BRIBERY ALLEGATIONS.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 444, 2 March 1912, Page 5

BRIBERY ALLEGATIONS.

PRIVILEGE COMMITTEE'S REPORT. The work of the Privilege CommitI tee, appointed by the House of Representatives to investigate the allegations of bribery brought forward in the House last week, has be*n compiled, and the report of the committee was furnished to the House on Thursday. Counsel were heard in regard to the following extract from a letter read by Mr Massey : "You may remember my introducing you to young , son of ——, one of my party who do not follow Ward. He worked hard and loyally for us in Parnell, Ponsonby, and especially in Grey Lynn. He now assures me that Payne has been souared, £IOOO, to support Ward on a no-confi-dence motion. So sure is he of the correctness the information that his dad has offered level money up to £IOO on Payne voting against you, anc j does not waste money on bets without some reason." The ccmmitttee asked Mr Massey to produce the letter, but this he refused to do. Sir Joseph Ward made a statement that to the effect that he did not wish to have the matter pressed. The committee also heard evidence as to the statement by Mr Payne that he had been offered a bribe by Mr McMasters to vote for the Ward Government. Reporting upon the first order of ' reference, which related to the writing and publishing of the letter quoted by Mr Massey, the committee stated that it "is unable to inquire further" into th p matter contained in the order of reference by reason of the facts that Mr Massey, having been asked to produce the letter referred to, and to g've the name of the writer, respectfully declined to produce the letter, or disclose the name of the writer. Sir Joseph Ward moved: "That in the opinion of this House a breach of privilege has been committed by the witness (Mr Massey, M.P.) refusing to produce to the committee a letter dated February 12th, from which he had quoted in the course of a speech delivered by him in the House on February 23rd, and that the House is of opinion that without establishing a j precedent, further consideration of the matter should be postponed." The Prime Minister said that probably looking at all the circumstances this was the most sensible course to follow, for the reason that Mr Massey had publicly withdrawn and apologised for his mistake in quoting from the letter in the House. Since the leader of the Opposition had. acted in this way it would be a mistake for the House to insist upon its rights by forcing the production of the letter. The motion was carried on the voices. Upon the second order of reference, the statement by Mr Massey that Mr Payne was reported to have been "squared" by Mr Vigor Brown and Sir' Joseph Ward at Napier, the committee reported that after hearing the evidence it was satisfied that there was no truth in the alleged charge made against Mr Brown, the Prime Minister, and Mr Payne. The Hon. J. A. Millar moved: "That in respect of the report of Privilege Committee No. 2 the report be endorsed by the House." The motion was carried. The statement by Mr Payne that Charles McMaster had been authorised to bribe him was the subject of the thrd order of reference. The committee was of opinion that the evidence taken on oath as to the words U3ed is conflicting. Mr Payne, the report proceeded, say the words used were: "What, do you think! I have been authorised to offer you from £SOO to £IOOO if you will go—l think those were the words —with the Ward Administration." Mr McMaster denies the use of the above words, and says the words used were: "That I (McMaster) cou'd get £SOO if I could handle him (Payne)." There _ being no further evidence on that point the committee is unable to say what the exact words used were. The evidence leads the committee to conclude that whatever statement was made was not taken seriously by either Mr Payne or by Mr McMaster at the time it was made.