53

i.— tik.

M. CJAETEE.]

74. But Mr Brennand is a higher man in the service?—Mr Brennand is head of the rollingstock department, and Mr. Rockland is in the traffic. 75. Mr Brennand holds a different position?— Yes. 76. He has a much higher position in the service of the company?— Yes, in a different department. 77 And you want the Committee to believe that Mr Brennand, who you say is a fine fellow —and may I say honourable? —Very honourable. 78. Do you want the Committee to believe that Mr Breimaud, who is a fail- and honourable man, is likely to be influenced by another officer holding an inferior position in the company, to do a man an injustice?—Mr Brennand was putting the man to a test more severe under the influence, of Mr Rockland. 79. Were you present at the time? —No. 80. Then, how can you seriously make such a suggestion against such an honourable man as you have just done when you were not present to see what happened? —1 have had the full facts given me. 31 By whom? —I have spoken to Mr Rockland and to Mr Brennand too. 82. Do you suggest to the Committee that Rockland told you that he had been unfair, or that Mr Brennand told you that he had been unfair?— Neither of them. I drew my own conclusions. 83. Do you men in Auckland seriously act upon conclusions which you deduce in that way? —I act upon that conclusion. 84. Will you mind telling me whether Jackson or Comer, the .men you referred to yesterday, were members of the union?—l could not say I think they were. 85. I should like you to tax your memory, if you can, and let me know definitely 1 suggest to you that they were not?—To the best of my belief they were. Jackson was one of the founders of the union, so I presume he was a member 86. Was Anderson a member of the union? —Yes. 87 Let me ask you this question : Supposing a motorman held a. Government certificate, and he gave up driving a tram-car for three months, do you or do you not think that such a person would require some further certificate before being allowed to drive a car again in the same system? —No, 1 think he would be able to drive all right again. 88. You do not think he would require a further certificate?—l would suggest the Sydney system —two days under a competent motorman. I came here from Sydney, and drove on a system I had never seen. 89 Do you think that a man who had been driving a car in Christchurch would necessarily be a suitable man to drive a oar in Auckland ?—He would be competent to do so with that proviso, having two days under a competent motorman. 90. Yes, but would not those two days tell the tale as to whether he was a suitable man to drive a car in Auckland? —He would be able to learn the equipment on the new line. He would have to drive for that. 91 Would a man who had driven with a magnetic brake, say, in Duuedin, be necessarily a suitable man to drive a car in Auckland ?—He would be able to do it all right, but he would require two days to learn the stopping-places and the line. 92. Who do you think should be the best judge of what the reasonable requirements of the traffic in Auckland are, the general public, the City Council, the owners of the cars, the union of workers, or a person appointed by the Government?—l think the local bodies should have some say in regard to the number of cars to run, but not the number of passengers that should ride on a car 93. When 1 speak of the requirements of the traffic I mean the number of cars required, and cognate questions like that?—l think the local body should have a say in the number of cars, but not the number of passengers. 94. Do you not think the requirements of the traffic is a matter that should be left entirely to the local authorities, who have to bear the expense and have to ascertain the public requirements? —That, to my mind, is further interlaced with the number of passengers, and whilst, as I said before, I am in favour of the local bodies recommending the requirements as to the number of cars, they must not decide as to the number of passengers allowed to be carried. 95. That is one thing, at any rate, you would be prepared' to leave to the Council?— Only the recommendation. 96. But subject to appeal?—-Yes, to the Minister 97 Then the Minister is to be the ultimate authority to say what the people require in the way of their traffic? —I think he should have the power of veto. 98. Supposing the local authority thought 100 cars were enough, and the Minister thought 150 were necessary, and the union thought 120, who should have the control then?—l do not consider that the union should have any say in the number of cars. I say the Minister by expert authority can judge most accurately 99. Better than the people of Auckland and their representatives?-—They make terrible mistakes. 100. I suppose the General Government, who are representives of the people, can make mistakes too, sometimes, or are they infallible? —I do not believe in the infallibility of man. 101 Then why do you think that the Minister, and not the local authority, should be the person to say what the people whom that local authority represents, should be the best judge?— Because they have made mistakes right through. They have never, been able to adequately deal with the requirements of the people.