THE WAIRAU PETITION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 225, 21 March 1912, Page 5

THE WAIRAU PETITION.

THE HEARING CONTINUED. SOME INTERESTING EVIDENCE. By Telegraph —Press Association. Blenheim, Wednesday. The hearing of evidence in the petition against the return of Mr. R. McCallum for the Wairau seat was continued to-day. Eileen O'Sullivan, daughter of one of the petitioners, said that on January 8 Parker called at her father's house and conversation turned to the subject of the electi'on. Mr. Sinclair proceeded to ask what Parker said, but Mr. Skerrett objected that Mr. Sinclair wanted to show that Parker made admissions in regard to hiring the cars to Mr. McCallum. His Honor said this was not evidence against McCallum, if the agency that existed on election day had ceased afte/ the election. Witness was ordered to stand down until Parker had been recalled. Parker having left for Nelson, counsel asked that he be sent for. The registrar was instructed to telegraph and order his return. Blenheim. Last Night. Regarding the cause concerning McCallum's expenses, McCallum testified that his expenses at the first ballot were £ll6 3s 3d. His secretary gave his services free, and he had no secretary at Picton. He had never paid Mr. Newman, of Picton, £ls in connection with the election. He had paid no rent for anyone in Picton. He did not obtain quantities of liquor from Mr. Campbell, hotel-keeper at Picton, and never took any liquor on his trips down the sounds. To Mr. Skerrett: He was on friendly tjerms with E. Parker, and asked him to lend him (witness) his cars at election time. He, however, let him know immediately that he couldn't make o>ny payment for them. Parker demurred at first, but finally consented, stating that he must keep one for Mr. Duncan. There was no secret understanding that Parker, , was to be paid. Hi also saw Parker, who was the largest shareholder, in reference to securing a share of the vehicles of the HcKenzie Carrying Co. Parljer, who was perfectly willing, re- 1 ferred witness to the company's manager, who said he would do the best he could. When Sir. Masey. received the company's account, witness went and saw Hogan, who informed him that the account should not have been sent, and took it back. With regard to the Grovetown incident, he said that Sutherland, his chairman, asked him and several friends to have a drink after the m«et- , ing. When they got to the hotel they found it full. Sutherland then decided to shout for all hands. Witness did not I employ Morrison to canvass for him be- , tw&en the first and second ballots, nor i did his agents. j William Henry Newman said that for. ai time he acted as secretary in Picton; for Mr. McCallum. He did not terminate the arrangement because Mr. McI Callum refused to pay him. I.'t was after he resigned the secretaryship that he was offered and accepted the position of deputy returning officer at Te Awaite. Mr. McCallum had no hand in getting him the appointment. He did • no canvassing for Mr McCallum, and had received no money from him during the lapt six months, but he had received ' £ls from a client of Messrs. McCallum • and Mills in security of liia life assur- • ance policy. This was early in October last. Ethelbert H. Best, motor-car proprietor, said* that the use of one of his cars was given gratuitiously to Mr. McCallum on each day. Jiohn W. Campbell, licensee of the Federal Hotel at Picton, said that Mr. McCallum did not obtain any supplies of liquor from him. Mr. Sinclair then with the . charge that at Mirza, between the first and second ballots, Archibald McCallum, respondent's brother, gave the electors ' money to buy liquor for the purpose of ' treating and bribing .such electors to • vote for respondent. i Frank Dodson, late member of the firm of Dodson Company, brewers, said that on November 20 he gave his cellarman an order for 18 gallons of beer, entered as "J. Hargood, Ward, and McCallum," and consigned it at the railway to Hargood. Frank Bull gave him the order and told him the other day he had the money to pay him. ' He' had never been abie to find Hargood. James Chinn, manager of the Dodson; ' Brewery, said that some days after the' beer had been supplied Norman Dodson, another member of the firm, asked wit- ' ness not to charge the beer, and accordingly he didn't transfer the entry to the ledger. Norman Dodson corroborated this, and said that it was at Frank Dodson's request. He didn't know J. Hargood. In regard to supplying liquor at Okai rimo for the purpose of influencing votes, I George Noble, a farmer, said that after i Mr. McCallum's meeting there on No- > vember 25 a number of electors had a i drink, for which he understood Mr. McCallum but he was not certain. Respondent was talking to somebody outside the hotel when witness had his drink. David 'Henderson, a farmer, said that > he and a friend or two walked into the t hotel, where Mr. A. McCallum asked E them to have a drink. If McCallum had not asked them they would have had a drink by themselves. They generally looked for a drink from political candidates during the election campaign. Mr. Sinclair then reverted to the Pari ker case, Edward Parker having returnt ed from his farm. Parker said that he 1 had told Mr. O'Sullivan and family that Mr. Bull had kept witness to his agreement to let Mr. McCallum have the cars for the election. He probably told fhem that the cars were engaged for the next electi'on. f Mr. Sinclair wished to ask the witness . a question regarding the hire of a motor . car by Healy (Mr. Duncan's secretary), but Mr. Skerrett objected, and His Honor upheld the objection. On the charges of promising and paying money to Frank Morrison, in return for his services between the first and second ballots, William Henry Macey . denied l that he was instructed at a meet- . ing of Liberal supporters after the first . ballot to engage Morrison to canvass ' for votes for Mr. McCallum. He went to'Morrison's house one night, as Morrison had promised previous to the first ballot to do all he could to assist Mr. McCallum if Mr. Wiffen, of whose committee he was chairman, was defeated at the first ballot, and asked Mr. Morrison if he could' give a good deal of his time to working in Mr. McCallum's interests. Mr. Morrison said he would if he could arrange his work, and came to see him e next morning. It was arranged that Mr. Morrison should accompany Mr. Macartr - ne.y and address the meeting at Renwick that evening. Mr. Morrison aecom- ' panied Mr. A. McCallum to Seddon on Tuesday. He gave Mr. Morrison to undertand that neither Mr. R. McCallum nor witness could offer him payment. Archibald McCallum said that on the s, Tuesday before the second ballot, Mr. a Morrison accompanied him on a motor- -- car trip to Seddon and Ward, if To Mr. Justice Williams: He neither i- promised nor paid Mr. Morrison any 5- money. l- To Mr. Skerrett: He was no party to sending beer to Mirza and knew of none going either there or to any other part S of the electorate. i- Frank Morrison said that on the occad sion of the conversation with Mr. Macey id the latter did not agree to pay him. He didn't go to Mr. Wiffen and consult him

as to whether witness should take the position of canvasser for Mr. McOallum at a remuneration of £1 per day. He might have told a good many that he was getting £1 a day in order to deliberately mislead them. He did not get one penny from anyone, nor did he admit getting £4 anonymously through the post. To Mr. Skerrett: In December. after the election Mr. Sinclair and two others came to the farm where witness was working and said he had come on election business. Mr. Sinclair produced a paper containing the words, "F. Morrison, £1 per day." He then told witness that he wantedi him to help iji upsetting the election and that he was representing Carr and others. Witness, told Mr. Sinclair he did not see that he could do any good, as he hadn't received any money. Mr. Sinclair said, "You have." Witness again denied this, and then Mr. Sinclair said, "When. 1 you go to town on Saturday see Mr. Macey and get the money." Witness said that no money was coming to him. When in town on Saturday he didn't call on Mr. Macey. On December 24 Mr. Sinclair called at his house and asked him if he had got any money from Mr. Macey. Witness said that he had received no monev from Mr. Macey. Then Mr. Sinclair asked him if he had a "nip" in the house, and he said he hadn't. He next saw Mr. Sinclair on Ppfnmber 29 at Renwick. Mr. Sinclair told him that he had brought a man to take witness's place so that he could go to town and get the money. Witness replied tha;t he was capable of doing his own work himself. Mr. Sinclair then said, "What would be nicer than having the next two days off. You could loaf about town, casually bump up against Mr. Macey and ask him for the money owing to you." Witness said that Mr. Macey would want to know what money. Mr. Sinclair said, "You know there's money coming to you." Witness again denied this. Mr. Sinclair then told him that he was very foolish, for if he helped to upset the election there was a good thing in it for him, a. good lump sum. Mr. Sinclair then offered him whisky, and after having a drink together Mr. Sinclair gave him the remainder of the contents (produced). He saw Mr. Sinclair again at about half-past five on New Year's morning near witness' hous<\ Mr. | Sinclair > said, "Have you got the money vet?" Witness said, "No; he washed his hands 'of all that dirty business." He didn't see Mr. McCallum or Mr. Macey from the .evening of the second ballot till after the publication of the petition on January 18. He had made statements about being paid before the publication of the petition.' The Court adjourned till 10 o'clock on Thursday morning.