I.—6b

20

Hon. Mr. Seddon : The last few years. 433. Mr. Wright.] In the " Conclusion" paragraph you give figures showing the loan expenditure during several years, and they run down to a constantly-diminishing quantity?—ln the copy of the Statement as laid on the table of the House that is so. In the copy published in the Appendices the amount for 1891-92 is larger than for 1890-91. 434. The correct figures, £391,000 instead of £295,000, would not bear out the construction placed upon this paragraph ?—I do not at all agree—l think I did the Minister an injustice in not giving him the correct figures to start with, because he could have made the paragraph very much stronger than he did if he had had the correct figures. The self-reliance of the Government and the heroism of the colonists is surely very much more displayed if the expenditure, without borrowing, is greater than if it is less. Mr. G. Hutchison : This opinion may be valuable, but you were not asked for it. Hon. Mr. Seddon : It is the opinion of an expert. Mr. G. Hutchison : That may be, but it is an opinion given in zeal. The Chairman : Is it a proper thing for a member of the Committee to comment upon his conduct ? Mr. G. Hutchison : The order of reference sends us Mr. Blow's correspondence as a basis of inquiry, consequently his conduct is necessarily before this Committee. The Chairman : No doubt that is perfectly right, but is it a proper thing for a member of Committee to comment upon his conduct here ? Mr. G. Hutchison: I claim to do that when I consider he is volunteering an opinion. Hon. Mr. Seddon : It is my duty as a Minister to protect our officers. Are members to express opinions that will go to the country —for we have a reporter here —that a witness is showing zeal, as though ho were endeavouring in his answers to screen a Minister, or colour matters? As the question was put, an opinion was asked for, and the officer had a right to fearlessly express his opinion. If he was wrong, the question should have been stopped. It was simply in answer to the question that the officer gave his opinion, and, having given it, it is scarcely in -keeping that such expressions of opinion should be offered by members. I hope they will not be, otherwise officers will be browbeaten. If our officers hear that this is to be allowed, we shall put them in a position I should not like to see them in. I hope, therefore, there will be a refraining from such expressions. The Chairman : I consider it my duty to protect a witness within certain lines, and in performance of that duty I rule it an improper thing to say this witness is manifesting undue zeal. Mr. G. Hutchison : I did not say " undue " at all. I say that it is zeal that he shows, and I shall claim the right of commenting where it is called for. 435. Mr. Wright.] The insertion of the correct figures in this concluding paragraph of £391,612 would have shown an increase over the expenditure of the preceding year ?—Yes ; I have already stated that. 436. That being so, would it have been correct to say that there was an enormous diminution in loan expenditure ?—Yes, I think so, clearly, because the Minister showed figures extending over several years, which show a diminution of 50 per cent. 437. Yes, if the object was to draw a comparison over several years. But the diminution would have been greater, evidently, if you had gone back to a much longer period ?—Doubtless ; but the Minister's apparent object was to draw attention to the self-reliant policy of his Government as compared with the policy of his predecessors. It therefore would have been useless to have carried the comparison back a great number of years. 438. And he succeeded in doing that by substituting the figures £295,978 instead of the correct figures ? Not at all. I think the Minister's argument is very much weakened by the unfortunate substitution of these figures. 439. You have stated it is usual to make numerous alterations in the Public Works Statements after they have been submitted to the House?—l do not think I said that exactly. 440. Yes, I took that down yesterday, and it is confirmed by Sir John Hall's question. Hon. Mr. Seddon : Sir John Hall's question does not tally with that. Hon. Sir J. Hall: What I have down is this : " There are other instances." Hon. Mr. Seddon : You have " numerous," Mr. Wright. Mr. Bloio : That would be distinctly wrong. 441. Mr. Wright.] " Numerous alterations," I have. Do you still put it as numerous? —No; not numerous. 442. Mr. G. Hutchison.] I think'he did say it, but qualified it afterwards ?—Possibly I may have used the word " numerous " in referring to all the Public Works Statements collectively, but not, I think, of numerous alterations having been made in any one Statement. Taking them all in all, numerous alterations have been made. But Ido not think I used the word " numerous "at all. 443. The Chairman!] Do you see the figures in the last column there—lB9l-92 ? —Yes. 444. Were those figures handed in by the Accountant to the Minister or to you ?—They were certainly handed to myself. 1 got them from our Accountant and showed them to the Minister. 445. Hon. Sir J. Hall.] And upon that he wrote his Statement ?—Yes, it is £295,978—the old figure. ■

Wednesday, 16th August, 1893. Mr. Samuel Costall examined. 446. The Chairman.] What position do you occupy, Mr. Costall ?—I am Government Printer. 447. What position did you occupy twelve months ago? —Chief Clerk and Accountant. 448. Are you aware there was an alteration made in the Public Works Statement after it had been laid on the table of the House ? —I am.