THEFT OF DOCUMENT.

Taranaki Daily News, 27 October 1922, Page 4

THEFT OF DOCUMENT.

EVIDENCE f \ DAIRY POOL. STOLEN FROM ROCKED DRAWER. GRAVE INCIDENT IN HOUSE. (By Wjre.—Parliamentary Reporter.) Wellington, Last Night. The theft of an important document in the Parliamentary Buildings was reported to the House this afternoon. A copy oi the evidence taken by the special committee that considered the Dairy Pool Bill had been lent to Mr. R. Masters (Stratford), one of the members of the committee. Mr. Masters had placed the copy in e locked drawer, and subsequently found th< drawer broken open and the papers missing Four copies of the evidence had been type written. The documents were confiden tial until they were presented to the House.

The Speaker said he had already received a letter from Mr. Masters reporting the incident, and the clerk assistant and the clerk of the committee had also made reports on the subject. They said that the condition of the lock showed that it had been roughly tampered with. “This, of course, is a very serious matter,” said the Speaker, “and I shall have the fullest inquiry made with the object of discovering who had committed this breach of the rules of the House. I shall do everything I can to see that the matter is cleared up.” The Prime Minister said he thought members understood that if publication took place as a result of the document being stolen a very serious breach of privilege would be committed. He suggested it would be well to communicate with the police and let the affair be investigated by the detectives, in order that the perpetrator of the outrage might be found ami punished. Mr. Masters briefly stated the circumstances. He had borrowed the copy of the evidence, in order that be might study a certain portion. He had locked it in a drawer, with some private papers, on Wednesday. He found on the following morning that the drawer had been forced open and the document had been removed. He hoped that every effort would be made to discover the offender.

The Speaker that the evidence had not been laid before the House, and therefore was confidential. It would be a breach of privilege for any newspaper to publish the evidence.