I.—6b

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Thursday, 10th August, 1893.—( J. M. Shera, Esq., M.H.E., Chairman.) Hon. Mr. Bolleston examined. 1. The Cliairman.] I understand you are the leader of the Opposition? —Yes, I hold that position. 2. In Hansard of the 25th July you are reported to have stated: " I think the falsification of the records of the House has been a worse thing " ; and, further, in referring to the Premier, you say he has made a " silent, secret, and surreptitious alteration of the public records." Are you correctly reported? —Yes, as far as I know. It is substantially correct, certainly, and I believe it to be correct. 3. Will you state the circumstances that led to your making that statement?— Yes. I say the report in Hansard is to the best of my knowledge and belief correct. I made the statement that has been alluded to by you, that the Premier had made a " silent, secret, and surreptitious alteration of the public records," and I amplified the charge further on—on the same page, 156—by saying : " He has sent out a record the veracity of which depended upon the correctness of certain statements he made, taking figures which the public did not scan or criticise, because they are not accustomed to such things. He has altered those figures, and let go broadcast to the public a statement which is entirely incorrect on the face of it. It is comparatively a small matter if the honourable gentleman does not know when there is a difference in the matter of accounts of some £90,000 : because that is'what it is, but I say it is no small matter that he should venture to mislead the public for all this long time both in respect to this railway matter and in regard to these public accounts." And, on another day, when the matter was before the House, in referring this question to Committee, I said, " I hope the Public Accounts Committee, when they take this into consideration, will take into consideration the general burden of the charge I made. The charge I made was this : that the Statement itself proceeded to argue upon these figures, and that, when the figures were proved to be wrong, and were altered, no corresponding alteration was made in the tone of the Statement for the enlightenment of the public." That is in Hansard, No. 11., page 166, July 25th this year. The general burden of the charge I made was that the last figures in the concluding paragraph of the Statement were altered, in the Appendix to the Journals of the House, from the document laid upon the table and circulated through the country. Since then I have looked through the Hansard upon which the statement was made, and it shows that Mr. Seddon was fully aware of the error, but he never altered the statements he had founded upon those figures. On the sth October (No. 78 of last year, page 682), Mr. Eichardson pointed out the error; on page 668 of the same volume, Mr. Mitchelson pointed out the same error; and on the 11th October, page 885 of the same volume, column two, Mr. Eichardson reiterates the charge. This particular speech shows that at that time, 11th October, the correction had been made ; and the charge was reiterated in the House without it being for a moment stated that the Premier was not awake and alive to what had been said. 4. Were these statements made during the debate on the Public Works Statement ?—The last statement was made on the debate on the Appropriation Bill, at the end of the session. 5. Hon. Mr. Seddon.] And those of the sth October ?—The one of the sth October was on the Public Works Statement. On the 11th of October, notwithstanding these statements had been made by Mr. Eichardson and Mr. Mitchelson, and notwithstanding the alteration had been made, Mr. Seddon on this day—the last of the session—does not admit or acknowledge the error, but says, " the Statement was perfection in itself." He says this on October 11th ; and yet he says he had had no opportunity of making an explanation previously. In Hansard, page 442 of the same volume, the error is corrected; therefore it is clear that Mr. Seddon was aware of it within a few days of September 27th, when the Public Works Statement was issued. I could not say upon what date the Hansard came out, but in the Hansard proof of the Public Works Statement the correction has been made. 6. The Chairman.] You refer to the error ?—To the figures; they were altered from the Statement. 7. Will you state in what the alteration consisted?— Yes; the alteration consisted in substituting the figures £391,501 for, I think (I forget the precise figures) £295,978. In Hansard No. 3of this year, page 133, June 30th, Mr. Seddon says: "It was mentioned at the time, and he (Mr. Seddon) knew it." That is in the second column of page 133. On page 134, in the first column, at the bottom, Mr. Seddon is reported as follows : " What he (Mr. Seddon) said was this: that when it was pointed out by the honourable gentleman and the honourable member for Eden, then, and between that time and the time when he (Mr. Seddon) would have replied, he found that the net amount had been given instead of the gross amount. He should have made the explanation had not advantage been taken of his taking a rest. The effect of the honourable gentleman's criticism on the Public Works Statement was such that he had gone to sleep, and advantage had been taken of that, and he could not make the explanation till the first opportunity, which he had taken advantage of." I have not found the opportunity which Mr. Seddon took to correct this statement. As to his being asleep, I may say, in a phrase of his own, that if he were, he had probably, like a weasel, one eye open. And it appears strange, too, I—l. 6b.