H.—l6b

2

From Mr. Graham. M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (25th April, 1902.) In compliance with almost absolutely universal desire here, will Government either reconsider or grant public inquiry in re charges against police? Am certain if you can spare time for full consideration Commissioner's report and findings thereon, your known sense of fair play will cause you to repudiate the unmerited punishment so far resolved upon-. I hope for a speedy reply such as will relieve public tension, which is very highly strung. Kind regards.

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (25th April, 1902.) Your telegram re police affairs in Nelson : I cannot, of course, interfere in the administration of that Department in any way. The question of public inquiry I shall have submitted to Cabinet on the return of the Minister of Justice to Wellington.

From Mr. Graham, M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (25th April, 1902.) Cordially agree with you that Ministers not in charge should not interfere with administration Police Department. Thank you sincerely for your assurance that the question of a public inquiry shall be submitted to Cabinet, pending which doubtless decisive action will be stayed.

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (25th April, 1902.) Your telegram to hand. Mine to you of this morning will doubtless have crossed it. You will recognise, of course, that it is not possible for me to interfere directly with the administration of another responsible Minister's Department.

From Mr. Graham, M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (28th April, 1902.) Please kindly reply if official action in reference to the proposed removal of Sergeant Mackay has been or will be stayed, as respectfully requested by telegram to you on Saturday last, pending public inquiry asked for. Am anxious to allay public feeling, which continues very strong.

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (29th April, 1902.) Be police : Your telegram containing your representations on this matter was before Cabinet to-day, and after full consideration it was decided not to interfere with the former decision.

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (29th April, 1902.) I presume your last telegram to me crossed mine to you. The Cabinet has carefully reconsidered the matter, but regret that the decision arrived at upon the facts placed before .the Ministers cannot be reversed. The Government will offer no objection to placing the whole of the correspondence on the table of the House.

From Mr. Graham, M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (29th April, 1902.) Be your telegram to-night stating that the decision arrived at upon the facts placed before the Ministers cannot be reversed : Do you refer to facts elicited in evidence at the departmental inquiry held in Nelson ? If Cabinet decision has been arrived at on any other facts or statements than those disclosed by the departmental inquiry, then the strongest possible reason exists for acceding to the request for a complete and exhaustive public investigation to prevent serious miscarriage of justice.

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (30th April, 1902.) Your telegram of last night: I have nothing further to add beyond what I have already indicated—namely, that Ministers have carefully considered the whole matter upon fresh correspondence placed before them, and have done what they believe to be their duty. I have already said there is no objection to the full correspondence being placed upon the table of the House.

From Mr. Graham, M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (30th April, 1902.) Glad to receive your telegram to-night stating that Ministry has been influenced in its decision by correspondence never produced at departmental inquiry. Thank you for willingness to further consider matter next session. Meanwhile does Ministry decline to give opportunity to rebut the fresh correspondence you refer to by granting public inquiry ? •

From the Acting-Premier to Mr. Graham, M.H.E. (Ist May, 1902.) The statement contained in your telegram that Ministers have been influenced in their decision by correspondence not produced at the departmental inquiry is not correct. As already advised you in my wire yesterday, Ministers have had before them the full correspondence. I have already conveyed to you the decision of the Cabinet in the matter, and the case will not be reopened.

From Mr. Graham, M.H.E., to the Acting-Premier. (Ist May, 1902.) I have your wire stating that my interpretation of your last telegram to me is not correct, and I now quote the words in your telegram to me, to which mine was an answer —namely, " Ministry have carefully considered the whole matter upon fresh correspondence placed before them." If there was no new matter to guide Ministers to a decision, whence the meaning of the words "fresh correspondence"? Kind regards.