting "A qUeBt - 10ns Were 0n other said James Jones also produced the forms first before referred to in your own handwritine 2S < 1* f* l uestlons on writing of the said George Yon Schoen as lrfclrZl 3 g >Tv S tben \ fr ° m *}»> for ™ in the handas part of the examinatfon-papers ofthe said James and . such papers such purposes a paper "Ex. whXLd alrldv bl? aISO rece , lved and admitted for said James Jones into the examination^anlwanot Stter' b y *c with the regulations for the examination o™maste7 S and mates (I) ZK*°* T accordal ? ce irregular examination you made and signed a eertiWp ™3•■ 'H the conclusi °n of this Department to the effect that tA* the Mari »* was contrary to the fact, (c.) Upon such report tLtifr his examination, which said report of July, 1897, obtained a JerrificaTe o"t3£nca a °I ** which certificate he was not legally entitled. 7 awf P ' t0 Marine Department, Wellington, 28th February, 1899, Marine Department.

H.—26.

324

EXHIBITS T AND U. f'T. Eeproduction of James Jones's examination papers (river master); see insets.] [U. Reproductions of questions in examination for master home-trade, worked by Captain Yon Schoen for James Jones; see insets, &c]

ftgjhcgkjfklfjkghjgcf

Number, j i i

Exn. 2.

TO BE EXAMINED s wr aEkhtycppE of competency f^^n & J OK MATE. „ Njtb.— 'DiviswijPte, (Dp. IE), of tlJs Paper are to be filled up by the Applicant for F amination, and handed to the Examine** r \ v 5» # J withligs Testimonials, and former Certificat.' if any.

(A.) NAME, &c., OF APPLICANT.

(e.> ;../., DECLARATION TO BE MADE BY APPLICANT. IS" TAKE NOTICE.—Any person who makes, procures to bo made, or assists in making, any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or any other person either a Certificate of Competency or Service, is for each offence liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour. d ir0 hmby httfaxz that the particulars contained in Divisions (A), (B)> (C)> (D)» an <l (G) of this Form are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPEBS enumerated in Division (Q) and sent with this Form are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the persons whose names appear on them. And I make thi^ Declaration conscientiously,believing it to be true. Pat3d ac this // & , 188 V v Signature of Applicant:

(F.) SUPERINTENDENT'S RECEIPT FOR FEE.

Sljx marked (ft) aAfixe was signed in my prese.nce, ajid the Fee nam3 Division (p) has been received by me. » • j^ , <*?* / yf/1 W /hjL J - , /// / ri' / ? Signature ef Superintendent.

Citri-.tian jNam_s i Year. 7fcf¥t> Christian jNarrttis at fuU length."' / _1 S\ ■ at fuU length." Date of Birth. Month. 1. %7ly r. Surname. Permanent Address, stating Town, Street, and Number of House. u &YLI& v -^ I / Where born. Day. Town. ' Count; y - -2.*" t fJ^2x^yzC&7/. j f /Y^L^j2sS. Date of Birth. (B.r Particulars of previous Certificates (if any). / (C.) Certificate now requeued. - I ±\*u_ber. Grade. I i 9 10_ ! ■Villi]be. of B.N.B. Certii'.nnte, if uoiv or formerly hi the '. ■ ! crve. _11 j I 1 State vhcthor Jlastov, Extra „. ... ... „.,. ... i or OrcUua-y; First, Only, or Secon I I Me nMe Mar ., O Hee to Triiw-i Mate. " j it is to be sent. .,/&i} — Sty » - -y- \ 7/7&£&-'^0^y | (D ■ ation for the Certificate now required, lie mui't sttae here when and where. If Applicant has failed within the last six months in a pec-.. yvious i?iXaiiiii; 14

Amount received. I. J I ! •_ Bate of Receipt. Month. 17 _ J • Mercantile Marina Office at which recolved. 19 i Year, Day. 15 1G 18 £y_____ji___. L 188 i ■i 7 *

NOT! , ;.—A Candidate for a Master's Curtiflcate must stale in , Column 22 whether the Vessels wete Fore-and-aft- or Square-riggod.

(G.) LIST OF TESTIMONIALS AND STATEMENT OF SERVICE FROM FIRST GOING TO SEA. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 20, below.)

(H.) CERTIFICATE OF EXAMINERS.

Wit htttbyr rtriifg that the particulars contained in Division (j-l) are correct. This JForm and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Secretary of the Marine Department: Dated this /"J day of— 7 , 18.S"") To the Secretary, -Mamie Department, (flflQ_, S^Al/^^

(*» a a m *3 •a o a .a CO Q> o rfl » Service of A Service of Applicant. Time in j g j' a each Ship. j © .2 \ InitialR of ■ Verifier; Ship's Name. E»g. 1 1 7 > 1 Big. S i' a Port of Kegistey I ,g and o .5 Official Number. |i EaRk ' S 2 !j y H j "So _ o q n _s ;| 24 a'. 2fl 1 ' ■o y o <-> tl Q 03 3 O o p 20 I I ; i ■! i I . . • .1 i . a 1 i _j _ >-X h a p j 27 28 I 29 1 Remarks. *_ i • -_ <a _ 1 a 38 i _ _ia I &• -° j ._ s _> a « 3 S rH rH si 3-2 5 "1 9 -Il 32 «_.-> _Jt-Hr*fc, j^WS 1 SO 22 11 k X. if & . _ a <*•& y<? 4vv+*~y %ud vN U iw*« bftiSl b f' il if () il it. Jy»s.. y&*,yz e/i 1 .--Lip #xS -/_■_ /yi Hit - tAv<>. t/SS' i/t \Ap. z/66- sh JH-. M. M ! . _ i r S'-. bf/BSiLijlSbf , jj&l fl/Al - Sj'il b/hl li/il — u/'te t/A$- *y - 3/66' s/n~— / / —. ) X / g^^> i C/S , , I (J7&-0--9. £-**-<. 1 _§_X% A *• j | t f-f. /- yy ' > 7. (3MVi<ri<jl Sciftlu f$X Sol fl-u^ McM- <?/$6/t/&/s ii 1 I tf&Ui -£. I hf- , t?/$6/A/s/y j ii 1 1 ■J . I 1 [ . j 1 1 1 i - I ' j j Tot il Service at Sea .. .... $ \p. Time served for which Certifii lates are now produced. .. 7 a j I I ! Time gfesve_ for which. «so Cer rificates are produced .. ..

NOTE. — The Examiners should fill up IHvisim (H). and in &H cases as soon as possible forward this paper to the Secretary, ftfariiw T>rparimi>nl, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certifieateti"ff"ttny, must be uiit with this the Secretary, Mannc Department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials ttfiil be delivered to the Applicant at the Office named in Division (C), Column i:V Date and Place of Examination. . Insert " Fassort " or " Failed '' in each Column. P Date. riaee. Navigation. Seamanship. ~35 J _' Si _ -Tnnilji. 85 _ '_ ?X ' j —k._^. liank for which passed. ? //*£- $>-

Port of HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOB A CEETIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE. At the above Port, this ZC*'——-—..J^ a y °f ' 188 ~p>

1. Express in figures— '/tsf / /%,

2. Add fctie following quantities together :— *.A...? Ljbul £ /?._ , £ /.... : J.: L,.../....,<tt).,A. %~ & 4 a J..J...0 .3, U 3.0 / t£.,..y. :.../. ~) U.L..3... L...L.%4...c....L 2 ? 6 $$J[(s I Answer. 30 $/ 3 AnSWW

3. —Subtract as fellows :— From JAIbOA Take <t^J? z f. J... TAe %&JL../_..Z. 7/ / l^fW%Amv, M ....fy../... From.:.^.//..y.,..1..<0....fy Take £...^..f. ../...£. Take t^..LA.A.f „„. : -

The" Candidate .should cign his name at the foot, of the last page.

EXAMINATION FOR A MATE— continued.

4.—Multiplication:— Multiply yy P Muiupiy II o £ 7

5. —PiviKiou:— i/^P'^P^Ml C Signature of Candidate :'-fctZ/frlMd Jbsl£4^

of ft-cJ^U^,s£^L Data! /£ ./?_£_")

FOUM JEXN..a7B

issued hy thb mabms Depaiw mekt, 1886.

COLOUR TESTS,

Note \o ExAMiNsas.-—A report on this form is to be- sent to tho Department in each case in wjiieli ;;n apjilictint tails to name any of the colours of tho cards or glasses correctly. It is to be used for applicants who go up for 'Colour Test only, as well as for applicants for Certificates of Competency. The only cases in which it is not to'be sent is whore an applicant names ali the colours correctly. h\ no case in which this form is used should less than eight tests be made ami recorded, all the cards and glasses being used in each test, and under the printed noma of each colour the Examines is t;> write the name of the colour, if any, which the applicant calls it. Name and age of applicant: /f/wil£/ j//JhjL</ & Number and grade of certificate, if any,) /7/Jt/^ which he held prior to present exainn.:) /j ' j sj Grade for which he now presents himself,) J~? 4-is~^-*~- -*» if any: j Has he been at sea; and, if so, how Ions? - ? _/7 (ti^^j^^ Has he been examined in colours pre-j _ 'zt-«—^«-^l-^ viously; if so, when and where, and did he then pass or fail ? )

CARDS. TEST BY NATURAL LIGHT.

ACTUAL COLOUBS Of'' CARDS.* j. White, Black. Red. Pink. ; Green, (1.) (2.) (3.) (4.) (5.) I)ra.h Blue. (6.) (7.) Yellow. j . (8-) COLOUR OF CARDS AS NAMED BY APPL: CANT. ' yius T^s@s\fu^~ ; i i \(2pCaS^. &~ /£rt—»-•_ _«_ I I ■ ■ : I j , u. ___ : _ (■ < -_..-_.. "... - I _._ Of —j ~_-> — -e. «-•< _~ _' ' — ■<-<■■—*■ 2 i i i i i ■ i i . 1 \ i i — i •» **_ i i 1 — *r \ - » . * * "' "'""'.! i i I i :' 5 * * The Exai niner is neyer to show the cards ir glasses to the applicant in tho sequenco heragi' ren, but should vj .ry the order as ■ »' «-M * :U_h _5POis..'jl»

GLASSES.

TEST BY ARTIFICIAL LIGHT.

ACTUAL COLOURS OF GLASSES.*

To the Secretary, Marine Department. 1 have to report the above case as one in which the applicant has shown an inability to distinguish test colours. In this case I have reported him as t obliterate tiu- having -4-fetirtt' ! tpassocT in his examination in colours. word that ileus . 4• not ftpply. ' if /f Examiner.

I Ground. Standard Rnk iv) Eec1 ' (!•) __ AX. .. Standard' Bottle | PaleGr - e3n . yellow. Green. Green. (3-) ■ (4.) i (5.) (6.) i i Neutral j J (ZX Blue. .Blue j (Pale). j (90 i i :olou;rs \/tU&£ )F GLASSES AS NAMED BY APPLICAN IT. !<w--«t__i /u.fu^~ I I '2 :■. 4 ! tfkJs &*0 i i i i i ! I ! ! i t ■ i i ! i ,| I ?l * i XI I x : ■ i \LU'{ l 'Ui+i r W*6\x.a^. j j . i i i i i | I I I ■■ I I • ' !' i 5 i I /. _ 7 i i I i j i i I i I i ! I j i i i * The Examiner is never to show the cards or glasses to the applicant in tho sequence here given, but should vary the order as math as possible.

Port of W/J^tf7ni^

Ezn. Iβ.

t EXAMINER'S AUTHORITY SOB DELIVERY OF A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY TO AST APPLICANT WHO HAS PASSBD HIS EXAMINATION.

NAME, &c. OF APPLICANT.

,—p . , , , tfi JStUbfF to the Person named above, the Certificate of Competency and Testimonials or other Documents forwarded to you by the Secretary of the Marino Department fop bits, on bis complying with the' Office Daw tvL . th»_oitnuL_\£L_, isS / Signature of Ajppjwant f f To the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Opce at j^^^^t^^^^U Stora.—An Authority in tliit form ie to be girra the Examiner to-ntdi AppJKsnt wiio passes bis Essmsnstion. It is (hen to be presented to the Superintendent of the ttfercanlile Msnne Office at which the Applicant hae stated ia bin Application (Esst. 2 or 3) that be wishes to receive bis CorliScate. „ ' r .

CSmofej. H*nse. Surname. Whether Mazier, Mate, or Engineer, 0_.de for wliieb patted. i — <?-*~7; i / «_5 tfjlv%,%je. r o /_ V.,. M _,_ J rX WVOvU

fikghmjdcfyre ujdfjghgj

Exn. 90.

Port of.. HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS -

EXAMINATION PAPEE TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOR A CEBTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS . A MASTER, [A Candidate for a Certificate , of Competency as Master will bo required to work out the following, in addition to the questions on the Forms Exn. 9e and Exn. 9p.] A /%

In Longitude If the observed altitude of the sun's lower limb were 7j J / bearing .^^__ jf . » ind ex error to &L*&(so\J , height of eye { @ _feet: required the latitude.

Signaturt. _, 1020' Date:

\& j[^_

Examination fob a Master — continued. DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS. [The Applicant must answer in writing, on paper given him by the Examiner, all the following questions-, numbering his answers to correspond with the numbers of the questions.] l._ When taking a meridian altitude, how do you know when the sun is on the meridian; or, in other words, when it is noon ? 2.—How does the sun hear when on the meridian of an observer in these latitudes (home trade limits) ? 3, — What do you mean by deviation of the compass, and how is it caused ? 4. — Having determined the deviation, how do you know when it is Easterly and when Westerly': 5. —Supposing the sun when on the meridian bore.by your compass /V* <&V V * « wliat would be the deviation of that compass for the direction of the ship's head Jt the time, the variation given on the chart being J kfjf . JET^O"^ 6. —How could you find the deviation of your compass when in port, or when sailing along a coast t 7.—Name some suitable objects by which you could readily obtain the deviation of your compass,.when sailino alone the coasts or a channel you have been accustomed to use • / e&* ' '*** 8 —The bearing of two objects when in a line with each, other was found on the chart to be /§\ Z/, /«** Iα * magnetic; but when brought in a line on hoard they bore /y. £?, /'%-*■ • by your compass : required the deviation of your compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time ? 9. — What means are there for checking the deviation of your compass by night ? 10. Supposing the North Star (Polaris) bore_/*V O~I/r?\*> h y - vuur '• ,,r »P ass . wiult wouM ,)e the deviation (approximately) of that compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, supposing the variation given ou the chart to be /£j S^^f U. D o you expect the deviation to change; if so, state under what circumstances 12. What is meant by variation of the compass, and what is the cause of it ? Signature of Candklati; : ? Date :

7*7 . iL £

DEVIATION TABLE No. 4.

Ship* Head by Compass. • , Deviations. ff-iwi'-_-i„hir_rt».-North ... byE. N.N.E. N.E. by N. - N.E. ... N.E. by E. E.N.E. E. by N. 'A ::: ,% _?. W. w. W W. j/^y East ... E. by 3. E.S.E. ... S.E. by E. 8.E. ... S.E. by S. S.S.E. ... S. by E. South ... S. by W. S.S.W.... S.W. by S. S.W. ... S.W. by W. W.S.W. W. by S. West ... W. by N. W.N.W. N.W. by W. N.W. ... N.W, by N. N.N.W. N. by W. North ... :: ', /_ ... /^. : I ■■7 L X ::: ii /A ... 3/+ X : i % ■ X , ■ xA / & _?• £•■ _?• £■ W. \7f W w w. "2fT £ £■ __ ._?. «_T» \~Vv \$'fh

Exn. 9e«

Issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877."

Port of W -r£*> \^^^Z~" i ■™ ,„■,...,.,„ \ „ v

EXAMINATION IN CHART FOB ALL GBADES WHERE THE CHABT IS USED.

[The Candidate will be required to work out the following questions on eitber a "truo" or "magnetic" chart, whichever may be handed to him by the Examiner; and 8.) so determine whether the chart is a true or magnetio one, and whether i 4 its for the nonlieru or southern, and eastern or western hemisphere]

of / / (1.) Using, deviation card No. _ j~ _, find the course to steer by compass from U(lf)ss &wH%so>{l{AAj the distance. *&fMM*~**-> jj ' Answer. —Compass course : Distance : Variation : Deviation: * (2A With the ship's head on the above-named compass course, -ft-ffieiafej ■. [Ligb4be»sej~ _ fj£^M bore by tfW.ty tf. ft W - by the same ecrmpass. Find the ship's position. Answer. —Latitude :_ Longitude : _____ (B.) With the ships head as above, a £go4s£j- [Lighthouse] / bore by compass____S/____v____/K._, and after continuing on the same coarse // miles it bore VV- /%- Vy.- Find the position of ship and her distance from jM. f/tA'Ui. at the time of taking the second bearing, Answer. —Latitude :____ Longitude: Distance :

All the foregoing questions must be answered, but this does not preclude the Examiner from putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. Signature : Date: M Chart used: JfU/4 UNIL . ft/I v

[Chart Paper for Candidate as Mmisr of a Home.-trade Passenger-skip.] Port of , EXAMINATION IN CHART, (Additional for Masters ) /m <

Esn. 9d«

(4.) Find the course to steer by compass 4i *- [see question 1] to counteract the effect of a current which set. 9fl&^. 33 r V¥* ~j*£ p 9// / mJT ' / at the rate of, rfx./.r? miles per hour, the ship making by log miles per hour; also the distance the ship would then make good in m^ hours . „__ Answer. —Compass course: Distance : „ . (5.) n n tm . Ct4 /< /XT ■ being off >»^^'^L^/t^?^Cf /^/ O took a cast of the lead: required the correction to be applied to the depth obtained by the lead-line before comparing it with the depth marked on the chart, (6.) What do yon. understand the small numbers to indicate that you see placed about the chart, and at what time of tide ? (7.) What do the Eoman numerals indicate that are occasionally seen near the coasts and in harbours ? (8.) How would you find, approximately, the time of high water at any place, the Admiralty tables not being at hand, nor any other special tables available? All the foregoing Questions, and those on Form Exn. 9c, must be axisvferad, but this does not preclude the Examiner from patting any other question of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. Signature: Date :

(G.) —List of Testimonials and Statement of Service at Sea. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 26, below.)

(H.)—Certificate of Examiner.

(I.) —Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit tyxtb% teriifij that the particulars contained in Divisions (H.) and (I.) are correct, This Form and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Principal Examiner, Marine Department. Dated this day of _ > I [Signatures of [ Examiners. To the Principal Examiner, Marine Department, Wellington.

If Service on board Ship. Sevvii ;e of Ap] ilican it. s \ a 1 11 *. EH o o" Ship's Name. Port of Kegistry a a o a <u a a o - y o _ _ 32 a o i 1 i Eh o - a 33 Time in tl i employed lis Service. 9 O s 1 a 9 TS „ H H Remarks. Initials of Verifier. and Rig. 1 27 &, ! Official No. of Ship. a a o J29 30 _ 34 _ 3 a o ?, 35 I B i__ 38 31 _37_ Ti ital Si irvice at Sea .. r, ___ — Time served for which Certi s are now produced ificatei Time served for which no C< jrtifiCE ,tes are produced

Note. — The Examiners should fill up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward this paper to the Principal Examiner. Marine Department, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sent with this paper to tlie Principal Examiner, Marine Department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the office named in Division (0) Column 20. Date and Place of Examination. Insert "Passed" or "Failed" in each Column. I Date. Place. Sight-Tests. If failed in Navigation. Seamanship. much fu: If failed in Seamanship, state how . much further Sea-service (if any) must be performed. 45 San] for whicl passei I '■' any) m 46 40 41 42 43 44

Height. Complexion. 49 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 I Colour of Hair. Eves. 51 ; _ 52 Feet, 47 Inches. 43 1 N i

H.—26

326

[10 Extract from Application for Certificate of Competency. [Notice to be torn off and kept by the Applicant.] N.B.—Any person who makes, procures to be made, or assists in making any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or for any other person a certificate, either of competency or service, is for each such offence liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour. Candidates are prohibited from taking into the examination-room any books or papers of any kind whatever, and the slightest infringement of this regulation will subject the offender to all the penalties of a failure.

EXHIBIT V. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 2nd March, 1899. Please see paragraph 121 of the regulations relating to the examination of masters and mates, which reads as follows: "The examinations will commence early in the forenoon, and will be continued from day to day, until all the candidates whose names appear upon the list are examined." The Examiner's report, dated the 19th July, 1897, states that the examinations were held on the 13th and 19th July. Kindly let me have an explanation of this. Wμ. Hall-Jones. Examiner's report herewith.—W.H.-J.

Hon. Minister. I cannot very well explain it. The application to be examined is dated the 12th, and the fee was paid on that date. It is quite certain that the candidate was with the Examiners on one day only, the 19th. Captain Edwin confirms this. Possibly Captain Allman may have looked into the qualifications on the back of the application form on the 13th, and counted that as part of the examination process. But this is mere conjecture on my part. The matter does not strike me as being of much importance. W. T. Glasgow. 2/3/99.

Home Trade Reports. Exn. 14. Port of Wellington. No. 514. Report of Examinations of Candidates for Masters' and Mates' Certificates of Competency, 19th day of July, 1897.

Passed. Sent to Secretary, Marine Department, by Examiner, on the 19th day of July, 1897.

Exn. 14, Port of Wellington. (Seal.) Issued under "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." MASTERS' AND MATES' EXAMINATIONS. Examiners' Report of an Examination for Masters' and Mates' Certificates of Competency for Home-trade Passenger Ships, held on the 13th and 19th July, 1897. [Note. —Reports of Candidates Examined for "Foreign-going " Ships are not to be made on the same sheet aa those for '■ Home-trade Passenger " Ships. A separate report is required for each of these two classes.] Rotation No.: 700. Christian and surname of candidate : James Jones. Country where born : South Wales, England. Number and description of former certificate (if any) : River-master. Certificate for which examined : Master, home-trade. Passed or failed in form vision test, in colour vision test, in colour ignorance test, in navigation, in seamanship: Passed. Date and place where fees were paid, and amount: 12/7/97 ; Wellington ; £1. We hereby certify that the above is a true account of the examinations of the above-named candidates, and that they have produced satisfactory testimonials and proofs of sea-service. Dated this 19th day of July, 1897. Geo. Allman, Examiner in Navigation. R. A. Edwin, Examiner in Seamanship. Cert. No. 5407, issued 20/7/97.

EXHIBIT W. Hon. Minister. Referring your verbal directions with reference to steps to be taken in connection with the cancellation of the certificate of competency as home-trade master which has been issued to James Jones, I now submit for approval draft of a letter to James Jones, calling upon him to deliver up the certificate within seven days, and informing him that failing compliance further steps will be taken. 22/2/99. W. T> Glasgow.

327

H.. -26

Mr. Glasgow, Dbaft letter approved. It should be handed Captain Jones to-day, and by an officer of the department. 23/2/99. ■ , ; W.H.-J. : Done.—W. T. G.—23/2/99.

No. 500-99. Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 22nd February, 1899. A certificate of competency as home-trade master, No. 5407, dated the 20th July, 1897, has been issued to you by this department; and as it has come to the knowledge of the Government that you have obtained such certificate without sufficient qualifications, and in a manner which renders the same illegal, 1 am directed by the Minister having charge of the Marine Department to call upon you to deliver the said certificate to zne within seven days from this date, with a view to having the same cancelled. Failing your compliance with this request, lam directed to say that the Minister will cause such further steps to be taken as he may be advised. I have, &c, Mr. James Jones, Wellington. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Letter No. 500/99, dated 22nd February, 1899, delivered to James Jones by me at 6.30 p.m. on -the 23rd February, 1899. Gbo. Sinclaie.—24/2/99.

Hon. Minister. It may be as well to ascertain the legal position as to cancellation of the certificate. This, I understand, is your wish. If you approve, the Crown Law Officers might be asked their opinion. 23/2/99. W. T. Glasgow. Accordingly.—W. H.- J. —24/2/99. For Solicitor-General.—W. T. Glasgow.—24/2/99.

I do not think there is any legal power under the Shipping and Seamen's Act, or its amendments, which would enable the certificate of competency issued to Jones to be cancelled. Sections 119 and 120 of the Act of 1877 do not seem applicable to such a case, and section 121 can only be made use of when there has been a conviction. Whether there may be any means which would enable the Crown to proceed against Jones in the Supreme Court, with the view of having the certificate cancelled or restrain him from using it, is a matter I should like to consider further. But, meantime, it appears to me the most efficacious way of dealing with such cases would be by amendment of the law—providing for cancellation of such certificates when improperly issued or procured, and for rectification of all records relating thereto. 24/2/99. W. S. Eeid. Hon. Minister of Marine.—For your information.—W. T. Glasgow.—-25/2/99. Mr. Glasgow.—l would like to have any further information from the Solicitor-General on this matter.—W. H. -J.— 25/2/99.

Hon. Minister of Marine. Captain Allman's reply is not very satisfactory. [See Exhibit B.] It is almost altogether taken up with a matter respecting which no charge has been laid against him—viz., the absence of proper qualification of the candidate. It is true he does not deny the truth of the charges which were sent to him ;at the same time he does not specifically admit that they are true. The Act provides that " when an officer is accused of inefficiency, offence of breach of his duty, or of any conduct rendering it unfit that he should remain in the Civil Service, if he deny the truth of such accusation, and if the Governor in Council nevertheless think that sufficient cause has been shown for further proceedings, the Governor in Council may refer the matter to the Board." As Captain Allinan has not denied the truth of the accusations, the course to be followed seems to be this: That a copy of the charges and of Captain Allman's reply thereto be forwarded to the Governor in Council with a recommendation from yourself that as he (Captain Allman) has been guilty of conduct which renders him unfit to continue in the Civil Service, and has not denied the charge, he should be dismissed from the service. This is the course indicated in section 23 of the Act of 1866. The above has been written after consultation with the Solicitor-General, to whom I communicated verbally the purport of Captain Allman's reply. I will report on the question of the cancellation of Jones's certificate to-morrow. W. T. Glasgow, 2nd March, 1899. Secretary, Marine Department. Mr. Glasgow. —Kindly prepare recommendation to His Excellency accordingly.—W. H.-J.— 2/3/99. ■ [See Exhibit B.] Papers prepared and forwarded to the Minister at 2.30 p.m.—3/3/99.—W. T. Glasgow.

H.—26

328

Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 2nd March, 1899! Kindly have letter drafted to-day dismissing Captain Allman from the Public Service; also have notice prepared cancelling Captain Jones's certificate as master home-trade, and let me see both. It would be as well perhaps if you were to consult the Solicitor-General as to the form they should take. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Hon. Minister. The papers concerning the dismissal of Captain Allman were prepared and submitted to you yesterday. With reference to the cancellation of Jones's certificate, I have seen the Solicitor-General, who has referred me to the opinion which he has already expressed on m. 99/426 herewith. He further states that no cancellation can be effective so long as the certificate is in Jones's possession. At present he is unable to advise in answer to above minute. 4/3/99. W. T. Glasgow. For Cabinet.—W. H.-J.—4/3/99. In Cabinet, 4th March, 1899. Eeferred to Minister of Marine, with power to act. —A. Willis, Secretary. . .

Dr. Fitchett. Fok your information.—W. H.-J.—7/3/99.

Hon. the Minister. As arranged with you, I conferred yesterday with Mr. Gully (the Solicitor-General being absent through ill-health), and we concurred in the opinion that, whilst the Supreme Court has inherent jurisdiction to recall and void the certificate on the ground of fraud, and proceedings for that purpose might be instituted by the Crown, yet there is no power under the present shipping Acts or regulations to cancel the certificate or prevent its use, nor can the power be given by fresh regulations. An amending Act is necessary. This morning I discussed the matter with the Solicitor-General, and he took substantially the same view. As, however, the Government desire to take some immediate steps to prevent the certificate being used pending proceedings in the Supreme Court or an amending Act, the only course we could suggest was a notification in the Gazette, which I have accordingly drafted for your consideration. It would be better if it were signed by the Governor, but, as he is absent, and you wish it to appear in to-morrow's Gazette, it will, I presume, be signed by you as Minister of Marine. As verbally explained to you, the notification is not authorised by the Act, and has no legal effect, but if the Customs Officer act on it and refuse to grant Jones a clearance, and he proceeds to the Supreme Court (as he can) to compel them to do so, the Government can then raise the question of fraud, and claim to have the certificate removed. 8/3/99. Fred. Fitchett.

To James Jones, of Wellington, Mariner, and to all Collectobs and Officers of Customs and. other Persons Concerned. Whereas under the provisions of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," a certificate of competency as home-trade master, numbered 5407, and dated the twentieth day of July, 1897, was issued by the Secretary to the Marine Department to James Jones, of Wellington, mariner, pursuant to the report of the Examiner that he had duly passed the examination prescribed by the said Act and the regulations thereunder, and was entitled to the said certificate: And whereas in truth and in fact the said James Jones did not duly pass the said examination and was not qualified to sit for the same : Now, therefore, notice is hereby given that, by reason of the premises, the said certificate is invalid and is not available for any of the purposes for which it purports to have been issued, and all Collectors and officers of Customs, and other persons concerned, are hereby enjoined to have regard to this notification and to act accordingly. Dated at Wellington this eighth day of March, 1899. Wμ. Hall-Jones, Minister having charge of the Marine Department.

Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister of Public Works, Wellington. Kindly hold over Gazette notice sent you this morning re cancelling Jones's certificate. Wμ. Hall-Jones 8/3/99. (per E.H.)

Dr. Fitchett. In the absence of the Solicitor-General, please see that immediate steps are taken (as referred to above) to bring the matter before the Court, with the object of having the certificate issued to Captain Jones cancelled. 9/3 99. . W. H.-J.

329

H.—26

Hon. the Minister. Have conferred with Mr. Gully, and he will commence proceedings at once.—F. F.—lo/3/9. I would suggest that, as the evidence of officers affected by the proposed inquiry may be needed in the action, the inquiry should in the meantime be held over.—F. F. —10/3/99.

Hon. Minister of Marine. The effect of the notice in the Gazette will be that Jones has not now any valid certificate, and is therefore not entitled to be master of the " Duchess." His river certificate was given up and cancelled when he obtained the home-trade certificate. . W. T. Glasgow. 10/3/99.

Dr. Fitchett. Fob your information.—W. H.-J.—lo/3/99. Hon. the Minister. It is a rule of equity that he who seeks equity must do equity, and, as the Crown is proceeding in the Supreme Court for the delivering up and voiding of the home-trade certificate, on the ground that it was obtained by fraud, the Court might think it equitable that the decree, if made, should be on terms that the river certificate should be returned. For these reasons I think it would be inadvisable to treat Jones as not having a river certificate—in the meantime, at all events. 10/3/99. Fbed. Fitchett.

EXHIBIT X. Memorandum for the Secretary for Marine. (Urgent). Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, July 13th, 1899. Kindly let me know whether any intimation was given to Captain Jones by the department that he could go up for examination. If so, please let me have a copy as soon as possible. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Hon. Minister. No intimation was given. He put in his application and paid his fee. The time was then arranged with the Examiners. 13/7/99. W. T. Glasgow.

EXHIBIT Y. 1886.—Marine Department. Date of Paper: November 11,1886. Date when registered: November 12, 1886. Previous Paper : With M. 86/2884. From whom, and subject: G. Pope, Wellington, applies for first mate's certificates in lieu of master's certificate cancelled by Court of Inquiry into wreck of " Tui."

Dear Sir,— Wellington, 11th November, 1886. I beg to apply for the issue of a first mate's certificate to me in lieu of the master's certificate formerly held by me, and which has been cancelled by a Court of Inquiry which sat on the 10th instant. As you are aware, the Court of Inquiry, when cancelling my master's certificate, recommended the issue to me of a first mate's certificate; and I presume, therefore, no difficulty will arise in acceding to my application. Should you require any evidence of character in support of this application, I can procure from my late masters, in whose service I have been for the past twelve years, a favourable certificate to my character and efficiency; but the recommendation of the Court of Inquiry will no doubt render the production of such a certificate wholly unnecessary. Yours truly, The Secretary Marine Department. Charles Pope.

Minutes. Referred to Captain Johnson for his opinion. Eeport of the Court and evidence taken at the inquiry herewith.—W. Seed.—lB/11/86. Mr. Seed. —My opinion is the certificate had better be issued. It is recommended by the Court of Inquiry as part of their finding ; besides I think it would be dealing too harshly with a man to deprive him of all means of earning a living.—R. Johnson.—2o/11/86. Hon. Minister in charge of Marine Department.—The Court in this case attributed the loss of the " Tui " to the reckless navigation of the master, and it cancelled his certificate, but added a recommendation that a mate's certificate be issued to him. The Governor has power to do this under the 246 th section of the Shipping and Seamen's Act of 1877. The extreme course of cancelling a master's certificate is one that is rarely resorted to, as it deprives the owner of his ordinary means of earning a living. I think the justice of this case would be met if the recommendation of the Court were acceded to. —W. Seed.—22/11/86. Approved.—R. Stout.—22/11/86. . . . . , . „ , .. 42— H. 26,

H.—26

330

The Collecto b H.M. Customs, to the Seceetaby of Marine, Wellington. In forwarding herewith a " casualty return " for the loss of the s.s. " Tui " in this port, on the Ist instant, I have to inform you that a Magisterial investigation was held yesterday, resulting in the cancellation of the certificate of service, No. 2497, in the name of Charles Pope, the master of the " Tui "at the time of the loss, and he was ordered to pay £4 4s. costs. The certificate was lost in the vessel. . ■ ■ ._••• Wellington, 11th November, 1886. H. S. McKellab, Collector. [Eeproduction of Casualty Keturn ; see inset.]

2904/1886. —Marine Department. ...,:. Date of Paper: November 16, 1886. ,::.;:,„:. Date when registered: November 18, 1886. Previous Paper: M. 86/2884, with M. 86/2928. From whom and Subject: R. M., Wellington, with report re inquiry into wreck of s.s. " Tui."

(Eecd. 18/11/86. Sir, — Eesident Magistrate's Court, Wellington, 16th November, 1886. I have the honour to enclose herewith my report, together with the evidence taken in reference to the loss of the steamship " Tui," near Pencarrow Head, on the Ist instant. The certificate of Captain Pope was lost with the wreck. I have, &c,, H. S. Waedell, Eesident Magistrate. The Hon. the Minister in Charge of the Marine Department, Wellington.

Minute. I think the Court's decision in this case is reasonable, for although the weather was thick at times it was not such as would prevent a careful commander taking his ship out to sea with safety. Had the weather been too thick the master should have waited till it cleared up, and not running at full speed with sail set when he could not see where he was going to. —E. Johnson.—2o/11/86.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 18th November, 1886. I have been directed to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant, forwarding report of the Court of Inquiry into the wreck of the s.s. " Tui," together with the evidence taken at the inquiry. I have, &c, H. S. Wardell, Esq., Eesident Magistrate, Wellington. William Seed.

No. 4. .(Seal.) Issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." " Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." —Weecks and Casualties. (For Eesident Magistrates and Justices of the Peace.) Colony of New Zealand, to wit. Report on a Shipping Casualty to the Steamship " Tui." To the Honourable the Minister having charge of the Marine Department of New Zealand. I, the undersigned, Eesident Magistrate, having been on the fourth day of November, 1886, applied to by Henry Scott McKellar, Esquire, Collector of Customs at the Port of Wellington, for a formal investigation, pursuant to section 240 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," and other provisions of the said Act, respecting a shipping casualty to a certain British ship, called the " Tui," of the Port of Wellington, on the first day of November last, at near Pencarrow Head, did duly proceed with the said investigation—to wit, on the tenth day of November instant, and had before me, and examined on oath, divers persons and witnesses—to wit, Charles Pope, master; August Becker, A.8.; (James) John Marshall, signalman ; James Gregory, A.8.; George Forbes, mate; Thomas Watson, engineer; William Moye, acting lighthouse-keeper, Pencarrow; and Alexander McDonald, master of the barque "Sophia E. Luhrs," the original depositions of whose evidence are hereunto annexed, signed by me, being assisted therein by Cecil Greville Home, E.N,, commander, holding a Certificate of Competency, No. , from the , and John Norie, holding a Certificate of Competency, No. 1,776, from the Board of Trade, who were duly appointed by me to act as Assessors; and upon such investigation and examination of witnesses as aforesaid, I find and report as follows, that is to say, — I. That the official number of the said ship called the " Tui" is 69,001, of which Charles Pope is master, who holds a Certificate of Service, and which ship belonged to Charles Seagar, of Wellington, engineer. 11. That the loss or damage herein more particularly mentioned happened on the first day of November, 1886, at about 11.10 p.m. o'clock in the afternoon, on a reef near to Pencarrow Head, 111. That the loss or damage appears by the evidence to have been caused by striking on a reef near Pencarrow Lighthouse. ■ ■ IV. That the nature of the loss or damage done was total wreck. That the vessel was not insured in any Company. That the " Tui" is schooner-rigged; her port of registry, Wellington; her registered tonnage, 55 t %%. That no lives were lost through the casualty.

%<fs*tA

«BSCED 9T TUB Jaaoery 1875. lietum for Wreck Register 18 ._

STRANDINGS (abroad).

<& Jfame** i>. Nationality. c. Descript i(m of Vessel. "• & -VTO

I. * M. SOW) p | 88 s7yLe~f~n7 yc—**s*C^~ Spechd particulars and remarks* opinions as to cause of casualty, _e. h.yz^y^/£!^r^*r^!£^^;..... • ' "" f* * 1. a, Warns. 6. Port of Begistry, If British. e. Official Snmber. d. Age. «. Wfcsw and how elasiefi. Ship. rWBUIB 2. e_ Steam or sailing? . h. Iron or wood ? Q. Rig? Additional particulars by officer making this Report. STfcjd r..i KTTr... j a. No, of a. Regis* original .cr [ crew, Tonnnge.! including i —- Jtfaster, &c. b. Signal ; letters in b. Number Inter- of available national hands at Code. time of casualty. PARTICULARS of Crew. i a__--miues». 1st Engineer. /.d..7.A... 9 3&& Mute j.i*_#r O. Mate4&J&JLf UKsUT.^S^^.p,.. 5. Nos. of Certificate _; If of competency insert " C;" if of service, "8." Might the casualty have been avoided, if se, iw— r r si. yL^^ If salvage services were rendered, state by whom.. 22. 6 ... . X r a'. Pesnriprion of cargo. b. Number of passengers, if any. and all others not included in eol.4. g. -... ; Cargo, e b..../yy£y4£*,+g£ i (v.wfr^n^fwT^TwwfM*!'...-.». f. \ ft, Pot* bound to. ij' &. Port last sailed from. a. Port originnily sailed from. "To VAGUS. ** \7fi<*fk/rw-?* lf tSfi J? At time of casualty. At time of sailing. 8. hour. and Date Cause of Mie casualty. X 9: tide, of State ! io. I mosphere, and aftof weather, •State 11, wind, foroe of Direction and ! -C#$w. 12. flowing, *■---, s ,:+;-. ,- in what and of Sea State b. Rama of Csnr.tW or Sea. -» . /&^^_^!_X3 ry - 7*' „ „ > .. . \7%4AJ> a*&"~* -y - j O. Exact spot. 13happened. Where casualty 36. Circumstances attending the casualty. 3_ese columns. (24 and 26) will be filled in at the Board of Trade. * If the loss cannot be estimated state here whether a total loss, serious oasuatLy, or trifling accident. yS^^^^^L^utsr^-i-^ /ty-^S. Cargo. f Zf&&Y*y4b .. «- /ZS0L*' » Ship. .7. 14. .15.. vesseL ! (Li On freight. 16. i a. No. of lives lost. b. No. saved and by what means. Total loss. State valne, if known. Partial JOSS. - State estimated loss. Amount of insurance -— — — Lives lost and saved. By whom licensed. 20. Same of PRot (if any). IS. ■ P « . /yfc-jC-L*.? » -e_V -» - -if-^* _£ - X, *•.'._ pZ-yy%~**-~ Prom what, or from whom tho particular! of this casualty Ji ii ve been obtained. 1*. ***

Total or partial loss of vessel. 26.fc*^^e^<f. f Was she supplied with requisite charts ? 27, Were the lights, buo-*s, &c, near to, and 28. indicating the shore, rook, or shoal on «&L-^C which site struck distinctly marked ? Title, date and publisher of the chart of 2t>. loeaUty of casualty. Number of eompassee. SO. . Where was the standard compass ? 81. /*n^&fU^rg£^.~*e£gc---Date when ship was last swung. 82. «*s>*-«—-*?• I <s« - e_vHad the oargo been changed since ? 88. %£c. W , Did any part of the cargo affeot the com- Bs. „ § passes ? 5, Had she boats to carry all persons on hoard ? 85. *&€■*&' |< Were they of any use in this ease ? 86. %£&^ "2 H not, why not ? 87. •^*-^t^d^A^^d^^> * . Condition of masts. 88. Do. rigging. 89. -<l&o*r—pt * Do. sails. 40. &*+-*£. ~. Was she well found in rigging, sails, &o. ? 41. igfc^r J If not, in what was she deficient? 42. f * ± **k -g Particulars of every Anchor on board. 48. Particnius of •rery Cable 00 Board. 44. Swoription. Size. Weight. Description. Length. Sfcicfaidw. - h , J x/ | What was her draught of water? 45. X " f)*** vK ', t Was she fitted with water-tight compart- 48. 3C*f f «*** ' ments ? Did they prove of any use in this case ? 47. %£tf-^' Total or partial loss of oargo. 48. rf- ■* tf llt ya tm ■» §» f Had she a deok load 1 49. /•£> , a -g I Was , she overladen ? 60. /£*, , '•** *S (Weight of cargo. 61. \^. 'Rank of officer in charge at time of stranding. 52. What and at what hour were the last land- 68. /^^^^^^^^^J-^^^Cc-^^^ marks, beacon, or buoys seen ? /<-«**«— ~\ " ** § Were they recognized ? 64. %Z^~S % Was' the lead hove ? 55. ,<£■,, g How long before tne stranding ? 56. ,— What was the depth at first, and last oast ? 57. ~**i . « Course steering at time o*■ '.randing. 58. IP - Direction of ship's head ufcer stranding. 5d 9 Other circumstances of the navigation im- 60. , " . mediately preceding the stranding. ' s J&j v^ Betails/oFmeasures taken to avoid the ®O<_ *«—-* #^*. sfaranding, . «-^>—^«-»- ~%%*~e M^^L _*c —e^^ t -*C_-«-' <t£:i7 cl^> « «... Nsuae o« master. 7 62 . t^^^b^ c^~^Neme and addreee of owner. 68. 1 f"-Care shoul9 be taken that every casualty to a British ship by rtroad, also to Foa«gß eta|»t 1 j by stranding on the Coasts of a British Poseessioß, ifiietier QMMXHting abiMg*., 2 J should bo reported on one of these Forms. J . Wnen is take Bf -a Fo«» •«*»»«» *# but the above aucstiona numbered 26 to 63 need not be answeied. Lin the absence of special circumstances no covering letter is recj«jj*d with thk report. mm » *^^—i^———^»i P >imw, ~,|.l t| ~, wutL )i,n,) l ßnm tffH ß

SCALE OF WIND FORCE FOR CASUALTY PURPOSES, WITH ILLUSTRATIONS.

Figures to denote the Force ofthe Wind. Description of Wind. illustrations of the power of the Wind as regards a well-oo-dtt-me* SUn-of • War or First-daw Clipper Ship. Fl«uret tSde-l note ihej FoMse ofthe Wind. 0 1 2 3 4 5 ft 7 8 9 10 11 12 Calm Light Air Light Bree» Gentle Breeze Moderate- Breeze... Fresh Breeze ...... Strong Breeze Moderate Gale ... Fresh Gale Strong Gale Whole Gale Storm Hurricane Just suakjjent to give-steerage way " " I With which the abore Ship with all sail f 1 to 2 knoto........."....'.-. V set and clean full would go in smooth \ 3 to 4 •i water - Uto6 „ ..::'".ZZ'.'.'.'.'.Z J f Royal s, <fcc , [in which she could just carry in chase J M *f fs f ***-£■ *»'.'. full and by ' 1 Double Beefs and Jib, &.. ... J ' " Triple Reefs, &c t _• _ _ ,i . , l Cloee Reefs and Courses in wnichsne could just bear close-reefed Main Topsail and reefed Foresail UnderStorra Staysail Bare Poles j ....."."..'" "" 0 1 _ 3 4 5 l> 7 8 9 10 11 12

331

H.—26

And I, the said Eesident Magistrate, further state my opinion on the matter aforesaid to be as follows : That the loss of the said vessel was due to the reckless navigation on the part of the master ; and I order that the master's certificate held by him be cancelled, and that he pays the costs of this inquiry, amounting to £4 4s. I recommend that a mate's certificate be issued to the said Charles Pope. Given under my hand, this tenth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and eightysix, at Wellington, New Zealand. H. S. Wakdell, E.M. I concur in the above report.—Cecil G. Hobne, Assessor. I concur in the above report.—John Nome, Assessor.

" Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877."—Wrecks and Casualties. Depositions of Witnesses before Resident Magistrate. The examination of Charles Pope, of August Becker, of John Marshall, of James Gregory, of George Forbes, of Thomas Watson, of William Moye, and of Alexander McDonald, taken on oath this tenth day of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, at Wellington, in the colony aforesaid, before the undersigned Eesident Magistrate, in the presence and hearing of Charles Pope, master of the ship hereinafter mentioned, touching a shipping casualty to a certain British ship, called the " Tui," of the Port of Wellington, Charles Pope, master, and belonging to Charles Seagar, of Wellington, engineer, which sailed from the Port of Wellington on the first day of November, 1886, bound to Foxton, and which investigation is made in compliance with the application of Henry Scott McKellar, Collector of Customs at Wellington, and pursuant to section 240 of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." This deponent, Charles Pope, being duly sworn on his oath, saith as follows: —I was master of the " Tui." I gave evidence before you on the 3rd November relative to the loss of the " Tui." I signed it, that is my signature, and the evidence is correct [just read]. I marked the course on the chart as steered and where she struck. Our usual course is pretty near mid channel; if anything, we hug the red light shore most. I steered a high course on this night from the wharf on account of the light on Somes Island being obscure. I never saw a chart of the harbour to examine it until after this occurrence. I steered a compass course when I made the light on Somes Island. I only took sight-bearings, not compass-bearings. I saw Points Gordon and Halswell distinctly as I passed ;it was thick to northward but clear to the southward. I passed Gordon Point about a mile and a half off—standing across. I don't think we passed Point Gordon more than three-quarters of a mile off when on a north-east course. I was a mile and a half away from Point Gordon when I altered my course southerly. I could then see Pencarrow light; it was about half a point outside the starboard rigging. I compared the standard compass with the steering compass on the bridge twice. I found the variation as shown by the deviation-card. I was watching the man at the wheel. I did not leave the bridge at all. By Mr. Skerrett: I have been twelve years running in and out of Wellington Harbour; been five years master of "Tui." I steered a high course for Somes Island. I judged I was a mile and a half from Point Gordon when I changed course. I had my doubts about making Somes light when I left the wharf. I opened Pencarrow light, and then I altered my course to S.S.B. I usually keep the lighthouse outside my starboard rigging. I steered S.S.E. about twenty minutes. I never allowed her more than twenty-five on that course. I opened the bright light on Somes Island before she was at the Pinnacle; I should say I was about half way before Gordon Point and the Pinnacle. That is the course I have been steering about five years. I never saw the green light. As soon as I opened the white light I went S.S.B. I ran fifteen to twenty on S.S.E. course before I opened the white light. I did not see any light on my S.S.E. course till I saw Somes Island. While on S.S.E. course I only saw Somes light once ; as soon as I opened it I changed my course. The green light is a difficult one to see, and cannot be seen any distance. If I had opened it I should not have seen it. I could only have opened the green light about a cable's length when I struck. I did not see Pencarrow light or Somes light after I changed to S.S.E. course. I kept a careful look-out for these lights. I could not see the land or any point at the entrance. The wind was east to north, not more than a point and a half to eastward. The helmsman had to give her weather-helm in the squalls. She tends to port without sail on her. The screw brings her up to port in smooth weather. I found the compass very sluggish. The compass is always sluggish in smooth water. There was a good sea for a boat, but nothing for a vessel. The vessel was very steady; never knew the compass to hang for more than a point and a half. We are obliged to carry heavy compass. We had a standard compass; the helmsman steers by the spirit-compass. If the sluggishness was not noticed the course of the vessel would be altered from half to three-quarters of a point. I have cautioned the steersman. I supervised the steering myself this night. I looked at the compass several times. I had looked at compass about five minutes before she struck. I was looking for both lights. The course was S. by W. That course was kept. I was of opinion I was well on the green side. I did not see Pencarrow after I passed Point Gordon. I am of opinion I kept too long on S.S.E. course. I only saw the red light once—that was when I was off Point Gordpn. It is a common occurrence when leaving this harbour to steer a high course for Somes Island, and then steer for Pencarrow light from the white light off Somes Island. I could not say how far I was from Somes Island when I altered course to S.S.E. I was going full speed. She goes about seven knots an hour. We left at 10.15 and struck at 11.10. It is seven miles to the lighthouse at Pencarrow from the wharf. I fell satisfied I was on my right course, and it never occurred to me to go half-speed.

332

H—26

She was nearly S. by W. when she struck, or after she struck. I looked at the compass when she struck. I looked at the compass within a minute. She was heading towards Barrett's Eeef. The night cleared pretty frequently, and I thought to pick up Pencarrow light. By the Collector: I set the foresail a little after rounding Point Halswell, on the starboard side. The wind was east of north from Point Halswell. By Mr. Skerrett: I should have left at 9 o'clock, but could not get away till 10 o'clock, the advertised time for leaving. There was a necessity for hurry. By Court: I saw the white light at Somes, and shaped my course accordingly. I saw Pencarrow light. I never saw the two lights together. It would be sufficient to steer by if I once saw Somes Island. I have often steered out by Somes light. I steered by the standard compass, and the helmsman by the spirit compass. I did not stand by the compass all the time. I kept a look-out every now and then. The helmsman could not steer by the standard compass. C. Pope. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. August Becker, sworn, saith: I gave evidence before the Collector of Customs on the 3rd November. I was on the look-out on the night of the striking. The evidence read is correct. I did not see Captain Pope. By Mr. Skerrett : This was my first voyage. I thought it was my duty to be on the look-out, but I had no orders to look-out. I was the only man on the deck. I did not see any one at the wheel. I was supposed to be on the look-out. August Beckbb. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. John Marshall, sworn, saith: lam signalman at Beacon Hill. I remember Ist November. It was thick and squally, and wind from north-east. I saw Pencarrow light from 10 till 10.30. I looked for it, but could not see it again till 12 o'clock ; neither could I see Somes Island light. It had been dirty all day. John Marshall. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. James Gregory, sworn, saith: lam an A.B. of s.s. " Tui." By Collector : I gave evidence before you on the 3rd November, and signed it; it is correct. [Evidence read and put in.] The captain was on the bridge, most of the time behind me, while I was steering, and seeing that I was steering the proper course. The captain was sober. I may have steered S.S.E. about twenty minutes. The captain altered course to S. by W. I saw the light at Pencarrow about a point and a half on port bow just after the course was altered. It was a very dirty night, and thick. I did not look for Somes light after we changed the course. I have no doubt the compass hung on this night. I only looked at the compass, and did not look for Pencarrow light. I have seen the compass hung two points. I cannot say I saw the compass hang that night, but I think it did hang. She griped to windward that night in the saualls. I do not know if the compass did hang. I have steered vessels out of this harbour. I steered the usual course on this occasion. It might have hung a point or point and a half that night without me noticing it. The captain attended to his work, and once or twice supervised the steering. The captain has told me the compass was sluggish. By Court: I noticed the captain at the standard compass. He corrected me twice, I think. James Gregoey. Taken and sworn this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. George Forbes, sworn, saith : I was mate of the " Tui" on the night of the striking. I gave evidence before you on the 3rd November in this matter. [Evidence read and put in.] That is correct. By Mr. Skerrett: The compass would not be so sluggish going that night to Point Halswell as it would be after turning to go out of the harbour before the wind, because the wind was on her side before turning. I would expect the compass to be sluggish in going before the wind that night. I have noticed the compass hang one point. I omitted to set the watch that night. I worked up till 6 o'clock that night loading. We came in that morning at Bor 9 o'clock. The helmsman had been working that day and part of the night before. He would be better in bed than at the wheel. By Court: Ido not suppose the men were overdone when we left harbour. Geoege Fobbes. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington in the Colony of Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. Thomas Watson, sworn, saith : I was engineer of the " Tui," and hold a certificate. By Collector: I gave evidence before you on the 3rd November in this matter. [Evidence put in and read.] That is all correct. Everything was tight below in the engine-room. We examine them every day ; all sluice-valves are always shut. Water came from forward compartment. We lefc the engine-room about ten minutes after striking. We went at as great a speed as possible. By Mr. Skerrett: She was about twenty minutes under steam from the time she struck. Ie might have been more. The fires were out when I left. ; ■:

333

H.—26

By Court ': It was not more than twenty minutes she was under steam from time of striking. By Mr. Skerrett: After I got in boat I got out again, and then returned to the engine-room, and then went on the boat again. When I left she was still working her engines. It did not take me any time going back to the engine-room. It was twenty minutes when I first left the engines from the time the vessel turned round till I left the engine-room. I could not have stopped any longer in the engine-room, the water was splashing about so by the working of the engines. Thos. Watson. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. William Moye, sworn, saith : I was acting as lightkeeper at Pencarrow Head on the night of the Ist November. I took notice of the light on Somes Island. I could see the light, the green one, except during the rain squalls, distinctly up till 11.15. There were rain squalls. I did not see the " Tui" approaching on the Ist, but I saw her lights when she was on the reef. I saw flash-lights, signals, but did not see her side-lights. I saw one bright light. I should say she was on the point of Barrett's Eeef. She is now between Chaffer's Passage and Barrett's Beef, in Chaffer's Passage. By Court: The squalls lasted about a quarter of an hour, and were pretty frequent. I saw continuously Somes Island light for ten minutes. By Mr. Skerrett: There might have been three squalls in an hour. I remember the night distinctly. By Court: I could not see pilot-station lights. I might have seen the light for more than ten minutes if I had kept looking, but I did not remain. William Moye. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M. Alexander McDonald, sworn, , saith : I am master of the " Sophia E. Luhrs." I came partly into the harbour, and had to stand off it was too windy to get in. It was a dirty night, and I could not often see the light at Pencarrow. On a clear night you can see the green light outside. When lam beating in the harbour I make the green light, and then go about. I got less than a quarter of a mile off Pencarrow light. I occasionally could see Somes light. I don't believe I saw it after 10 o'clock and before 12 o'clock. The wind varied from N.W. to N.E. A. McDonald. Taken and sworn before me this 10th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand.—H. S. Wardell, E.M.

" Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877" (Wrecks and Casualties). Depositions of Witnesses before the Collector of Customs. The examination of Charles Pope, taken on oath this third and fourth and sixth days of November, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and eighty-six, at Wellington, in the colony aforesaid, before the undersigned, Collector of Customs at Wellington, in the presence and hearing of Charles Pope, master of the ship hereinafter mentioned, excepting that of Forbes and Watson, touching the loss of a certain ship called the " Tui," of the Port of Wellington, master, and belonging to Charles Seagar (managing owner), engineer, of Wellington, in the Port of Wellington, on the first day of November, 1886, and which investigation is made in pursuance of the provisions of "The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877." This deponent, Charles Pope, being duly sworn on his oath, saith as follows : —I am master of the s.s. " Tui," I hold a certificate of service as master, No. 2497. We left the Queen's Wharf for Foxton at fifteen minutes past 10 p.m. on the Ist instant, with a full cargo of general goods— about 75 tons—and nine passengers, with a crew of twelve all told. The night was very dark, with drizzling rain; thick at times. I could not see Somes Island red light, so I steered a compass course midway between the red light on Somes Island and Point Halswell. When I got well over by Point Halswell, I saw the red light and all round I set the foresail and kept away. After rounding Point Gordon it came on thick again with drizzling rain. I could see the loom of Pencarrow light, but I could not see the light distinctly. I steered a compass course, also by the light. After running for some time it cleared again. I opened the white light on Somes Island, and then it thickened again. I kept her going on the usual course, with the white light open, until about 10 minutes past 11, when I felt her strike. The weather cleared then, and I found that we had struck on a point on the north side of the lighthouse at Pencarrow Head. I stopped the engines and gave the order, " Full-speed astern." I took sail in at the same time, and set a hand to the lead. I got the answer back, " She is going astern." This was immediately after the hand went to the lead. I reversed the helm and gave the order, " Full-speed ahead," and hauled her head up the harbour again. The cook came to me and said that she was making water in the fore cabin. I sang out down to the engineer in the engine-room to drive her all he could, as I would beach her. Shortly after he told me that she was making water in the engineroom, and that he could not stop long. I then gave the mate orders to clear away the boats and have all ready, also to the steward to have all the lady passengers ready. I made all the usual signals. I burnt Holmes's signal-lights, but got no assistance. Then she sank by the bow ; her stern stopped up about an hour, 1 should say. About half-past 11 I ordered the boats away; every one on board the ship in them. I saw to this myself. The boat I was in landed at the pilot-station about 2 a.m. The other boat landed at the old station. I was anxious about her, and Captain Holmes, the pilot, was just preparing to go in search of her when one of the hands came in and reported all right.

St.—26

334

By Collector : The courses steered were —First, N.E. \N ; second, 5.5.8.; third, S. by W. There was a squall about every five minutes. I lost the white light on Somes Island in each squall, and Pencarrow light in some of them. I had lost the latter light for about four or five minutes, and saw it again just before we struck. I had the light then well on the port bow. I did not take notice of how many points, but, the land being obscured, I could not judge my distance properly. I had lost Somes Island light before this. I cannot say for how long. There are two compasses aboard. The standard compass is on the forward part of the bridge. The steering compass is also on the bridge—it is a spirit compass. In some courses it is out three points. It is bad going to the eastward. I then allow an extra half-point. My impression is that in steering from a white light I must have been on the edge of the green, and so being closer to the eastern shore than my usual course. The wind was to the eastward of north. She carried the boom on the starboard side. We had the foresail only. I should say that the strength of the wind would be No. 7 — i.e., a moderate gale, except in the squalls, when it was a full gale. There was a decent sea for the harbour—a nasty, short chop; the tide was ebbing. I cannot say exactly. We generally leave Wellington On the ebb to catch about two hours' flood when rounding Terawhiti. The exact spot upon which we struck is a reef marked on the chart at not quite a quarter of a mile north of the Penearrow lighthouse. No soundings were taken before we struck. The same water is carried on both sides—viz., from Bto 10 fathoms from shore to the reef. She was drawing 7 ft. 9 in. aft, and 5 ft. 6 in. forward. The " Tui " was fitted with four water-tight compartments. They did not prove of any use in this case: Ido not know why. She must have gone over something else, besides striking forward. I knew that the sluice-valves were closed, because I closed them myself two trips ago. There is no chance of their having been opened since. We have been carrying dry cargo since. I have not seen the ship since she went down, but have been told by the agent, Mr. Bishop, who has been there, that she now lies about 70 yards from the beach in Chaffer's Passage. When heading up the harbour I was trying to get behind the Pinnacle, so that if she did go down there would be a chance of lifting her, being clear of the south-east wind sea. I think we were well down to the Pinnacle Rock in going out when we lost the red light on Somes Island, and then we opened the white light. We then kept her away, and the course S. by W. was steered, when it came on thick. We always try to keep in mid-channel as much as possible, but keep more to the red than the green side. We cannot see the green light at any distance. lam of opinion that had I opened the green light I should not have been able to see it, and I should have supposed I had lost the light altogether in the squall. There is no set of the tide towards either shore. I have never known it have any effect on a vessel going out; it has when coming in. It depends upon which bow it catches her on. The sea was running straight out. The only way that I can account for the "Tui" being out of her course is that, the compass being very sluggish, I got more over on that side. She was full-loaded, and when that is the case she always gripes to windward. I was watching the man at the wheel, and he appeared to be steering right. I was at the wheel as far as Halswell Point. The mate and two hands I had sent below when we reached Point Halswell. There was a man forward supposed to be on the look-out. He, the man at the wheel, and myself, were the only persons on deck, so far as lam aware. The ship was swung last about a year ago. We had no cargo on board to affect the compasses. The ship was valued at £4,000. She is not insured. Ido not know the value of the cargo, or whether there is any insurance on it, or the freight. Nothing was saved from the ship. There was time to have saved personal property but no one seemed to think of doing it. There were no lives lost. There was no insobriety. We had a very steady crew. We were going full-speed at the time of the striking. .It was a severe shock. We appeared to strike well forward; There was no warning from the man on the lookout. Chaeles Pope. Taken and sworn this 3rd day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand before me. —H. S. McKellae. The foregoing deposition of Charles Pope, written on sworn sheets of paper, is the evidence referred to by the said Charles Pope in his evidence given before me on the 10th day of November, 1886.— H. S, Waedell, Resident Magistrate.—lo/11/86. This deponent, August Becker, being duly sworn on his oath, saith as follows: I was an able seaman on the s.s. "Tui." I was about the main deck forward of the bridge from the time of leaving the wharf. I was doing odd jobs about. I was supposed to be on the look-out, but was not doing so. I had no orders to keep a look-out. Just before she struck I was coiling up the gear of the foresail. I noticed the light at the Heads was shut in once or twice—l mean shut in by the fog or haze. I cannot say whether 1 saw the light within ten minutes of the striking. It was a squally night—rain squalls; they did not come very often, I think, but I did not take much notice ; it was blowing pretty fresh. I did not take any notice of the Points as we passed. I did not see the Pinnacle or outer rock. The shock of the striking was severe, but not enough to upset me. I did not notice how long the vessel stuck. I was busy then. The foresail was set at the time of striking. By Master : I noticed before we left the wharf that the squalls were frequent; they had been so all day, and very thick. The mate did not ask me to go on the look-out. By Collector : I saw the red light on Somes Island; that was before we rounded the Point. I never saw the white light. August Beokee. Taken and sworn this 4th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in' the colony of New Zealand, before me —H. S. McKellae, Collector. The foregoing deposition of August Becker, written on two sheets, numbered 8 and 9, is the evidence referred to by the said August Becker in his evidence given before me on the 10th day of November, 1886.— H. S. Waedell, Resident Magistrate.—lo/11/86.

335

H.—26

This deponent, James Gregory, being duly sworn on his oath, saith as follows: I was on the s.s. "Tui" as an able seaman on the night she was wrecked. It was my place to coil up the lines and see them made secure for the night. As soon as that was done I went to the wheel and relieved the captain. It was then nearly half-past 10 p.m. The order I received from the captain was " N.E.; nothing to leeward." At this time I could see Point Halswell indistinctly ; I could not say how far away. I could see the red light when I went to the wheel. I saw that until we kept the vessel away after rounding the Point. I did not look behind me. I never saw the white light. The course after keeping away was 8.5. E., keeping Pencarrow light on the starboard bow. I could see the light at that time, but we had frequent rainsqualls, and it was very thick. The course was altered by the captain to S. by W., but I cannot tell at what time, or where the ship was at the time. I could see Pencarrow light off and on, but not all the time, or at the exact time of the alteration. Shortly after the course was altered I saw the light on the port bow. I did not see the outer rock at Barrett's Eeef. It was blowing pretty fresh. The foresail was full, with the tack hauled up, not reefed. I was steering the S. by W. course by compass at the time we struck. I missed the light for some time before we struck. I never saw the light on the starboard bow on the S. by W. course. Our compass-card is very slow, and in looking at that frequently objects around cannot well be distinguished, owing to the glare from the binnacle-light on the eyes and the thickness of the night—there was a kind of white haze over the land—the compass being very slow, the ship's head may have varied a point or so without being able to detect it by the compass. I have been a month in the " Tui," and have had nearly ten years' experience at sea. I have many times steered the " Tui." On leaving the port the same courses were steered this time as those usually steered. There was no drink on board, and every one was sober. I do not know of any one being on deck except Becker, the captain, and myself. By Master : You have often cautioned me about the compass being sluggish, and have directed me to watch an object visible. Unfortunately, there were no objects visible that night. You have told me that the ship's head would go off a point or more, while the compass would hang on the course for a few seconds. I have seen her do so myself in any jumping sea. I think that she might very easily have griped to windward that night. I cannot remember whether I had to give her any weather helm—she carried more weather helm in the squalls, of course. James Gbegoey. Taken and sworn this 4th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand, before me —H. S. McKellar, Collector. The foregoing deposition of James Gregory, written on three sheets of paper, numbered from 10 to 12 inclusive, is the evidence referred to by the said James Gregory in his evidence given before me on the 10th day of November, 1886.— H. S. Wabdell, Resident Magistrate.—lo/11/86. This deponent, George Forbes, being duly sworn on his oath, saith as follows : I hold a certificate as Master Bof Trade Competency, No. . I was mate of the s.s. " Tui" on the Ist instant. We left the wharf at 10.15 p.m. It was thick and raining. The wind was northwesterly. Just after we had coiled the ropes away and made them fast, the captain sang out to set the foresail. I had the foresail set and ropes coiled, and then went on the bridge. The captain told me to go below, and he would call me when we went round the Cape. I should say it was then from fifteen to twenty minutes after we left the wharf. We were approaching Point Halswell. I could see the land quite plainly. I did not notice the Somes Island light. I did not look for it at the time. We were approaching the Point in just about the usual position and distance when I went below. I left the captain on the bridge with a man at the wheel. In fine weather I have noticed that the steering-compass was sluggish. I should not expect it to be sluggish with the breeze of wind we had that night. I was dozing when she struck, and rushed on deck. She was then on the rocks. I took a cast of the lead, and found that she was going astern. Sang out accordingly to the captain. I then got the foresail down and went on the bridge to get the boats out. I had no time to define the position of the ship when she struck. After the ship was clear of the reef, she was turned round for the harbour again. I should say it was from thirty to forty minutes after this that she sank under us by the bow. I have not seen her since we got ashore. When I came on deck I found the boom of the foresail amidships. Some one must have let go the guy. The peak was also let go. I have not been a month in the ship. The captain has always taken her out of the harbour. I was master of the s.s. " Lyttelton," and in her made many voyages out of Wellington. My rule for steering was to enter the bright and fairway light at Somes Island, and keep it until I got clear of Barrett's Eeef, and in dark nights to keep on until the Pencarrow Head light was abreast, and then keep away. I do not remember any occasion when it would have been necessary to steer a compass-course. The water came in very fast, and she sank by the head. I saw the water in the engine-room. The propeller was still revolving when she sank. There was no means of keeping her afloat; pumping was of no service whatever. When we were in the boats the light at Somes Island was as often obscured as visible. It was. a thick and dirty night. The anchors were ready; I could have got them over in a few seconds if asked for. It is not usual to take soundings when going out or in of the port. There was a hand lead ready to hand. I had it over in a second when wanted. Geoege Foebes. Taken and sworn this 4th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand, before me—H. S. McKellar, Collector. The foregoing deposition of George Forbes, written on three sheets of paper, numbered from 13 to 15 inclusive, is the evidence referred to by the said George Forbes in his evidence given before roe on the 10th day of November; 1886,. —H. 8, WAKDEiiL, Eesident Magistrate.—lo/11/86.

H,—26

336

This deponent, Thomas Watson, being duly sworn on his oath, saith: I was engineer of the s.s. " Tui," on the Ist instant. My certificate number is 1015, for service as second-class engineer. I was in charge of the engines. We were going at full speed ahead at the time of striking. The shock was not severe. I received orders to stop her and go astern, and shortly after the order was given, " full speed astern," she backed off. Then order was given to " stop," and " full speed ahead." Shortly after this, the engine-room began to fill with water. I called the fireman down to lend a hand, and we remained in the engine-room until the water was up to our knees. I came on deck and told the captain that she was going down. I asked him to get the boats out so as to get the passengers on board. I went forward, and found the boards in the fore cabin all afloat. We left in the boats about ten minutes afterwards. We left the engines going full speed. She was afloat for some time after we landed on the beach, with her stern sticking up, and sunk forward. I have been back to the wreck since. She is lying in Chaffer's Passage, nearer to the western shore than midchannel. Her masts are from 8 ft. to 10 ft. above water. I am quite satisfied that she could not have kept afloat any longer. I had a hard job to keep the men down below as it was. I was the last to leave the engines. The order to " stop " was given immediately after the striking ; it was given by Captain Pope. I spoke to him just before leaving the wharf. To the best of my knowledge, he was quite sober. Thos. Watson. Taken and sworn this 6th day of November, 1886, at Wellington, in the Colony of New Zealand, before me—H. S. McKellar, Collector. The foregoing deposition of Thomas Watson, written on two sheets of paper numbered, 16 and 17, is the evidence of the said Thomas Watson, referred to by him in his evidence given before me on the 10th day of November, 1886.— H. S. Wardell, Eesident Magistrate.—lo/11/86.

Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z., 26th November, 1886. The following is the report of the Court of Inquiry into the wreck of the s.s. " Tui," of Wellington, official number 69001, 55 tons register, Charles Quintin Pope, master, holding a New Zealand certificate of service as master in the home-trade, No. 2497 (renewal). The vessel struck on a reef near Pencarrow Head Lighthouse, at the entrance to Wellington Harbour, on the Ist instant, and shortly afterwards sank in deep water. William Seed, Secretary. " That the loss of the said vessel was due to the reckless navigation on the part of the master, and I order that the master's certificate held by him be cancelled, and that he pay the costs of this inquiry, amounting to four pounds four shillings. I recommend that a mate's certificate be issued to the said Charles Pope. " Given under my hand this tenth day of November, one thousand eight hundred and eightysix, at Wellington, New Zealand. H. S. Wakdell, Eesident Magistrate." "We concur in the above report. —Cecil G. Home, John Norie, Nautical Assessors."

Wellington, 22nd November, 1886. His Excellency the Governor is respectfully advised, in pursuance of the provisions of the 246 th section of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," to authorise a new certificate of service as mate of a home-trade ship to be granted to Charles Pope in place of his master's certificate of service No. 2497, which was cancelled by the Magistrate, before whom a formal investigation was held at Wellington on the 4th instant respecting the loss of the s.s. " Tui," of which vessel Charles Pope was master. The papers connected with this investigation are forwarded herewith for His Excellency's information. Approved—W. F. D. J.— 22/11/86. Robert Stout.

The Collector, Marine Department, H.M. Customs, Wellington. Wellington, 23rd November, 1886. Herewith I forward New Zealand certificate of service as mate, home-trade, No. 2542, which has been issued in favour of Charles Quintin Pope, in accordance with the recommendation of the Court of Inquiry into the loss of the s.s. " Tui," and 1 have to request that you will deliver the same to him on application. William Seed.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 23rd November, 1886. With reference to your letter of the 11th instant, I have the honour to inform you that, in accordance with the recommendation contained in the report of the Court of Inquiry into the wreck of the s.s. " Tui," by which your master's certificate was cancelled, a certificate of service as mate home-trade has been issued in your favour and sent to the Collector of Customs at Wellington for delivery to you on application. I have, &c, Mr. C. Q. Pope, Wellington. William Seed.

Marine Department, Wellington, 13th July, 1887. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. Herewith I forward copy of the evidence taken at the formal investigation into the wreck of the s.s. " Tui," on the Ist November last, for delivery to Messrs. Bell, Gully, and Izard, solicitors, on payment of £1 10s., the cost of making the 3ame; and I have to request that this amount may be paid to Mr. Grix, of this department, when received. Ijewis H- B. Wilson, for Secretary,

337

H.—26

Gentlemen,— Marine Department, Wellington, 13th July, 1887. With reference to your request for a copy of the evidence taken at the formal investigation into the loss of the s.s. " Tui," near Penearrow Head, on the Ist November last, I have the honour to inform you that a copy has been made and sent to the Collector of Customs at this port for delivery to you on payment of £1 10s., the cost of making the same. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, for Secretary. Messrs. Bell, Gully, and Izard, solicitors, &c, Wellington.

Hon. Sic,— Wellington, 27th September, 1888. On the 12th November, 1886, my certificate as master, New Zealand coastal service, was cancelled owing to the loss of the s.s. "Tui" while under my command. As I have been unable since that time to obtain employment, owing to the loss of my certificate, I would pray for the return of the same. I am, &c, The Hon. Geo. Fisher, Minister of Marine. Chaeles Pope.

Minutes. . I think Pope could have applied for a mate's certificate. Ask him whether he has a mate's certificate, or whether he has made any application for it.—Gbo. Fishes. 9/10/88. Hon. Minister.—Pope was granted a mate's certificate of service on the 22nd November, 1886.— H. S. McKellae, Secretary.—lo/10/88. Eeply that, as he has had mate's certificate, master's certificate cannot be granted.— Geo. Eishee.—lo/10/88.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 10th October, 1888. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th ultimo, in which you apply for the return of your certificate as master, which was cancelled by the Court of inquiry into the wreck of the s.s. "Tui," and, in reply, I am to state that, as you have already been granted a mate's certificate on the recommendation of the Court which cancelled your certificate, the Government does not see its way to take any further steps in the matter. I have, &c., Mr. Charles Q. Pope, Mariner, Wellington. H. S. McKellae, Secretary.

Sir,— Lome Street, Wellington, 14th April, 1889. I beg to make an application for the return of my certificate, as I have an offer to take command of a vessel, being unable to get a situation on the mate's certificate granted. For the last two and a half years it has been a hard struggle to keep my wife and family from starvation, and, not succeeding in getting employment ashore, I beg once more that you will consider my application favourably, and plead in extenuation that I have suffered severely for any errors I may have committed. I am, 4c., L. Wilson, Esq. Chaeles Popb.

Hon. Ministee, — About two years and a half ago the Court of inquiry into the wreck of the "Tui" cancelled the certificate of service as master held by C. Pope, a mate's certificate being issued to him. He now asks that his certificate may be returned to him. Although there can be no doubt that the decision of the Court was a proper one, I think that the period which has elapsed since the certificate was cancelled might be considered in some way to mitigate the fault committed. I do not recommend that the certificate of service be returned to him, but I recommend that, on satisfactory proofs of good conduct and sobriety since his certificate was cancelled, he be allowed to present himself for examination for a certificate as master home-trade. Lewis H. B. Wilson. 27/4/89. - ' Approved.—T. Feegus.—27/4/89.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 29th April, 1889. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th instant, in which you apply for the restoration of your certificate of service as master, which was cancelled by the Court of inquiry into the wreck of the s.s. "Tui," and, in reply, I have been directed by the Minister acting for the Minister having charge of this department to state that the Government is unable to accede to your request, but that, on your furnishing satisfactory proofs of good conduct and sobriety since the cancellation of your certificate, you will be allowed to be examined for a certificate of competency as master home-trade. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Mr. Charles Pope, Lome Street, Wellington.

Sic, — Wellington, 15th November, 1897. I have the honour to apply for permission to present myself for examination for a master's certificate in the home-trade. Enclosed I send testimonials, mentioned in last letter, which on production would be granted. My time here being limited, I beg to ask the favour of an early reply. I am, &c, The Secretary of Marine. Chables Pope, care of Johnston and Co. 43— H. 26.

H.—26

338

Minutes. Hon. Minister. Me. Pope has furnished testimonials. I submit them for your information, in connection with your minute on the accompanying paper. I think he may be allowed to go up for examination. See also copy of letter written to him on the 29th April, 1889. W. T. Glasgow. 17/11/97. Approved.—lnform accordingly.—W. H.-J. —17/11/97. Mr. Pope verbally informed that he may be examined, and his papers returned to him.— G.A.—l9/11/97.

Marine Department, Wellington, 19th November, 1897. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. Me. Chaeles Quentin Pope, whose master's certificate of service was cancelled by the Court of inquiry into the stranding of the s.s. " Tui" on a reef near Pencarrow Head Lighthouse on the Ist November, 1886, and who now holds a mate's certificate of service, has received permission to go up for examination for a certificate of competency as master home-trade. You may, therefore, accept his application to be examined. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Marine Department, Wellington, 19th November, 1897. To the Principal Examiner of Masters and Mates, Wellington. Me. Chaeles Quentin Pope, whose master's certificate of service was cancelled by the Court of inquiry into the stranding of the s.s. " Tui" on a reef near Pencarrow Head Lighthouse on the Ist November, 1886, and who now holds a mate's certificate of service, has received permission to go up for examination for a certificate of competency as master home-trade. He may, therefore, be examined for a certificate of that grade on making a propsr application. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Examined accordingly.—Geo. Allman, E. A. Edwin.—7/12/97.

The Collectoe of Customs at Wellington, to the Seceetaey, Marine Department, Wellington. (Memorandum No. 1065/97.) Befebeing to your letter of the 19th ultimo, M 97/ 2450—242/93, Mr. Pope is unable to produce the mate's certificate of service which he is supposed to be in possession of, and has this day made a declaration that it was never received by him. He informs me that, apparently, it had got mislaid after receipt at the Customhouse ; that, knowing such certificate was granted, he was allowed to ship on the "Stormbird;" that he called several times at the Customhouse, and understood that the certificate was mislaid, and, finally, that, when found, it would be sent to him at Wanganui, but he did not get it. The record-book in my office shows the receipt on the 11th June, ]887, of " C.2, Pope's certificate," but the column, " How disposed of," is still blank. Search has been made in the safe at shipping office, &c, but we fail to find any trace of letter itself or the certificate. D. McKellae. 6/12/97. ■

I, Chaeles Pope, of Wanganui, mariner, do hereby declare that a certificate issued in my favour by the Marine. Department has not been received by me,, and that verbal permission was given to me by the then Acting Collector of Customs, Mr. Hart, to ship as mate on the steamer " Stormbird." Mr. Hart promised that he would endeavour to trace the certificate for me, but up to the present time have had no further information on the matter. Chaeles Pope. Declared at Wellington this 6th day of December, 1897, before me—D. McKellar, Collector of Customs, Wellington.

[Keproductions of C. Q. Pope's examination papers ; see insets.

» ~ ~@~eEiAX?~(ferfj JyV HEtotation Number. A\f APPLICATION TO BE EXAMINED — GElf COMPETENCY AS MASTER OR MATE. I VefiiiGayi at any Mercantile Marine Office, free of charge. Divisions (A.), (B.), (0.), (D.), (E.), a?s<i (G.) of this tjejfer afe the. Applicant for Examination and handed, to MieiNSUfßers, with, T "'" JurtHir*"" 7 " former Cerltimte, p or gratuity tvhotever must be offered to or received\n any officersnmffirVants of the the Regulations. Any officer, messenger, or servant of »c accepts any prcseiffoqryxxtuite will ba\nmedfately discharged from his office, and any Candidate so offeree money wwFbe subject to the penalty ithsxtionef in par. w, at ffs back of this Form, ,i Before reiuired •particulars the Applicant should read carefully the Not™ on myes 3 and 4, *- / \ / . ij f i / Wγ

Fxn. 2,

Issued undbb " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877.'

(A.) —Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.) —Particulars of all previous Certificates (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.)—Certificate now required.

(D.) —If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

x ———£-- — (E.)—Declaration to be made by Applicant.

jfx" TAKE NOTICE.—Any person vvho makes, procures to bo made, or assists in making, any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or any other person a Certificate either 01 Competency or Service, is for each ofienco liable to be punished as tor a misdemeanour.

# bo herein) fredate that the particulars contained in Divisions (A.), (B.), (C), (D.), and (G.) of this Form are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPEES enujaaerated in Division (G.) and sent with this Form are true and genuine given and signed by the poisons whose names appear on them. I further declare that the Stateme*fi/(G.) contains a true and coriect account of the whole of my services without exception. j/ Ami I make this Declaration conscientiously beliejOTg the true. Dated at L l- IH ATQM this day of 189 r7 Signed in the presence of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office. / / ' Signature of Applicant. . 4/*" ___6te&i~yL=z~ Present address - (F.) — Superintendent to Examiner. tT be jt)tf.Utration (E.) above was signed in my presence, and of £ v &■-/% C received " } U Dated at WkyiisXQM__-^ this da J of s> /c^!B9> , >y"7Z) xt^^^^V" 7 "' 811 STiperintendent.

>' / /Christian Names air yj . ■-,- 7 7i7St>z> 6 .ngtli. i i Surname. UJ ?4_> Permanent Address, stating Town, Stj*_9_|9B_NBKtu_tber of House, and Name of Person (if any) with whom residing. / / -' i Date of Birth. ®- S I Where born. Day. Month. Year. 6 ___/. __ v ___ ywn. !lZ_ 1 __7 . '___ 2 yl . j 7 7 8 — * /; 7 f\/P%M ilS , /

" fnniiiplpncv "" Service " or „ , For "Fore-and-Aft' or where If at any time suspended or Number. I Tffw iwteZSk Grade. " riquare" Biggod Vessels, or i™™*, Date of cancelled, state bv what Court now or lormeiiy. othor Class of Vessel, issued. Issue or Authority. . xx / 1% l ' &S7ty^yyy^ ~ Date. 16 Cause. 17

r / ts -J Grade. ______-- i i For "Fore* 77 >re*_d-Aft" or "Square" fiigged / / Vesbols. . Mercanlife Marine Office to which it is to be Bent. l —_—y —_j —/ * «> . —*

Fori jectsin i I Day. 21 f Month. 22 r-A~-y \s 22 \ 2:i i 25

(2)

(G.)-List of Testimonials and Statement of Service at Sea. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 26, below.)

(H.)-Certificate of Examiner.

(I.) —Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit fyxtbj} fcrlifjr that the particulars contained in Division (H.) and (I.) are correct. This Form and the Testimonies are forwarded to the Secretary, Marine Department. Dated this *- day of 189 V // I Signatures of '->* f %>' — > ~~ ,r J Examiners. To the Secretary, Marine Department, /fc^/^4rj> r s'j6iff2<fc2L— Wellington, ft>C4> -—^— _

it Ser f ice on board Ship Servi. ;e of A; tp.ica. it. M-t !* '2 o £ o 6 ft 26 Ship's Name. I Port of Registry and a a> « 3 3 3 o u o o "a! P 32 a o +-* .s 2 u © o iS 33 Tinn in tl ; emp] lis Sex loyed ■vice. o >> o CD -a o 3 a <D »£. «e EH Remarks. Initials of Verifier. Big. CD _ P C o H Official No. of Ship, j 4 O _3 35 36 30 / ] CO u 3 Jt_ 30 S3 '20 £31 _37 _ _ 38 27 v y — 4 _» I \ r V r £**y 7h 74. _- if s j & i 70Total Service o.t Sea .. I i i i ! I ! It 4 1 V y , Time served for which Certificates are now produced Time served for which no Certificates are produced rr—

Note.— The E.caminers sJwUdfill up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward this paper to ike, Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sent with this paper to the Secretary, Marine J department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the office named in Division (C), Column 20. I > t Date and Place of Examination. Insert " Passed " or " Failed "in eaoli Column. "" |If failedin Beoi'nanshii), state howl Bank lor which passed. Date. Place. Colour Test Navigation. i Seamanship. much further Sea Service (if i auy) must be performed. 40 «_ ! J2_ 43 i ■ 44 45_ J_--«a - *£ y. /■£'#/ \ '" %it4**

Height. Complexion. 40 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 Colourof Feet. _ _ 47 Inches. 49 <y/z '■? -I ySyTL,^' Sz~c^*7Hair. : Hvos. 51 „ yL.-<~y f

Exn. 9c.

Issued under " The Shippijig and Seamen's Act, 1877."

Port ~ EXAMINATION IN GHAUT FOB ALL GRADES WHERE THE CHART IS USKO.

Rotation No,

[The Candidate will be required to work out the following questions on either a •' true " or "magnetic " elmrt whichever may be banded to him by the Examiner; and also determine whether the chart is a true ov magnetic one, am] whether it is for the northern or southern, and eastern ox western hemisphere.] / ' "

(1.) Using deviation card No. ™?1._.., find the course to steer by compass fen ; also the distance. '/WA-t £ &Y.Jj£ Answer.—Compass course: uK (/? Distance : 'if f/I Variation: /'4 ■ 4 # & Deviation : J /%' & * (2.) With the ship's head on the above-named compass course, -a —t^^trrfr~-r44*?ht ; btnrae" —~ sr s* }r £' bore by ; and^<^se_y : -^!)ore__^S?_^^-^;__.lss> js by the same compass. Find the ship's position. y/) & Answer-Latitude: /k £ •'■ ■j/'falt/ Longitude: /£f, ,W. & (3.) With the ship's head as above, a [Point] [Lighthouse]. .&>£?£*& « J _boie by compass , and after continuing on the same course y£> miles it bore SY *4L*£-> . Find the position of ship and her distance from at the time of taking the second bearing. £/u*J(° csY' . ~i dt/ Answer.—Latitude: <//- -:\L 3-r— : 7? ' Longitude : Z^£_J.k:j!L-.k— Distance :._ 6 /<$

All the foregoing questions must be answered,, but this does not preclude the Examiner roixi putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. Signature: Cnu4,£, /%£L Date : - - 873] Chart used: -

ZjL£l [Chart Payer for Candidate as Master of a Home-Trade Passenger Ship.] Port EXAMINATION IN CHART, (Additional for Masters.)

9b.

(4.) Find the course to steer by compass to _e^?vr9<a£ [see question 1] to counteract the effect of a current which set <sz>■&-■■* '-^ at the rate of t7 miles per hour, the ship making by log a miles per hour, also the distance the ship would then make good in *£? hours towards C *g^k-*-^ r/Ykfy/M" , Answer. —Compass course: /w ■■&*(& 4f- i *~ vi My < *■ __ •V __ _____ _/j% Distance : off took a cast of the lead : required the correction to he applied to the depth obtained by the lead line before comparing it with the depth the chart. Ayt //. „_• r c-tp- p «- (6.) What do you understand the small numbers to indicate that you see placed about fehe chart, and at what time of tide ? 6 -^ (7.) What do the Eoman numerals indicate that are occasionally seen near the coasts and in harbours ? 7&:y£ /v &< <*-— *<- 0-4. *<-%*■ ■ (8.) How would you find, approximately, the time of high water at any place, the Admiralty tables not being at hand, nor any other special tables available ? <%4 tz*?a6^-< 0/ , c All the foregoing questions, and those on Form Exn. 9c, must be answered, but this does not preclude the Examiner from putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. Signature: L-4_jPJll£> __ 2817-94] Date ._

754~

Exn. 9E.

Port of HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE. Q 7 At the above Port, this day of *£2><* , l&py?'

}■ Express in figures— 4^Z^^t J fit. 4 < f>. ,___..

2. —Add the following quimiities togetlier ;- "KKEWZI.. Zl.'.±zi Z±2lEl'l'£ ZZZfS

-'}. Subtract as follows:— V m my..&..ffZ<t.£Z.. T!r0m...4t&.:£..:£..a.a... / / Ij ? Answer. "•* ■« 3 *"*'? } J* /■■+/. I & / 8 f-> *. f f Answer. Answer.

The Candidate should sign his name nt the foot of the last page. 1013] . [° VB *'

EXAMINATION FOR A MATE— continued, 4.—Multiplication :■-—- - <$ C> Multiply h 7 .<£Z & /tn . — -γ-t— 4LJL-i —-

o. Division :■ — Divide Jfg4'4'/ b y /T^O 0 6 __ Jf'D Signature of Candidate .' Csyrf/t** Date: / V% P , £?}

Esn. OF.

Port of $$&£&s£&- -/ HOME-TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOE A CERTIFICATE OP COMPETENCY AS A MATE. [All Candidates for Certificates of Competency for Home-trade Passenger Ships will be required to work out the following in addition to the questions on the Paper Exn. 9k,]

1. —Add together the following quantities ; — £ s. d. Tons cwt. qr. lb. /.£/<5..,....//,....c/..z <d ./Cr&?.,.../.2^.,..<3.,.f5. 6.3., /2.,../0£.... 4£.0Yf.,../£,...2..,2.$ #.<?/,../<?,..#£.... 9 /£

2.—Subtract the following qu-antitfes : — i »■ A. Tons cwt. qr. lb. ~ szz,,.f&.y.,s£. /..£.&,. /&....../0.% r^M..,./2.r.!^l^ Answer. ' Answer.

H.— -Multiply the following quantities by gi>&<^/c*-yy\ & s. d. Tons cwl. qr. lb. <?.Bg. /g~. #% <?*., /s.z./y £■-.■■" /

4. — Divide the following .quantities by. & J £ s d. Tons cwt, (jr. !!>.

Signature of Candidate: J^U^ 5178-961 Date: y /B~9y

TJ~TJ ■." 4?" -■ ; ■ i p.

Exn. 9g.

Port of )^ HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MASTER. A Candidate for a Certificate of Competency as Master will be required to work out the following, in addition to the questions ou the Forms Exn. 9e and Exn. 9p.]

/J > ■ In Longitude , If the observed meridian altitude of the sun's lower limb were c?<s . k3o. —^~ nettling , index error /- <?1?~ to &^L<s*' , , height of eye /<o feet: required the latitude. }# ■ A 'WSJ <t ) J*.?jL~#f% -jT Tf~ 7 Tr~Y "i^TTT 7 " ~~fj~~ Signature of Candidate I »»*■>. Date :

Examination fok a Master— continued.

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS. [The Applicant must answer in writing, on paper given him by the Examiner, all the following questions, numbering his answers to correspond with the numbers of the questions.]

I.—When taking a meridian altitude, how do you know when the sun is on the meridian; or, in other words, when it is noon ? 2. —How does the sun hear when on the meridian of an observer in these latitudes (home trade limits) ? 3.—What do you mean by deviation of the compass, and how is it caused ? 4.—Having determined th|e deviation, how do you know when it is Easterly and when Westerly? 5. — Supposing the sun when on the meridian bore by your compass rL/ what would be the deviation of that compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, the variation given on the chart being,^?<^/£? g^ o.—How could you find the compass when in port, or when sailing along a coast V 7.—Name some suitable objects'by which you could readily obtain the deviation of your compass, when sailing along the coasts or a channel you have been accustomed to use? B.—The bearing of two objects when in a line with each other was found on the chart to be ~Cc/&d&' magnetic; but when brought in a line on board they bore /£. &<& • <$O Ot/ by your compass : required the deviation of your compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time ? 9—What means are there for checking the deviation of your compass by night? 10. Supposing the North Star [Polaris) bore _C/Y &_ • Yjr'"" by your compass, what would be the deviation (approximately) of that compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, supposing the variation given on the chart to be ■**•& . c3<D '■ 11.—Do you expect the deviation to change; if so, state under what circumstances? 12. —What is meant by variation of the compass, and what is the cause of it ? Signature of Candidate : *!^J£^L?-

QL'KSTTON. Oγ tj Wj/ua*. ~7%u7 <Mi*~ faj. <# <?&/t y p ~lp £0 0 \L^ V -β^fct <Cc t*~—j <*'#~*~+. 10> J 0 fir' VJ3< VL/ A/ 4/Uj*A~ m a. i~~: 'far U #*~y» — 1 / // /£. Zh 'fas W -«£***«- , l 80 _ se] Signature of Candidate /J^*^ ,

' _ - ii

Exn 91i.

"HOME TRADE" EXAMINATION PAPERS.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

Note. —T)iis sheet to be returned with the Examination Papers; No. 1. <? * 7 S ? I No.2. sz y^-.?2.% s^Pr./J?^ I No. 3. /* > J"8 ?,**:. £ £ s t> * 4< 4No. 4. /-/ / & / <^. .... ..# SSo \ no. s. .... \ o. i. //f?+ <? • /^^4 I No. 2. <£,<? .... Exn - »/• |! No. 3.// , /..i^.... i No. 4. .2 * .... Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. I No. 1. Dec" <//~ I No. 5. Deviation / «, 2L.£? „.*£---_* 5xn. 9(7. v o -r. > ' No. 10. w Z/'* v^ .^j ' II ..l.ll-l I — . ■■- II II III. ■■■_ I. I. II ■■!.. - No. 1. Answer—Compass course: j/r _ Distance: # ' Variation : '- , Deviation: jj Exn 9r I 1 - so - -• Answer —Latitude: &* & Longitude : / & p ~ £ ~ |i : No. .3. Answer—Latitude: <■- -^ a '' Longitude: S />* £J ■*■ /$ - Distance : J^^^^t^^ I No. 4. Answer —Compass course : i , i I] Distance ; Exn. 9d. I No. 5. Answer- —Correction : £> ft. / in.

339

H.—26

EXHIBIT Z. (Seal.) New Zealand Ceetificate op Competency as Masteb of a Home-tbade Passengee Ship. To James Jones. Wheeeas it has been reported to me that you have been found duly qualified to fulfil the duties of master of a home-trade passenger ship, I do hereby, in pursuance of " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877," grant you this certificate of competency. Given under the seal of the Marine Department of New Zealand, at Wellington, this twentieth day of July, 1897. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Eegistered, Geo. Allpoet.

New Zealand. No. of Certificate, 5407. Address of bearer : 12, Oriental Bay, Wellington, New Zealand. Date and place of birth : 10th July, 1845 : Cardigan, South Wales. Signature:

This certificate is given upon an ordinary examination passed at Wellington, New Zealand, on the 19th of July, 1897. Every person who makes, or procures to be made, or assists in making, any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or for any other person a certificate, either of competency or service, or who forges, assists in forging, or procures to be forged or fraudulently alters, assists in fraudulently altering, or prooures to be fraudulently altered any such certificate, or any official copy of any such certificate, or who fraudulently makes use of any such certificate or any copy of any such certificate, whioh is forged, altered, canoelled, suspended, or to which he is not justly entitled, or who fraudulently lends his certificate to or allows the same to be used by any other person, shall for each offence be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and may be summarily punished by imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a period not exceeding twelve months, or by a penalty not exoeading £100 : and any master or mate who fails to deliver up a certificate which has been canoelled or suspended is liable to a penalty not exceeding £50. Issued at the Port of Wellington on the 26th day of July, 1897. D. McKellab, Collector of Customs.

EXHIBIT 1. (Copy.) Deae Sic, — Trinity House, Hill Street, Wellington, 10th September, 1897. I have been waiting for you since last Thursday week, on which day you left the "Takapuna," to take your place (as contracted upon between you and me) at the Trinity House Navigation and Steam School, Wellington. I have received official information upon which I will not enlarge : suffice for me to say, " that I think you will serve your interests most" by calling at Trinity House in Hill Street to-morrow (Saturday) afternoon, at half-past 3 o'clock. I shall stay in for that purpose. Yours, &c,

Mr. Hood, Princes Street. Yon Schoen. Captain Allman. Me. Hood received this, I suppose, because he had placed himself under another coach. Please return. . W. H.-J.

14/9/97. Hon. Minister Marine. I think your opinion is correct. I would be pleased if you would send this to the Secretary Marine. Geo. Allman.

17/9/97. Mr. Glasgow. —Please peruse and return.—W. H.-J.—lB/9/97. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones. —Eeturned herewith.—W.T.G.

Private. —ln the course of conversation, Captain Edwin informed me that nearly a quarter of a century ago, when the first examination took place in Wellington (probably the first in New Zealand), he and the late Captain Johnson conducted it jointly, one relieving the other. It transpired that Edwin left the room on some other duty, leaving the candidate alone; he returned somewhat quickly, and found Captain Yon Schoen in the room with the candidate. He turned, him out, and then failed the candidate. Edwin swears to this, and says that from that day to this he has been a perfect nuisance and worry to Examiners, and that it has only been in my time that he has received any set-back. ' /' ' ' '' E0 - Allman.

EXHIBIT 2. Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Wellington, Deae Sir,— 30th November, 1891. I think it is unnecessary to ask you whether the Marine Department permits an Examiner of Masters and Mates in this colony to first prepare candidates for their examination and then to examine and to pass them, charging so much for preparing and so much for passing them. Yet such practice—and, in regard to public safety, a very dangerous one—has been in vogue in Napier for years. For proof vide Exhibits Nos. 1 and 2. In regard to Lyttelton, a persistent rumour has been current during the last eight years that the Examiner in Navigation, who is also Superintendent of the Sailors' Home, is in the habit of preparing a certain class of candidates for their examination. I have made inquiries, with various results, vide Exhibits Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6. I would ask the department to send an officer to

340

H.—26

interview Captain North, of the s.s. " Waihi," who, I believe, could give valuable information, if he could be induced to do so. • I now come to Dunedin. How examinations are conducted there the Marine Department should be well aware of—in fact, it is a by-word all over Australasia —but if the department should be ignorant in this respect, then I would refer it for particulars to Captain Stuart, of the s.s. " Eosamond," and Captain Eomeril, of the s.s. "Kahu"; in fact, any respectable officer would do. From my own experience in preparing candidates who already had passed an examination for a lower grade in Dunedin, I must state that I found them almost void of all knowledge of navigation. Captain W. Bendall, of Wellington, Surveyor to the United Underwriters' Association, would, I believe, bear me out in this respect and in many others, if interviewed by the Marine Department. New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, &c, have only one port each where examinations are held. A large port like Newcastle (New South Wales), for instance, has no Examination Board, and candidates there desirous of passing their examination must proceed to Sydney. Why must Neio Zealand have six inefficient Examination Boards, or twice as many as New South Wales, Victoria, and South Australia combined ? Would not Wellington alone be more than sufficient for all purposes with a proper examination-room and two decently-paid Examiners, say, £500 apiece or thereabouts ? Men who would have no other jobs to attend to, but whose whole time during office hours would be spent in the examination-room, either for the purpose of examining candidates or else to perfect themselves in their profession. All the New Zealand shipmasters are unanimous in condemning the present system in having six ports in New Zealand where examinations are held by only nominally paid officers. They say that only one port should be put aside for that purpose, and that should be Wellington, and until this is done a New Zealand certificate will continue to be looked upon by the other colonies with contempt. In this colony I believe the maximum salary paid to any of the ten Examiners is the nominal sum of £75 per annum, and in some ports they are only paid so much for each candidate they examine. Surely the department cannot realise the importance of the office of Examiner of Masters and Mates, or else it entirely ignores it. The mischief which an Examiner might cause in the long run through passing an incompetent candidate for the sake of getting his money, or through not being competent himself, is incalculable. Now, a few words about Wellington, the shipping centre of New Zealand. This most important port of all has at present no examination-room, the room hitherto used being now occupied by the Postmaster-General; and I am anxious to know when the Marine Department will provide a proper room where examinations can be held in the manner as laid down by the regulations. At present candidates, when lodging their papers, are told, "We don't know where to put you; we have no examination-room." Another thing, candidates are not supposed to be examined in a room which so far has been nothing less than a "public office," where, during examination-hours, telegraph boys and the public are continually trotting in and out; whereas by the rules no person whatever should be allowed in the room during the time of examination but those whose duties require them to be present. Candidates are entitled, the same here as in England, to all and every consideration when undergoing examination, and the examination-room should be a spacious, well-ventilated and well-lighted apartment, with blinds so as to regulate the light, and in cold weather it should be warmed. No candidate would submit himself for examination in a public thoroughfare such as the passage next to the long room of the Customs in the Post Office, or by artificial light in the lumber-room. I have, &c, Gbo. Yon Schoen, Teacher of Navigation and Engineering, &c. The Hon. J. McKenzie, Minister of Marine, Government Buildings.

Deae Sic, — Spit, 7th November, 1891. 1 have received your urgent letter quite unexpected, for, although I have not sent you the document we had spoken about, I had not forgotten it, and the first opportunity I got I would speak to other shipmasters about it. Those I have spoken to seem very lukewarm about it. They seem to be afraid, and think it may involve them into trouble, which they do not like. You ask me who prepare candidates to pass their examination. The Examiner,' Captain Gleadow, he prepares them, and passes them, and makes up their time, all to suit the candidate, for so much money. I do not know the price. I have heard he has different prices, from £1 to £5. I will try to get the document sent this week or next. Of course, it takes a little time, but it cannot be helped. Yours, &c, Captain Yon Schoen. P. A. Peteesen.

Deak Sic, — Trinity House, Hill Street, Wellington, 13th November, 1891. I understand that you passed your examination last May for a certificate of competency as mate of a home-trade passenger ship in Napier, and that you were coached up for this examination by Captain Gleadow of Napier, before whom you also had to pass your examination. Will you kindly inform me what Captain Gleadow charged you for professional services rendered in the ordinary way, and what you had to pay him in a lump-sum after he had successfully passed you? Yours, &c, Captain Christian Svendsen, ketch " Catlin," Wellington, Yon Schoen. P.S.—Kindly write your reply underneath this letter, or on the other side of it, and oblige.

Deab Sic,— Wellington, 13th November, 1891. I did pass my examination before Captain Gleadow, at Napier, in May this year. His charges were, per hour, Is. 6d. for ordinary teaching, and for examination £2. Yours, &c, Captain Yon Schoen, Trinity House, Wellington. C. S. Svendsen.

341

H.—26

, (Telegram.) Wellington, 16th November, 1891. Want to pass foreign master. What are your charges for preparing, &c. ? Eeply letter. G. Gbaves, steamer " Kahu." Captain Owen, Sailors' Home, Lyttelton.

Deae Sic, — Lyttelton, 17th November, 1891. Captain Owen handed me the telegram you sent to him this morning, and asked me to write you a reply. Captain Owen, being himself one of the Examiners, of course he cannot do anything in the way of preparing candidates. I have been the only one doing that work in Lyttelton for the past few years, and I shall be very happy to start with you whenever you are ready. Being engaged in other business during the day, I can only take my pupils in the evening, but I find that generally suits the candidates very well. My fees are £3 for second mate, £4 for chief mate, and £5 for master, payable in advance. I remain, &c, Mr. G. Graves. Robt. Hatchwell. Lyttelton is sufficient address to find me.

Dβae Sic,— Wellington, 27th November, 1891. I shall feel obliged if you would kiudly furnish me with the names and other particulars of persons of whom you have personal knowledge that they were prepared for their examination by Captain Owen, Superintendent of the Sailors' Home in Lyttelton, and also examined by him; Yours &c, Captain Prank Lawton, Martin Street, Wellington. Yon Schoen. Kindly write your reply underneath this and return.—G. Yon S.

Dbab Sic,— 30th November, 1891. In the year 1883 I was acting chief mate of the s.s. " Timaru," running between Lyttelton and Greymouth. On several occasions I heard that Captain Owen was teaching navigation, and by report heard that he also examined. Whether this is true or not lam not prepared to say. Yours, &c, Captain Yon Schoen. F. Lawton.

In answer to my inquiries, who prepares candidates for their examination in Lyttelton, I have received the following replies : — Mr. Hayes, first officer s.s. "Herald": The man who keeps the Sailor's Home, Captain Owen ?—Yes. Mr. Balding, first officer s.s. " Wakatu "_: I do not know of anybody, but I believe Captain Owen does it; in fact, I believe he does a little. Mr. Joslin, first officer s.s. " Dingadee " : I cannot tell you, but I believe the man who keeps the Sailor's Home, Captain Owen, does the teaching in Lyttelton. Mr. Wilson, second officer s.s. " Maori" : Captain Owen teaches, but his work is principally amongst the people belonging to the small sailing crafts. Question : Can you give me the name of a person who has been coached for his examination by Captain Owen? Answer: I cannot think of any one just now, but I will try and remember, and let you know. Mr. Scoones, hulk " St. Kilda," Wellington: I have been told by several that Captain Owen teaches, but only people belonging to Lyttelton, skippers of the small sailing crafts. Mr. Larnach, Foreman Coal Department, U.S.S. Company, Wellington, informs me that the second officer of the s.s. " Herald " told him a day or two ago that there was a person he knows getting prepared for his examination by Captain Owen now, but he cannot give the name. Captain Chambers, s.s. " Stormbird " : During my time Captain Owen used to teach. He prepared Captain Munro, of the " Kate Tatham." Captain W. Bendall, Surveyor to the W.U. Association, Wellington: Yes; I know I have heard a great deal about it, but could never obtain sufficient proof. Yon Schoen.

Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Deae Sic,— Wellington, Ist February, 1892. Not having received any acknowledgment of or reply to my letter of the 30th November last on the subject of the " examination of masters and mates," I should feel obliged if you would kindly intimate to me what has been or is to be done in the matter. I am, &c, Geo. Yon Schobn, Teacher of Navigation and Engineering, &c, &c. The Hon. John McKenzie, Minister of Marine, Wellington.

Hon. Minister. Me. Yon Schobn makes serious charges against the Examiners at other ports, and it would, I think, be advisable to make some inquiries into the charges as to the system of having only one examining port in New Zealand. This was from the first recommended by the Marine Department, but pressure from outside ports was too strong to resist; in fact, it seemed right to appoint Examiners at Auckland and Dunedin, and this was done. No complaints as to the room used at present have been received from candidates, but it is proposed to get a new room as soon as possible. Eecommended that the receipt of this letter be acknowledged. 8/2/92. Lewis H. B. Wilson.

a.—26

342

Accordingly. J. McK. 10/2/92. G. Yon Schoen. No. 482-70. 29/2/92. Note. —On Saturday, the sth instant, I saw Captain Gleadowat Napier. He distinctly denied ever having acted as a " coach "to persons whom he afterwards examined. I told him that it was not considered desirable by the department that other than local people who could not be examined elsewhere should be examined by him. Write and inform him accordingly, referring to conversation.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 29th February, 1892. I am directed by the Minister having charge of this department to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th November last on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, and to inform you that the points raised therein will be considered. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. G. Yon Schoen, Esq., Navigation School, Hill Street, Wellington.

Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 7th March, 1892. Eeferring to my conversation on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, I have the honour to state that it is not considered desirable that other than local men, who have not the opportunity of being examined elsewhere, should be examined at Napier, and I have therefore to request that you will not examine men who do not belong to Napier and local men trading to other ports, where they can present themselves before the regular Examiners. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Capt. J. B. Gleadow, The Spit, Napier.

Deae Sic,— Wellington, 16th March, 1892. I have just interviewed Charles Olsen, A.8., on board the s.s. " Kahu," now loading at the Queen's Wharf, who, without the slightest reserve, told me that he was prepared for his examination as mate, and passed, by Captain Gleadow in Napier; that Captain Gleadow charged him 2s. per night for an hour and a half's teaching ; and that he had to pay him an extra £2 10s. on receipt of the blue paper entitling him to receive his certificate. I would now ask you to send for Charles Olsen on receipt of this letter (Captain Bomeril would not object), with a view of obtaining from the said Charles Olsen a declaration stating the facts, and so effectually settling the Napier case. I am, &c, The Assistant-Secretary, Marine Department. Yon Schoen.

Charles Olsen called at the office to-day, and stated that he was coached by Captain Gleadow just before he went up for his examination before him, the arrangement being that he was to pay so much an hour if he passed ; that he passed his examination as mate, on which certificate No. 5330 was issued; and that he then paid him about £2 10s. for the instruction he received. 16/3/92. G. Allpoet.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 30th March, 1892. Eeferring to my conversation with you on the sth instant on the subject of the allegation that you taught candidates who were afterwards examined by you, I have the honour to inform you that a man named Charles Olsen, who was examined and passed by you for a certificate as mate, home-trade, on the 26th February, 1889, recently stated to this department that he was coached by you just before he went up for his examination, the arrangement being that he was to pay you so much an hour for the instruction if he passed, and that after he passed he paid you about £2 10s. for your coaching him. With reference to this, I have to request that you will let me know whether this statement is correct or not. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant-Secretary. Captain J. B. Gleadow, The Spit, Napier.

Napier,- Spit,, April 4th, 1892. Sic,—l am in receipt of your letter dated the 30th March, and in reply I beg to inform you that I did not coach Charlie Olsen on the subjects he had for examination. I keep a school for seamen and boys. The amount which he paid Ido not recollect.—Yours, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. John B. Gleadow.

Hon. Minister. Captain Gleadow denied that he ever coached men who came up for examination before him. He, however, now admits that he keeps a school for seamen, to which the man examined went. This I consider most improper. I recommend that Captain Gleadow be called upon to resign his appointment as Examiner of Masters at Napier. There is now .no real necessity for an Examiner at Napier. Captain Gleadow was paid by fees only. Lewis H. B. Wilson. 8/4/92. Ask him to resign.—W. P. Beeves. Captain J. B. Gleadow, No. 28-71, 14/4/92. Collector, Napier, No. 390-71, 25/5/92.

H.—26

343

Sic,— Marine Department, Wellington, 14th April, 1892. I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 4th instant, in which you state that you keep a school for seaman and boys, but that you do not recollect the amount paid to you by Mr. C. Olsen; and, in reply, I have been directed by the Minister having charge of this department to state that it is considered most improper that an Examiner should keep a school at which men who may be afterwards examined by him for certificates are taught, and I am therefore to request that you will resign your appointment as Examiner.—l have, &c, Captain J. B. Gleadow, The Spit, Napier. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

The Collector of H.M. Customs, Napier. 25th May, 1892. The department having ascertained that Captain J. B. Gleadow kept a navigation school, it was considered improper that he should continue to hold the appointment of Examiner of Masters and Mates and examine candidates who may have been taught by him, and he was therefore requested on the 14th ultimo to resign his appointment as Examiner, but his resignation has not yet been received. Should any candidates make application before you to be examined, you should not send their applications on to Captain Gleadow, but should inform them that they should present themselves before the Examiners at Auckland, Wellington, Lyttelton, or Dunedin. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

Sic, — Trinity House Navigation and Steam Schools, Wellington, 30th May, 1892. I beg to bring under your notice the following matters relating to the examination of masters and mates in this colony. On the 30th November last I laid before the Government certain facts showing the unsatisfactory manner in which examinations were conducted at Napier, Lyttelton, and Dunedin, instancing cases where the Examiners acted as teachers of the candidates they afterwards examined. Not having received any acknowledgment of this communication, I, on the Ist February last, again wrote asking for a reply, and was informed by letter from the Assistant Secretary of Marine, dated the 29th of that month, that the points raised by me would be considered. On the 16th March last, I wrote to the Marine Department stating a ease in which a man who had passed his examination at Napier was prepared to make an affidavit that he was taught by the Examiner, the payment for the instruction to depend upon the result of the examination. I have not even received an acknowledgment of this letter. I trust that you will look into these matters and take such steps as may seem proper to you to prevent New Zealand certificates being looked upon with disfavour and suspicion by shipowners and others. I understand that one of the conditions on which our certificates are recognised by the Board of Trade as of equal validity to those issued in Great Britain is that our examinations shall be similar to theirs, so that we are committing a breach of faith with the Imperial authorities by allowing things to be done as they are, and running the risk o£ having the privilege granted to us withdrawn, should the Board of Trade learn that our examinations are conducted in the manner I have pointed out. It is well known among seafaring men that candidates who are doubtful of their ability to pass the examinations avoid Auckland and Wellington, and present themselves at Napier, Lyttelton, or Dunedin. As I said in my letter of the 30th November last, I am afraid that matters will not be properly remedied until the number of examination ports is curtailed, and properly-paid Examiners appointed at, say, one central port, so that they can give proper attention to the work. I have, &c, Geo. Yon Schobn, The Hon. E. J. Seddon, Minister of Marine, Wellington. Teacher of Navigation, &c. Mr. Wilson, —Will you please look into the matters herein complained of.—B. J. S.—3o/5/92.

Hon. Minister. Mb. Yon Sohoen made certain allegations against the Examiners of Masters and Mates at Lyttelton and Dunedin, which were not supported by any evidence and which appear to have no foundation in fact. In the case of the Examiner at Napier, it was found that he kept a navigation school and he was called upon to resign but he has not done so, but instructions have been issued that no candidates are to be sent to him. 1/6/92. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Insist on the resignation of the Examiner at Napier or remove.—E.J.S.—l/6/92. Write to Gleadow for a reply to letter of 14/4/92. Captain J. B. Gleadow, No. 486-71.—2/6/92. Captain G. Yon. Schoen, No. 487-71.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 2nd June, 1892. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo with reference to the examination of masters and mates in this colony. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. . . Captain G. Yon Schoen, Trinity House Navigation School, Hill Street, Wellington,

H.—26

344

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 2nd June, 1892. ': Adverting to my letter of the 14th April last, requesting you to resign your appointment as Examiner of Masters and Mates at Napier, I have the honour by direction of the Minister having charge of this department to point out that your resignation has not yet been received, and to ask you to forward it. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Captain J. B. Gleadow, The Spit, Napier.

Sic,— Napier, 7th June, 1892. I am in receipt of your letters dated the 14th April and the 2nd June, and in reply I did not know it was requisite to send my resignation. I accepted the resignation, and have not acted as Examiner from the 14th April. Yours, &c, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. John B. Gleadow.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 10th June, 1892. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 7th instant, resigning your appointment as Examiner of Masters and Mates at Napier, which is accepted. I have, &c, Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. Captain J. B. Gleadow, The Spit, Napier.

The Collector, H.M. Customs, Napier. 10th June, 1892. With reference to my memorandum of the 25th ultimo, I have to inform you that Captain Gleadow has now resigned his appointment as Examiner of Masters and Mates at Napier. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

Oedee Papbe, House of Bepbesentatives, Friday the 24th Day of June, 1892. Question 3. —Mr. Fisher to ask the Minister of Marine : (1.) What are the conditions on which the Imperial Government recognise certificates granted in New Zealand to masters, mates, and engineers? (2.) Have any representations been made to the Government as to the unsatisfactory manner in which examinations of masters and mates are carried out in some New Zealand ports ? (3.) If such representations have been made, has the Government taken any steps to enquire into the correctness thereof, and if so, who was the officer appointed to investigate the matter, and what report has he made ? (4.) What action does the Government intend to take to place the examinations on such a footing as will comply with the conditions prescribed for the recognition of New Zealand certificates by the Imperial authorities ? Hon. Minister. (1.) The conditions are that the examinations are to be similar to those held in the United Kingdom, and that copies of the candidates' applications to be examined, which give particulars of their service at sea, are to be sent Home. (2.) Yes; representations were made by a person engaged in coaching candidates for certificates, who desired that all candidates should be examined at the port at which he resides. (3.) Inquiries were made by the head of the department, who reported that the charges were with one exception not supported by any evidence, and did not appear to have any foundation in fact: the exception being in a case of an Examiner who examined for certificates which are not recognised by the Board of Trade. This Examiner has resigned his appointment. (4.) As the examinations are conducted as required by the Imperial authorities, no action is required. 24/6/92. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

Sic,— Wellington, 14th July, 1892. I have the honour to forward you the enclosed papers referred to by- Messrs. Guinness, Carncross and myself, at our interview with you this evening. If the allegations contained therein are true, 1 think a strict and impartial inquiry should be made. I have &c, The Hon. B. J. Seddon, Wellington. Eobt. M. Houston. Mr. Wilson, —Please bring up the papers on this matter. E.J.S.—I4/7/92.

The Examiners of Masters and Mates, Lyttelton. 18th July, 1892. It having been alleged that Captain Owen has taught candidates who were going up for examination, in the subjects in which they were to be examined, I have been directed by the Minister having charge of this department to request that you will state whether either of you teaches such candidates or have ever taught them since you were appointed Examiners. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

The Examiners of Masters and Mates, Dunedin. 18th July, 1892. It having been alleged that some of the Examiners of Masters and Mates have taught Candidates for examination in the subjects in which they were to be examined, I have been directed by

345

H.-26

the Minister having charge of this department to request that you will state whether either of you teaches such candidates or has ever taught them since you were appointed Examiners. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

Sic, — Examiners' Office, Lyttelton, 22nd July, 1892. In reply to your memorandum No. 19-72, we beg to State that neither of us have ever in any way prepared or given any kind of instruction to candidates previous to their examination since the date of our appointments as Examiners of Masters and Mates at Lyttelton. We have, &c, Eobt. L. Owen, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Feed. D. Gibson. Keep until Otago is received.—L.W.

Sic, — Examiners' Office, Dunedin, 28th July, 1892. We have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your memorandum of the 18th instant, No. as per margin, relative to assertion having been made that some of the Examiners of Masters and Mates have taught candidates for examination in the subjects in which ifrhey were to be examined, and in reply beg to state that neither of us teach such candidates, nor ! have we ever taught them since we were appointed Examiners. We have, &c, Wμ. Thomson,)™ John Obkney, [Examiners. Eeply to Mr. Houston accordingly.—E.J.S,—B/8/92. E. M. Houston, M.H.E.—No. 219-72.—9/8/92.

Sic,— Marine Department, Wellington, 9th August, 1892. With reference to your letter of the 14th ultimo, sending papers referred to by Messrs. Guinness, Carncross, and yourself, at an interview with me on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, I have the honour to inform you that the Examiners at Lyttelton and Dunedin state that they do not teach candidates for examination, and that they have never taught them since they were appointed Examiners. I have, &c, E. M. Houston, Esq., M.H.8,, Wellington. B. J. Seddon.

Memobandum for Hon. Mr. Seddon. I have carefully looked into the within correspondence, and I hope you will inquire into the matter with a view of having some radical reform made in the matter referred to. 10/10/92. A. E. Guinness.

Dear Sib, — Library, General Assembly, Ist November, 1892. I found a letter left in my charge by Mr. Arthur Guinness. I have to add a few words contained in a letter received from a shipmaster in Singapore. He says, " The evil you spoke about in the House regarding the examinations of mercantile marine officers in New Zealand is very great. I am sure it will benefit all hands to have it rectified." This is from a master who has sailed in New Zealand waters. Yours, &c, Hon. E. J. Seddon. Geoege Fishee.

Sic,— Wellington, 30th January, 1893. With reference to my previous letters pointing out the unsatisfactory manner in which the examination of masters and mates is carried out in this colony, I again venture to address you on the subject in the hope that you will see your way to take such steps as will insure the examinations being conducted in a proper manner in future ; for I can assure you that the way in which they are now carried out at some of the ports is nothing shore of a public scandal; moreover the public safety is endangered, as incompetent men now obtain certificates, and are thus enabled to get positions of responsibility on board vessels. I would suggest that in improving this system it would be desirable that there should be a principal Examiner at headquarters in a similar position to that now occupied by Mr. Mowatt in regard to the examination of engineers, who should supervise, prepare papers for the examination, and afterwards check the candidates' work. I have, &c, The Hon. E. J. Seddon, Minister of Marine, Wellington. Geo. Yon Schoen. Mr. Wilson, —Eeply matter has received attention Government. That steps are being taken to appoint competent Examiners.—E.J.S,—3l/1/93.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, Ist February, 1893. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo, on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, and in reply to state that the matter has received the attention of the- Government, and that steps are being taken to appoint competent examiners. I have, &c, G. Yon Schoen, Esq., Wellington. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary. 44— H. 26.

346

H.—26

EXHIBIT 3. Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, 9th August, 1892. With reference to your letter of the 14th ultimo, sending papers referred to by Messrs. Guinness, Carncross, and yourself, at an interview with me on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, I have the honour to inform you that the Examiners at Lyttelton and Dunedin state that they do not teach candidates for examination, and that they have never taught them since they were appointed as Examiners. I have, &c, E. M. Houston, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. E. J. Seddon.

EXHIBIT 4. Sir, — Marine Department, Wellington, Ist February, 1893. I have the honour, by direction of the Minister having charge of this department, to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo, on the subject of the examination of masters and mates, and in reply to state that the matter has received the attention of the Government, and that steps are being taken to appoint competent examiners. I have, &c, G. Yon. Schoen, Esq., Wellington. Lewis H. B. Wilson, Assistant Secretary.

EXHIBIT 5. [Reproductions of Peter Mclntyre's examination papers; see insets.]

EXHIBIT 6. Memorandum for Mr. Glasgow. Office of Minister for Public Works, Wellington, 11th March, 1899. Captain Allman in his letter of Ist March states that " To yourself, the Collector of Customs, my co-examiner (Captain Edwin) the Chief Clerk of the Marine Department, the fact was well known that there was no regulation in existence authoring the dispensation of a mate's certificate." Kindly let me know if this correct. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Hon. Minister. Quite correct.—W. T. Glasgow.—ll/3/99.

EXHIBIT 7. Mb. Yon Schoen,— Wellington, May 9, 1878. I understand that you are leaving Wellington for Auckland, intending to obtain command of some vessel, and that you are desirous of having some proof of having resided in this place as a teacher of navigation. I have much pleasure in stating that I have known you to have been here for a considerable period, and that you are thoroughly competent to prepare candidates for the Board of Trade examinations in navigation and seamanship. E. A. Edwin, Commander E.N., Wellington, New Zealand. Mr. G. Yon Schoen, Nautical Academy, Brandon Street, Wellington.

EXHIBIT 8. Deae Sir,— Wellington, March 2nd, 1885. Understanding that you are about to apply for the appointment of Harbourmaster at the Bluff, I have much pleasure in stating that I have known you during the last eight years, and can testify to your being a most steady, sober, and trustworthy man, that you hold a certificate of competency as extra master in the mercantile marine, and also certificate of having passed the voluntary examination in steam, and that you were duly appointed and performed the duties of Examiner of Masters and Mates to the Government of Fiji, pending the arrival of the officer appointed by the Imperial authorities. Trusting that this may be of some service to you. I remain, &c, Captain G. Yon Schoen. E. A. Edwin, Commander E.N.

TO OFVGGiKTENa BB MATE.

ghkhglfkj;gkygujufgj

. 2.

Note.— ThfcJfyriKxidStba oLtainkck&wny frc.&of charge. DyfJions (kjf (B.), (C-U amp •* (G.) of this PwpgKMne tdhk filldd *^5^3 l 3J2yOV"*" l J'*«^ former Nolremjimfrs)(ion or gratuity wnwlever offmrs of Government beyond theyfes mJtitioLeaTqrflhe Regulations. Any officer, mtssseaiger or servant of tlie Government who acjfyts t g present or gratuity milfotie ivimedm&dqfokschi,rged from his office, aryij&na ComMdate fyfs}// penalty mentioned irelM. 171 at thetltacKof tMs Form. fVf f/ U"J //i£J£m/w "f^^f 11 fl&iore fittitefCin the reqm&d Warttatlais the Applicant should read earefiilly the Notice cnl pagjfS an^4. \ «! / J—^ — A^€^v^-^^2^_

ISSJED UKBKB " The Shipping Mi<3 - Seatnen'a Act, 3.677."

(A.)-Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.)—Particulars of all previous Certificate (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.)-Certificate now required.

(D.)-If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If he has not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

(£.J—O««3iaa«s4ie« to tee ssesses: by iftfspeiea«»t. ISB* TAKE KO'ilCE.—Any person who mo,kos, procures to be made, or assists in making, any false representation for tlie purpose of obtaining lot himself or any other person a Certificate either of Competency or Service, is for each offence liable to bs punished as for a misdemeanour. I bxr !|cmTrr hufan that the particulars contained in Divisions (A,), (B.), (C), (D.)> a»<i (G.) of-this Form are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPERS enumerated in Division (G-.) and sent with this Form are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the persons whose names appear on them. I further declare that the Statement (G-.) contains' a true and correct account-of the whole of my services without exception. And I make this Declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true. £ated st. /&£?**+£& this "day of B<** *~ 189(< Signed in the presence of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office. - v Signature o£ Applicant. Preeoiit address.

Cb (E.) above was .signed in my'njsesence, and of £' < * • received b} ' "Sated at W £LUn&TQM thi s _ /Oday of r "0 Cl. m° 3876-94] **■■■ 4/~~?+?. Superintendent.

Christian Names at full langvi. \\ SurnauVo. I _x \ *— Surname. 3. r Permanent Address, stating Town, Street, and Number of House, and Name of Person (if any) with whom residing. 3 2 ■_ " 7 ~M'¥, f2yS7:--*< f?' '<_*• Bate of Birth. Where born. Day. Month. Year. Year. Town. Country. 77 "" XXX 2727 6 7 8 y7277 s i 7 t£

r i .... . .. „ u „,.,.._■ For " Fore-and-Aft" or I *j_v,__ If at any time suspended or f Number. Grado ' " Square" Biggod Vessels, or £££? Date of cancelled, state by what Court 1 r-*y- K.N.B. now 01 formerly. other Claw of Vessel. issueu. Issue or Authority. kX§ n ia | _a_ u is_ .__ Date. 16 Cause. 17 r"""

■Grade. . ✓ - iy, S{ £?Sy^ i j j For "Fore-and-Aft"or "Square" Bigged Vessels. • 10 \ I Mercantile Marine Office to which It is to be sent. ao__ !

Day. Month. Year. gl j 22_ 23_ Port. • 24 . X__ SS dj «5$" | _ ■Z-T&J-V^-' Subjects in which h«- failed. 25

(H.)—Certificate of Examiner.

(I.)-Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit jwrebg artifg that the particulars contained in Division (H.) and (I.) are correct. This Form and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Secretary, Marine Department. Dated day of To the Secretary, Marine Department, -~~e==dsE3»-s*-«.

.*si (The Teste !0«ii •fy t S, 6c„„.) "5. § "S O a at « EH _ d 26 '1 Ser ■ice on board bmp £51W VAI M) Ui _-J a s a B a o ■ ■ O "o S) a P 82 _ o i» o a Time employed in tills Service. £/*/*£ty /77fsSJfi&L&<? \ Ship's Name. 27 ®. Big. 29 Port of Registry and Official No. of Ship. 30 jfSS-€&***~' „ Pi 31 _. /_•-. a in tills Service. .€> ' CQ a 1 tr. » £ S 1 & c3 , 5 «S « h a ft 33 31 35 36 y / 77/ei ~ // - yM— 3 & 1 a CO 3 s Bemarks. _ 38^ L Initials of Verifier. 39 (46o\ nffl 7 /= %ym ■— fJ/%£^£C£2*~-'^- <? 7Z, s, ' .! ■/t/ffS&nf/yt-X£/-Xm. /y77 yy? ■-■■<- m mi wetw*" £ F /i.J ay a73'\ iaf/M ■- * t 'ff w -A — 3 c ! _r» sTF _? KfykS 6 '7 _• tr$ 7&£ M f ft7 - U* WfK7 e ft '72$. > W. 3 ■$*-- H a>S ft ft mm — •jU&h* — (_r ST ¥/f' r tf tf r^ i 0 2 17? fi/W<~y $^Sfe-y4^, 7-dfyk a 7.7a, f J*>. ;Mc— $, 27 'fc y i ff _j_. I II ii f Total Service at Sea .. £- Time served for which Certificates are now produced <r Time served for which no Certificates are produced

NfffK.— The Examiners should fill up f>ivisio?i$ (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as -possible forward this pager to the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sp.nt with this paper to the Secretary, Marine Department, The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the. Applicant at the office named in Division (C), Column 20. Date and Place of Examination. Insert " Passed " or " Failed " in each Column. Insert " Passed " or " Failed " in each Column. -, Date. Place. I ~ i if failed in Seamanship, statohow Bank lor wLioIi passed. Colour Test. Navigation. Seamanship. runch further Sea Serricc (if I '•■ sfZt' * ' . any) mast Iμ performed. _J «. , ~s

Feet. 47 .. _;_■»••— "** —- Height. 49 tSft'frr' Complexion. ' 49 Persona) Marks or Peculiarities, if any. Colour o. SO Hair. Eiyejs. 1 . ' ../

EXAMINATION IN CHART FOR ALL GRADES WHERE THE CHART IS USED.

Rotation No. 6 4Z&

Exn. 9c.

Issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877."

The Candidate will bo required to work out the following questions on either a " true " or " magnetic " chart, whichever may be handed to. him by the- Examiner ; and also determine whether the chart is a true or magnetic one, and whether it is for the northern or southern, and eastern or western hemisphere." (1.) Using deviation card No. l/fZJ~ , und the course to steer by compass from /V _ . ioif/i£floC the distance. '/■/" -S & 2 £- -Answer. —Compass course-:_/*_ --. . -—- — Distance: / / v [ __ _. . Variation: ' Deviation: ' A __ _, % , (2 ) With the ship's head on the above-named compass coursef *< [Pom*j , - bore by and f^^^i^rfjM^^^^^ t"H tiie same com P ass - Find the sni P' s position, ,- ~ / . /, >■./- $JA J /i- -''" - i " f Answer. —Latitude: Longitude: ._ ... (3.) With the ship's head as above, a [Point! [Lighthouse] by • , and after continuing on the same course // __miles it bore Jh. JjAt£?j£—. —• Find the position of ship and her distance from fe ££/&&& //£fi£j£~---- — at the time of taking the second bearing. ' . V '■■' Answer-Latitude:._ : Longitude- ' ' ■ Distance r^4^

Ail the foregoing questions must be answered, but this does not preclude the Examiner com putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require, .. ? Signature : i —/ v+.:-Jk*±*2r ■/WChart /y/ 7 - //ft,uj/m I '; i /

bl/Zf

Exn. 9d.

[Chart Paper for Candidate, as Master of a Home-Trade Passenger Ship.} Port /£ , && EXAMINATION IN CHART. (Additional for Masters.)

(i.) Find the course to steer by compass from (__ A .— to -7-^-7 — -^ isee question 1] to counteract the effect of a current which set Jj>_ ZiJ&fJSjat the rate of _ per hour, the ship making by J ]eS _ / / per hour, also the distance the ship would then make good &£jf Jr* -■ ° Answer— Compass course: - - ' *«*s'* ' £$2L^ZL_I (50 beißg off $_iMh?£o v^^f- took a ° ast of the lead: re i uired the correction to be applied to the depth obtained by the lead line before comparing It with the '* c s 7 depth marked on the chart. . (6.) What do you todlretand the small numbers to indicate that you see plaeea about the (7.) What do the Roman numerals indicate that are occasionally seen near the coasts &n& in harbours? *~f &-f£ <.*-&/&< /tf~fr^f*>**( &£***-f#. ■ (8.) How would you find, approximately, the time of high water at any place, the Admiralty tables not being at hand, nor any other special tables available ? ? % may require. \y' 5% W a« W re.A.

64.4

Sxn. 935.

Port of HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS.

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE, At tke Port, tins *V ofJ&***J*?, «* <*

1. Express in

2 —Add the following quantities together :— , <?7 9 £> £X- & £■■■& * ' ~se±. i % / J2 a o <?.. y.P P # TX/l 2 JJl£Zf

3.—-Subtract as follows :— / ,^» Jake 4i21.pl J&£±Zf Answer. • ¥ J^H &..&.. &■&■■■■■■ ■e«m~i£...Q...QJ~.M-£~ "fjffFjjrff Answer. IJTJTT}™™*

i The Caiididatc shoulj sign W 8 name at the foot of the last pa«e ICiSj

EXAMINATION FOE A MATE— continued y

4. —Multiplication :-**■ Multiply £#y3~cPZt by &e6 Multiply 7^^Z by £&£

5. —Division : — Divide 5 L£<F *7_ by 7 i9 <^ Signature of Candidate : .j_. //f~- A^h-Vd Date:_ /&£ ?/ffS

2SE

Exn, 9P.

Port of\J& / 4&£*P#/&?2r HOME-TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS,

r T EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MATE. [All Candidates for Certificates of Competency for Home-trade Passenger Shipa will be required to work out the following in addition to the questions pn the Paper Exn. 9e.]

I. —Add together the following quantities : — £ s. d. Tons cwt. qr. Ib Y&.Z //. . &.s*. . 6.3.2 a /$.. 3 . 2/r '& Y.S.. ...zAy.q.. o / / $&f

"2. —Subtract the following quantities :- — £ s. A. Tone. cwt,, qr ib. 33A3 ZZS', /0..%.. J £€(?,.m / '

\_ H. — Multiply the following qiiantitiefi by jf "V £ k. d. Tons eWt. qr. Ib. -""r Zlf 1 ' ZIZZ s *£f _&£ __/£_" Ita, ... - _ .. .... -.. ~-^~-----,- . ~- i" i —— ■- i "... .I ass

•)1&* 4.— followinK quantities Fy. v - / . £ s<!. Tons cwt. qr. Ib. w 4 * £ .kjM....JA,.M%.-. 6/S6M. / LJfc... __ '1 ~.. ___ -j£^zk*==^

£2 Signature of Candidate: i*. Jγ-/%?¥*£ of: 6&i 9f£-/ff/r ...

pc*%pdtzz. *U, ¥^'- /J -H&ft* 7 '"'' s 7^~7rjf-^

&/f4c-

Exn. 9h.

"HOME TRADE" EXAMINATION PAPERS.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

Note.—I his sheet i ieet i to bi ;O be ret >e returnee turned with the Examination id with the 3 Exa amination Papers. apers. Exn. 9e. jl no. l. /*9y#z>?w& J No. 2. /j£f3?f6 i, No 3. //<?? O<?p No. 4 63%0/WG^ No. 5. /if/??*- / Exn. 9/. ■fftp £ s. d. , No. \.S64)6. 4? 0iZ~ .. No. 4. //2/. <? /ofr . ..i Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. /Say. 6**£'/£ No. 1. Dec" Lat. Exn. %. No. 5. Deviation No. 8. fttf/^Ua*^< No. 10. No. 1. Answer—Compass course : JQ Distance: *?&.%<. Variation : /&*. <*O fc Deviation: v3^.^^. Exn. 9c. 4/o V, ,. rv No. 2. Answer—Latitude: °° Jr' -_, Longitude : /?sT, S&.3<* %~ No. 3.. Answer—Latitude : "26 , -&<> <j\ Longitude : /ytf* fST G Distance : A&2** /i«-*<f No. 4. Answer—-Compass course :i}/f(rtf G> Distance: ( ?>Z4^£tf}&&***■ Exn. 9d. No. 5. Answer—Correction : ft, in. [677-95

Port of Wellington.

Exn. 17a.

To the Superintendent. PLEASE to RETURN to the person above named the y -—~ r sum of ■ j&oiwirf he having failed to pass his Examination.... Dated this Q^o . • day of iS<?6.

RECEIVED this day of ,18 ,of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office at the above pert, the sum of pound shillings. ( Signature luOTj ..... \ of Applicant.

I j V VibeOKt Gradefor l-Botation Number. Name of Applicant. -- x . '»? . ot which.

Exn. 9c.

Port EXAMINATION IN CHART FOR ALIj GRADES WHERE THE CHART IS USED.

Rotatioa No,

Issued under " The Shipping and Seamen's Act, 1877."

-The Candidate will be required to work out the following questions on cither a " true " or " magnetic " chart, whichever may be handed to Mm byThl ExamTnTr ; and also determine whether the chart is a true or magnetic one, and whether it is for the northern or southern, and eastern or western hemisphere.:

(1 ) Using deviatipn card No. . . , find the course to steer by compass from LVUI^ .//OM/ Answer. —Compass course 'P vr ~~ Distance: McJzf Variation: /Af* Deviation: /$ & (2.) With the ship's head on the above-named compass course a | Point] j lighthouse ' . by compass. 7 &AA ', and OUo>&* 3 -*-. ! & by the same compass. Find the ship's position. **■ i£*A "*££_ Longitude: //#* *f^ (3 ) With the ship's headjts above, a [Point! [Lighthouse] by compass and after continuing on the same course miles it Ire /? & • Find tiie P° sition of sllip and lier distanoe from at the time of taking the second bearing. *■*#*■££_ M?T£_ Longitude *£&& ' ~' Distance.

of the port may require. y- 7 y —- Chart used - - 873] /

Exn. 9b.

[Chart Paper for Candidate as Master of a Home-Trade Passenger Ship.] Port . — EXAMINATION' IN CHA R T. (Additional for Masters.)

(4.) Find the course to steer by compass to ■^β , •see question 1] to counteract the effect of a current which set /V __£*_ at the rate of miles per hour, the ship making by per hour, also the distance the ship would then make good In <t>^£t*^y L hours towards fat, /s*£ Af.C A/ Amwer% --Compass coarse: 4fj&* W Pittance: _?*"&&* ___ (5.) On £_!_ _ /J I being 'i^ , off took a " ast of tbe lead : re^uired thfe correction t0 r ' be applied to the depth obtained by the lead line before comparing it with the I .depth marked on the clwfc. ' / 0" if' /-? sf / ' L SJtZI '#<**&■ t^z; " , (6.) What do you understand the small numbers to indicate that you see placed about the chart, and at what time of tide ? jfa,fe£?/ / - if Tver (*-Cft*L*sv&£ &f#4£j£L ) (7.) What do the Eoraan numerals indicate that are occasionally seen near the coasts and in harbours'? f/ rfc^M**^ (8.) How would you find, approximately, the time of high water at any place, the Admiralty tables not being at hand, nor *ajs-other special tables available ? All the foregoing questions, and those on Form Exn. 9c, must be answered, but this docs not preclude the Examiner from putting any other questions of a practical character, or which the local circumstances of the port may require. Signature: c A\- / fv

Em Bq,

~~ / HOME TRADE PASSENGER SHIPS./

EXAMINATION PAPER TO BE USED BY A CANDIDATE FOB A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS A MASTER, [A Candidate for a Certificate of Competency as Master will be required to work out the following, in addition to the questions on the Forms Bxn. 9b and Exn, 9f.J fyj-J&M, d i£fs~ In Longitude d** 4~?^'*~If the observed meridian altitude of the Sim's lower limb were &/■ nr • bearing - ' i - n^ex e * ror i-Z., jLjL- , <0 ° JdL& $£* • height of eye _/ Q feet: required the latitude. • fo* /P0 f /&'' __

Signature of VandiJale : /■ At* ioao; Date: fa* /f~ /ff/ I-

Examination fok a Mabteb — continued.

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS. ■The Applicant must answer in writing, on paper given him by the Examiner, all the following questions, numbering his iuiswrs to correspond with the numbers of the questions.] I. —When taking a meridian altitude, how do you know when the sun is on the meridian; or, in other words, when it is noon ? o— J low does the sun l>ear when on the meridian of an observer in these latitudes (home trade limits) ? 3. —What do you mean by deviation of the compass, and how is it caused ? 4. —Having determined the deviation, how do you know when it is Easterly and when Westerly? 5. —Supposing the sun when on the meridian bore by your compass //, #£/ _ (s> what would be the deviation of that compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, the variation given on the chart being 6? //-M'ffl 0. —How could you find the deviation of your compass when in port, or when sailing along a coast ? 7. —Name some suitable objects by which you could readily obtain the deviation of your compass, when sailing along the coasts or a channel you have been accustomed to use? B.—The bearing of two objects when in a line with each other was found on the chart to be, 4/f3/ €*s magnetic; but when brought in a line on board they bore vCs by your compass : required the deviation of your compass for the direction of the ship's head Ql^. at the timer £J* 0 C/>^ 9.—What means are there for checking the deviation of your compass by night ? 10. Supposing the North Star (Polaris) bore /l—jJLo 2~ by your compass, what would be A// I the deviation (approximately) of that compass for the direction of the ship's head at the time, f jt X supposing the variation given on the chart to be /° C4f~ k-t'i' £L fir 1 ]. —Do you expect the deviation to change ; if so, state under what circumstances 't 12. —What is meant by variation of the compass, and what is the cause of it ? SU/iititttiv of Candidate : . _ ■ Date :

4 Jju i& ,£*-{- /fr»*/ f fcfrtuAvr- h/s4&up f I /%i**~<-<& I /fit/"/? pvi d) Affits V 7&v /# sf/2 d**fe~^~ /jkz^*^f ( /fiy£&L£~*f &j%&u, &C? Z5&, // "/% k*tdn± (rttf &£*uA€. Jen, JpnS <fc*e &fcl& /^ If iHc &*--*"i &rvUs &*■*- &&&&■ ji/Lirtou* Pit- &*4&£ /#& &*** 2&c, &£**«&j>^ I

Exn. 9h.

"HOME TRADE" EXAMINATION PAPERS.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

Note. —This sheet to be returned with the Examination Papers. !i No. 1. No. 2. ! No. 3. Exn. 9e. |j i " I! No. 4. I No. 5. £ s. d. Tons. cwts. qrs. lbs. j No. 1. f No. 2. Exn -^.||No.3. kii ■m. </jPZ*£i&Z<!L*<zg. Exn. %. || No. 1. Dec" " f~A I No. 5. Deviation <£✓ J No. 8. „ S"~£ j! No. 10. „ /*-<£_, /yr >^ II ll I No. 1. Answer—Compass course: Distance: II Variation : Deviation: I /o iL i l * . r I I No. 2. Answer —Latitude : xn. 9c. Longitude : || //<y. —— i No. 3. Answer —Latitude: Longitude : Distance : /£ c>*+-^ No. 4. Answer —Compass course : 5 </<r • ■ Distance: /£ A^* R xn. 9(Z. No. 5. Answer—Correction : y ft, 4* in. [677-95

'.Port of EXAMINER'S AUTHORITY FOR DELIVERY OF A CERTIFICATE OP COMPETENCY TO AN APPLICANT WHO HAS PASSED HIS EXAMINATION.

Exn. 16.

NAME, &c. OF APPLICANT.

a «__________»:____________™_« „_____ , iJPICcISiC to Sctibcr to the Person naincd above, the Certificate of Competency and Testimonials or otlicr Documents forwarded to you by the Secretary of the Marine Department; for him, on his complying with the Office Regulations. y _ & *, Dated y?___ka_, this V£ JU£t*~* - W&/ fiignaturt , , of Applicant s* ' /* Af- J&fZ*- /?, j f <^g^t^^^>-7''? Signature of Examiner. To the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office at y /* C^t-"* Voie. —An Authority in this foijn is to be the -Examiner io paoii Applicant who pneses hie Examination. It is then to be presented to the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office at which the Appliciuit bas stated in bis Application (Exn. '£ or 3) that be wiriics to receive Uis Certificate.

Christian Name. Surname. ■ i \ I Whrl her Master, Mute, or Engineer. Grade for which passed. 7f2%22#Sc* -Z2>sry*~± 2222S-J

fxdjtgb,dgyiydujghj

( I(JIf t J IfM Ba Tilf. i% ihß Wα Jr££BC£?*Ar\y&KiML h3pkm>3L{*) J )

NEW ZEALAND.

$0, of Cttttfimte JEjßE^fr Address of Bearer ./V/AMrn. ; Date and Place of Birth //V t /0&2 Jla&y s Signature _ v•/f "~ £ . Cijis Certificate is given upon an Orbmatg lamination /><zW at J^MdL^Jni. on the /AsijrhM, day of isffi?

Every person c who makes, or procures to be ?nade, or assists in ?naking any false represe?itatiofi for the purpose of obtaining for himself or for any other person a Certificate either of Competency or Service, or who forges* assists in forging, or procures . to' be forged, or fraudulently alters, assists in fraudulently altering, or procures to be fraudulently altered, any such Certificate, or any Official Copy of any such Certificate, or who fraudulently makes use of any such Certificate or any copy of any such Certificate which is forged, altered, cancelled, suspended, or to which he is not justly- entitled, or who fraudulently lends his Certificate to or allows the same to be used by any other person, shall for each offence be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and may be surmnarily punished by imprisonment, with or without hard labour, for a period not exceeding twelve months, or by a penalty not exceeding £100; and any Master or Mate who fails to deliver up a certificate which has been cancelled or suspended is liable to a penalty not exceeding £$0. Issued at the PORT oj the <Qj)_ day

EXHIBIT 9. Port of Wellington. APPLICATION TO BE EXAMINED FOR A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS MASTER OR MATE.

Rotation Number.

Exn. 2.

Note.— This Form can be obtained at any Mercantile Marine Office, free of charge. Divisions (A.), (B,), (C), (D.), (E.), and (G.) of this Paper are to be filled up by the Applicant for Examination and handed to the Examiners, with his Testimonials, and former Certificate, if any. No remuneration or gratuity whatever must be offered to or received by any officers or servants of the Government beyond the fees mentioned in the Regulations. Any officer, messenger, or servant of the Government who accepts any presenter gratuity will be immediately discharged from his office, and any Candidate so offering money will be subject to the, penalty mentioned in par. 14, at the bach of this Form. Before filling in the required particulars the Applicant should read carefully the Notice on pages 3 and 4,

Issued by the • Minister of Marine.

(A.)—Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.) —Particulars of all previous Certificates (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.) —Certificate now required.

(D.)—If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If he has not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

(E.)—Declaration to be made by Applicant.

XS" TAKE NOTICE.—Any person who makes, procures to be made, or assists in making any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or any other person a Certificate, either of Competency or Service, is for each offence liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour.

J tw foxthy )Stthn that the particulars contained in Divisions (A.), (B.), (C), (D.), and (G-.) of this Form are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPEES enumerated in Division (Gr.) and sent with this Form are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the persons whose names appear on them. I further declare that the Statement (G.) contains a true and correct account of the whole of my services without exception. And I make this Declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true. Dated at Wellington , this 20th day of October , 1898. Signed in the presence of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office. H. B. WALLBY, Signature of Applicant. V. 3067 of 20/10/98. Whitehall, Boulcott Street, Wellington Present address.

(F.) — Superintendent to Examiner. Cfo $*daralifltt (B-) above was signed in my presence, and the Fee of 10s. received by me. Dated at Wellington , this 20th day of_ October , 1898. ___ - P. MoKBLLAB, Superintendent.

Christian Names at full length. Surname. Permanent Address, stating Town, Street, and Number of House, and Name of Person (if any) with whom residing. 3 1 2 Harry Egerton. Walley. c/o Mrs. Baxter, Whitehall, Bouloott Street, Wellington. Date of Birth. Where born. Day. Month. Year. Town. Country. i 5 6 7 8 20th. September. 1874. Manchester. Lancashire.

Number. " Competency," " Service," or " B.N.B." now or formerly. Grade. For " Fore-and-Aft" or " Square " Rigged Vessels, or other Class of Vessel. Where issued. Date of Issue. If at any time suspended or cancelled, state by what Court or Authority. Date. Cause. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 773. Competency. Second mate. Square-rigged. New Zealand. 14/9/95.

Grade. 18 For " Fore-and-Aft" or " Square " Eigged Vessels. 19 Mercantile Marine Office to which it is to be sent. 20 Wellington. First mate. Square-rigged. Wellington.

Hvision. Day. 21 Month. 22 Year. 23 Port. 21 Subjects in which he failed. 25 No previous fail ure.

o^to

_.. —20

(G.) List of Testimonials and Statement of Service at Sea. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 26, below.)

(H.)—Certificate of Examiner.

(I.)—Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit Ijmbg arlifjJ that the particulars contained in Divisions (H.) and (I.) are correct. This Form and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Secretary, Marine Department. Dated this day of , 1 I Signatures of F Examiners. To the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

If Ser dee on board Ship. Servi ice of A] iplicai it. a *^ 1 o 3 m § O 6 Ship's Name. Port of Registry and _ 9 3 Q <_. fl Q) 3 3 O O •H O I B 32 a o 1 a 3 U 6 •M o 1 n 33 Timi intl ) employed lis Service. l» O a 3 © o 1 a o iq r. 6 Remarks. Initials of Verifier. Rig. 27 § a a o B Official No. of Ship. 'o 3 Q r. 31 _ -a H o 31 35 tn &-, a 3G 38 30 28 29 31 37 Bank-lands Bq. 1196 Liverpool ap.3rd mate 31/5/88 10/2/94 8 10 Foreign Bankhall Bq. 1270 Liverpool 3rd mate 9/7/91 22/12/94 5 13 Foreign Aratapu Bq. 122 Auokland A.B. 2/1/95 9/8/95 7 7 Coastal Eliza Firth Bq. 143 Lyttelton Mate 2/1/96 7/11/96 10 5 Coastal Sarah and Mary Bq. 145 Invercargill 2nd mate 16/11/96 25/5/97 6 9 Inter. Taupo S.s. 408 Dunedin A.B. 12/6/97 11/10/97 5 Coastal Waihora S.s. 1269 Dunedin A.B. 2/11/97 20/4/98 5 18 Inter. Wanaka S.s. 1572 Dunedin Boatswain 18/5/98 19/9/98 4 1 Inter. I w Total Service at Sea .. >tal Si 9 3 Time served for whioh Certificates are now produced 9 4 3 Time served for whioh no Certificates are produced

Note. — The Examiners should fill up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward Marine Department, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sent w. pal Examiner, Marine Department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the oj Column 20. this paper to the Secretary Ith this paper to the Princifice named in Division (C), ; . Date and Place of Examination. Insert "Passed" or "Failed" in each Column. If failed in Seamanship, state how much further Sea-service (if any) must be performed. 45 Bank for which passed. Date. Place. Colour-Test. Navigation. Seamanship. 40 41 42 43 44 46

Height. Complexion. 49 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 Colour of Feet. 47 Inches. 48 Hair. 51 Eyes. 52 I

349

H.-26

Memorandum, Secretary, Marine Department. Mr. Glasgow. Herewith I forward papers and certificates of Mr. E. H. Whalley, also his application to be examined for certificate as first mate. Candidate bases his application upon the time shown by his discharges from the "Eliza Firth" as mate, and on that from the " Sarah and Mary " as second mate. I find, on oxamining his-paperSj-feat hio owvioo ao aato wao improperly porfofiaedj-fte having at that timo a-eortificato of no higheE-gfado than feat of ooeead-mato; and I am-fee?ef-e?o of opinion feat thio oervioo oannefr-be-tafeea-iate-eeßgideFatiea;—T-a6-eaad4date r theEe£ege;-ean only claiia-the-eeryiee ekewa-by dioebarge-from the— L §afah-aad-Mary," in which ho aegyed-ia-fee-eapaoity te whioh-bia oortifieate ontitlod him to. The candidate's papers show time as follows: — " Sarah and Mary," second mate, 2/1/96, 7/11/96 —311 days foroign coast, 207 days foreign. " Eliza Firth," services as mate, 16/11/96 —190 days eeast foreign, Igg-dayo foroign. Total foreign, 190 + 207 ... ... ... ... 397 days. Service required ... ... ... ... ... 647 days. Time required ... ... ... ... ... ISO days. Candidate's papers give no explanation of why he was allowed to serve as mate of " Eliza Firth." E. A. Edwin.

Eeperred to Captain Allman, W. T. Glasgow—2.l/10/98. Secretary, Marine. As Captain Edwin was in error I got him to make his alterations in red ink. By paragraph 32, sub-clause (6), the candidate requires one year and a half service, or 547 days in all. His papers show total service with second mate's certificate 501 days, or forty-six days short of time required. 21/10/98. Geo. Allman.

Hon. Minister. Marine Department, 22nd October, 1898. I think it is doubtful whether Captain Allman's opinion as to this man's service is correct. The Regulations (No. 32) require the following service as qualifying for examination for first mate's certificate : — (a) One year not less than fourth mate of a foreign-going vessel whilst holding a second mate's foreign-going certificate, (b) Or, one year and a half not lower than only mate in home-trade whilst holding a second-mate's foreign-going certificate. Captain Allman rejects this candidate's application because his total service with second mate's certificate amounts to 501 days, whereas by Regulation 32 (b) one year and a half is required. In his view the sub-clauses (a) and (b) are alternatives. The candidate must show either one or the other. To be consistent with this, the service in home trade—viz., 311 days only—should be regarded. But Captain Allman has included the foreign service—viz., 191 days. If both foreign and home-trade service with second mate's certificate are to be counted, then it is a question whether the following is not the correct position of this case : Coasting service, 311 days. This is, by Regulation 95, to be regarded as equivalent to two-thirds of the time served in foreign trade, which would make 311 days equal to 207 days. There is, then, 191 days of foreign service with second-mate's certificate to be included, making n all 398 days of foreign-going service, or its equivalent, in accordance with Regulation 95, entitling the candidate to be examined under Regulation 32 (a). As refusal to examine may result in unpleasant consequences, I submit that the Crown Law Officers be asked to advise whether or not the view I have put forward above is correct. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Approved.—W.H.-J.—22/10/98.

The Solicitor-General. As this man wishes to be examined on Monday, if possible, I would be glad if an opinion could be given on Monday forenoon. W. T. Glasgow. 22/10/98.

Having considered the point involved in the above memorandum, I think the construction of Regulation 32 is that subclauses (a), (b), and (c) are alternatives, and that a candidate must show a compliance with such one of them as is applicable to his case. Ido not find any provision for allowing parts of one qualification and parts of another to be reckoned as a complete whole. Ido not, therefore, concur in the view put forward by the Secretary. W. S. Reid. 26/10/98. Copy of Regulations, please.—W.H.-J.—27/10/98.

Sir,— Whitehall, Boulcott Street, Wellington, 25th October, 1898. I handed in my papers, &c, to be examined for a first-mate's foreign-going certificate on Thursday morning last, and was instructed by Captain Edwin to be at the examination-room on Monday morning at 10 o'clock. I did so, and was informed by Captain Allman that my papers were in the Marine Department for consideration, and requested me to see him this morning (Tuesday). I did as I was told, and was again informed that my papers were still at the Marine Department, and that he had heard nothing, and asked me to call this afternoon, and when I did so he told me he had heard nothing as yet. I informed him that I had an appointment whether I

H.—26

350

was successful or not, and that to-morrow (Wednesday), according to the regulations, was the last examination day this week, and I should therefore lose my appointment—which I thought very inconsiderate—as I handed in my papers in plenty of time, which fully entitled me to examination. I asked Captain Allman if I should see the Minister and he replied with a decisive " No," as my papers were in the hands of the Law Office, and I cannot possibly understand the reason why they should be, as they are correct in every detail and in perfect order. I should be most grateful to you, Sir, if you would interest yourself in my case, as further unnecessary detention will be a hardship to me, and why should I suffer for the faults of the Examiners, who are unable to interpret the regulations? as I consider my papers clear enough for any one to understand. I am, &c, The Eight Hon. E. J. Seddon, P. 0., &c, Premier. H. B. Walley. Acknowledged.—27/10/98.—A.W.—Hon. Minister of Marine.

Hon. Minister of Marine. A paper containing the Solicitor-General's opinion of this man's application was sent to you yesterday. 27/10/98. W. T. Glasgow. Inform Mr. Walley of the reason why he was not examined, based upon the opinion of the Law Officer; and that the New Zealand regulations are exactly the same in this respect as the Board of Trade regulations.—W. H. -J.— lo/11/98.

Sic,— Whitehall, Boulcott Street, 28th October, 1898. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your reply to my letter of the 25th instant, which refers me to the Hon. the Minister of Marine. Since writing you, through the intervention of Messrs. Millar and Hutcheson, M's.H.E., I have had an interview with Hon. Hall-Jones, and the result is entirely unsatisfactory. I respectfully submit, Sir, that, according to precedent and common-sense interpretation of the Marine regulations, I have more than sufficient service to entitle me to be examined for a first-mate's certificate. The Marine Department refuses to consider foreign and coastal service as interchangeable— i.e., that I must either present twelve months' foreign service as second mate or eighteen months' coastal as mate, and that part service in either cannot be accepted. This interpretation of the regulations is unique, and, in the opinion of the Minister of Marine (who has promised to have the regulation altered), exceedingly harsh. But I would respectfully point out to you, Sir, that the regulations made by the Board of Trade cannot be easily altered. Therefore, as I have failed to obtain relief in any other quarter, I humbly beg that you will send for my papers, which are still in the possession of the Marine Department, and compare them with paragraphs 95 and 104 of the Eegulations for the Examinations of Masters and Mates. Either lam improperly prevented from being examined, or many others who have preceded me have been illegally examined. I refer you to the case of Mr. Fender (examined in Wellington in August last for foreign-going master), whose case is precisely on allfours with mine. Trusting you may be able to afford me the desired relief, I have, &c, Eight Hon. the Premier. H. E. Walley. The Law Officer's opinion should be taken on this.—B.J.S.—25/11/98. Eight Hon. Premier.-r-This has been done. See M. 98/2489 herewith.—W. T. Glasgow. 28/11/98.

Absthact from Regulations. Paragbaph 95 states:—"For home-trade passenger ships certificate service in the home-trade or coastal trade is regarded as equivalent to service in the foreign trade, but for foreign-going certificate it is regarded as only equivalent to two-thirds of the time served in the foreign trade." Paragraph 104 states :—'• Service in a lower grade than first or only mate in the home or coastal trade will not be recognised as officera' service towards qualifying a candidate for examination for a foreign trade certificate." Sea Service. —Twelve months service in the foreign trade as second mate qualifies for a first mata's certificate. Eighteen months' service in the coastal trade as mate does the same. Sir,— I, myself, show six months' service as second mate in the foreign trade, and the other six months is more than sufficiently made up by twelve months' service as mate in the coastal trade. P.S.—My papers, including my second mate's certificate and application for examination, are still in the hands of the Marine Department. H. E. Walley.

Sir,— Marine Department, Wellington, 12th November, 1898. With reference to your letter of the 25th ultimo, addressed to the Premier, on the subject of your application to be examined for a first-mate's certificate, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to inform you that you could not be examined, as you had not the qualifications required by the New Zealand regulations for the examination of masters and mates, which are identical as regards qualification with those issued by the Board of Trade. The requirements, as regards service, for the certificate for which you wished to be examined are proof of one year's service in a capacity not less than fourth mate of a foreign-going vessel whilst holding

351

H.—26

a second-mate's foreign-going certificate, or one year and a half not lower than only mate of a home-trade ship whilst holding a certificate as second mate, foreign-going, or as mate, home trade. The officer's service shown in your application since you obtained your second-mate's certificate is ten months and five days as mate in the home trade and six months and nine days as second mate in the foreign trade, and the Crown Law Officers have advised the department that the service in one trade cannot be added to the service in the other trade to make up the quantity required by the regulations. I return herewith your certificate, discharges, and testimonials. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Mr. H. B. Walley, care Mrs. Baxter, Whitehall, Boulcott Street, Wellington.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z., 12th November, 1898. I have the honour to forward, under separate cover, copy of the New Zealand regulations for the examination of masters and mates, which are similar to those of the Board of Trade, and, as your regulations are no doubt similar, I shall feel obliged if you will inform me what is the practice of your Board with regard to the qualifications of a candidate for examination for a certificate as first mate under clause 32—that is, are the provisions of subclauses (a) and (b) treated as alternative, or can service under subclause (a) be added to service under subclause (b) in order to give the necessary qualifications ? The provisions of clauses 95 and 104, to which there are similar clauses in the Board of Trade regulations, would appear to indicate that the service is not alternative, but that service under one clause, when it does not give the necessary qualification, can be added to service under the other sub-clause, so as to give what is required. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Board, Brisbane, Queensland. Also sent to the Secretary, Marine Board, Sydney, New South Wales; the Secretary, Marine Board, Melbourne, Victoria; the Secretary, Marine Board, Port Adelaide, South Australia; the Secretary, Marine Board, Hobart, Tasmania; the Secretary, Marine Board, Freemantle, Western Australia.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 12th November, 1898. A candidate has made application to this department to be examined for a certificate of competency as first mate of a foreign-going ship on ten months five days' service as only mate of a home-trade ship, and six months nine days' service as second mate of a foreign-going ship, and during the whole of the periods of such service in the home and foreign trade he has held a second mate's certificate for foreign going vessels. Doubts have, however, been raised as to whether he has shown sufficient officer's service to qualify him to be examined for a first-mate's certificate, on the ground that the service specified in subclauses (a) and (b) of clause 32 of the New Zealand regulations for the examination of masters and mates are alternative, and that service under subclause (a) cannot be added to service under subclause (b) in order to qualify for examination. The whole of clause 32 is identical with clause 32 of the Board of Trade regulations of 1898, from which it was copied. I shall therefore feel obliged if you will let me know whether the Board of Trade consider that service under the subclauses of clause 32 is alternative, or whether service under subclause (<x) can be added to service under subclause (b) in order to qualify for examination, of course counting service under the latter subclause as equivalent to two-thirds of the time served in the foreign trade. Clauses 104 and 110 of the Board of Trade regulations, to which we have similar regulations, would appear to indicate that the service is not alternative. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The Assistant Secretary, Marine Department, Board of Trade, London.

Sic, — Whitehall, Boulcott Street, Wellington, 15th November, 1898. By your request to me through Mr. J. Hutcheson, M.H.E., I wrote you on the subject of the examination for a first-mate's foreign-going certificate, and I have heard nothing further. I am well aware, Sir, that you have your hands pretty full of business, but I should be grateful to you if you would help me through, as this detention is getting very serious to me. Hoping to get an early reply. I remain, &c. Et. Hon. the Premier, P.C., L.G., &c, Premier. H. E. Walley. Bring this up with other letter on my return to Wellington.—E.J.S.—l6/11/98.

Sir,— Sydney, 23rd November, 1898. In reference to your letter of the 12th instant, forwarding under separate cover copy of the New Zealand regulations for the examination of masters and mates, I have now the honour by direction of the Marine Board of New South Wales to inform you, in reply to the question raised, that subclauses (a) and (b) under clause 32 for first mate are treated as alternative in this colony. I have, &c, G. S. Lindeman, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

352

H.—26

Sir, — Marine Board, Hobart, 25th November, 1898. I have the honour, in reply to your letter of the 12th instant, to have to state, with regard to the qualifications of a candidate for examination for a certificate as first mate, that the provisions of subclauses (a) and (b) are not alternative, and that the applicant must have served one year as third or fourth mate in charge of watch in foreign trade, or one year and a half in Home or coast trade as only mate, and that he must hold second-mate's certificate. I have, &c, Henry Smith, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Marine Board Offices, Port Adelaide, S.A., 24th November, 1898. g IK Examinations. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter dated the 12th instant, and to inform you that the practice of this department is not to treat subclauses (a) and (b) as alternative, but as a statement of equivalent service—that is to say, that the candidate's time may be made up of either (a) or (b), or both; but, in any case, the time served under (b) must be half as long again as that served under (a). I have, &c, T. N. Stephens, President. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Sir, — Marine Board Office, Brisbane, 30th November, 1898. I have the honour to acknowledge with thanks copy of the New Zealand regulations for the examination of masters and mates, and in reply to your inquiry of the 12th instant, with reference to first-mate's service requirements, subsection (a) and (b). of section 32, I beg to inform you that service when insufficient under one subsection is allowed to be added to service under the other subsection to make up what is required. I have, &c, L. A. Pethebridge, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. Secretary.

Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, Ist December, 1898. a Service Qualifications. — First Mate. 1 am in receipt of your letter of the 12th November, (No. 98/282), requesting information as to the practice of this Board in accepting service tendered by candidates for first-mate's certificates of competency for foreign-going ships, and in reply (quoting from your regulations) I beg to state that such regulations are interpreted in this colony in conformity with the view taken by you —that is to say, if a candidate presented a certain amount of service (less than twelve months) under regulation 32, subclause (a), the balance of service would be accepted under subclause (b), allowing, of course, for the operation of clause 95. If the greater portion of the qualifying service of an intending candidate had been performed, say nine months, under subclause (b) of regulation 32, then he would be deemed to have substantially complied with the requirements of the regulations if he showed six months' service under subclause (a). I have, &c, J. Geo. McKie, The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand. Secretary.

Sir — Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z., 13th December, 1898. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the Ist instant, in which you state the practice followed by your Board in regard to the regulations governing the services required by a candidate for a first-mate's certificate. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria. Also sent to the President, Marine Board, Port Adelaide, South Australia; the Secretary Marine Board, Hobart, Tasmania; the Secretary Marine Board, Sydney, New South Wales.

Sir — Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z., 15th December, 1898. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 30th ultimo, in which you state the practice followed by your Board in regard to the regulations governing the service required by a candidate for a first-mate's certificate, and I beg to express to you the thanks of the department for the information sent. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Board, Brisbane, Queensland. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Board of Trade, Marine Department, 7, Whitehall Gardens, Sic, London, S.W., 4th January, 1898. In reply to your letter of the 19th November, asking to be informed whether, in the opinion of the Board of Trade, services under paragraph 32 (a) and paragraph 32 (6) of the Board of Trade and the New Zealand regulations may be counted together in calculating the amount of

H.—26

service required for a first mate's certificate, or whether service under each of the paragraphs in question should be treated separately, I am directed by the Board of Trade to inform you that, in their opinion, the services may be counted together, service in the home trade being regarded as equivalent to two-thirds of that in the foreign trade, as indicated. In the case quoted in your letter, the candidate would therefore be regarded in the United Kingdom as qualified for examination. I am, &c, Ingram B. Walkee. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Hon. Minister. The Board of Trade's practice is against the view taken by Captain Allman, supported by the Solicitor-General. I think that the other Marine Boards should be informed of this, and that the candidate Walley should be informed that he can now go up for examination. 20/2/99. W. T. Glasgow. Send copy of letter from Board of Trade to Marine Office, Sydney, and inform candidate Walley that he can now be examined.—W. H.-J.—2o/2/99.

Hon. Minister. Walley informs me that he cannot go up for examination again in New Zealand, as his vessel is going to Sydney, and he proposed to go up there. Dnder the circumstances, I recommend that the fee of 10s. be returned to him. 16/6/99. W. T. Glasgow. Approved.—W. H.-J.—l7/6/99.

Sib, — Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1899. Adverting to your letter of the 23rd November last, I have the honour to forward herewith, for the information of your Board, copy of a communication which was addressed by this department to the Board of Trade on the subject of the qualifying service for a first-mate's certificate, together with copy of the reply which has been received to that communication. The interpretation which is placed by the Board of Trade upon the rule regarding such service will be followed in this colony. I may add that I find the same practice is followed in Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania. I have, &c, The Secretary, Marine Board, Sydney, N.S.W. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary. Also sent to the Secretary, Marine Board, Port Adelaide, South Australia ; the Secretary Marine Board, Melbourne, Victoria; the Secretary, Marine Board, Hobart, Tasmania; the Secretary, Marine Board, Brisbane, Queensland.

Sic, — Marine Department, Wellington, 21st February, 1899. Adverting to my letter of the 12th November last, I have the honour, by direction of the Minister of Marine, to state that a reply has been received from the Board of Trade to a communication from this department on the subject of whether your service qualified you for an examination for a first-mate's certificate, from which it appears that the Board of Trade allow service under paragraphs (a) and (b) of clause 32 of the Eegulations for the Examination of Masters and Mates, to be counted together in calculating the amount of service required for a first-mate's certificate. Under these circumstances a similar practice will be followed in New Zealand in future, and this will enable you to go up for examination for a first-mate's certificate on the service which you showed when you made application on the 20th October last should you desire to do so. I have, &c, W. T. Glasgow. Mr. H. E. Walley, c/o Mrs. Baxter, Whitehall, Boulcott Street, Wellington.

Sib, — Marine Board of Victoria, Melbourne, 4th March, 1899. I am in receipt of your letter of the 21st February (No. 99/479) enclosing a copy of a letter received from the Board of Trade confirming the interpretation placed upon the regulations thereof in connection with the qualifying service for the grade of first mate, for which accept my best thanks. ■ I have, &c, J. Geo. McKib, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z.

Sib,— Marine Board, Hobart, 6th March, 1899. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 21st ultimo with reference to the qualifying service for a first-mate's certificate, and beg to thank you for the information received. I have, &c, Henry Smith, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington. 45— H. 26.

353

H.—26

Sib, — Marine Board Office, Brisbane, 7th March, 1899. I have the honour to acknowledge, with thanks, the receipt of yours of the 21st ultimo, enclosing copies of correspondence between your department and the Board of Trade relative to the interpretation of the regulation respecting the qualifying service for a first-mate's certificate. I have, &c, L. A. Pethebridge, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, N.Z.

Sib,— Sydney, 9th March, 1899. I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 21st ultimo, enclosing a copy of a communication addressed by you to the Board of Trade on the subject of qualifying service for a first-mate's certificate, together with a copy of the reply received from that body. I have, &c, Geo. S. Lindbman, Secretary. The Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington, New Zealand.

Marine Department, Wellington, 17th June, 1899. The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. As Mr. Harry Egerton Walley, who paid the fee of 10s. on the 20th October last (voucher 3067), is unable to go up for examination here as his ship leaves for Sydney, where he intends to sit for examination, it has been decided under the circumstances of his case to refund the amount paid by him, and I shall therefore be glad if you will do so. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

Mr. Glasgow. This bears out my recollection—namely, that in Walley's case the Chief Examiner and the Solici-tor-General said that each service must stand by itself, and that the reply from the Marine Board of New South Wales confirmed this ; while the reply from the Tasmanian Board is, in my opinion, in the same direction, the others were against this view. However, we have adopted the practice of the highest authority. Eeport should be amended accordingly. W. H.-J. 24/6/99. Alterations in report made accordingly.—G.A.—27/6/99.

EXHIBIT 10. Captain Allman. Can anything be done to get over this difficulty ? —E.S.—2I/9/95.

I have carefully considered Captain Jones's case, and I regret to say there is no possibility of overcoming the difficulty.—Geo. Allman.—27/9/95.

354

"855"

EXHIBIT 11. Port of Wellington. APPLICATION TO BE EXAMINED FOB A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS MASTER OR MATE.

H.—26.

Rotation Number, 640

Exn. 2.

Note.— This Farm can be obtained at any Mercantile Marine Office, free of charge. Divisions (A.), (B.), (C), (D.), (E.), and (G.) of this Paper are to be filled up by the Applicant for Examination and handed to the Examiners, with his Testimonials, and former Certificate, if any. No remuneration or gratuity whatever must be offered to or received by any officers or servants of the Government beyond the fees mentioned in the Regulations. Any officer, messenger, or servant of the Government who accepts any presenter gratuity will be immediately discharged from his office, and any Candidate so offering money will be subject to the penalty mentioned in par. 14, at the back of this Form. Before filling in the required particulars the Applicant should read carefully the Notice on pages 3 and 4,

Issued by the Minister of Makine.

(A.) — Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.) —Particulars of all previous Certificates (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.) — Certificate now required.

(D.) —If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If he has not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

(E.)—Declaration to be made by Applicant.

tS" TAKE NOTICE.—Any person who makes, procures to be made, or assists in making any false representation for the purpose of obtaining for himself or any other person a Certificate, either of Competency or Service, is for each offence liable to be punished as for a misdemeanour, j

I trcr §mh% itttk« that the particulars contained in Divisions (A.), (B.), (C), (D.), and (Gγ.) of this Form are correct and true to the best of my knowledge and belief; and that the PAPEBS enumerated in Division (Gγ.) and sent with this Form are true and genuine documents, given and signed by the persons whose names appear on them. I further declare that the Statement (Gγ.) contains a true and correct account of the whole of my services without exception. And I make this Declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true. Dated at Wellington , this 11th day of December , 1896. Signed in the presence of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office. WILLIAM BENDALL, Signature of Applicant. Wellington. Present address. (F.) — Superintendent to Examiner. Che jSgtdaraiimt (E.) above was signed in my presence, and the Fee of £1 received by me. Dated at Wellington , this 11th day of December , 1896. P. McKELLAB, Superintendent.

Christian Names at full length. Surname. Permanent Address, stating Town, Street, and Number of House, and ! Name of Person (if any) with whom residing. 3 1 William Bendall, Oriental Bay, Wellington. Date of Birth. Where born. Day. Month. Year. Town. Country. 4 5 6 7 8 23rd September 1833. Bristol. England. 'j

Number. 9 " Competency," " Service," or "R.N.R." now or formerly. 10 Grade. 11 For " Fore-and-Aft or wv,«i-„ ti_+„ r>f If at an V tlme suspended or " Square " Rigged Vessels, or ." ,,°*f T«nA cancelled, state by what Court other Class of Vessel. issued. issue. or Authority. 12 1S_ 14 15 Well'gt'n, Unrestricted. New 1873. Zealand. Date. 16 Cause. 17 235. Service, Foreign-going. Master. Unrestricted.

Grade. 18 For " Fore-and-Aft" or " Square " Rigged Vessels. 19 Mercantile Marine Office to which it is to be sent. 20 isses. Laws of deviation and adjustment of compasses.

Day. 21 Month. 22 Year. 23 Port. 24 Subjects in which he failed. 25 Not previously exam ined.

H.—26

356

(G.) —List of Testimonials and Statement of Service at Sea. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 26, below.)

(H.)—Certificate of Examiner.

(I.)—Personal Description of Applicant.

W\t jjmbg artifg that the particulars contained in Divisions (H.) and (I.) are correct. This Form and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Secretary, Marine Department. Dated this Hth day of December y 1896. CrEO. ALLMAN, I Signatures of E. A. EbwlN, f Examiners. To the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

[f Ser' dee on board Ship. Servii :e of Applicai it. >. a 3 --— _ [_ a o a - H o d P5 Ship's Name. Port of Registry and 4-J g © 3 © O © 3 3 O O O © _ P 32 a _o 10 eS a 3 u iO H =*H O Q> +J d P 33 Timi intl i emp] lis Ser loyed rvice. © >> O ft a 01 a o 3 ia « rH _H Remarks. Initials of Verifier. Rig. 27 0) be s a a o B Official No. of Ship. a DQ h o3 0) 34 in n a o % 35 09 R 36 38 30 29 31 37 Served in various si loast, and the Australia: iered vessels, steamers, mnexed statement. M; steamer " Stella." ips l tra ,nd i las Mid v ,des, 1 sailin t sail: essels registered in the United Kingi Tom 1847 till 1856. Since then sen g vessels, employed in foreign, inter ing vessel was the barque " Falcon, '' lorn and employed in the Atlantic, th ■ed as mate and master of various colo solonial, and New Zealand coast trad and the last steam command the Gi ie English >nial regisles, as per overnment . . -- -. «; T. otal Service at Sea .. Time served for which Certi ificates are now produced *■ Time served for which no C< jrtificates are produced

Note.— The Examiners should fi, Marine Department, Wellington. If tfa Secretary, Marine Department. The ne : , Column 20. up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the o 'Ms paper to the Secretary sent with this paper to thi Ice named in Division (G), Date and Place of Examination. Insert "Passed" or "Failed" in each Column. Date. Place. Colour-Test. Navigation. Seamanship. If failed in Seamanship, state how much further Sea-service (if any) must be performed. 45 Rank for which passed. 40 41 42 43 44 46 Wellington. Syllabus in compasses.

Height. Complexion. 49 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 ' Colour of Feet. 47 Inches. 48 Hair. 51 Eyes. 52 Fair. Grey. Blue.

357

H.—26

Customhouse, Wellington, 11th December, 1896. Received from Captain Bendall, £1, for license as Adjuster of Comoasses. T. C. Eowe, for Collector.

Exn. 16. Port of Wellington. Examiner's Authoeity fob Delivery op a Certificate of Competency to an Applicant who has Passed his Examination. Christian and surname: William Bendall. Whether master, mate, or engineer : Master, foreign. Grade for which passed : Syllabus in deviation of compass. Please to deliver to the person named above, the certificate of competency and testimonials or other documents forwarded to you by the Secretary of the Marine Department for him, on his complying with the office regulations. Dated at Wellington, this 11th December, 1896. Geo. Allman, ) -n, B. A. Edwin, (Examiners.

(Seal.) Syllabus of Examination of Masters in the Laws of the Deviation of the Issued under COMPASSES OF AN IRON SHIP, AND IN THE MEANS OF COMPENSATING OR Coß"The S. and S. RECTING IT. Act, 1877." 1. Describe an artificial magnet, and how a steel bar or needle is usually magnetized. 2. Which end of the compass needle, or a magnet, is commonly termed the red and which the blue pole ? 3. Which is the red magnetic pole of the earth, and which the blue ? And give their geographical positions. 4. What effect has the pole of one magnet of either name on the pole of the same name of another magnet, and what would be the consequence of the pole of one magnet of either name being brought near enough to affect the pole of contrary name, if in these cases both magnets were freely suspended? 5. By applying this law to all magnets, natural as well as artificial, describe what would be the result on a magnetic bar or needle, freely suspended, but by weight or by the nature of its mounting constrained to preserve a horizontal position ; and what would be the result, if so mounted, but free to move in every direction, the earth being regarded as a natural magnet. 6. What is the cause of the variation of the compass? 7. What is meant by the deviation of the compass ? 8. What is meant by the term "local attraction"; under what circumstances have ships' compasses, from recent careful investigation, been found to be affected by it? and name some of the localities in different parts of the world where this disturbance is to be found, and, consequently, where increased vigilance is necessary (see Appendix, "Evan's Elementary Manual," 1888). 9. What do you understand by the term " soft " iron ; and what are its properties as regards acquiring and retaining magnetism ? 10. What do you understand by the term " hard " iron ; and what are its properties as regards acquiring and retaining magnetism ? 11. Describe the meaning of the term "horizontal force" of the earth. Where is it the greatest, and where the least; and what, effect has it in respect to the increase or decrease of the directive force of the compass needle ? 12. Does the magnetic equator coincide with the geographical equator? If not, state clearly how it is situated. 13. Where can the values of the magnetic dip, the earth's horizontal force, and the variation be found ? 14. State in what parts of the globe lying in the usual tracks of navigation the variation changes very rapidly, and what special precautions should be observed when navigating these localities ; also why a "variation " chart is then very useful. 15. Why is a knowledge of the magnetic dip and the earth's horizontal force important in dealing with compass deviations ? 16. Describe the meaning of the term " vertical force "of the earth. Where is it the greatest, and where the least ? 17. Would you expect a compass to be more seriously affected by any given disturbing force when near the magnetic equator, or near the poles ? And state the reason. 18. State briefly (a) the essentials of an efficient compass; and (b) what you would consider a good arrangement of the needles (that is, whether long or short, single or double, &c), with the view to good compensation. 19. In stowing away spare compass-cards or magnets how would you place them with regard to each other, or what might be the probable consequence? . 20. State briefly the chief points to be considered when selecting a position for your compass on board ship, and what should be particularly guarded against. 21. What is meant by transient induced magnetism? 22. Which is the red and which the blue pole of a mass of soft vertical iron (or, indeed, of any soft iron not in a horizontal position) by induction, and what effect would the upper and lower ends of it have on a compass needle in the Northern Hemisphere ? i

H.—26

358

23. Which is the red and which the blue pole of a mass of soft vertical iron by induction, and what effect would the upper and lower ends of it have on the compass needle in the Southern Hemisphere ? 24. What effect would a bar of soft vertical iron have on the compass needle on the magnetic equator ? 25. Describe what is usually termed the " sub-permanent "* magnetism of an iron ship, and state when and how it is acquired, and which is the sub-permanent red and which is the blue pole, and why it is called sub-permanent magnetism. 26. What is meant by " the composition of forces " and " the parallelogram of forces "?■ and show how the knowledge of these is valuable in ascertaining and compensating the sub-permanent magnetism of an iron ship. 27. Describe the nature of the co-efficients B and C plus (+), and minus ( —), and the different magnetic forces they represent; also why they are said to produce semicircular deviations. 28. Can semicircular deviations be produced by any other force than the sub-permanent magnetism of the ship ? If so, by what ? 29. On what points, by compass bearing of the ship's head, does + B give westerly deviation, and on what points does it give easterly ; also on what points does — B give westerly, and on what points easterly? 30. On what points does + C give westerly deviation, and on what points easterly; also on what points does — C give westerly, and on what points easterly, deviation ? 31. The value of either co-efficient B or C being given, also the magnetic direction of the ship's head while she was being built, determine by the traverse tables the approximate value of the other co-efficient C or B ; and, the value of both these co-efficients being given, determine approximately the direction by compass of the ship's head whilst being built, assuming, of course, that these co-efficients resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. 32. Would you expect the greatest disturbance of the needle from the effects of sub-permanent magnetism alone to take place when ship's head is in same direction as when building, or when her head is at right angles to that direction, and in what direction of the ship's head would you expect to find the least disturbance ? 33. Describe quadrantal deviation, and state what co-efficients represent it ; also on what points of the ship's head, by compass, each of these co-efficients gives the greatest amount of deviation, and why it is called quadrantal deviation ? 34. On what points of the compass will each of the co-efficients D and E, + and —, give easterly, and on what points westerly, deviation ? 35. What conditions of the iron of a ship will produce + D, and what — D ?, 36. State clearly, then, which end of horizontal iron running athwart ship (such as beams, &c), and of horizontal iron running fore-and-aft of a ship, acquires red and which blue polarity, by induction, when ship's head is at N.E., S.E., S.W., and N.W., respectively. 37. Describe the nature of the deviation represented by co-efficients + and — A, and describe the errors in the construction of the compass, and other causes, that frequently produce it. 38. What is the object of compensating the compass by magnets, &c, and what are the general advantages of a compensated compass over an uncompensated one ? 39. Before adjusting the compass of an iron ship, what is it desirable to do with the view to eliminating as far as possible, what may be termed the unstable part of the magnetism of the ship? 40. Describe clearly the tentative method of compass-adjustment (that is, the compensation of co-efficients B, C, and D, with ship upright) as generally practised by compass-adjusters in ships of the mercantile marine. 41. State at what distance, as a general rule, the magnets and soft-iron correctors should be placed from the compass needles, and what will be the consequence if they are placed too near the needles. 42. Is it necessary that the magnets used for compensating co-efficients B and C should be placed on the deck? If not, state where they may also be placed, and the rules to be observed in placing them into position. 43. Does the B found on board ship usually arise altogether from sub-permanent magnetism, or does part of it usually arise from some other cause or causes ? 44. If the part of B due to induced magnetism in vertical soft iron, as well as the part due to sub-permanent magnetism, are corrected by a magnet alone, as is generally the case, what is frequently the consequence on the ship's changing her magnetic latitude and hemisphere ? 45. How should each of these two parts of B then, strictly speaking, be compensated ? 46. Assuming, for the sake of clearness, that your steering compass is unavoidably placed very near to the head of the stern-post (and other vertical iron at the stern), thereby causing a very large — B from induced magnetism, describe briefly any method by which the approximate position for the compensating vertical iron bar (Flinders or Rundell's) could be estimated, in order to reduce the error. Describe also how you would proceed in order to improve, if not to perfect, its position after observations have been made on the magnetic equator. 47. State if standard compasses, as well as steering compasses, are generally subject to this disturbance from induced magnetism in vertical iron; also whether the attraction in all cases is found to be towards the stern; and, if not, state the conditions under which it might be toward the bow, and how the compensating soft-iron bar should then be placed.

* The term " sub-permanent magnetism " in the syllabus is used in the original sense, as proposed by the late Sir G. B. Airy, to denote the character of the permanent magnetism of an iron ship as distinguished from the permanent magnetism of a magnetized steel bar. The terms " sub-permanent " and " permanent " throughout the syllabus may therefore be considered as synonymous.

H.—26

359

48. Generally speaking, does the magnetism induced in vertical iron usually have any effect in producing the co-efficient C, ship upright, or is it generally produced by sub-permanent magnetism alone ? State also your reasons for saying so. 49. Provided the needles of your compass are not so long and powerful, and so near, as to cause the soft-iron correctors to become magnetized by induction, would the co-efficient D if properly compensated as you have described (Ans. 40) be likely to remain so in all latitudes and both hemispheres ? If so, state the reason why. 50. Under what circumstances does the character of A and E so change as to render it desirable that these co-efficients should be disregarded or modified ? 51. Supposing your compasses were allowed to remain uncompensated, clearly explain what would be the probable changes (ship upright) in the deviations produced separately, by (1) the .subpermanent magnetism of the ship alone, (2) by the induced magnetism in vertical soft iron— (a) on reaching the equator, (b) in the Southern Hemisphere. 52. Assuming you were able to arrive at the proper proportions to be corrected, and were then to exactly compensate the sub-permanent magnetism of the ship by means of a permanent magnet, and the induced magnetism in vertical iron by a soft-iron bar, would you expect any deviation to take place in your compass as the ship changed her latitude and hemisphere ? And state your reasons for saying so. 53. Supposing the co-efficient D from horizontal soft iron were allowed to remain uncompensated, would you, or would you not, expect the D to differ in name or amount on the ship changing her magnetic latitude and hemisphere? And state the reason. 54. Describe how you would determine the deviation of your compass—(l) by reciprocal bearing ; (2) by figures on the dock-walls; (3) by bearings of a distant object. 55. Describe, in detail, how you would determine the deviation of your compass by the bearings of the sun; also by a star or planet. 56. Describe the uses to which the Napier's diagram can be applied, and its special advantages. 57. Describe clearly how the Napier's diagram is constructed. 58. For accuracy, what is the least number of points to which the ship's head should be brought for constructing a complete curve of deviations, or a complete table of deviations ? 59. Nearing land, and being anxious to check your deviations on a few courses you may probably require to steer, what is the least number of points it would be necessary to steady the ship's head upon, if making use of a Napier's diagram, in order to ascertain the deviation on each of the points—say, in a quadrant of the compass ? And describe clearly how you would do this at sea. 60. Supposing you have no means of ascertaining the magnetic bearing of the distant object when swinging your ship for deviations, how could you find it, approximately, from the equidistant Compass bearings ; and how far, as a rule, should the object be from the ship when swinging, or steaming round ? 61. Having taken the following equidistant compass bearing of a distant object, find the object's magnetic bearings, and thence the deviations : —

(a.) Magnetic Bearing Required.

(b.) Construct a curve of deviations on a Napier's diagram, with the deviations as above, and give the courses you would steer by the standard compass to make the following courses, correct magnetic:— Magnetic courses: N.N.W., S.S.E., W.N.W., E.S.E. Compass courses required: (c.) Supposing you have steered the following courses by the standard compass, find the correct magnetic courses made from the above curve of deviations: — Compass courses: N.N.E., E.N.E., S.S.W., W.S.W. Magnetic courses required': (d.) You have taken the following bearings of two distant objects by your standard compass as above. With the ship's head at N.E. J E., find the bearings, correct magnetic :— Compass bearings: S.E. by S. and N.N.W. Magnetic bearings required: 62. Assuming the deviations observed with the ship's head by compass to be as follow [or as in Question 61, whichever may be given], determine the value of the co-efficients A, B, C, D, and E, andjrom them construct a complete table of deviations (or for as many points as the Examiner may direct):—

Ship's Head by Standard Compass. Bearing of Distant Object by Standard Compass. Deviation Required. Ship's Head by Standard Compass. Bearing of Distant Object by Standard Compass. Deviation Required. North. N.B. East. S.E. S. 75° W. S. 64° W. S. 56° W. S. 50° W. South. S.W. West. N.W. S. 34° W. S. 31° W. S. 49° W. S. 71° W.

H.—26

360

Deviation at North [ South [ N.E. [ ] S.W [ ] East [ ] West [ ] S.E. [ ] N.W. [ ] f 63. When swinging your ship, if it be required to construct deviation-tables for two or more compasses situated in different parts of the vessel, describe the process, and how you would employ the Napier's diagram for this purpose. 64. State your rule for determining whether deviation is easterly or westerly. 65. Is a knowledge of the value of the various co-efficients of any advantage ? If so, state why. 66. Describe (a) what is commonly known by the term " retentive " or " retained " magnetism, and how the ship acquires it when in port and at sea; (b) its effect on the compass-needle whilst ship's head continues in the same direction; (c) the immediate consequence when the direction of the ship's head is altered ; and (d) the special precautions to be invariably observed at sea on the alteration of the ship's course. 67. Describe a "dumb-card" or pelorus," and its use (a) in compensating a compass, (b) in determining the deviation. 68. If you determine the deviation by an azimuth or an amplitude of a heavenly body, it is then combined with variation, which together is sometimes called the correction for the compass. State when the deviation is the difference between the variation and the correction, and when the sum ; and when it is of the same name as that of the correction, and when of the contrary name. 69. In observing azimuths of heavenly bodies, the best method is by " time azimuths," since these can be observed without an altitude when the ship is in port, or when the horizon cannot be defined from any cause. Given the sun's declination, the hour of the day, and the latitude, to find the true bearing of the sun.* 70. By night, if it be desirable to observe the correction of the compass: Given the day of the year, and time at ship, also the latitude of the place, to determine what stars will be in a good position for this purpose. 71. If your correcting-magnets are so mounted that their position can be altered, describe the process by which, on open sea, you can place the ship's head correct magnetic N. (or S.), and correct magnetic E (or W.), and can make the correction perfect. 72. Given the name of a star, the time, the place of ship, the variation of the compass, and the bearing of the star by compass: determine the deviation, and name it east or west. 73. Would you expect any change to be caused in the error of your compass by the ship heeling over either from the effect of the wind or cargo ? 74. Describe clearly the three principal causes of the heeling error on board an iron ship. 75. Towards which side of the ship would that part of magnetism induced in continuous transverse iron (which was horizontal while ship was upright) help to draw the north point of the needle when ship heels over (a) in the Northern Hemisphere, (b) in the Southern Hemisphere? 76. Supposing the compass was placed between the two parts of a divided beam or other athwartship iron, towards which side of the ship would iron so situated help to draw the north point of the needle when ship heels over (a) in the Northern Hemisphere, (b) in the Southern Hemisphere ? 77. Would you expect that part of the magnetism induced in iron exactly perpendicular to the ship's deck, such as stanchions, bulkheads, &c, if below the compass, to cause any part of the heeling error when the ship heels over, and, if so, towards which side of the ship (a) in the Northern Hemisphere, (b) in the Southern Hemisphere ? 78. If an ordinary standard compass placed higher than the iron topsides be compensated whilst the ship is upright, what co-efficient will be affected by heeling ? 79. Under what conditions —that is, as regards position whilst building, and the arrangement of iron in the ship—is the north point of the compass needle usually drawn to windward, or the high side of the ship, in the Northern Hemisphere ? 80. Under what conditions, as a rule, is the north point of the compass needle usually drawn to leeward, or the low side of the ship, in the Northern Hemisphere ? 81. State to which side of the ship, in the majority of cases, is the north point of the compass drawn when the ship heels over in the Northern Hemisphere ; and when this is the case, and it is not allowed for, what effect has it on the assumed position of the ship when she is steering on northerly, and also on southerly, courses ? 82. On what courses would you keep away, and on what courses would you keep closer to the wind, in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, in order to make good a given compass course (a) when north point of compass is drawn to windward or the high side of ship, and (b) when drawn to leeward or the low side ? 83. If a ship is beating to windward: when she tacks, under what circumstances will the heeling error retain the same name, and under what circumstances will it take the contrary name ? 84. If a ship is placed on the opposite tack by the change of wind, the ship's course being the same by compass, will the heeling error change its name ? 85. In which direction of the ship's head does the heeling error attain its maximum value, and n which direction does it generally vanish ?

* The prooess of finding time azimuths by the ordinary formulae of spherical trigonometry is tedious, and, since on board an iron ship these observations should be often repeated, the candidate will be allowed to use any table or graphic or linear method that will solve the problem within half of a degree, the altitude of the heavenly body not being given.

H.—9,6

361

86. Explain clearly how that part of the heeling error due to the permanent part of the magnetism of the ship varies as the ship changes her geographical position, and what is the reason of this 87. Explain clearly how that part of the heeling error due to the induction in transverse iron (which was horizontal when ship was upright), and iron vertical to the ship's deck, varies as the ship changes her geographical position. 88. What, then, would be the probable nature of the heeling error —that is, whether to high or low side of the ship; and whether the error would be equal to the sum or difference, &c, of the forces given (1) in high north latitudes, (2) on magnetic equator, (3) in high south latitudes ?—- -assuming the polarity of the sub-permanent magnetism of the ship under and affecting the compass to be as given below ; the vertical induction in soft iron, of course, obeying the ordinary laws in the above geographical positions, (1), (2), (3): — (a.) In cases where the effect of red vertical sub-permanent magnetism is equal to that of the vertical induction in the soft iron of the ship : (b.) Where the effect of red vertical sub-permanent magnetism is greater than that of the vertical induction in the soft iron : (c.) Where the effect of red vertical sub-permanent magnetism is less than that of the vertical induction in the soft iron: (d.) Where the effect of blue vertical sub-permanent magnetism is equal to that of the vertical induction in the soft iron : (c.) Where the effect of blue vertical sub-permanent magnetism is greater than that of the vertical induction in the soft iron: (/".) Where the effect of blue vertical sub-permanent magnetism is less than that of the vertical induction in the soft iron. 89. Can the heeling error be compensated ? If so, state the means to be employed, and how the compensation may be effected. 90. Can the compensation of the heeling error be depended on in every latitude ? If not, state the reason. 91. Do the soft-iron correctors used for compensating the co-efficient + D have any effect on the compass needle when the ship heels over, and, if so, do they draw the needle towards the low or the high side of the ship, and do they counteract, or otherwise, the effect produced by the vertical induction in the soft iron, (a) in the Northern Hemisphere, (b) in the Southern Hemisphere ; and what is the reason of this ? 92. Given the heel, the direction of the ship's head by compass, and the heeling error observed, to find the approximate heeling error, with a greater or less given heel, and with the ship's head on some other named point of the compass, the ship's magnetic latitude being in both cases the same. 93. Describe any instrument to show the ship's heel (generally called a clinometer), and state how and where it should be fixed. 94. Should the clinometer be observed when the ship is swung to determine the deviation when the ship is upright? If so, state the reason why. 95. Would you expect the table of deviations supplied by the compass-adjuster from observations made in swinging the ship to remain good during the voyage, or would you expect the deviations to change ? If so, state under what circumstances. 96. Is it desirable that a record of your observations for deviations should be kept as a guide for any subsequent voyage in case the ship should be in the same locality, or for further correction of the compass ? If so, describe some suitable form for keeping such record. 97. Would you under any circumstances consider it a safe and proper procedure to place implicit confidence in your compasses, however skilfully they may have been adjusted? If not, what precautions is it your duty to take at all times ?

Compass Syllabus. No. I.—An artificial magnet generally consists of a tempered steel bar magnetized by the inductive action of another magnet, either natural or artificial. The loadstone and the earth itself are natural magnets. A very general method of magnetizing a steel bar or compass needle is by the means of a horse-shoe magnet. The needle to be magnetised is laid on a flat surface and one of the poles of the hcrse-shoe magnet when pressed on the needle should be drawn end to end. The other pole of the horse-shoe should then be brought to the centre of the needle and drawn several times in the opposite direction. This process should be repeated on the other side of the needle, care being taken that in all cases the same pole of the magnet is drawn to the same end of the needle. Steel bars for correcting compasses and smaller pieces of steel for compass needles are sometimes magnetised by drawing each half over the poles of a strong compass magnet or of an electro magnet. No. 2.—That end of a compass needle or magnet which points towards the north when it is suspended so as to move freely in the horizontal plane is usually termed the red, and the end which points towards the south the blue pole. No, 3.—The northern magnetic pole is termed the blue and the southern the red. The blue pole is in latitude 70° N. and longitude 59° W. The red pole is about 74° S. and 147° E. . • 46— H. 26.

362

H.—26

No. 4.—The pole of one magnet of either name will repel the pole of the same name by another magnet. If the pole of one magnet of either name is brought near the pole of the same name of another magnet the two poles will mutually attract each other. No. 5. —If a magnetic bar or needle is suspended so as to move horizontally, it will assume a different direction in different parts of the world, but generally nearly north and south. Jf the bar or needle is suspended so as to move in any direction the north end of the needle will also point downward in the Northern Hemisphere, and upwards in the Southern Hemisphere, and horizontally about the equator. In England at present a needle free to move about its centre in any direction points with its north end about 18° west of true north and 69° below the horizontal. No. 6. —The variation of the compass is caused by the fact that the direction of the earth's horizontal magnetic force, in obedience to which the compass needle points, does not generally coincide with the direction of the meridian. No. 7. —The deviation of the compass is the difference between the magnetic north—that is, the north as shown by an accurate compass in a position free from local disturbances—and the north as shown by an accurate compass on board ship at the same place. The term is used exclusively to denote the error of the compass caused by the magnetism of the iron of the ship, whether used in her construction, in her equipment, or in her as cargo. No. B.—The term "local attraction" may be understood to mean any disturbance of the compass caused by the magnetism of objects external to the ship. It has especial reference to disturbance caused by the magnetism of the ground in certain localities. As the effect of magnetism is not cut off by the intervening water, a ship's compasses may be affected in shallow water although she may be at some distance from the land. No. B.—The following places are given in the Admiralty Manual where, from well-authenticated observations, ships' compasses have been known to be disturbed: The approaches to Cossack, North Australia; Cape St. Francis, Labrador ; New Ireland and Bougainville, Solomon Islands; Tumbora Volcano, Sumbawa Island, near Java; the coasts of Madagascar, especially near St. Mary's Island; Iceland and its adjacent waters, Odessa Bay and the shoal south of it, Isle de Los, West Coast of Africa. No. 9.—The term " soft iron" is iron which becomes instantly magnetized by any inductive influence to which it is exposed, but which loses that magnetism or changes its magnetic condition When the inducing cause is removed or changed. No. 10.—The term " hard iron" is applied to iron which is not easily magnetized by induction, but which has the property of retaining magnetism so acquired more or less permanently. No. 11. —The term " horizontal force" means the horizontal component of the earth's magnetic force. The earth's force increases and is more inclined from the horizontal as the latitude is increased. The angle at which it is inclined is termed the dip. The dip and the earth's total force increase together, but in such a manner that the horizontal force diminishes as the poles are approached in both hemispheres. At the magnetic poles, the dip being 90°, there is no horizontal force. If the magnetism in the compass needles remain the same the directive force on the needle increases or decreases in proportion to the magnetic force. No. 12.—The Magnetic Equator: A term applied to a line on the earth's surface where its magnetic force is horizpntal. Does not coincide with the geographical equator; it intersects the latter in longitude 12° W. Continuing the line to the line to the eastward, it keeps in north latitude going as high as 10°, and crosses into south latitude in about 170° W. longitude. It attains its greatest south latitude 14° in about 45° W., and rejoins the equator in 12° W. longitude. No. 13. —Charts, showing the magnetic dip and the earth's horizontal force, are to be found in the Admiralty Manual of the Deviation of the Compass. The variation is accurately shown on the Admiralty variation chart by curves of equal variation drawn to each degree. This chart is now published for 1895, and thereon is shown the annual changes so that the variation may be found for any future date. No. 14.—8y the Admiralty variation chart it will be seen that the variation changes very rapidly on the coasts of Newfoundland, the Gulf of and Eiver St. Lawrence, the -east coast of North America, the coast of Brazil, to the southward and eastward of Madagascar, off the southwest part of Australia, and the English Channel and its approaches. When navigating these localities, and in all cases where the ship's course is at right angles to the curves of variation, the course must be carefully adjusted to the changing variation. For that purpose the chart of variation curves is specially useful. No. 15. —Because the ship's magnetism and its effect on the compass change when the magnetic dip and horizontal force change. No. 16. —The term vertical force means the vertical component of the earth's magnetic force. It is greatest at the magnetic poles, where the whole force is vertical, and zero at the equator, where the whole force is horizontal. No. 17. —Any disturbance must affect the compass least where the directive force on the needle is greatest. As the directive force on the compass needle is greatest about the equator and least at the poles, the effects of any disturbance on the needle must be least at the equator and greatest at the poles. No. 18.—It is essential that the compass should have the greatest amount of magnetism in its needles combined with the least possible weight in the whole card. The jewelled cap should be sound —that is, not worn nor cracked—and the pivot sharp and free from rust. If the card is placed on the pivot and deflected through a small angle from its position of rest, it should always come back to exactly the same point. The card should be accurately divided and centred, and the point of the pivot in the same plane as the gimbals of the bowl. Standard compasses must be furnished with the means for taking the bearing of an object at any elevation and of reading it off within a

363

H.—26

degree. When a compass is placed on board ship, the lubber-line should be vertical and exactly in the fore-and-aft line from the centre of the card, and the bowl should swing freely in its gimbals. It is desirable that all compass bowls should be made of pure copper. In order that the needles should be the required distance from the soft iron correctors and that the effects of the correcting magnets on them should be uniform, it is desirable that the needles should be short. This necessitates the use of two or more needles to get the requisite magnetic power. By placing the needles parallel to each other and an equal number on each side of the centre of the card the space is free for the cap. Needles made of two laminae of steel are said to be stronger for the same weight than when in one piece. No. 20.—Standard compass should be placed in the midship line in a convenient position for watching by the officer of the watch and comparing with the steering compass, and should have a clear view all round for taking bearings. It should not be within 5 ft. of iron of any kind, and the proximity of vertical iron, or iron liable to be changed in position such as davits, derricks, ventilating cowls, &c, should be carefully guarded against. When electric lighting is used the position of the dynamo has to be considered, as it may disturb a compass at the distance of 50 ft. or 60 ft. Steering-compass should be placed in a convenient position for being clearly seen by the helmsman, &c. No. 19.—Spare compass-cards or magnets may be stowed over or beside each other on end on, but always with their unlike poles together. If poles of the same name are together, they will probably weaken the magnetism of each other. No. 21.—" Transient induced magnetism " means magnetism which is instantly produced in soft iron by induction from any magnetic force to which it is exposed, such as that of the earth, but which parts with that magnetism, or changes its magnetic condition, immediately on the inducing cause being removed or changed. It is generally called magnetism by or from induction. The poles of induced magnetism and of the inducing cause are always of contrary names. No. 27. —The expression " coefficient B " represents a magnetic force in the fore and aft line of the ship. It has the sign + when the north point of the compass is attracted towards the ship's head, and the sign — when the north point of the compass is attracted towards the stern. " Coefficient C " represents a magnetic force in the athwart-ship's line. It has the sign + when the north point of the compass is drawn towards the starboard side, and the sign — when the north point of the compass is drawn towards the port side. They are called coefficients of semicircular deviation, because the deviation they produce is always easterly in one semicircle, and westerly in the other. No. 28.—Yes, semicircular deviation is produced by vertical induction when vertical iron is nearer the compass in one direction in the ship than in the opposite direction. No. 29.— + B gives westerly deviation on the western semicircle between north and south, and easterly deviation on the opposite semicircle. — B gives westerly deviation on the points of the compass where + B gives easterly deviation, and easterly deviation on the points where + B gives westerly. No. 30. \- 0 gives westerly deviation on the southern semicircle from east to west, and easterly deviation on the northern semicircle. — C gives westerly deviation on the northern semicircle, and easterly deviation on the southern points of the compass. No. 32. —I should expect the greatest disturbance in the compass needle when the ship's head is at right angles to the direction in which she was built, and the least disturbance when the ship's head is in the same direction in which she was built. In the former case the ship's force is at right angles to the compass needle, and in the latter case in line with it. No. 33. —Quadrantal deviation is produced by the induced magnetism in horizontal iron. It is represented by the co-efficients + D and *- D and + E and —E. D gives the maximum deviation when the ship's head is north-east, south-west, north-west, and south-east by compass. Co-efficient E gives the greatest deviation when the ship's head is north, south, east, or west. They are called quadrantal because they produce the greatest deviation on four equidistant points of the compass. No. 34. 1- D gives easterly deviation in the north-east and south-west quadrants, and westerly deviation in the north-west and south-east quadrants. — D gives easterly deviation in the quadrants where + D gives westerly deviation, and easterly deviation in the quadrants where + D gives westerly. + E gives easterly deviation in the northerly and southerly quadrants, and westerly deviation in the easterly and westerly quadrants. — E gives easterly deviation in the quadrants where + E gives westerly, and westerly deviation in the quadrants where + E gives easterly. No. 35, f- Dis produced by induced magnetism in transverse iron, such as beams ; but when a beam is divided for any purpose a compass placed between its divided parts will have — D. Induction in fore-and-aft iron produces — D, but a compass between divided parts would have +D. From the predominance of transverse induction Dis generally +. No. 36. —It is desirable to place the ship with her head in the opposite direction to that in which she was built. No. 51. —The part due to subpermanent magnetism would be least where the horizontal force is greatest. Therefore it would be least about the equator, and increase in the Southern Hemisphere, going away from the equator. The part due to vertical induction would be least where the vertical force is least, and would vanish at the equator, where the vertical force is zero. It would again increase with a contrary sign going away from the equator in the Southern Hemisphere. No. 52. —I should expect but little deviation, especially in an old ship, because the subpermanent magnetism being corrected by permanent magnets the only change that could take place ■would be in the less permanent character of the ship's magnetism. As the vertical induced magnetism in the ship's iron is compensated by vertical induction of the same amount in the bar, ancfboth being magnetised by the same force, there could be no change from that cause.

H.—26

364

No. 53.—1 should not expect the Dto change its name or amount, as the directive force on the compass needle depends on the earth's horizontal magnetic force, and the disturbance causing the D depends on induction from the same force. Therefore, the pointing force of the needle and the disturbing force maintain the same relative value, and the amount of deflection caused by the latter remains the same. No. 54.—T0 determine the deviation of a compass by reciprocal bearings a compass should be placed on shore in a position where there is no iron in the vicinity, and where it could be conveniently seen from the standard compass. As the ship is swung round, observe the bearing of the shore compass from the standard when the head is steady on each required point and, by signal, have the bearing of the standard taken by the shore compass at the same instant. The difference between the bearing taken on board and the opposite of the bearing taken on shore is the deviation. By figures on a dock-wall when available, as at Liverpool. The difference between the bearing of the object in the background by the standard compass and the figures marked on the wall exactly in line with the object at the same instant is the deviation of any point the ship's head may be on. By the bearing of a distant object when the magnetic bearing is known, the difference between it and the bearing observed by the standard is the deviation. If the magnetic bearing is not known it can be taken from the chart, or it may be found by finding the difference of bearing between it and the sun. The sun's true bearing at each observation can be computed or found from azimuth tables. By allowing the variation with its proper sign to the true bearing the magnetic bearing is found. A compass may sometimes be placed on shore in a position where the object has the same bearing as from the ship, and the magnetic bearing found by it. The difference between the true bearing and the magnetic bearing will be the deviation for any point the ship's head may be on at each observation. No. 55.—T0 determine the deviation of a compass by bearings of the sun or other celestial objects, the exact time must be noted, and the bearing of the object taken when the ship's head is on each point. The true bearing of the object at each observation can be computed or found from azimuth tables, and, by applying the variation with its proper sign, the magnetic bearing is found. The difference between the true and magnetic bearings is the deviation for the direction of ship's head at each observation. No. 56.—8y Napier's diagram a complete table of deviations can be formed from a small number of observations, and from observations made at irregular intervals round the compass. Its special advantage is the facilities it gives for converting compass courses or bearings into magnetic courses or bearings, and the reverse. No. 57.—There is a line drawn through the centre of the diagram, with a scale of degrees and points of the compass marked on it. This is called the mesial line. At each point of the compass the mesial line is intersected by broken lines drawn upwards from right to left, and at the same angle downwards from right to left by plain lines. These broken and plain lines also cross each other where they intersect the mesial line at the angle of 60 degrees, and thus with the parts of the mesial line intersected form equilateral triangles. No. 58.—For an accurate table the duration should be obtained with the ship's head on the four cardinal points and on the four quadrantal points. No. 59.—1f the deviation is small, probably an observation on the course and on the fourth point each side of it will be sufficient; but it is preferable to take every alternate point. As it may take time to steady the head at each observation, by taking the bearing as often as can be conveniently done while the ship's head is slowly moving away from the course, and also when returning to the course on each side of it, and plotting the deviations observed on the " Napier's " diagram, and drawing a curve through them, the deviation can be found on all parts of the arc very accurately. No. 60.—The magnetic bearing can be found approximately by obtaining the mean of four or more bearings with the ship's head on equidistant points. The mean of bearings taken on the four cardinal points give a good result if the ship is upright ; otherwise the mean of bearings with head east and west is better, as there would be no heeling error on those points. The distant object should be so far away that the radius of the circle on which the standard compass moves as the ship goes round subtends an angle which would be of no practical consequence in navigating. By entering traverse table with 1° as a course and the distance of the object as a distance, the length of the radius that would cause one degree (1°) of error in the bearing will be the departure. No. 63.—Note the direction of the ship's head by each compass at the same instant that the deviation is observed at the standard. Find the magnetic direction of head at each observation by applying the observed deviation to the direction of head by the standard. By comparing the deviation thus found with the noted direction of head by each compass, the deviation can be found at irregular intervals round the compass. By plotting the deviation on Napier's diagram, the deviation, both for compass points and magnetic points, can be found. No. 64.—1f the magnetic bearing is to the right of the compass bearing, the deviation is easterly; but if to the left, westerly. No. 73.—Yes, I should expect a change in the deviation, because a. magnetic force previously vertical may be no longer so when the ship heels, and the iron about the compass may be so changed with reference to the earth's magnetism that new forces may arise from induction. No. 74.—The principal causes of the heeling error are vertical induction in transverse iron induction in iron vertical to the ship's deck—and the vertical component of the ship's sub-permanent magnetism. The part arising from vertical induction in transverse iron is due to the fact that such iron as beams, by departing from the horizontal and inclining to the vertical as the ship heels, acquires polarity in its ends of the same sign as that of vertical iron in that hemisphere. This polarity tends to draw the north point of the compass to one side or the other.

Examinations in the Laws of the Deviations of the Compasses of Iron Ships.

DEVIASCOPE EXAMINATION.

Find the correct magnetic bearing from (a) eight equidistant compass-bearings, (b) from cardinal points, (c) from north and south points, (d) from east and west points, and thence the deviations.

Magnetic Bearing Required.

ft f b /A/ JV A__£is % C^rCandidate's .signature : &itjs '/ 5307-95] Bate: ,4-&&* So - /Pfj£

Deviascop'e Head by Compass. Bearing of Objeot. Deviation required. Deviascope Head by Compass. Bearing of Object. Deviation required. *» f (, /// £ *? /£■// A North V AT South N.E. 2f7f #~ // & S.W. /t £ 6 /> M2&/^ tf & West k/r& >'^ East S.E. }£ & ttr // 6 N.W. k f '& /J**-

NAPIER'S DIAGRAM.

no. of ,U j- . syy y ,^^ 88 - TIOH . . fs?-^.^ ■■» (ay. &— /* **>*: ££j <? -?y /??/£> : A yy^ /. /?. £ /J 4' / '" 4S/4, vV^^ jySxo J/Jg. ) / ? tmrv* , ■ — —— . — — — — —• /-,„ -/- y* &o ■ & — 2 4-~/£ ; -42. ~/~ yz,, J* y J -w_ y 'so yy ~& &* %?y& /, ? g // i* /« i //~. </ £ £'# £. //" *? <& 2 2«S? £ d>s<ei. /& „ <//'y<* /? g / ~ fjL &j? aLs /Ls S^£_ f &7?t /^L&^s-

id. <>f STiON. ' y .

Exn. Ba.

j Rotation No.

EXAMINA TlO N - P A P E E. DEVIATION OF TilE COMPAHS.

iBsukd under the Shiphno and Seamen's Acts. (Problems included in Syllabus of Examination for Compass Deviation and for Extra Master's Certificates.) Port of ___ , this_ _day of , 189 .

Question 31. — (a.) Assuming the direction of the ship's head whilst building to be /*"✓ // magnetic, and the co-effioient Cto be —f~ *9 *, & Required the value of co-eilicient B with its proper sign, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. Question 31. — (b.) Assuming co-efficient B to be —— , and co-efficient C to be g> „ & cj Required the direction of the ship's head whilst building, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. Signature of Candidate :_ T^d^-U 12f-96] [OVKI*.

"DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Question. 61.— -Having taken the following compass bearings of a distant object, find the object's magnetic bearing, and thence the deviation ; —, (a.) Magnetic bearing required : — /

{b.) With the deviations as above, construct a curve of deviations on a Napier's diagram, and give the courses you would steer by the standard compass to make the' following courses, magnetic: — . n . . , jrff/r nUtr ftvetr S/£& (jompass courses required, v ° ' f (c.) Supposing you have steered the following courses by the standard compass, find the magnetic courses made from the a-bove curve of deviations :— , Compaq courses, .**/*>. f#* Magnetic courses required, • (i.) You have taken the following bearings of two distant objects by your standard compass as above : with the ship's head at <£ -dy /? /Z/v , find the bearings, magnetic:— <7 / J / y> Compass bearings, /? and /& mT Magnetic bearings required, // fa ft-0> " M it A * h 1* * ft <* t_ • ft // f> _ . -/ tt&k /tiv¥ ttyV Jf*£ #Jf i 2 »_ Signature of Candidate : ___^^.2^^^^^3-J^^ / 0-

Shin's Head Bearing of Ship's Head j Bearing of bv Distant Object by Deviation required. by | Distant Object by Standard Compass. Standard Compass. Standard Compass. ; Standard Compass. NoiVn £ 'K £ South W f^ n.e. 2 if * ? v w ; j 4 5 5 Deviation required. ff fr J' ¥

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Exn. Ba.

Question 62. —Assuming the deviations observed with ship's head by compass to be as follow,' determine the value of the co-efficients A, B, C, D, and E, and from fchem construct a table of deviations for ship's head by compass on every alternate point ■from north, round by east and soujb, to north again. -**- r At North, deviation /&*, &° * At South, deviation //" & & M^ „ N.E., „ /" 2 / y/ „ S.W., „ /S~+o # . East, „ 2f~ „ West, „ 24*- * % <*L „ S.E., „ - , N.W., „ /**? -*■

O / ?¥• * A B c D E Ship's Head by Compass. Deviation. -*-. z^ *} -+ /2-i* +<£<+'? -f- 0-£o /■ tro % & ■ u r 7 r North. r£j&j£.. \+ 0. iff -+_(^<n? i t 0 \ I 7 T\ _ N.N.E. i i- / - trc ° • J \ ■/•//- Si i ■ ' - ' N.B. -t f-try M^-l \±L^M— i £ 0 e E..N.E. ±f_<t*Li o r wr^" East. o o 0 / j " J £j.S.!Bj. Uv- /y _ - 1 -t- <**£& S.E. -/-/. /z» I - £-i*9 o_ 36*y&~Hr S.S.E. \=jUl. a V/ tor diuL-fe-J I/- <TJ South. ■f /-try o - f£-io O * f i //■ n> pit Z."T57"¥ s.s.w. ±MJJL^ e /■ 1 J.4-*-'t> /r. n~ i> o . J*? ■ -f-^,*^ s.w. ■+■ r-n o ' * r ~ 9-S3 i + r-«f w.s.w. I I— U-ifij + tf ■ 6 -,<5 A/ .+- 53 .'i-f - -j West. WlzjsA \f-lM-A? o O W.N.W. k*£ ° ' i - N.W, ~n!n.w. « r o + /.SP -J-.«t _ *y -fjLJ2.--Lf. & ■ _ jr- <*? I 1 ! ...1 ! i i J _ J-- **9. •=F » »^T? Signature of Gcmdidate: 4r4 / &£%/ -+- e>- A-/ €-f. /fb [OVElt, [OVElt,

DEVIATION OP THE COMPASS— continued.

gwestforc CS r — / ?&A/%. at ship, being on the Equator, i.-* longitude /7 jjf t- J/\S . Correct rriean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, _ g£ v , £> ~ <£■ g Eequired the sun's true azimuth, — -rTfTTfTg '-■ '--- %"J' 'fa ■7s~ r^~^ - . , ' ■ * 'ft &?■ i-7 t \ i ! t Signature of Candidate : /■/ $ /&L-4L - 2> d^-xj

DEVIATION OE THE COMPASS— continued.

' rl _n. Ba.

Question 70. /<fs ? <o , about &-> /g &/5? mean time at ship, in latitude ' d° .longitude. & <f~*<£ & Name some ©f the principal stars that would be in good position for determining the error of your compass. Signature of Candidate: j/j/ * * [OVEB 4

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Question 72.— /^ ?4d/fy'&t ship, in latitude ##„ // J longitude Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, % V /Z &&. The star & bore by compass /? £9" • <■' *'■<.. Eequired the deviation of the compass, the variation being ,4*. 7 . '• i*-*' -.-* ** ■ ' /f (its tl&-^r<z~>e^ v ,■ ■■. - : '--'"'' "■ ■" / Question 92.—With the ship's head • J)y heeling to &* "* r the heeling error was found to be -V , *■ £? & 6=><i2^Z2-*^y<-Eequired the probable heeling error.with ship's head < ,by the same compass, and heeling .^._.y^a^Y ■ .'■ " '' ■'""' "2v -■ / -+& If _ Signature of Candidate: /C^C-l^/ , /g-Ox--

365

H.—26

The part due induction in iron vertical to the ship's deck is due to the fact that such iron is not vertical to the earth when the ship heels. The magnetism induced therein is less in amount, but, the poles becoming on one side of the compass, instead of vertically under it, the north point of the compass is drawn to one side or the other. The part arising from the vertical component of the subpermanent magnetism arises from the fact that, although the magnetic force remains the same in amount, if brought out to one side or the other as the ship heels, and so deflects the compass needle. No. 78.—Coefficient C. No. 79. —In the Northern Hemisphere, if a ship is built with her head to the northward, and the compass is aft, the north point of the compass will be drawn downward by subpermanent magnetism. If the compass is forward this downward force is much diminished and becomes in part a horizontal force as the ship heels, drawing the north point to windward or high side. No. 80.—In the Northern Hemisphere, if a ship is built with her head to the southward, and the compass is aft, the north point of the needle will be pushed upward by subpermanent magnetism. If the compass is forward this upward force is much diminished, and becomes in part "#a horizontal force as the ship heels, drawing the north point of the needle to leeward, or the low side. In the Northern Hemisphere inductive magnetism in vertical iron has the effect of drawing the north point to windward, or the high side, and only when subpermanent magnetism predominates the needle is drawn to the low side. No. 81.—In the majority of cases in the Northern Hemisphere the north point of the compass is drawn to windward or the high side when the ship heels. When this is the case, and it is not allowed for, the ship will be found to windward of her assumed position when steering to the northward and to leeward when steering to the southward. No. 82.—When the north point of the needle is drawn to windward, keep away on northerly courses and closer to the wind on southerly courses. When the north point of the needle is drawn to leeward keep away on southerly courses and closer to the wind on northerly courses. No. 85.—The heeling error generally attains its maximum value when the ship's head is either north or south, and it usually vanishes when the head is east or west. In the first case a disturbing force is at right angles to the compass needle, and in the latter case in line with it. Wμ. Bendall.

Deviascope Examination Questions foe Ordinary Master's Certificate. (For Examiner s Use only.) [Vide pages 234-35 for detailed questions.]

[Beproductions of William Bendall's examination papers, deviation of the compass ; see insets.]

EXHIBIT 12. (Telegram.) 21st January, 1897. We have known Captain Hugh McLellan personally for years, and can certify to his good character and conduct. Pitcaithly, Wallace, and Co., Captain Hugh McLellan, Wellington. Shipping Agents, Lyttelton.

Sic, Marine Department, Wellington, 3rd February, 1897. I have the honour to inform you that the following indorsement has been made on the New Zealand certificate of competency as master ordinary, No. 310, granted to Hugh McLellan on the 21st September, 1882 :— " Passed examination in the laws of the deviation of the compasses of iron ships at Wellington on the 25th January, 1897."—D. McKellar, for Secretary, Marine Department, New Zealand." I have, &c, D. McKellae, for Secretary. Eegistrar-General of Shipping and Seamen, London.

366

H.—26

Botation Number 647

Port of Wellington. _ applicationlol^examined FOE A CERTIFICATE OF COMPETENCY AS MASTER OR MATE.

Exn. 2.

Issued by the MINISTEB OF MABINE.

(A.)- Name, &c., of Applicant.

(B.)-Particulars of all previous Certificates (if any), whether issued in the United Kingdom, the British Possessions, or elsewhere.

(C.)—Certificate now required.

(D.)-If Applicant has failed in a previous Examination for the Certificate now required, he must here state when and where. If he has not failed he must state so in writing across this Division.

(E.)— Declaration to be made by Applicant. persons services without exception. ° On6 tTl Zkelhis DeolaratioS "conscientiously believing the same to be true. Dated at Wellington , this 21st _day <o__ __ , 1897. . Signed in the presence of the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office. 8 H. McLELLAN, Signaturb of Applicant. City Buffet, Wellington. ~ Present address.

- (F.)— Superintendent to Examiner. . »tdwetion (E.) above was signed in my presence, and the Fee of Jfl. receive bym Satedat Wellington , this 21st__day af_ ,1807. D McKBL LAB,_ fluppirntcnaetlti

Permanent A^J^$^$£^ [ouse, ai Christian Names at full length. 1 Surname. Hugh McLellan Islay Cottage, Lyttelton. • Hugh Where born. Date of Birth. Country. Year. Town. Day. Month. 7 8 5 6 4 Scotland. 1836. Islay. 12th May __.

Number. " Competency," " Service," or "R.N.R." now or formerly. For " Fore-and-Aft" or Grade. " Square " Rigged Vessels, or other Class of Vessel. 11 I? Where Date of issued. Issue. la _______ _. „ ,, 23 Sept., Lyttelton. 1882 _ If at any time suspended or cancelled, state by what Court or Authority. 15 Date. 16 Cause. 17 9 10 Master. Square-rigged. 310. Competency.

For "Fore-and-Aft "or "Square" Rigged Vessels. | Mercantile Marine Office to which it is to be sent. 20 _____ Grade. 18 19 ___ Lyttelton. Compass deviation.

ivision. Port. 24 Subjects in which he 25 :u._ Day. 21 Month. 22 Year. 23 Not fail led.

H.—26

367

(G.) List of Testimonials and Statement of Service at Sea. (The Testimonials to be numbered consecutively according to the number given in Column 26, below.)

(H.)—Certificate of Examiner.

(I.) — Personal Description of Applicant.

Wit IjntbjJ certify that the particulars contained in Divisions (H.) and (I.) are correct. This Form and the Testimonials are forwarded to the Secretary, Marine Department. Dated this 25th day of £ a i l^ ar y_ > 1897. G-EO. AXLMAN, [Signatures of E. A. EDWIN, | Examiners. To the Secretary, Marine Department, Wellington.

[f Ser' 'ice on board Ship. Service of A] iplicant. a s9 ■M '8 o I -_ <E EH o d Ship's Name. Port of Registry and 4= a o a o o a a a o O *o Q +-> eg P 32 a o _ a 1 r_ o EH o o +j R 83 Time employed iii this Service. na _ o ft 3 © ■3 ! a _ u tRemarks. Initials of Verifier. Rig. 03 „ a a o Eh Official No. of Ship. +_. '3 5 & o _ 4-1 a o p. 85 27 30 3 3 84 _i l>, _ R 36 38 29 31 37 Total Service at Sea .. Time served for which Certificates are now produced Time served for which no Certificates are produced

Note.— The Examiners should fill up Divisions (H.) and (I.), and in all cases as soon as possible forward this paper to the Secretan Marine Department, Wellington. If the Applicant passes, his Testimonials and previous Certificates, if any, must be sent with this paper to tht Secretary, Marine Department. The new Certificate and the Testimonials will be delivered to the Applicant at the office named in Division 1C) Column 20. Date and Place of Examination. Insert "Passed" or "Failed" in each Column. Date. Place. If failed in Seamanship, state how Colour-Test. Navigation. Seamanship. much further Sea-service (if any) must be performed. 42 _ 48 _ 44 45 Bank for which passed. 40 41 46 Passed in syllabus of laws of deviation of iron ships, 25/1/97.

Height. Complexion. 49 Personal Marks or Peculiarities, if any. 50 Colour of Feet. 47 Inches. 43 Hair. 51 Eyes. 52

H.—26

368

Em. 16 . Port of Wellington. * ea Examiner's Authority for Delivery of a Certificate of Competency to an Applicant who has passed his Examination. Christian and surname : Hugh McLellan. Whether master, mate, or engineer : Master ordinary. Grade for which passed: Syllabus in compass-deviation. Please to deliver to the person named above, the certificate of competency and testimonials or other documents forwarded to you by the Secretary of the Marine Department for him, on his complying with the office regulations. Dated at Wellington, this 25th of January, 1897. Signature of Applicant : H. McLellan. To the Superintendent of the Mercantile Marine Office at Lyttelton. Geo. Allman,) -c E. A. Edwin;} Exammers. Issued at the Port of Lyttelton, this Bth day of February, 1897. Bth February, 1897. Edward Patten, Collector.

Syllabus of Examination of Masters in the Laws of the Deviation of Compasses. {Vide Exhibit 11, page 357.)

2. Geographical position not given. 4. The word "pole" is required. 5. Is not sufficiently explicit. 6. Should state horizontal force, not earth meridian. 7. This does not answer the question. 8. Does not mention the localities required. 9. Eequires the word "magnetism" after "require," also the words "the inducing cause " after " when." 18. Nothing about the jewelled cap or the pivot, nor the dividing of the card or point in same plane as gimbals of bowl. Nothing about the taking of bearings. 19. The word " pole " should follow " reverse." 20. Wants word " standard " ; distance not stated; no mention of dynamo nor of iron, which may change position. 22. Does not state the action on compass needle. 27. Co-efficient C side, not bow. 37. Wants word " not " near end of eighth line. No mention of any unsymmetrical arrangement of iron. 38. Should not be " equalised all round," but " proportionately diminished." 40. One or two words omitted. 41. 44. This answer does not reply to the question. 46. Ditto. 56. This does not give the answer in terms of the book answer. 63. Ditto. 64. Ditto. 93. Describe chronometer. Eemarks by Captain Edwin on the questions.

These questions have been rewritten and corrected, except Nos. 41, 44, and 56.— G. A.

No. 1 (rewritten). —Magnets are magnetized by loadstone, or from an artificial magnet, for compass needles by a horse-shoe shaped magnet, by a rubbing process. No. 2 (rewritten). —-The north end of the compass needle is termed red and the south end blue. No. 3 (rewritten).—The north pole of the earth is termed blue and the south red. No. 4 (rewritten). —Like repels and unlike attracts. No. 5 (rewritten). —The blue of the north pole of the earth attracts the suspended red of the needle, and the opposite with the south pole and the needle. No. 6 (rewritten). —The earth's meridian not coinciding with the magnetic meridian, the difference is called or termed the variation as shown on charts. No. 7 (rewritten). —The deviation is the difference between the true magnetic, as shown by a compass needle not affected by iron. No. 8 (rewritten). —Local attraction is any disturbance caused by iron-ore when near land or by iron on shore. No. 9 (rewritten). —Soft iron will acquire instantly by induction, but lose it when removed or changed. No. 10 (rewritten). —Sard iron or steel will retain magnetism for any length of time if properly applied. No. 18 (rewritten).' —The compass-card should be as light as possible, and also the needles as light; if two needles, to be placed parallel to one another, with art average length of 5 in. or 6 in,

369

H.—26

bowl of copper, and acting properly, free and well-balanced, with its lubber-line perpendicular and plain to be seen by the officer or man at the wheel. No. 19 (rewritten). —End to end or alongside of one another with reverse adjoining one another. If the pole of one was against the pole of the same colour it would destroy their strength. No. 20 (rewritten). —The compass should be placed in the midship line of the ship, and placed as far away from vertical iron, such as masts, funnels, bulkheads, or staunchions as the circumstances of the deck would allow. No. 21 (rewritten). —Transient induced magnetism is magnetism that is instantly produced in soft iron when it is exposed to any magnetic force, such as that of the earth, but is easily lost or changed. No. 22 (rewritten). —The lower end of soft iron vertical in the Northern Hemisphere would be red and the upper blue. No. 27 (rewritten). —The expression "coefficient B " represents a magnetic force in the fore and aft line of the ship, + B when the compass is attracted towards the ship's head, and — B when the compass needle is drawn towards the ship's stem. Coefficient C represents a magnetic force in the athwartships line, + when the north end of the needle is attracted towards the starboard bow, and — G when attracted towards the port bow. B and C are termed coefficients of semicircular deviation, because the deviation they represent is always easterly in one semicircle and westerly in the other. No. 28 (rewritten). —Yes, by vertical induction when vertical iron is nearer to the compass in one direction than it is on the opposite direction. No. 29 (rewritten). f-B gives westerly deviation on the westerly semicircle between N. and 8., and easterly on the opposite semicircle. — B gives westerly deviation where +B gives easterly, and easterly where +B gives westerly. No. 30 (rewritten). (- C gives westerly deviation on the southern semicircle from east to west, and easterly on the northern semicircle. — C gives westerly deviation on the northern semicircle, and easterly on the southern semicircle. No. 33 (rewritten). —Quadrantal deviation is produced by horizontal iron running fore and aft and athwartship. It is represented by the coefficient +D and — D and +E and -E. D gives the maximum deviation with ship's head N.E., S.W., N.W., and S.E. magnetic, and east when ship's head N.S.E. or W. by compass. No. 34. (r-ewritten). — +D gives easterly deviation between N. andE. and S. and W. +D. gives westerly deviation between N. and W. and S. and E. —D gives easterly deviation on the points of the compass where + D gives westerly and westerly, + D gives easterly. : No. 35 (rewritten). —Induction in transverse iron, such as beams, produces + D, but when a beam is divided for any purpose — D is produced in a compass placed between its divided parts. Induction in fore-and-aft iron produces — D. When divided for any purpose + D is produced. From the predominance of transverse iron D is generally +. No. 36 (rewritten). —Ship's head N.E.: The fore end of fore-and-aft iron will acquire red polarity, and the after end blue; the port end of athwartship iron red polarity, and the starboard end blue. Ship's [head] S.E.: The fore end of fore-and-aft iron will acquire blue polarity, and the after end red; and the port end of athwartship iron red polarity, and the starboard end blue. Ship's head S.W. : The fore end of fore-and-aft iron will acquire blue polarity, and the after end red; the port end of athwartship iron blue polarity, and the starboard end red. Ship's head N.W. : The fore end of fore-and-aft acquires red polarity, and the after end blue; the port end of athwartship acquires blue polarity, and the starboard end red. No. 37 (rewritten). —Co-efficient A represents a constant deviation all round the compass, more especially when ship swung for adjustment. The compass needle will hang a little in the opposite direction to that in which the ship's head is going, more especially at N. and S., and least at E. and W., the deviation produced, + A and — A, representing easterly and westerly deviation. Many reasons may be given, such as the needle of the compass, or needle, may be placed on the card parallel to the cardinal points; the compass-bowl and the lubber-line may not be parallel to the fore-and-aft midship line of the ship ; the lubber-line alone may be out in its perpendicular. No. 38 (rewritten). —A small deviation is more practical for navigation than a large one. And with a corrected compass, the directive force of the needle is equalised all round, which gives more confidence in shaping courses. No. 39 (rewritten). —Lay the ship's head in the opposite direction to that in which she was built. No. 40 (corrected). —The D presumed to be known or previously found is first corrected by soft iron placed the binnacle athwartship, and then the ship's head is swung in succession on two of the cardinal points magnetic, this correcting the B and C.; the + B or —B, with ship's head Eor W magnetic, by a fore and aft magnet; and the +Cor — C with ship's head N. or S. magnetic, by an athwartships magnet. No. 41 (not corrected). —Magnets generally used should not be nearer the compass needle than twice the length of the magnet. Soft iron correctors should not be nearer the compass than one and a quarter the length of needle. No. 42. No, they can be placed in any convenient position whilst being parallel to the fore-and-aft line and athwartship line of ship on bulkheads if necessary. No. 43. B consists of two parts ; one is due to the subpermanent magnetism of the ship, the other to vertical induction. No. 44 (not corrected). The part due to subpermanent magnetism must be corrected by magnets alone ; the part due to vertical induction by an upright bar. If corrected by magnets 47— H. 26,

H.—26

370

alone the parts due to B would be over-corrected as she changed her latitude into a greater or less horizontal force. No. 45. The part due to B by magnets placed fore and aft, and by a vertical bar placed before or abaft the compass, the latter correcting for the vertical induction. No. 46 (rewritten). If ship was built with her head N. or S. the B arising from vertical induction cannot be separated from subpermanent magnetism. In this case it is usual to correct the one half of the B by a vertical bar and the other half by magnets. No. 47. On account of the position that standard compasses are generally placed they are not so subject to a disturbance towards the stern. If abaft a funnel the attraction would be towards the bow and the compensating on Flinders bar abaft would necessarily have to be placed abaft the compass. No. 54.—1 would place one compass on shore in some position free from iron or any other magnetic force, and by prearranged signals give the difference between the bearing of the ship's head magnetic on shore and the bearing of ship's compass on board, the difference between the compasses being the deviation with ship's head on that bearing, and at every point of the compass in the same manner. Dock walls : The difference between the magnetic bearing shown on walls and that shown by the compass on board would be the deviation. Knowing the magnetic bearing of any distant object and swinging the ship round on every point of the compass against a dolphin or buoy in any convenient place, the distance being sufficiently great, not less than six or eight miles. No. 55.—1 would take the sun's true bearing and compass bearing—the true bearing from Burwood and Davis's tables, Labrosse, or Towson's tables, according to apparent time at ship and the latitude of the place, applying the variation in the usual manner, noting a.m. or p.m. as the case might be. No. 56 (not corrected). —By Napier's diagram the advantages are that the magnetic or compass courses can be taken at a short notice by the dividers on a scale measuring on the mesial line to the curve at any of the thirty-two points of the compass. No. 57. —The circumference of a compass-card, with its divisions into points and degrees, and about 18 in. in length, and representing the thirty-two points of the compass, with what is called the mesial line in the centre, with the degrees marked. The deviation curve westerly, deviation on the left-hand side, from right to left and upwards, and easterly deviation on the right, compass courses on the dotted, and magnetic on the plain lines. No. 58.—The four cardinal and the four quadrantal points. No. 63 (corrected). —Place the ship's head correct magnetic on four cardinal points, and the four quadrantal points of the compass and the difference between the deviation card previously constructed and that shown by the other compasses will be the deviation for two or more compasses, magnetic-bearings to the right of compass-bearings deviation easterly. No. 64 (corrected). —Easterly deviation true to the right of compass bearing and westerly to the left of compass bearing, magnetic bearing to the left of compass bearing, deviation westerly. No. 65. —The value of the coefficients are an advantage, as the deviation can be approximately carried out by a process of the coefficients A, B, C, D, and B, for the thirty-two points of the compass. No. 66.—Eetentive magnetism is magnetism retained from the earth inductive influence while the ship's head is kept in a certain direction, but loses it on changing the direction of her head. No. 67. —Pelorus is simply a dumb card without a needle, with a scale of degrees round the rim and sight-vanes that can be removed to take bearing at any object with a camp-screw on the dumb and a tripod with sharp points to fix into the desired position for taking bearings whilst ship is swinging for adjustment. No. 93 (corrected). —The clinometer should be fixed on the forward or after part of the binnacle. This instrument is divided into an arc with degrees marked on to determine the ship's heel, with vertical line in the centre, the degrees marked to the right and left. No. 94. —The clinometer should be carefully observed when swinging ship, especially at N. and S., where the heeling error would be greatest, and least at E. and W.

Rewritten Questions. No. 1. —Magnets are magnetised by loadstone or from an artificial magnet. Compass needles are magnetised by what is termed a horse-shoe magnet by a process of drawing across the magnet. No. 2. —The pole that points to the north is termed the red pole of the needle, and the south the blue pole. No. 3.—Magnetic pole in Northern Hemisphere is in latitude 70° N. and longitude 97° W., and in the Southern Hemisphere in latitude 74° S. and longitude 147° W. The north pole of the earth is termed blue, and the south pole red. No. 4.—Like poles repel and unlike poles attract. No. 5. —In the first place, it takes a certain position reference to the meridian of the place called the magnetic meridian; in the second place, it takes the same direction with an inclination to the horizon called the dip. No. 6.—Because the magnetic poles do not coincide with the true poles, the earth's horizontal force is greatest at the magnet equator. No. 7. —Deviation of the compass is the error of the compass caused by the magnetic force of the iron in the build of the ship or its cargo. No. 8. —Local attraction is any disturbance caused by iron ore near to the land, generally in shallow waters, more especially noticeable at the following places: Solomon Islands, coast of

371

H.—26

Australia, coast of Labrador, New Ireland, West Coast of Africa, Odessa Bay, and many other places. No. 9.—Soft iron becomes instantly magnetised by induction when exposed to any magnetic force, but has not the power of retaining the magnetism for any length of time after it is removed from the inducing cause. No. 10.—Hard iron or steel will retain magnetism for any length of time if the magnetism is properly applied. No. 18.—The bowl should be of copper or .brass, the needle or needles and compass-card as light as possible, the centre-pin of hard cast-brass, with cap of brass, and a good agent, free of flaws. The card should be accurately centred and divided. The lubber-line should be vertical and the midship-line of the ship. No. 19. —End to end, or alongside of one another, with reverse poles adjoining one another. If the pole of the same colour were stowed together it would destroy their strength. No. 20. —The standard compass should be placed in midship line of the ship and where bearings all round can be taken by the officer, and as far from vertical iron or bulkheads, say, at the least, 5 ft., and also 60 ft., from dynamos or any electrical machinery, also to be kept as far from funnels, masts, or boat-davits, or any other movable iron. No. 21.—Transient induced magnetism is magnetism that is instantly produced in soft iron, when it is exposed to any magnetic force, such as that of the earth, but loses its force when the inducing force is removed or changed. No. 22. The lower end of soft iron, vertical in the Northern Hemisphere, would be red polarity, and the upper end blue. The upper end will attract the north end of the compass-needle, and the lower end repel it. No. 27.—The expression coefficient B represents a magnetic force in the fore-and-aft line of the ship; it has the sign -+- when the north point of the compass is attracted towards the ship's head, and the sign — when drawn towards the ship's stern. Coefficient C represents a magnetic force in the athwartship line; it has the sign + when the north end of the needle is attracted towards the starboard side, and the sign — when attracted towards the port side. B and C are termed coefficients of semicircular deviation, because the deviation is always easterly in one semicircle, and westerly on the other. __ No. 28. —Yes, by vertical induction, when vertical iron is nearer to the compass in one direction of the ship than it is in the other or opposite direction. No. 29. . B gives westerly deviation on the westerly semicircle between N. and S. and easterly on the opposite semicircle. — B gives westerly deviation where + B gives easterly, and easterly where -. B gives westerly. No. 30. h C gives westerly deviation on the southern semicircle, from east to west, and easterly on the northern semicircle. No. 33. —Quadrantal deviation is produced by the induced magnetism of horizontal iron running fore and aft and athwartship. It is represented by the coefficient +—• and — D and + E and —E. D gives the maximum deviation when ship's head is N.E., S.W., N.W., and S.E. magnetic, and E gives its maximum when ship is N., S., E., or W. magnetic. No. 34. 1- D gives easterly deviation when ship's head is between N. and E. and S. and W., and westerly deviation when ship's head between N. and W. and S. and E. — D gives easterly deviation when ship's head between N. and W. and S. and E., and westerly deviation between N. and E. by compass and S. and W. + E gives easterly deviation between N.W. and N.E. and S.E. and S.W., and westerly deviation between N.E. and S.E. and S.W. and N.W. by compass. — E gives easterly deviation when ship's head between N.E. and S.E. and N.W. and S.W., and westerly between N.W. and N.E. and between S.W. and S.E. No. 35. —Induction in transverse iron, such as beams, produce +D; but when a beam is divided for any purpose, —D is produced in a compass placed between its divided parts. Induction in fore-and-aft iron produces —D ; when divided for any purpose, +D is produced. From the predominence of transverse iron, D is generally +. No. 36. —Ship's head N.E., the fore end. of fore-and-aft iron acquires red polarity and the after end blue ; the port end of athwartships iron acquires red polarity and the starboard end blue. Ship's head S.E., the fore end of fore-and-aft iron acquires blue polarity and the after end red ; the port end of athwartship iron acquires red polarity and the starboard ends blue. Ship's head. S.W., the fore end of fore-and-aft iron acquires blue polarity and the after end red; port end of athwartship iron acquires blue polarity and the starboard end red. Ship's [head] N.W., the fore end of fore-and-aft iron acquires red polarity and the after end blue; the port end of athwartship iron acquires blue polarity and the starboard end red. No. 37. —Coefficient A represents a constant deviation all round the compass, more especially when ship swung for adjustment the compass-needle will hang a little in the opposite direction to that in which the ship's head is going, more especially at N. and S., and least at E. and W. The deviation produced is + A and —A, representing easterly and westerly deviation. Many reasons may be given: for instance, the lubber-line may be out, or the needle may not be placed parallel with the cardinal points; needle not properly attach to the card. No". 38. —A small deviation is more practical for navigation than a large one. With a corrected compass, the directive force of the needle is equalised all round. No. 39.—Lay the ship's head in the opposite direction to that in which she was built. No. 46. —In the case mentioned, a correcting-bar would be necessary before the compass. In some cases the value of the part of B which is caused by vertical induction may be found approximately from the direction of the ship's head while building, and the value of the B and C found by observations, as the C, in a compass placed amidships, is caused by subpermanent magnetism only. If the traverse-table is entered with the direction of ship head, while building

H.—26

372

as a course, and the C as a departure, the difference of the latitude will represent the value of the subpermanent part of B. It will have the same sign as the C when ship was built in the S.E. or N.W. quadrants, and the contrary sign when built with her head in the N.E. and S.W. quadrants. The difference between tbe B thus found by observation will be part due to induction, and should be corrected by vertical bar. At the magnetic equator, there can be ho B from vertical induction, therefore the deviation of the uncorrected compass with ship's head east or west will be due to subpermanent magnetism. If that is corrected by magnets, any B which appears as the ship leaves the equator will be due solely to vertical induction, and if that is corrected by a vertical bar, the B will be perfectly corrected for induced and subpermanent magnetism. H. McLellan.

Deviascopb Examination Questions fob Oedinaey Masteb's Certificate. (For Examiner's Use Only) [Vide pages 234-35 for detailed questions.

[Reproductions of Hugh McLellan's examination papers, Deviation of the Compass ; see insets, j

DEVIASCOPE EXAMINATION.

Find the correct magnetic bearing from (a) eight equidistant compass-bearings, (b) ftom cardinal points, (c) from north and south points, (d) from east and west points, and. thence the deviations.

Magnetic Bearing Required.

ljhkidfuhjgfjghjg

Candidate's .signature : ~~^»

I ieviascope Head by Comi Bearing of Object, Deviation required. Deviascope Head by Compass. Bearing of Object. Deviation required. North S/f^ 7+*r a s/fw t*!*' South lfr~ N.B, Sif£ $//£ 7*. tiT S.W. t$ *r UrC East 7$ *r West l f c S.B. S/f* \ T .W. $jjyv

Exn. Sα.

Botation No.

EXAMINATION-PAPER.

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS.

Issued under the Shipping and Seamen's Acts.

(Problems included in Syllabus of Examination for Compass Deviation and ,for Extra Master's Certificates.) Port of , this day of 189Jf

Question 31. — (a.) Assuming the direction of the ship's head whilst building to be <//•*'** magnetic, and the co-efficient C to be ~f- c) • 00 Kequired the value of co-efficient B with its proper sign, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. n> _ /£ Question 31.—(b.) Assuming co-efficient Btobe T* &*&~ , and co-efficient Ctobe —3f OO Required the direction of the ship's head whilst building, assuming that B and C resulted altogether from sub-permanent magnetism. Signature of Candidate :_ 127-96] [OVEE,

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS^-conUnued.

Question 61.-Having taken the, following compass bearings of a distant object, find the object's magnetic bearing, and thence the deviation: — (a.) Magnetic bearing required:—

(b.) With the deviations as above, construct a curve of deviations on a Napier's diagram, and give the courses you would steer by the standard compass to make the following courses, magnetic : — Magnetic courses, m H2/?4/ i '. . JKMfc ___ - Compass courses required, *- (c.) Supposing you have steered the following courses by the standard compass, find the magnetic courses made from the above curve of deviations : — Compass courses, JVJTZ- ■-.- < Magnetic courses / » k f (d.) You have taken the following bearings of two distant objects by your standard compass as above : with the ship's head at GeyJYlu c/r . »- , find the bearings, magnetic: — Compass bearings, and ~ 4^^C^v/>^ f Magnetic bearings required, ~*i '$ z}£ZX, r jf f& {,-$ ' S ° Signature of Candidate: S&///S 7 '

Ship's Head Bearing of bv Distant Object by I Standard Compass. Standard Compass, ' i . l North Jf/S'liT- | N.E. JV i East %7T2Jt£f s.e. jr yikt^ Deviation required. // _-*__. Ji __W_ /J _U_~_ Ship's Head Bearing of by Distant Object by Standard Compass. \ Standard Compass. __ _ ..j South | i^jfcC wilt ] Jirfr-z n.w. ■ 1 /V4l'Z&Deviation required. ytsuj

_XIl. Ba.

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Question 62. —Assuming the deviations observed with .ship's head by compass to be as follow, determine the value of the co-efficients A, B, C, D, and E, and from them construct a table of deviations for ship's head by compass on every alternate point from north, round by east and south, to north again. At North, deviation */£■ . & &> At South, deviation // T O i4/~ „ N.E., „ /' *7 „ S.W., „ /ST. 3. £ „ East, „ Z J7Z " West ' "• 2^.^Z£ //, -pO 2b. tt Z- -f- (fj.jL~— "% s, c- -t- rr, <? $

Ship's Head A B C N M TH -~~y-7~o' \ &L +* -?' 'J2 -f-f$i\ ! D ■fiff ±*Lj£- '/#'■*:& E Deviation. -h /. M> ■*-/£>, /S " t \±jtt^S \tAs.AL ' /T^^ .+- «, V ±£ 4L 4%. a7i ■ V-te't/ **f4/\ Y'V^ 1 j=j#: e<? if, 6^ <~ I- ? * |- '■+r/r,*jr '7 ' '_ an Ml* / ti -ULAL- M ££4^ - 5>^ & %> #$Q^ Z 77 J f I_JL_ ~f-#r£ j-0rJ-/ I Jr £ , *. *7 . , ■ 1 e ' ,' ! I ■. ■ ±M?_ I : -~0 lo\j4,#X£ %r, # X 3 5£3T & \z4lA.. -0 2/ \J$,4f £. — Or £0 ~7 z M^<f£~ -$~,4T - - , N.N.W. — i v "I ! I ! 1 v_f_j z Y'/r / / e>f * v —iffto c f^v _t/ 19 -»*• >, /; i » " ~ I i : 1 ! I _J_ ■A J-/ +_&£_ -H> r 2/\ /gv_J*^ I f 0—1f f -J- Gr V-tr -Hit, z f + 4c&7 <+-■£$; 4* 0 JLf 1~ r?r 0/ ■r?7jr Signature of Candidate: __ ~~ ==z :'"' ' ., '4 0* Z g a- -■-' f — v / -+~J/, #7 [OVBB.

DEVIATION OF THE CO MP Am--continued.

Question 69.— /BJty 'fe&f. 2*? - & at sh *P> bein S on ttie Equator, in longitude %/t>- $& *Cr . Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, /& - - && Eequired the sun's tru« azimuth. /*) /} /f J/ 4*, 4-r y _ if Signature of Candidate: ftir ._//./_. /^^?-^'^^^Zr>___

. •5

DEVIATION OE THE COMPASS— continued,

Exn. Ba,

Question 70.-/0/*7 '.&%*£*££ ZLP , about 3 . mean time at ship, in latitude f<Z> CJ , longitude *3aFT <Z^ __ Name some of the principal stars that would be m good position for determining the error of your compass^ Signature of Candidate : <*£^&&2L~<-^_^ c '"" [OM-:it

DEVIATION OF THE COMPASS— continued.

Question 72.— ship, in latitude f &&££^ longitude $&? Correct mean time at Greenwich by a chronometer, %7*'/2^&£**,'6? ■ The star by compass 'tM^^Required the deviation of the compass, the variation being *3ct *3<c> ~*-££>*&mj& l 2J*s^ ty —7J77X/ Question 92. —With the ship's head /& c> by compass, heeling to 49r4yz4s&& / &£' / - the heeling error was found to be. /f- - O <C*&2*4S£**^~~Eequired the probable heeling error with ship's head ,&/ &y £&" . by the same ~~«— compass, and heeling c> <££&<?&£" Signature of Candidate: _ /

NAPIER'S DIAGRAM.

373

H.—26,

EXHIBIT 13. Dear Sib, — 3rd January, 1899. In reply to your confidential memorandum, dated 31st December, 1898, I have the honour to report that I have made a careful examination of the papers referred to—viz., those of Messrs. William Bendall and Hugh McLellan. I find there are so many blunders uncorreeted in each paper containing the questions 31 (a), 31 (b), 61, 62, 69, 70, 72 that neither candidate should have been allowed to pass his examination. I cannot find that the charge of allowing access to paper No. 3is borne out by the facts which have come under my notice. The whole examination (written portion) has been conducted with the greatest carelessness. The answers to questions in compass-deviation of both candidates are full of inaccuracies. I have, &c, The Secretary of Marine, Marine Department, J. A. H. Mabciel, Wellington. Examiner of Masters and Mates.

In the case of Captain Bendall answers to certain questions appear to be verbatim (nearly) as they appear in Towson's printed book, suggesting either the use of the book during examination, the acceptance of answers written outside, or the answering from memory. The latter seems very improbable in the case of a man of Captain Bendall's age. I shall be glad if you will state your opinion on this point. 4/1/99. W. T. Glasgow.

In answer to your question (footnote) relative to the printed questions on the compass syllabus answered in William Bendall's papers I am of opinion that this candidate had access to Towson's answers. J. A. H. Maeciel, Examiner of Masters and Mates.

You mean, I presume, that the answers could not have been written in the examination-room by Captain Bendall without access to the printed answers in Towson, the alternative being that the answers were brought already written out to the examination-room ? 9/1/99. W. T. Glasgow. Such is my opinion.— J. A. H. M. Mr. Glasgow,—Please see minute on Captain Marciel's report, dated 9th January, 1899.— W. H.-J.—9/1/99.

Chief Eeeoes in Wμ. Bendall's Papeks. 61 (b.) Mag. Co. = E.N.E. Comp. Co. required =N. 49 W.; according to candidate should be N. 49 E. Hence candidate has failed. 61 (c.) Comp. Co. N.N.E. Mag. Co. required S. 38 E.; according to candidate should be N. E. Hence candidate has failed. 62. Ship's hd. by comp. A-B-C-D-E-. = E.S.E. -+ 1 - 22° 21' -4° 47' - 4 —6— 0° 21' = 20° 35' W., according to candidate. Candidate calculates— - 21° 21' - 4° 47' - 4° 27'

- 30° 35' Yet candidate writes 20° 35' W., correct result being 30° 35. This would be a failure. 72. In this question the variation of the compass is necessary for the solution of the problem. This is not given in the question, yet candidate gets it from somewhere and gets it wrong—33° 30' W., instead of 30° 30' W. Yet candidate brings his answer to practically the same as that in the paper in Examiner's possession, on which the answer is worked—viz., Dev. = 28° 55' W. Candidate's working should bring Dev. as 25° 55' W., which would be wrong, and constitutes a failure. I have recorded my opinion as to the written questions to printed answers. 9/1/99. J. A. H. M.

Chief Ebboes in Hugh McLellan's Papeks. 61 (c). Comp. Co. W.N.W. Mag. Co. required N. 75 E.; according to candidate should be N. 76i W. This should be a failure. 62. Ship's hd. by comp. A-B-C-D-E-. E.S.E. --f 1 - 22° 21' -4° 47' -4° 6' -0° 21' = 20° 25' W. Candidate's working shows— - 21° 21' - 4° 47' - 4° 27'

- 30° 35' Hence, though the working is shown correctly, 20° 25' is placed in column as final result instead of 30° 35', the correct result, and, as it stands on candidate's paper, constitutes a failure. 69. Correct mean time at Greenwich given in the question is 19d. 23h. 46m. 48s. Yet candidate writes 19 — 27 — 46 — 48, and still gets the correct result in answer. This, unconnected, should constitute a failure.

H.—26

374

70. The candidate's sidereal time of observation is wrong, thus : Per Candidate. H. M. S. Sid. time ... 6 22 48 Ace. ... 1 58 ; 8 6 24 54 M.T.S. ... 15 10 00 S. time ... 21 54 54 It should be 21 h. 34 m. 54 s., and, uncorrected, is a failure. 72. There is an error in the calculation of the star's hour angle, thus, vide candidate: — H. M. S. S.T.O. = 21 41 55 S.E.A. = 14 31 12 Star's hour angle = 7 10 35 Should be = 7h. 10 m. 43 s., and should have been corrected, and not on these figures made to appear the same result as the working of the answer in the Examiner's possession. In the written answers to printed questions I find the candidate has been allowed to rewrite no less than twenty-six answers, but I am not satisfied with the rewritten answers, and I do not consider them sufficiently accurate to enable the candidate to pass. 9/1/99. J. A. H. M.

List of Candidates' Examination-papers examined by Captain J. A.H. Marciel.

Name of Candidate. ©rade for which examined. Date of Examination. Passed or Failed. By whom examined. Alfred Johansson Thomas McMillan Robert Henderson Smith Aron Gustaf Oberg Daniel Henderson John William Watkins John Henry Rochfort Aron Gustaf Oberg Roderick Matheson John McKenzie George Henry McDonald Caroline Frederick Scott Maundrell Frederick Julius George Schutz William Hugh Ward Frederick Julius George Schutz Dugald Stuart McGregor George Mensing Herbert John Riohardson George Mensing Louis Roy .. .. Harold Louis Foster.. Robert McKenzie Cliffe Louis Roy .. .. Charles Bonner Louis Roy Frederick John Duncan Robert McKenzie Cliffe Vans Brown Master, ordinary .. 29/12/97 .. 23/12/97 .. 17/12/97 .. 15/12/97 .. 14/12/97 .. 8/12/97 .. 21/12/97 .. 21/12/97 .. 7/12/97 .. 10/12/97 .. 10/12/97 .. 26/11/97 .. 23/11/97 .. 23/11/97 .. 16/11/97 .. 1/11/97 .. 26/10/97 .. 27/10/97 .. 18/10/97 .. 7/10/97 .. 30/9/97 .. 29/9/97 .. 27/9/97 .. 22/9/97 .. 20/9/97 .. 15/9/97 .. 14/9/97 .. 12/7/97 .. 5/7/97 .. 17/6/97 .. 15/6/97 .. 7/6/97 .. 1/6/97 .. 17/5/97 .. Failed Passed G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto First mate Failed Second mate Master, ordinary .. Passed * First mate Master, ordinary .. First mate Master, ordinary .. Only mate Master, ordinary .. Only mate Second mate First mate Master, extra' First mate Failed Passed Failed Passed Second mate First mate Master, ordinary .. First mate Failed Second mate Passed Failed Passed Failed William Palmer Collins George Allan Broad Master, extra First mate Passed Failed John Nathaniel Beighton Second mate Passed G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. John Reid John Nathaniel Beighton John Reid Only mate Second mate Only mate 18/5/97 .. 10/5/97 .. 10/5/97 .. 6/5/97 .. 22/4/97 .. 12/4/97 .. 5/4/97- .. 29/3/97 .. 18/2/97 .. 1/2/97 .. 21/1/97 .. 5/12/98 , Failed Robert Stewart Christian Svendson Master, ordinary .. Passed Failed William Rundall Ponsonby .. Murdoch Morrison Seoond mate Passed Failed Passed G. Allman. Stephen Lawson Frank Lawton James Irvine Mate, home trade .. 31/10/98 .. 24/10/98 .. G. Allman and R. A. E dwin. Ditto. G. Allman and A. P. Douglas. G. Allman. Richard Huggins Master, home trade 10/3/98 ..

375

H.—26

EXHIBIT 13— continued. List of Candidates' Examination-papers examined by Captain J. A.H. Marciel— continued.

The above papers have been examined and reported on by me. — J. A. H. Maeciel, Examiner of Masters and Mates.—Wellington, 9th January, 1899.

The above list contains the names of all the persons who have been passed by Captains Allman and Edwin both when examining separately and together since Captain Allman's appointment, except those on which Captain Marciel has reported specially. 9/1/99. George Allpoet.

S IB) _ Wellington, 9th January, 1899. I beg to report that I have, in accordance with your instructions, examined the papers submitted to me by yourself. These comprise: {a.) The papers of candidates who have been examined in the compass syllabus, and to whom certificates have been granted, (b.) The papers of one candidate who has failed in the compass syllabus, (c.) The papers of candidates of various grades to whom certificates have been granted, (d.) The papers of candidates of various grades who have failed to obtain certificates.

Name of Candidate. Grade for which examined. Date of Examination. Passed or Failed. By -whom examined. Oliver Powell Mate, home trade .. 8/12/97 .. Passed G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. William MePherson Arthur Ernest Burt Thomas Frederick Meyers William Mollison Master, home trade Mate, home trade .. 26/11/97 .. 24/9/97 .. 17/12/95 .. 30/3/96 .. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. G. Allman, R. A. Edwin, and A. P. Douglas. G. Allman. Master, home trade John Proudfoot Edward Dorling Mate, home trade .. 4/2/95 .. 12/7/95 .. Passed Frank Lawton 24/10/98 .. Fai'ed Frithiof Wilhelm Hultgren .. Aron Gustaf Oberg Charles Quentin Pope Master, home trade Mate, home trade .. Master, home trade 31/1/95 ... 16/9/95 .. 7/12/97 .. Passed G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. R. A. Edwin. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. Frank Glover John Allan River master 1/4/98 .. 30/9/97 .. Failed William Henry Meredith Henry Somes Robert Hatohwell Robert Strang w • • Compass syllabus .. 22/9/98 .. 16/6/97 .. 21/7/97 .. 10/4/96 .. Passed J. A. H. Marciel. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. G. Allman. Aleo Mitford Edwin .. John Robertson Thomas Fernandez Robert Geoffrey Cross 3/10/95 .. 30/10/96 .. 2/11/96 .. 24/8/96 .. Failed Passed Seoond mate G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. G. Allman and W. J. Grey. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. W. J. Grey. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. Duncan Cameron Carl Gustaf Moberg George Napier Lindsay First mate Master, ordinary .. First mate 23/10/96 .. 3/7/96 .. 31/3/96 .. Failed Passed Archibald Hewithey Reed James Francis Crawford Maurice Charles Yore Seoond mate 6/3/96 .. 24/1/96 .. 30/12/95 .. Harry Neil Cornwell Roderick McLean Frederick Graham Collard Roderick MoLean First mate Second mate First mate 21/1/96 .. 20/12/95 .. 17/12/95 .. 5/12/95 .. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. Failed Stanley MoCheyne Hopkins .. Arthur Beard Lionel Campbell Hugh Worrall Edward Dorling Second mate Master, ordinary .. Second mate 3/12/95 .. 26/11/95 .. 14/11/95 .. 23/10/95 .. Passed G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. G. Allman. G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. G. Allman. Failed Charles Thompson .. Frederick Arnott Hutchinson.. Only mate Master, ordinary .. 30/10/95 .. 24/9/95 .. 15/3/95 .. Passed William Walker George Melville Ruxton Aleo. Mitford Edwin Aron Gustaf Oberg James Goulding Harry Egerton Walley George Melville Ruxton William Joseph White Second mate 9/5/95 ., 7/8/95 .. 6/9/95 .. 5/9/95 .. 10/9/95 .. Failed Passed Only mate Second mate Master, ordinary .. Second mate 17/9/95 '.'. 22/9/98 .. Failed Passed G. Allman and R. A. Edwin. R. A. Edwin. Charles Thompson Master, foreign-going steamship Compass syllabus .. 9/9/98 .. Robert Heddlestone Neville .. James Small Pender.. Herbert Louis Barton Geortz .. James Jamieson Master, ordinary .. First mate 16/11/98 .. 10/8/98 .. 12/7/98 .. 22/1/98 .. G. AUman and R. A. Edwin. Ditto. R. A. Edwin.

H.—26

376

I find as under :— (a.) In this class I have no reason to doubt that the certificates were honestly obtained. In the case of John Eobertson, who passed on the 30th October, 1896, I find an extraordinarily close adherence to the text of Towson's answers in the candidate's written answers to the printed questions on the compass syllabus. I may say here, however, that I have known a young and vigorous man memorise and reproduce in writing these answers with almost identical similarity to the original text. The general character of Robertson's work does not lead me to doubt his integrity. (&.) This is an honest failure. (c.) The whole of this class, with those exceptions which I herewith submit for your inspection, are consistent with honest examination. The cases I beg to draw your attention to are, —■ (1.) Of John Hoffey, who was granted a certificate as mate (home-trade) on the 7th November, 1898, and as master (restricted limits) on the same date. In his examination as mate (home-trade) I find that I cannot reconcile the handwriting in paper Exn. 9c with that of John Hoffey, a specimen of whose handwriting may be seen in his examination-papers, and well seen in paper Exn. 9 for master (restricted limits). There are errors in paper Exn. 9b and in paper Exn. 9f, which show carelessness of examination in his examination as master (hometrade) . (2.) John McLeod (first mate, foreign-going), 25th June, 1897 : The handwriting on Exn. 9c does not appear to me to be that of the candidate in examples 1 and 2. (3.) James Theodore Wilson (master, foreign-going), 17th November, 1897 (Exn. 9c) : The handwriting on this paper does not seem to me to be the candidate's. (4.) Peter Mclntyre (master, home-trade), 18th January, 1897 (Exn. 9c): The answers to the questions in this paper are filled up in pencil, and the handwriting seems doubtful. Example 2is unanswered. It will be observed that these seeming irregularities of handwriting occur in the one examination —viz., the answers to chart-problems (Exn. 9c). It is conceivable that, through carelessness, the candidate's results might have been recorded in pencil and subsequently inked over by another hand, though this theory would not hold good if the pencilled results in case 4 were found not to be in the candidate's handwriting. However, this is a matter for an expert in handwriting to decide. In the course of my investigations I have found traces of careless examination; but lam able to say that in no case, other than the four I have felt it my duty to bring to your notice, have I reason to suspect anything which might be construed into dishonesty in the granting of the certificate. I have, &c, The Secretary of Marine, Marine Department, J. A. H. Maecibl, Wellington. Examiner of Masters and Mates. Mr. Glasgow,—l think that these papers should also be laid before the Solicitor-General, so that he may be acquainted with all that is known in the matter.—W. H.-J.—9/1/99.

EXHIBIT 14. 229/1899. — Marine Department. Date of Paper : 28th January, 1899. Date when registered : 31st January, 1899. From whom and Subject: J. Hutcheson, M.H.E., Wellington. Lyttelton Times report of alleged interview with him stating he made certain statements re department is very inaccurate and garbled.

[Extract from Lyttelton Times, Friday, 20th January, 1899.] The Marine Department.—lnterview with Mr. J. Hutcheson. —Sekious Allegations. [From Our Correspondent.] Wellington, 19th January. To-day I had an interview with Mr. J. Hutcheson, one of the representatives of Wellington City in the House of Eepresentatives. This gentleman has had many years' experience of nautical matters, especially in New Zealand waters, where he was for some years associated with the late Captain Fairchild on the Hinemoa. For some time past he has been in business in Wellington as a ship-rigger, hencfe he is better known on the wharf as " Jack, the Rigger." With warm sympathies for the class in which he graduated and a strong tendency to speak his mind very freely, it would not be surprising if he occasionally seemed to give an exaggerated impression of irregularities in the Marine Department. It must therefore be understood that in the following remarks I am giving expression to Mr. Hutcheson's views, which, however, he declares he is able to prove by evidence obtainable on the spot. What Caused the Inquiry. He says that the inquiry recently held into the conduct of certain officials connected with the Marine Department in Wellington was ordered by Mr. Seddon in response to a demand made by himself, and that he furnished specific charges in writing and gave the names of persons who could substantiate his allegations. He has been aware that for some time past a departmental investigation has been proceeding, because he has been occasionally referred to for documentary and, other information material to the case. He has been informed that an unsuccessful attempt was made to frustrate the investigation by abstracting some of the more incriminatory documents, but he declines to state at present by whom. Unreliable Ships' Compasses. Apart from the question of issuing irregular masters' and mates' certificates, he says that there is a certain port in New Zealand where an incompetent person is appointed to test the

377

H.—26

variation of compasses, and when it is understood that a very slight error in a ship's compasses might mean her wreck, and the loss of many lives, the seriousness of the allegation is apparent. Wholesale Crimping and Fraud. Mr. Hutcheson declares emphatically that a wholesale system of crimping is also openly and defiantly carried on in the port of Wellington, and gives the names of two persons who, he says, are notoriously active in this nefarious system. The modus operandi is to procure the discharges of men who have completed their articles at the port of Wellington, and to transfer these discharges to mere lubbers and incompetence who are anxious to return to England. These receive a shilling a month for the passage, and when it is stated that the common rate of pay is £12 a month from the port, and as much' as £30 has been paid for the run Home from Lyttelton, it is evident that the men engaged in the crimping trade make enormous profits, which are divided betiveen them and unscrupulous masters of vessels who, of course, enter in the ship's books against the names of the shilling-α-month men the full average rate of pay at the port of departure. Is is also alleged that crews who have signed for the return trip are often covertly encouraged to desert, in order that the master and his accomplices of the crimping fraternity may benefit. A Eemedy for Crimping. Mr. Hutcheson suggested, as a remedy for this, that a reliable officer should board all oceangoing vessels immediately prior to their departure, have the crew mustered on deck, the roll called, and a comparison made between the particulars given in the certificate of discharge and the age and appearance of the person to whom the certificate is said to belong. The member for Wellington chuckled drily as he explained thai very frequently youths of sixteen ship as A.B.s on the strength of a discharge issued to a man of fifty, while old men past the age of efficiency are represented on their alleged, certificates of discharge as mere juveniles. "We want a sort of nautical Tunbridge," remarked the member for Wellington, "to detect and put a stop to these gross abuses." Bogus Examinations. Mr. Hutcheson declares that many of Ihe examinations for masters' and mates''s certificates are a mere sham. In one instance the results of an important paper were found to correspond word for word and figure for figure with a certain text-book not commonly in circulation. In another the examination-paper was an exact copy of a previous one sent in, with all its errors repeated exactly. One examining officer boasted that he could pull any man through for a certificate without any difficulty, providing —well, I leave the reader to guess the rest. My informant goes so far as to say that a close scrutiny should be made into all certificates issued here for some time past. Dangers to Passengers. An endeavour has been made in certain quarters to discount the seriousness of issuing certificates for the home trade to incompetent persons by conveying the impression that such a certificate only applies to running a vessel within the harbour. The fact is that it applies to trading all along the New Zealand coast, and places the holder on a par with the oldest and most experienced shipmasters in the colony. Mr. Hutcheson's allegations must not be understood to be applied to the cases which are to come before the Court on Tuesday; on the contrary, they apply generally to the whole system.

Mr. Gully. For your information please note portion marked x . W. H.-J.—22/1/99. [Portions marked x printed in italics.]

Hon. Minister. Minutes. Mr. McKellar has taken much pains to report on the statements made in the Lyttelton Times, and 1 submit his remarks for your information. It is now certain, however, that the statements referred to in the form in which they appeared were baseless. The department would be only too glad to do everything possible to prevent abuses if some reliable information respecting them is furnished. W. T. Glasgow. 30/3/99. Mr. Glasgow. —Please let me have a type copy of report.—W. H.-J. —30/3/99. Hon. Minister. —Copy herewith.—W. T. Glasgow.—6/4/99. Mr. Glasgow.—l have the copy.—W. H.-J.—6/4/99.

Dear Sir, Wellington, 26th January, 1899. I enclose what purports to be an interview between a Press reporter and yourself in reference to matters concerning the Marine Department. I would feel obliged if you would be good enough to let me have any information you may have which will assist the department in dealing with the cases therein referred to. Yours, &c, J. Hutcheson, Esq., M.H.E., Wellington. Wμ. Hall-Jones.

Dear Sir,— Wellington, 28th January, 1899. I beg to thank you for sending me a copy of what you very properly say " purports to bo an interview between a Press reporter and myself," &c. The enterprising pressman who constructed the article may have extracted some information from me in the course of ordinary conversation, and drawn on his vivid imagination for the rest. 48— H. 26.

H.—26

378

But there was no interview, and the article was written and published without my knowledge or approval. As "the cases therein referred to" are grotesquely inaccurate and garbled, I am, of course, unable to give you such information as will enable the department to deal with them. Yours, &c, Hon. W. Hall-Jones, Minister of Marine. John Hutchbson.

Marine Department, The Collector, H.M. Customs, Wellington. Wellington, 4th February, 1899. Herewith I forward an extract from the Lyttelton Times of the 20th ultimo, which gives an account of what purports to be an interview between the reporter and Mr! Hutcheson, M.H.8., in which certain allegations are made regarding crimping at this port; and I have to request that you will report whether you consider there are any grounds for these allegations or not. I may state that Mr. Hutcheson has informed the Minister that the whole article was written and published without his knowledge or approval, and that the cases referred to in it are very inaccurate and garbled. W. T. Glasgow, Secretary.

[Extract from Lyttelton Times, Friday, 20th January, 1899.] Mr. Hutchbson declares emphatically that a wholesale system of crimpiug is also openly and defiantly carried on in the port of Wellington, and gives the names of two persons who, he says, are notoriously active in this nefarious system. The modus operandi is to procure the discharges of men who have completed their articles at the port of Wellington, and to transfer these discharges to mere lubbers and incompetents who are anxious to return to England. These receive a shilling a month for the passage, and when it is stated that the common rate of pay is £12 a month from the port, and as much as £30 has been paid for the run home from Lyttelton, it is evident that the men engaged in the crimping trade make enormous profits, which are divided between them, and unscrupulous masters of vessels, who, of course, enter in the ships' books against the names of the shilling-a-month men the full average rate of pay at the port of departure. It is also alleged that crews who have signed for the return trip are often covertly encouraged to desert in order that the master and his accomplice of the crimping fraternity may benefit. A Remedy foe Ceimping. Mr. Hutcheson suggested as a remedy for this that a reliable officer should board all oceangoing vessels immediately prior to their departure, have the crew mustered on deck, the roll called, and a comparison made between the particulars given in the certificate of discharge and the age and appearance of the person to whom the certificate is said to belong. The member for Wellington chuckled drily as he explained that very frequently youths of sixteen ship as A.B.s on the strength of a discharge issued to a man of fifty, while old men past the age of efficiency are represented on their alleged certificates of discharge as mere juveniles.

From the Collector of Customs at Wellington to the Secretaey, Marine Department, Wellington. (Memorandum No. 374/99.) 27th March, 1899. Befeeeing to your letter of the 4th ultimo, M 99/229, 235/99, covering an extract from the Lyttelton Times of the 29th January last, giving an account of what purports to be an interview between the reporter and Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.8., I have to report that, in my opinion, there is no system of crimping openly and defiantly carried on at this Port of Wellington. If this were so, why has no individual case been brought forward with sufficient evidence to sheet the facts home to the parties alleged to be concerned ? There is in all probability some ground to suppose that there have been transactions with seamen that would not bear the light of exposure, but they have not in any way been glaringly apparent, or an example would have been made of them. The quotation says the common rate of pay is £12 a month from this port, and that as much as £30 has been paid for the run Home from Lyttelton. Now, from the previous remark, this refers to men of the class alleged to be replaced by mere lubbers and incompetents. I do not know what may have been paid at Lyttelton, but I would be of opinion that Mr. Hutcheson must surely have been misinformed that any one before the mast would be paid £30 by any company or any master for the run Home. Our statistics for this port show that, from October, 1897, to date, the current rate of wages throughout has been from £4 to £5 per month for A.B.s (in the New Zealand and United Kingdom direct trade), the highest wages paid to seamen for the United Kingdom being—in October, 1897, £8 10s. per month to firemen per " Buahine " ; in January, 1899, £8 per " Queen Margaret." In January, 1898, £12 was paid per "Morayshire" to A.B.s for run to London; and in January, 1899, £6 per month was paid for A.B.s per " Ochtertyre " to London. The excessive rates of pay mentioned in connection with crimping is therefore confined, apparently, to the Is. per month men and boys who have been shipped before the officer, and those scattered instances where the men have been shipped before leaving and not reported for record. Now it will, I think, be patent that, from the list I now quote, and the class of ships, masters, and persons employed, that we must look elsewhere for such unscrupulous masters (who must also be in collusion with their pursers and others, to enable them to enter in the ships' books and draw from the owners the enormous profits mentioned). The seamen engaged at Is. per month at this port from January, 1897, to present date are as follows :—

379

H.—26

Summary. 1897 ... ... •■• ■•• ■•• 26 men and boys at Is. 1898 ... ... ... ... ... 28 1899 ... ... ... ... ... 10 Grand total 64 men and boys at Is.

Date. essel iapacity. No. 1897. February ... Buapehu Surveyor (working passage) Assistant steward 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 ft • • ' March a • ■ ■ Tokomaru Gothic ... Tongariro a » ... Assistant —stores Greaser April May Gothic July September... October November ... Hawke's Bay Mataura... Devon Tongariro Aotea Ionic Waimate Lake Erie Star of New Zealand Hermione Gothic ... n • • ■ • • • G.S. ... Assistant steward Surgeon Carpenter's mate Trimmer O.S Trimmer Assistant refrigerator greaser O.S." O.S* O.S. ... Boy* Assistant, stores Refrigerator greaser December ... Weathersfield Morayshire Total 26 1898. Boy* Assistant steward A.B. ... Assistant cook... O.S O.S. * Snow boy Surgeon Trimmer O.S Assistant steward Purser O.S. .. Assistant Cook O.S Assistant steward O.S Snow clearer ... O.S. ... Carpenter O.S Boy January February •. • March April Tongariro Moel Try van Aotea Port Chalmers Ruahine ... Ionic Hawke's Bay . . 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 Tokomaru Rimutaka June July November .. Star of England ... Aotea Star of Victoria Maori Star of England ... Waimate 1899. Ochtertyre Westland Gothic Total 28 January February ... O.S.* Boy* Assistant steward Assistant refrigerator greaser Assistant—stores Deck-hand O.S. * Assistant greaser Deck-hand * ... 2 1 1 1 1 L i 1 1 1 March Angerona Papanui ... Melville Island Total 10 * Sailing vessel Is.

H.—26

380

It will be noticed that of this number only one was an A.8., and eighteen were ordinary seamen, the remainder being as a rule low-wages men, some working their passages to get Home, and in respect of whom high wages could not be debited against owners. Of the total number of vessels the sailing-ships took five ordinary seamen, one deck-hand, and three boys at Is. per month. Since March, 1898, the work in the Shipping Office has been performed by competent master mariners whose whole time is devoted to shipping work; the allegation therefore, that very frequently youths of sixteen ship as A.B.'s. on the strength of discharge issued to a man of fifty, and that old men past the age of efficiency are represented on their alleged certificates as mere juveniles is a serious reflection on the intelligence of any officer, more particularly in the case of Captain Bollons, now master of the "Hinemoa," and Captain Hunter, the present shipping clerk, and I can only suppose that the reporter must have seriously misinterpreted and exaggerated the facts regarding the interview with Mr. Hutcheson, M.H.8., for Wellington. D. McKellar, Collector.

Marine Department Scandals. —Me. J. Hutchbson's Opinion. Me. J. Hutcheson, M.H.R. for Wellington City, was interviewed in respect to the Marine Department scandals by the Wellington correspondent of the Auckland Star. Apart from the allegations of issuing irregular masters' and mates' certificates, he challenges the efficiency of the provisions made for testing the variation of compasses ; and when it is understood that a very slight error in a ship's compasses might mean her wreck, and the loss of many lives, the seriousness of the allegation is apparent. Mr. Hutcheson declares emphatically that a wholesale system of crimping is almost openly and defiantly carried on in at least one of the ports of the colony. The modus operandi is to procure the discharges of men who have completed their articles at the Port of Wellington, and to transfer these discharges to mere lubbers and incompetents who are anxious to return to England. These receive a shilling a month for the passage, and when it is stated that the common rate of pay is £12 a month for that port, it is evident that the men engaged in the crimping trade make enormous profits, which are divided between them and unscrupulous masters of vessels, who of course enter in the ship's books against the name of the shilling-a-month men the full average rate of pay at the port of departure. It is also alleged that crews who have signed for the return-trip are often covertly encouraged to desert, in order that the master and his accomplices of the crimping fraternity may find cheap substitutes. Mr. Hutcheson suggests, as a remedy for this, that a reliable officer should board all the ocean-going vessels immediately prior to their departure, have the crew mustered on deck, the roll called, and a comparison made between the particulars given in the certificate of discharge, and the age and appearance of the person to whom the certificate is said to belong. The member for Wellington chuckles dryly as he explains that very frequently youths of sixteen ship as A.B.s on the strength of a discharge issued to a man of fifty, while old men past the age of efficiency are represented on their alleged certificates of discharge as mere juveniles. "We want a sort of nautical Tunbridge," remarks the member for Wellington, "to detect and put a stop to these gross abuses." Approximate Coat of Paper.— Preparation, not given ; printing (1,260 copies, not including lithographs), £257 Bs.

By Authority . John Mackay, Government Printer, Wellington.—lB99. Price, dt.\

This report text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see report in its original form.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/parliamentary/AJHR1899-I.2.4.2.1

Bibliographic details

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT., Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1899 Session I, H-26

Word Count

377,891

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1899 Session I, H-26

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)

To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.

You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.

For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1899 Session I, H-26

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)

To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.

Pages 1-20 of 496

Pages 1-20 of 496

Pages 1-20 of 496

Pages 1-20 of 496

Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

Word Count

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1899 Session I, H-26

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)

MARINE COMMISSION: COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CERTAIN MATTERS RELATING TO THE MARINE DEPARTMENT. Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1899 Session I, H-26

Using This Item

No known copyright (New Zealand)