I.—la.

18

137. And his conduct at that time was of groat service to the country ?—Yes; I think he satisfactorily performed his duties as Agent-General and Loan Agent. Of course there was a great deal of business of both kinds being done. 138. The Chairman (to Sir Julius Vogel).] You have not yet told the Committee what claim you have on the colony of a money value. Will you please say the amount you claim separately under the three heads—first, for commission on the loan ; second, for the commission on conversion ; and, third, the claim for compensation ? —I would point out that in number two I said, as regards my claim for commission on negotiation, if that is not allowed, then I claim commission on conversion; so that numbers one and two resolve themselves into one claim. I consider lam entitled to one-eighth of 1 per cent on the Five-million Loan, £6,250, the same as Sir Penrose Julyan received. The claim for conversion would come to a similar amount. Under number three I claim compensation for being deprived of the office which Sir John Hall pointed out I was to hold. 139. What do you claim for that ?—lt is hard to say, but I would point out to the Committee they may reasonably say that if they pay the amount under number two, which Sir John Hall refused to pay, it might be looked upon as a part payment under number three. If they say we cannot deal with numbers one and two, it seems to me that I should receive commission on the amount which was not converted at the date of my leaving office as Agent-General, which was, I believe, £1,600,000, and that compensation should be paid for the loss of an office which, as far as we can see, will go on for a number of years. Sir Penrose Julyan received, I think, during two years some £1,300 or £1,400. He is now receiving £800 a year. So, if you consider the question of compensation for the loss of that office which Sir John Hall pointed out as of great value, I do not think you could give an opinion that it was worth less than £7,000 or £8,000, besides the commission on the £1,600,000. I should be content if the claim under number two, £6,250 were allowed me, and two years' salary, the same as Sir Penrose Julyan receives. I think that would be a satisfactory settlement of the claim. 140. You asked Sir Frederick Whitaker whether he did not consider you were entitled to commission on the amount of stock converted after you had ceased to bo Agent-General: what would that amount to ?—To the best of my belief, it was about £1,600,000. The commission would be about £2,000. To that would have to be added compensation for the Government not appointing me to the position which Sir John Hall said I should have, and which was one that, to use his words, was " an appointment which will, with the exercise of little labour, return, in all probability, a considerable income, and assist materially your position in London, whilst leaving you free to engage in any other business. From this point of view it is sure to be argued that this is not an unreasonable recognition of your services." In considering the compensation for the loss of that appointment I hope the Committee will take into account how great a slur was cast upon me in being omitted from an appointment which, of course, everybody expected I should hold. lam sure Sir Penrose Julyan himself would not have said that his claim to the appointment was so great as mine. lam not putting myself in comparison with him on the merits. 141. Mr. Allwright.]' Do we understand, then, your claim to bo £6,250 and £2,000, or a total of £8,250 ? —Yes; £6,250, and two years' salary, such as Sir Penrose Julyan received, about £700 or £800 a year. 142. The Chairman.] It would be for the convenience of the Committee if you put the claim in writing under the different heads? —I will do so. I wish the Committee to understand this: that, if they pay me for the conversion of the Five-million Loan, the agency of which Sir John Hall wrote that I should not receive, I have a farther claim for not receiving the office after ceasing to be Agent-General, as promised by Sir John Hall; and I think the justice of the case would be met by adding to the £6,250 for conversion two years' salary, such as Sir Penrose Julyan received. If I am denied commission on the Five-million Loan, then I consider this as the basis of my claim: First, commission on the amount converted after I ceased to be Agent-General; and, secondly, compensation for my not holding permanently the office which Sir John Hall pointed out to me I should hold : and in the elements of that compensation will have to be considered the advantages which he held that appointment would confer upon me; besides the very serious slur to me in -being passed over when the appointment was made —not merely passed over but gazetted out of the appointment, and not re-gazetted when the new appointments were made. From either point of view, in my opinion, £8,000 would be a moderate compensation to pay me. 143. Mr. Samuel.] You state that £1,600,000 was converted after you ceased to be AgentGeneral, and whilst you still continued to be Agent for Inscription of Stock ?—Yes. 144. And for that you received no remuneration whatever ?—None whatever. 145. Why is it that you suggest that remuneration for that might be Jj- per cent instead of -|- ? —Because in the position I was to hold after I was Agent-General the commission was originally £ per cent.; but we afterwards agreed to hold the agency at a commission of per cent, for subsequent operations. It is an important matter, therefore, if you put on one side all my claim to commission on the Five-million Loan, that you would have to take up the position as to what I should be entitled to merely carrying out Sir John Hall's letter to me as to the position being one of. emolument; and from that point of view I should think you would say that would be the commission which would be payable on the £1,600,000. From this point of view also you would be pleased to consider the compensation I should receive for being deprived of that office. Then I would point out that, after having gone Home, as Major Atkinson has said, with the idea that the appointment would be given to me; afterwards, as Agent-General, having rendered most important services to the colony; being the author of the Inscription of Stock Act; and my whole career pointing, as Sir" John Hall amply indicates in his letter, to the carrying out of this measure in London, it was taken from me^and.my position, of course, was very much affected by being passed over entirely; the result being, as you know, that I have come out again to New Zealand. 146. Was not part of the loan unconverted when you were gazetted out as Agent under the Inscription of Stock Act ?—All but half a million was converted.