23

I.—2a

88. The Chairman.'] Do I understand you to say, Mr. Pollen, the letters just referred to were laid upon the table of the House ? —I believe so, Sir. 89. During the last short session of Parliament ? —That is my impression. 90. Mr. Phillips.] Have you a knowledge of what the expenses of a general election come to throughout the colony ?—You mean the actual conduct of the poll. I have not made it up this last time ; I can tell you approximately, say, between £7,000 and £8,000. 91. For each electorate ?—Eoughly speaking, about £5 for each polling-place. 92. If there were forty polling-places, that would be £200 for a country district, or £150 to £200 ? —lt would be about that, I suppose ; you must bear in mind that the expenses vary. 93. You are aware I could have upset this election ?—I am not aware of that. 94. The Chairman.] Did you receive any protests previous to the general election against the appointment of Mr. Armstrong as the Returning Officer? —I do not remember receiving any. 95. In what respect did the mode of conducting the general election, so far as you are concerned, differ from that of previous elections ?—I do not know that there was any special difference. 96. So far as your department is concerned, the election of 1896 was carried out as the general election, 1893'? —Yes ; allowing for the difference in the Act's amendments. 97. Mr. Armstrong .] Mr. Pollen, have you had any complaints about the general conduct of the election, and did you yourself have any complaints against the way I conducted that election ?— Speaking from memory, I have received no official complaints. I have heard that there were complaints, but can only say that they were hearsay. 98. Mr. Phillips.] No official complaints, Mr. Pollen ?—No. 99. What are those three letters just read previously ? —Those letters refer to the licensing election; they do bear indirectly on the matter, but I regard them as dealing with the licensing election rather than the general election. 100. Did they state general election ?—1 certainly regarded them with reference to his (Mr. Armstrong's) being allowed to conduct the licensing election. 101. Are not those letters official complaints, and he therefore should not have been appointed to conduct the general election. Did not you receive them as official complaints?— Hardly. 102. Mr. Phillips.] I ask that those letters be published. 103. Mr. Field.] When was Mr. Armstrong appointed Eeturning Officer, Mr. Pollen?— The appointments were made in November, I think ; October possibly. 104. At the time the appointment was made, did Mr. Armstrong get any instructions as to the conduct of the election apart from that contained in the statutes ?—A circular is forwarded to the Eeturning Officers, bearing upon certain points of the administration. 105. The instructions sent to him (Mr. Armstrong) were sent to all Eeturning Officers ? —Yes, a circular was sent. 106. Did any correspondence take place between you and Mr. Armstrong at the time, or immediately after the election, with reference to these complications that had arisen?—l called Mr. Armstrong's attention to the section of the Act, and he replied that he had read it, and was of opinion that he was right. 107. You left the responsibility with him ? —Yes, following the invariable practice. I simply thought it right to call his attention to the matter to see that he was sure of his ground. 108. Then, he did not fix the date of nomination by any instruction from you or your department ?—No. 109. Mr. Armstrong acted in a dual capacity—that is, he conducted the general election as well as the local option poll ?—Yes. 110. He subsequently conducted the licensing election?— That is ex officio. 111. Do you recollect the date of the licensing election ? —ln March. 112. Did you receive the letters of which copies are now produced before or afterwards ?—- Before the licensing election, in February, I think. 113. You did not think the matter contained in those letters was of sufficient importance to warrant you appointing somebody else in Mr. Armstrong's place ?—No, they were rather general. • 114. Have you any cause to complain of Mr. Armstrong's conduct on either of the elections?— The licensing election I know little about. As regards the general election, I have no cause of complaint. 115. Did any one else complain to you in writing?—No, except Mr. Phillips and the writers of the three letters which were referred to just now. 116. Did any one call upon you and complain verbally ? —Mr. Buchanan, I think, happened to be in the office one day about some other business, and made some remarks about it; but I did not consider this a complaint. He did not put it as a complaint. 117. So far as you are aware, Mr. Pollen, the nomination-day for the Wairarapa election was different from that fixed by any other Returning Officer of the colony ?—Yes, I think so, but would not like to say, without seeing all the returns. 118. You could furnish us with a return of the days fixed for the various Eeturning Officers ? —That would be a question of looking up the advertisements; they do not inform me officially, It is quite easy to obtain the information, and I will do so. 119. Did you bring under the notice of the Minister these complaints with reference to the appointment of Mr. Armstrong ?—Yes. 120. And Mr. Phillips's complaint ?—Yes. 121. What Minister? —Mr. Phillips's complaint would be brought under Mr Walker, he was the only Minister here at the time of the general election; the February one would be brought under Mr. Carroll's notice. 122. No notice was taken of this?— Not beyond they were acknowledged.