1.—9

62

94. The second case was then gone into ?—Yes; and all the evidence for the Crown was given in full, and everything possible was raked up against me. It was shown there was no case at all, and I was not called upon. 95. The defence was not called upon ?—That is so. 96. They got Mr. Harper over specially to act for the Crown prosecution ?—Yes ; and it was Mr. Harper who found out that the two offences had been made one by some Act. 97. Mr. Duthie.] Can you tell us whether on receipt of the auditors' report you resigned, and gave up your keys ?—Yes. 98. From the investigation by the auditors up to that date you had the keys, and were in charge ? —Yes. 99. And were all the documents and books kept locked up ?—I had a key of the office, and I always locked the office when I went out. There was another key in the building, and the night-watchman had access to the office, but there was a safe. In the first instance they said there was no money in the safe, but in another part they say that the funds were there, and that there' was £1 more than there ought to have been. 100. I want to know about the keys : had you the keys of the safe ?—Yes, up to that date. 101. Did the Mayor have a key of the safe?—No, but we did not keep the vouchers or anything of that kind in the safe—simply the books and the money. 102. Then, these vouchers, not being kept in a safe, were practically open to any one getting access to the office ?—Yes, they were. 103. And I suppose occasionally you went out and did not lock the office-door after you?— That is probable. As a rule I locked it, but sometimes I went across the street without doing 50..:. 104. Are you aware that a number of vouchers were missing ?—No, I do not know anything about it. 105. Mr. Morrison.] You said, in reply to a question by Mr. Seddon, that Nathaniel Seddon, after terminating his engagement as a permanent hand with the Kumara Borough Council, was continued in employment by you ? —Yes, at day-work. 106. Only in casual work ?—Yes, I paid him by the day, but there being continual work required he got full wages. 107. He was getting regular employment ?—Yes. I had works to carry out and employed him. 108. Mr. Massey.] You told us that the cause of the trouble was on account of it being your duty as Eeturning Officer to proceed against a man named Simmons for taking a seat on the Council without being properly qualified?— Yes. 109. Will you kindly give us an explanation of what you meant ? —lt is only lately that I was looking over that paper which I put in just now. It was my duty as Eeturning Officer to prepare the roll of burgesses, and I found that this man was not qualified, and so struck him off the roll. He was sitting in the Council illegally, and another man proceeded against him. 110. Do you remember what the reason was —was he not a ratepayer, and had not paid his rates ?—Yes, I think that was the case. 111. And he was a member of the Borough Council at the time?— Yes, he was a member of the Borough Council. 112. Have you any idea what date that was? —No; the books would show exactly when he was elected. 113. What was this man's business?—He was a tinsmith. 114. Do you remember anything about his being given work by the Borough Council in the capacity of a tinsmith? —I do not remember it. 115. You are quite clear about the first point, that you proceeded against him to strike him off the roll ? —Yes, I am certain of that. f 116. And you think that thereby you incurred his enmity?— Yes; and not only his enmity by striking him off, but the enmity of other members, because it affected their majority. 117. You told us, in answer to Mr. Seddon, that you never paid any moneys to him on account of Nathaniel Seddon?—No, certainly not. 118. Do you remember anything of an order having been given by Nathaniel Seddon to pay all moneys owing to Nathaniel Seddon to Mr. E. J. Seddon?—l think there was a small order before the time covered by the auditors. I think Nathaniel Seddon went away at that time, and a week's wages or a month's wages were due, and I think he gave such an order. 119. Do you remember the date ?—No. 120. But still there, was a document in existence?— Yes, and if I remember rightly Nathaniel Seddon returned, after a short absence, and got the money himself. 121. Have you any idea whether the document is in existence now ? —No. 122. You said that the Borough Council was in financial difficulties?— Yes. 123. Had it an overdraft at the bank ?—1 cannot say. i: -.124. Did the bank refuse to honour its cheques ? —I do not think it would be so foolish as to draw a cheque if it knew it would not be honoured. 125. Why do you say the Borough Council was in difficulties?— Because we had to pay wages by bill. We would never have done that if we had had the money. Besides that, the chief source of revenue in those days was from hotel-licenses, and sometimes these had not come in. 126. What date did you receive the license-fees —when did they fall due ? —I cannot say ; but icense-fees are all due on a certain date. 127. Were there many hotels in Kumara?—Yes, a great many. 128. Have you any idea of their approximate number ?-—About fifty. 129. What was the amount of the license-fee?—£4o,