AUDIT ENQUIRY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1592, 2 November 1905, Page 3

AUDIT ENQUIRY.

FISHER ADMITS HIS MISTAKE.

XPexs Ptess AMcokVon.)

Wellington, yesterday. The Audit Commission resumed this suggested that as Captain Seddon intended to submit himseif, Mr Fisher should go into the' witness-box. Mr Fisher said he had no objeotion, and gave evidence. He was cross-examined by Dr Findlay as to how be arrived at jane 9 as the date of the Seddon voucher, and said he bad looked np the date Captain Seddon was in Ohristohuroh, and arrived at the aonolasion in that way. Afterwards be found that he bad made a mistake in the number of the vouoher and dale. In correcting the former he correded the latter. It wa3 impossible for him (fa aay from whom he first learned the amount of the vouoher.- It oame as a’ rumor; not from Willis. Cross-examined by Dr Findlay, _Mr Fisher said he was satisfied Captain Seddoa never received payment on account of the voucher eOen by Willis and 'others. He should say it was a, physioal impossibility for a genuine voucher to pass through the books without being reoorded. He still 'believed that Willis aod others law a vouoher. Pressed a* to whether it Was genuine or not; he said it was an Inexplicable mystery, He could not ■pro- : 'vine a.-theory. He denied emphatically that be had stated Willis had misled him. Witness afterwards said it seemed that the vouoher must have been a hoaxed one. v„: v .: , i ■ ;f'-* t-t ' ■! - -■ ■■-■

THE EVIDENCE CONCLUDED.

,(FeCt Fjoesa Association.')

Wellington, last night Colonel Porter, who was officer commanding in Ohristohurojh from March, 1908, to September, 1904, said be had never authorised a payment to anyone for reorganisation, of defence stores, Richard Sneddon, of Anderson and Co., Christohurob, said that in oooveraation with Fisher and Willis, Fisher asked him If he was sure he did not sign his name to • voooher as " Seddon.” Witness replied M'No,” Richard John Spottswood Seddon, japtain in the Defence Force, said he was »0t in Christohurob in Juoo of last year. tTs'- had never received payment of any mm in Chrlsioharoh or any other place '• for reorganising the defence store, This practically oonoluded the taking of the ) evidence.

WILLIS’S CONUNDRUM.

Wellington, Tuesday. Joseph Willis, one of the parties to the inanity, gave evidence yesterday before the Audit Commission. In reply to Mr '"'Fisher, he narrated the oircnmstances under whiohho, while aolerkin the Christchurch post office, saw and handled a voucher for over £7O, made out in favor of Captain R. J. S. Seddon, for reorganisation of defence stores in Wellington, Witness had no political feeling in the matter at all. Ho was not satisfaed with then Auditor-General’s inquiry, nor with the searoh that was being made for the vouober, for he believed that ii proper ■etitoh were made that voucher would be found. Dr Findlay: Assuming that the voucher was genuine, and there was no fraud in connection with it, would it have been recorded in the records? Witness: Well, yes; but apparently some gentleman knows how to got round » the Department. Mr Justice Edwards: Well, then, if there was a '{* receipted ” vouober there must have been a casque. Will yea tell ns of any process by which money can be taken out of the bank by Government cheque or any other cheque without there being a record of the transaction ? Mr Justice Donniston: And in any case its absence would be noticed in tho daily balance. - t - Witness : Yes ; but we can’t say, because the cheques have not been examined whether there was payment made or not. Dr. Findlay : And if the cheques are examined, what will you say ? Witness: Only that I saw. a genuine voucher, as I have said. Dr. Findlay : Can you suggest any explanation ? Witness : That’s a conundrum which I’ll leave to yon. Mr Justioe Edwards: You are not

merely a witness called to say that you saw Ibis vouoher, At your own request you were made a party to the inquiry, and we ask yon if yon have any theory to account toe the fact that a mistake can be made in tbo matter, not by one, but by so many persons ? Dr;:Findlay : if Captain Seddbn says he did not receive this money, will you eay that be is telling an untcuth ? Witness : All I can say is that I saw tbo vouoher,' and the Auditor-General’s • inquiry did not satisfy me. Dr. Findlay: Are you satisfied now that Oaptaln Seddon waa tolling the truth ? Witnoes : I don’t know wbat to say. What do you waut me to say ? Mr Flahjr : Your Honors will seo that witness ia in a peculiar position, because bis case is new under the consideration of the Premier as to whether he should remain in the eervioe or not. Mr, Justice Denniston said the Bench was inclined to the opinion that witness need not gnawer tho question, but not on account of: the reason whioh Mr Fisher had referred to. Mr Skorrett suggested that witness, as a reasonable man, would probabiy be satisfied if all the cheques and vouchors were, produoed, and he was enabled to see whether they correeponded with the names aud olaime in the Treasury and defence books, and no snoh vouoher ae that alleged was found. It would surely be demon-

strated that no eueh payment as was alloged had over been, mado out of thopnblb aooount. ~ c a , Witness said he would bo •■‘» h | | oa * h “| no suoh money oame oat of the Bans New Zealand in Ohristohuroh. In re-examination by Mr Fisher,witness [ said he had soon tho whole sy stem of Treesury and defence audit, and ho did not think it was ;ono that could boi oas y evaaod. Ho did not suggest o syatom of ! evasion, but ho had seen a vouchor such ns , he had desoribed to him. Th ® whole ma--1 ter was the greatest conundrum bad ever met with. It wtis I like a porso witnossmg a murder, [and then being unable to find the body of ‘he viotlm. Mr Justioo Edwards: Well, as far as theovidenoo has gone, it appears to bo Impossible for a genulno voucher to be squeezed through those books. It is just as if you had a heap containing, say, 100 sovereigns. There could nol bo 70 taken away without it being immediately discovered. , Witness, in answer to other questions, said the weight of evidenoe was against him In some respeols, and in the faoe Captain Seddon’s declaration that he had not signed tho vouoher he would accept it as oorreot. He had no desire to injure ( Captain Soddon, and indeed only knew | him by sight, but he etill maintained that , he sow a vouoher suoh as he desoribed,and , whioh had been signed by someone.