MR. HINE'S CHARGES.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 962, 1 November 1910, Page 5

MR. HINE'S CHARGES.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL INQUIRY,

QUESTION OF ETHICS.

DISCUSSION OF PROCEDURE.

REMARKS BY MR. MYERS AND MR. SKERRETT. The Special Committeo of the legislative Council appointed to inquire into tho charge brought by Mr. Hine, M.P. for Stratford, against tho Hon. T. K. Macdonald, M.L.C., opened its sittings last night. There wore present: The Hon. Sir. Callan (chairman), and tho Hons. Dr. Findlay and Messrs. Samuels, Sin- ' clair, Thompson, Luko, .Tenkinson, ltigg, . and Captain Tucker. Mr. Myers appeared on behalf of Mr. Hine, "and Mr. Skerrett, K.C. (with him Mr. Sharp), . represented Mr. Macdonald. Both Mr. . Hine and Mr. Macdonald were in attendance. The Charge. Tho text of the chargo is as under:— . "That Thomas Kennedy Macdonald, m or about tho year 1904 and subsequent years, whilo a member of tho Legislative Council, either alone or in conjunction with his then partner (a land agent), conducted the sale to the Government of tho property of" . one John Motley Leigh, at Nai Nai, and the properties of two other per. sons, and received from the said John i Motley Leigh and the vendors of such other properties commission or other sums of money, or alternatively the said T. K. Macdonald and his said partner received the said commission or other sums, and divided tho same." Preliminary Discussion. When the committee admitted couth sel _ and tho press representatives the chairman inquired from Mr. Myers if he were ready to go with his case. . Mr. 'Myers ■ replied that he' understood that tho meeting was to be only of a, preliminary nature. He would ask tho committee to call certain witnesses, and would -also suggest the committee ad-, journ until any other night this weekly, Wednesday. _The chairman:: Could we not hear Mr. Hmes evidence to-night? iJ l ?\} lye £ said that he did not know tnat Mr. Hine would have any evidence to give. Mr. Hine had made certain inquiries. Anything he could say would be said by other witnesses.: ■ What he could say would really only be hearsay. , Mr. Skerrett said that Mr. Macdonald ■and'himself had,attended fully lelieving that the charge would be. investigated' - that night. For themselves, they were quite ready and anxious to go on' that n l g j ls . Possible. He could not understand why-Mr. Myers should not. have applied to the committee before to summons , witnesses. Obviouslv, from tho very nature of the charge, 'the witnesses' must be all residents of the city. Why then should they be brought together ■• merely to hear Mr. Myers's application lor an adjournment? He would say that r., Myers did not know that he (Mr. bkerrett) was retained on behalf of Mr. : Macdonald. He could not help thinking, however, that Mr'. Macdonald had ' been treated with scant courtesy in beins brought down there that night for no- . thing. All they could ask was that the charge b« heard at the earliest possible * moment, . ; Mr. Myers remarked that he could have Deen ready to have gone on that night, h 1 had ex Plained,'he understood ■■ that the committee was meeting simply ' t0 jnake preliminary arrangements. ; Ihe chairman said that in the conversation which he had with Mr. Myers the ■ questions discussed were whether the ' ' witnesses would be sworn, also whether they would get their expenses. He had ■' replied that he could not say until the committee met. That was the whole conversation. Mr- Myers: I. said, a little more than tnat; and I certainly understood that it was to be merely a preliminary meet- 1 mg. Mr Skerrett here remarked .that he had hoped that the investigation would nave concluded that evening. . Ihe Hon Dr. Findlay said that he understood Mr. Myers had not declared that it was impossible to make a start so far as the examination of Mr. Hine . was concerned, but that as the other wit- ' nesses were not present tile inquiry would have to be adjourned. Tho committee was anxious to get over as much, of the case as possible. If it.were possible for Mr. Myers to call Mr. Hine, if he were to be called, so much time would be saved. Mr. Myers: I don't think it necessary to call Mr. Hine at all. Certainly I dont intend to tender Mr. Hine simply to give ovidence which I know would be inadmissible in a Court. Of course, the committee would not listen to evidence o! a hearsay nature. : .Dr. Findlay said that it might be desirable that Mr. Hine'should explain the innuendo underlying tho charge. Tho charge n3 it stood might not convey, any innuendo, hut he apprehended that Mr. Mine might intend his charge to do so. Obviously the committee would be anxious to ascertain the nature of the innuendo. It would help the committee by ".'■" showing whether tho charge was to : be ' w? v the verbli l snapo it took or v Whether there was accompanying it any reflection not expressly stated. • ■ ' ' The Evidence to be Called. Mr. Myers said that he.intended to-caU evidence as follow:' (1) In regard to the sale of Mr. Leigh's • property at Nai Nai to the Government, which sale was conducted by Mr. Macdonald or by his firm, and Mr. Hine said that Mr. Macdonald or his firm received from the vendor commission upon the sale of the property. . _ (2) Mr. Hine made- a similar allegation in regard to the sale of a portion of the property of Mr. and Mrs. Love at the \Vaiwetu, near Hutt. The .chairman: When was the sale of the Loves' property? Mr. Myers: At the end of .1905 or the beginning of 190G—ho was speaking from recollection. These are the two; matters in regard to which we intend to call ev-denco. I'he chairman: Tour charge" is simply, that Mr. - Macdonald received a commission for the sale of these properties? , Mr. Myers: Yes, but we go somewhat , further—wo say that these properties wore sold at very high prices to the Government. The Hon. Mr. Sinclair: Moaning there* by? Mr. Myers-: The whole point is this:. Sir: Hine's submission is that it is wrong for a member of either House to aot aa the agent for remuneration upon the eala of a property to tho Crown. The chairman: That is your charge. Mr. Myers: That is the inference. Dr. Findlay said that counsel had stated that these sales took place at very high prices. Was it implied that these high prices were due to any collusion between the Government and the vendor or the agent? - Mr. Slycrs: We charge nothing against tho Government. Dr. Findlay: Or. against any Government officer? Is it said that there is no charge of impropriety against the Govern, ment? . . - Mr. Myers: In connection with these two charges, no, sir. Tbe chairman: Then was the price paid for Love's estate too high regarding the state of the market at the time? Mi'.' Myers: Not necessarily. What Mr. Hine asks should be «iid is this: That it is not right for members to act as agents for remuneration upon sales to tho Government. The chairman: That is ivhat you say is wrong—for a member of Parliament to act as agent in.such a matter. Mr". Myers: Yes. That if once that ."■■■ principle is admitted it may lead to i - great deal of wrong-doing. The Question of Ethics. Dr. Findiay asked if lie might suggest that if the inquiry was limited merely to the propriety of a member of Parliament acting as the agent of a vendor to tlto Government in regard to purchases under the Land lor Settlements Act the facts might probably be wholly conceded, and . then the inquiry would bo limited to the question simply of ethics

. Mr. Myers: No; I don't think that all the facts will bo admitted, but I don't j«mt:to.say anything which will prejudice anybody. ■■' \ <' Mr. Skerrett: Except Mr. Macdonald? Mr. Myers: I don't think that is fair, tor I have said nothing. Mr. Skerrett: No, you insinuated. _ Mr. Myers: I have weighed every word ;in order not to create prejudice or seem Ito make any unfair suggestion about anyvbody or "any reflection on Mr. Macdonald. I only answered the committee. . Dr. Eindlay said that ho only wanted to save-time if possible. A great deal of what Mr. Hine attempted to establish rould doubtless be conceded. If no impropriety is .charged against the .Government'or. any officer, it would shorten time to find what was common ground between the parties. Mr. Myers: I should probably have to call witnesses before we could shorten the proceedings, but I will do my best to shorten them.' .; Tho Hon. Mr. Sinclair: Does Mr.' '.Myers wish to make any point about his allusion to high prices? "Mr. Myers: .You.are putting to nie a very difficult question, and I don't want at the present stage to answer that question directly. * - Mr. Sinclair: I thought you said something to the effect that there was no imputation' itf anything wrong?. Mr. Myers: Any member of the Government or officer of the Government, I was asked. :, . The chairman: You used tho expression: "Very high prices." You ought to explain whether tho price -was, in .your .opinion, higher than ought to have been j ,paid'un(lcr the circumstances—higher than ' 'the market price. ■ ■ Mr. Myers: If' I may make the sugfestion, J, think it would be better to ear tho evidence than press me for an answer.. The chairman: What we want is something that we can investigate—inquire into. ~.•■■■ , My* Myers: You are inviting me now to say with regard to one matter the very thing that I think I ought not at .present. Itate. The chairman: Then we don't know at present what we are to inquire into. Mr.- Myers:. I, have already stated, the two allegations' that we make. The chairman: Then these are the only two allegations? /' Mr.; Myers: Yes. . The Scope of Inquiry. The Hon. Mr. Rigg suggested that the inquiry could not be complete unless the committee had before it the evidence of ■Mr. Hine. He would further suggest that the-scope of .the inquiry should not be directed by counsel, but by. the committee. Mr. Hine could be invited by the committee, to give evidence before it. If Mr. Hine would take the opportunity now the committee could, in a short time, find out what was meant by the allegations. It might not be necessary to call further evidence. Mr. Myers: I have already-said that Mr. Hine's evidence would be inadmissible as it would be hearsay- evidence. ■ Dr. Findlay. I apprehend that although Mr. Myers does not think it necessary to call Mr. Hine it would be free for-Mr. v Skerrett or the committee to call him. ' Mr. Myers: I apprehend that they would not desire to do so at this stage, afterwhat I have said. . . Remarks by Mr, Skerrett. , ' Mr. Skerrett said that he regretted to hear that' Mr. Myers did not-intend to. tender Mr. Hine as a witness so that .the committee could hear the genesis of the charges and their exact nature. Mr. Myers had to some extent cleared the air, but he had done so.somewhat reluctantly;, and. although he spoke as-he said, weighing overy word, he had spoken a little doubtful. He was a-little more inquisitive than Mr. Myers., If Mr. Myers.did not .call. Mr.. Hine, he would call, him. He wanted to-know when the information came into his possession, how and where, and in what way he. considered it to be, his public dnty to bring up-the matter. Another word.he would Kay.-' Ho hod listened attentively to what Mr. Myers had said. At first he had said that there.was a tag to the charge—that the property was sold at a very high price. But, in answer to a question, lie had/said explicitly and clearly that he didn't charge, 'in fact, he disavowed charging any member of the Government ortofficer of the Land Purchase. Department in'connection with the sale of any properties to the Crown- ■. If that were correct, he would submit that it was puerile and childish to set the committee up as one of land agents to determine the value of the properties at a particular time. He woujd suggest that it would be-unworthy of the dignity of the_committee, unworthy of the responsibilities placed upon it to embark upon an inquiry as to whether the bargain wasa bad one on the part of the Government. With reference, to the main.charge, he did not propose, to say anything at all, in regard to the ethics of what Mr. Hine and Mr. Myers deposed. He did, however, want to" point "out that there appeared to be only, one matter before tho committee.' That is a matter of general application, whether a commission agent who happened to be a member of Parliament or a lawyer who was the same was excluded by that fact from any dealings' with the Crown. That was the general question to be dealt with by the.committee, and it'! certainly appeared to him to be a matter that could be disposed of in : a rrery short time. Mr. Myers: The circumstances wUI require • consideration—as to whether the general principle he was contending for ■was going to apply. Mr. Skerrett: Oh, this discussion can't go on. : I am not opposing the adjournment. The chairman at this stage stated that, 'the ■ committee had decided on. the following mode of- procedure:—For. Mr. .Myers to open the case; examine his witnesses: Mr." Skerrett to oross-examine •them, and Mr. Myers to re-examine. The committee .would not • require, any: addresses from counsel. Mr. Myers: I was not proposing to open. Mr. Skerrett: The committee is to be congratulated on the course proposed; 'its' procedure will save much frothing eloquence on the question of ethics. Mr. Myers: You are speaking for yourself! " The chairman also added that the witnesses would be sworn and receive expenses. The committee then adjourned till this crening,- at 8 o'clock. "