H.— s

10

course as that. It would be unusual. He may be confusing it with some other letters. I would not swear to anything of the sort. 73. Did Mr. Ward come to your room ? —He did. 74. Did he take the letter with him, or did you send it by a messenger to him ?—I sent it by a messenger. 75. About what time did you send it to Mr. Ward ?—lt is just possible that Sandbrook, the messenger, is right. I may have sent it to the Premier's room. I would not like to say that I did or did not; but I sent it after I had read it, and after Mr. Ward had been in my room, to Mr. Ward by Sandbrook. Why I did not give it to Mr. Ward when he was in my room, there and then, I cannot say ; but I know I had a lot of other things to attend to, and I am satisfied I sent it by Sandbrook to Mr. Ward's room afterwards. 76. At about what time?—l suppose it would be between 11 and 12 o'clock —shortly after I had read it myself. 77. How long was it in Mr. Ward's possession before it came back again to you ?—A very short time—so short that I wondered how he had read it so quickly. He wrote some remark upon it to the effect that he had seen it, or read it, or something like that. 78. How did he send it back ? —Gummed up in the same way in a fresh envelope, addressed to me. I would not be certain whether it was not after that that he came into my room, because I know we both said, or I said to him, "Cadman must see this letter now " ; and I sent it on by the same messenger to Mr. Cadman, gummed up, and addressed to him. 79. Do you know in whose writing it was addressed to you when it came back from Mr. Ward's room, or who brought it to you ?—I fancy it came by his own messenger, and lam also inclined to think the handwriting was his own. 80. What did you do with the letter when you got it from Mr. Ward ?—I sent it to Mr. Cadman. 80a. Did you send it by Sandbrook ? —Yes. 81. About what time ?—I suppose it would be within an hour after I first received it—perhaps less; as soon as possible afterwards. '82! Could you fix anywhere about the time you sent it back to Mr Cadman? It is rather important?—lt was some time before noon, I think—at any rate, before 1 o'clock. I am not sure whether I was not in his room some time afterwards, while it was on his table. If I have anything to do with Mr. Cadman, I generally go in and see him. It would be before lunch some considerable time. My object was that Ministers should see it as soon as possible. 83. Did you see Mr. Cadman in his room that morning? —I think so, because, as a rule, I see him every day in his room. 84. Was the letter there then ?—I am speaking now from recollection. I think I told him I sent him the letter. He said he had not read, it yet. It was on his table there with a lot of other letters. That is my recollection. We afterwards held a Cabinet meeting in this room, on the. following day. I think the letter was then for the first time handed to Mr. McKenzie, who read it, and, to the best of my recollection, gave it to me. I then gummed it up, and sent it to the Premier. That is, probably, what my messenger is thinking about. 85. Sandbrook came in the other day to tell me that something he had done might have occurred on the following day, and I could not see how it could be so. It is possible now, in view of your evidence, that he took the letter to the Premier's room, say, on the next day, or the. Friday?—lt is quite possible; but one does not like to be positive. Of course, these are matters to which it never occurred to me to attach importance, though I see their importance now. It is quite possible Sandbrook is confusing the time, but if he says it was the first day I should be very sorry to contradict him. 86. It is quite immaterial, because it came back, according to Sandbrook, in precisely the same condition and from precisely the same spot in which it had been left, so that it could not have been handled within that time ?—I feel certain of this : that if I had asked my messenger to take that letter for the Premier—seeing the importance of the letter, and of what had taken place —I should have told him to give it to Mr. Blow, to be kept for the Premier, and not to let it out of his possession. I would not have given him a letter of that kind to be left on the Premier's table, after what had occurred the previous night. 87. Did you understand from Mr. Hoben that he was the person who got the information ?-rNo; but he said to me, " You have received a letter from the Premier with the Fox correspondence. It has reached you this morning." I began to express my astonishment, for I had not seen it myself at the time. I said, " You know a good deal more than Ido about this thing." I was very angry with him. He said, " I know everything that is in it." Now, from the position in which he stood in the room he could not possibly have seen the envelope on my table. 88. This book [produced] is kept in the messengers' room, and in it are recorded all the letters that are sent out for delivery by the Government messengers in town. On the morning of the 4th April—l have it on the sworn evidence of the messengers in the Buildings—this book shows that a letter was sent to the Evening Post, and another to Mr. Atack. It left the Government Buildings in the hands of Messenger Mason at 10.10 a.m. It was entered in the book by Messenger West. Have you any recollection of any letter on any subject having left your office that morning?—No letter of any kind was addressed by me to the Evening Post that morning—in fact, I never address letters to the Evening Post, or to any other paper. 89. Thank you. Ido not think, at present, there is anything else I can ask you ?—I am ready to answer any questions you may wish to put to me. Hon. John McKenzie sworn and examined. 90. The Commissioner.] You are Minister of Lands, Mr. McKenzie ? —Yes. 91. Will you kindly tell me what you know, of your own personal knowledge, of the receipt of those letters from Colonel Fox to the Premier, which form the subject-matter of this inquiry? —