5

EL—33o

then asked me if I remembered a voucher passing through the Post-office at Christchurch payable to R. J. S. Seddon for reorganizing the Defence stores. I said I did; that I would be quite prepared to swear the same before a Judge of the Supreme Court. I told him that was all I could do for him. He appeared satisfied then, and during the week 1 made my affidavit; but I do not recollect what led up to it. I have no doubt—l am perfectly satisfied—that the amount exceeded £70. 1 cannot swear that it did not exceed £80; but my impression is that the amount was about £76. As to Mr. Mcßeth's telegram to the Hon. the Premier, Mr. Mcßeth's memory is so bad that he could not recollect the payment if he had made it. With regard to the record of Treasury vouchers paid at the Chief Post-office—the record now before me—speaking generally, the voucher in question must have been entered in it. That was the ordinary course. I would refer to that: record for any payment made at Christchurch with confidence that I should find it there. Though I cannot precisely fix the limit of the amount at £80, or even £90, I know it is under £100. But I can positively state that a payment by Treasury cheque of between £70 and £100 was made to R. J. S. Seddon at Christchurch for reorganizing the Defence stores at Wellington. Joseph Willis sworn and examined. Witness: I am a clerk employed in the Chief Clerk's office in the General Post-office at Christchurch. At some time during the 3'ear 1904 1 saw a voucher made out in favour of R. J. S. Seddon for the reorganization of the Defence stores at Wellington; such voucher was for an amount exceeding £70. The said voucher was shown to me by William John Larcombe, a clerk employed in the Chief Clerk's room in the Post-office at Christchurch. 1 distinctly remember that the amount of such voucher was charged against the Defence vote, but which part of such vote I cannot remember; that at the time such voucher was shown to me by the said William John Larcombe we both remarked on the fact of such voucher being made payable in Christchurch. 1 understood Mr. Larcombe's motives in showing me the voucher to be the facts that the amount was payable to Mr. Seddon, the Premier's son, that the payment was for reorganizing Defence stores at Wellington, and that such payment was made at Christchurch. The voucher seemed to be, as I thought, peculiar in that the payment should have been made at Christchurch at all. Mr. Larcombe and myself have in the course of our duties to be continually in the Chief Postmaster's room. When the vouchers are paid and receipted by the payees they are placed in a basket on Mr. Mcßeth's table, in cases where Mr. Mcßeth's clerk (Mr. West) is out, and Mr. Mcßeth takes the receipts. It could then only be the receipted voucher which Mr. Larcombe would handle. The voucher was receipted by R. J. S. Seddon. I cannot recollect whether the receipts of R. J. S. Seddon was for a Treasury cheque countersigned by Mr. Mcßeth. I remember Mr. West's comments on the voucher. He came into our room—the Chief Clerk's room —from the mail-room, and Mr. Larcombe told him to go and have a look at the voucher for a payment made to Captain Seddon. Mr. West went to see the voucher and came back again, and we together commented on the peculiarity of the payment. From that time to this I have not seen the voucher. I do not recollect the month when the payment was made, but as I only entered the Chief Clerk's room after the 7th January, 1904, my impression is that it was since that date. Still, it mayhave been before that date. The voucher, when receipted, would in ordinary course be entered in the record now before me of the Treasury vouchers paid at Christchurch by cheques countersigned by the Chief Postmaster. I would refer to this record with confidence for the Treasury number and the amount of any such payment made at Christchurch. My only doubt would be from the possibility of an omission to enter the vouchers; but I think such possibility remote. I have no doubt that the amount exceeded £70. I cannot say how much in excess of £70 the payment was, but I feel sure that it was under £100. The fact of the payment to Captain Seddon was not mentioned by me outside the office till Mr. Fisher asked me to find the payment. He asked if there was such a voucher; if I knew anything of it. 1 told him I saw it—that it was for over £70 for reorganization of Defence stores. Ido not know how he came to ask me the question. He afterwards wrote from Wellington, asking whether I could supply further particulars. This was before he brought the matter up in the House at all. As he said that the payment was made in June and was for about £76, ! looked up the record of Treasury vouchers in the Chief Postoffice, and from that record gave him the number and amount of the voucher nearest to the amount that he quoted. The date of the payment is not entered in the record, and I must have given him the date as between the 9th and the 14th June, 1904, because there were no vouchers written up between those dates. The vouchers returned to the Paymaster-General on a given date are often for payments made many days before. With regard to the telegram of the Ist August from the Chief Postmaster, Mr.- Mcßeth, to the Hon. the Premier—that " There has never been at any time payments to Captain Seddon, and he has never been in my office " —Mr. Mcßeth has a very bad memory, and is absolutely unable to say whether Captain Seddon was ever in his office, or if ever such a payment was made. I have served under Mr. Mcßeth since he went to Christchurch, and during the last nineteen months have been in close contact with him. I have been in and out of his room several times daily, and Mr. Mcßeth does not know me. Five weeks ago Mr. Morris, the Chief Clerk, came out of the Chief Postmaster, Mr. Mcßeth's, room, saying to me and Mr. Larcombe, " I just remarked to Mr. Mcßeth what a handy thing it. was to have a man in the office who could write shorthand and use the typewriter. Mr. Mcßeth's reply was, 'Oli, yes—Mr. Larcombe: 1 recomended him for an increase of salary some time ago.'"' This was in spite of the fact that Mr. Larcombe does not write shorthand or use a typewriter, and that Mr. Mcßeth has seen me doing both on many occasions. It is a common remark, made in my hearing in the office, that Mr. Mcßeth's memory is bad.