THE ALLEGED OFFER OF MONEY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1376, 29 February 1912, Page 6

THE ALLEGED OFFER OF MONEY.

IN AN AUCKLAND HOTEL. / MK. PAYNE GIVES EVIDENCE. The committee resumed at 12.00 p.m. No mention was nindo o£ tho matter which had been under deliberation, and the next order of reference was proceeded with. Tin's was the allegation made by 31 r. I'ayne in the House to the effect that Mr. Charles M , Master had said he was authorised to offer him i:500 to .61000 if ho would "go in tho direction of thi Ward party." Mr. Payne, sworn, and examined by his counsel, .said that Mr. M'Master became a supporter of his within a fortnight of tho beginning of tho election campaign. He had a conversation with Mr. M'Master on February i>, in Auckland. Witness received a message that Mr. M'Master wanted to see him, and he accordingly went in a taxi-cab to tho Thistle Hotel, Auckland, and met Mr. M'Master there at about I) p.m. They had a drink at tho bar, and remained there about ten minutes. Mr. M'Master introduced him, for the first time, to Maurice O'Connor, the licensee of the hotel, and his brother. They did not, ■to tho best of his recollection, discuss political matters unless in. the most general way. Finally, -Mt. M'Master took him by the sleeve and said, "Come along; I want to speak to you." Jlr. M'Master looked into Mr. O'Connor's office, which was in tho vestibule between tho front und back bars; and finding it empty, took witness in there. They sat down and began to talk in a pretty general way about political affairs. Mr. M'Master said, "How arc things going?' You go on as you are going. You havo a better block with me in some things, but you keep on as you. are, and you will bo all right." Witness understood that he was referring to tho political situation. Mr. M'Master then said "What do you think? I havo been authorised to offer you from JCoOO to iIIOOO if you will go with the Ward Administration." They were sitting facing each other at the lime, but witness then looked right past Mr. M'Master, and for this reason, that ho was evidently under tho influence of liquor. Witness could not consider it as a direct offer in tho words in which it was made. Did you regard Mr. M'Master, when he raado the statement, as responsible for his words and actions ?—No, I certainly did Did you make any reply?— Not a singlo word. . Was the matter. Tofcrred to again dunng tho conversation?— No. You ignored the remark?—les, entirely. And Mr. M'Master_ did not repeat it or again refer to it?— No. Why did you not regard the suggestion that you might receive ,£3OO or ,£IOOO if vou voted in a. particular way as an insult to you personally?— Because ho was under tho" influence of liquor. And you thought he was not responsible for his words?—l thought so then and I think so now. A Talk. With Mr. Massey. AVitncss did not see Mr. M'Master again that day, but immediately after tho .£SOO or XIOOO had been mentioned,. Mr. 11' Master asked him to go with him to seo Mr. Massey. They went in witness's taxi to the Auckland Club, and there met Mr. Massey in. tho strangers' room. ' As soon as Mr. Massey came in Mr. M'Master said. "I havo brought Mr. Payne to seo you." Mr. Massey replied, "I have been before you. I have already seen him." Tho conversation then proceeded on "general lines. He could not say whether it related to tho question of how ho would vote on the no-confidence motion, It was understood that Mr. Massey had already seen him and that the matter was fixed up. Witness had previously made nn appointment to meet Mr. Massey at 2 o'clock that day to give him his decision as to how he would vote. Mr. Dicksou before that had found witness at the Trades Hall, and asked him to conro and seo Mr. Massey. Witness went with Mr. IJickson, and met Mr. Massey coming out of the Public Works office. Thoy went down Queen Street and then to Mr. Diekson'fl office, where the threo of them had a conversation. Witness told Mr. Massey that he wanted to because tho way Tub Dominion' newspaper had been writing down tho tramway men during the strike in Wellington had made his position as a Labour member very seriously compromised, and before he could renew his assurance that ho would support him on the no-coufidenco motion, ho would luivo to spo tho chiefs of his committee. Mr. Massey then asked witness to namo a time for another interview, and they ngrcod to meet again at '1 r>.m. Witness then took the taxi and saw the chiefs of his committee. He returned afterwards to meet Mr. Massey, ns already stated, and then in Mr. Dickson's office, Mr. Dickson being present, ho told Mr. Massey that ho had had a conversation with the chiefs of the committee, and they had evidently not seen 'The Dominion report?, and saw no reason why he should break his pledge. Ho was, therefore, tjuito free to assure Mr. Massey that he would voto with him on tho no-confidenco motion. Ho had no further interview that day with Mr. Massey, Mr. Dickson, or Mr. M'Master.

The Richmond Post Office. Mr. Skerrett': Was anything paid by Mr. M'Master that would show of which party ho was an emissary? Mr. Myers objected to this question. The chairman ruled that it could not bo put in that form. Mr. Skerrett: I will put it I his way. Do you know nf any circumstance that would indicate which parly Mr. M'Master was associated with I* Witness: J omitted ono small matter ju-t now. As we were leaving the club, Mr. M'Master said to Mr. Massey. "Wo will have that post office at Richmond yet, and ho will get the credit of it."— slapping,mo,on the chest. Witness also said Mr. Massey must have heard this remark. Mr. Ilcrries-, M.P., was present for a short time, during tho conversation at the club, but only whilo tho conversation was general. Mr. Skerrett was prevented from eliciting further details about tho Richmond post oliiee matter, which ho said might liavo thrown light upon the question as to which party Mr. M'Master belonged Witness said ho left Auckland the same night (Friday, I'ebruary (0, for Napier, ami what hud occurred there had already been related. On the following Wednesday or Thursday, in the Parliamentary iiuldings, Wellington, Mr. Dickson nskcil witness to go with him to Mr. Massey's room and see the latter. Thcv went" accordingly, and a conversation" took place between them. Tho intent of tho conversation was to ascertain whether lie still intended to voto with Mr. Massoy. Witness then said iio had heard something uf the other side, and was not snro about it. . Mr. Young objected to this evidence, and the objection was upheld. Mr. Mr. Young: Mr. M'Master was ■interested in politics mainly on account

of his connection with tho liquor trade as a wine merchant, and had been particularly anxious lor tho defeat of Mr. Fowlds nt Civey Lynn. It witness btul thought tho olfer was made seriously, ho would have knocked down the man who mode it. To Mr. Myers: Ho did not know whether Mr. Mnurico O'Connor was an acknowledged supporter of tho Ward Administration. He told his chairman and secretnry in thn interview already mentioned that an offer had been madu to him. To Mr. Fraser: Mr. M'Mabter was quite ablo to walk properly at tho timo referred to. To Jlr, Nosworthy: He was not prepared to say that Mr. M'Master,' was "decidedly"' under the inllner.ee of drink. He would not have words put into his mouth. Jlr. Jl'Jtaster walked well enough from the taxi iuto the building where they met Mr. Massey. Was it Possible? Mr. Russell: Did you conceive it possible that a man could seriously offer you a bribe to vote for tho leader of ono party, and then tako you to see the Leader of the other party?—" From what 1 have seen of polities, I don't know what is possible? (Laughter.) Mr. Allen: If you did not tako it seriously, why did you mention it in the House ?—"Because 1 was forced to after mentioning it to Jlr. Massey." Why did yon mention it to Mr. Massey, if you did not take it seriously?— "1 was prepared to give all the particulars just now, but I was stopped." This answer revived the discussion as to whether Jlr. Payne should bo allowed to state what occurred at the interview in Jlr. Massey's room. Mr. Young contended that the nurration might prejudice his client, who was the only man on trial. It would be unfair to do Ibis for the sake of clearing up some other matters. On Mr. Allen repeating his last question, Jlr. Payne said: "Then I insist on telling the whole story." Kventuallv, Jlr. Young's contention was upheld, and Mr. Allen's question remained unanswered.

The committee adjourned from 1.15 p.m. to 2.30 p.m. When the committee resumed at 2.,10 p.m., Jtr. Hauan stated in reference to ilr. Allen's question that, although, in his opinion, such a' question would not be allowed in a Court of law, at the same time he could not control any member of the committee from putting any question he might dasir?. Mr. Allen: I do not press it. sir. Answering Mr. Thomson, Jlr. Payne said that, at the interview of which ho had spoken, when Jlr. Jl'Jfaster had had a drink with witness he was in a "halfdrunk and maudlin condition."