I.—lβ.

8

If. w. isitt.

11. Mr. B. McKenzie.] I am requested by the Committee, Mr. Isitt, to ask you formally to give this Committee the name of the person who gave you possession of this ballot-paper?— Yes. 12. You admit that this was the ballot-paper that was given to you [produced] ?—-Yes. 13. And it was a genuine ballot-paper, that could have been used at the Wellington Licensing Committee election ?—Yes, to the best of my knowledge. 14. You grasp the position and yet refuse to give the Committee the name of the person who gave you this ballot-paper?— Yes. I regret that I feel it my duty most respectfully to decline to give you the name. [Mr. Symes at this stage resumed the chair.] A. D. Thomson, S.M., late Returning Officer for City of Wellington, sworn and examined. (No. 3.) 15. The Chairman.] You were the Returning Officer at the last election for the Licensing Committee of Wellington ?—Yes, for the Licensing Committee election held in March last. 16. You have heard, no doubt, about the ballot-paper which is the subject of this inquiry?— Yes. 17. Have you ever seen that before [ballot-paper produced] ?—Yes; this ballot-paper was the one handed to me subsequently to the election. 18. And it is similar to the ballot-papers used at the election ?—Yes. 19. Is it a genuine ballot-paper? —It is. 20. Can you tell the Committee or give any evidence as to how it got into Mr. Isitt's possession ? —I have not the slightest idea. 21. You did not give it to him yourself?— No. On the day of the election I heard that there were several ballot-papers similar to those in use at the election in the hands of outsiders. That was the first I knew or heard of it. 22. Could any one besides the printer who had the contract for printing these ballot-papers have printed similar papers to that ? —I think not. lam satisfied that this is one of those that were printed by Mr. Ferguson, who was the contractor for printing the ballot-papers. As soon as I got this ballot-paper I took it to him and we examined it carefully together. He also was satisfied that it was one of those printed in his office, and one of the ballot-papers intended to be used at the election. He pointed out —and you will notice it yourselves —a break in the ruled line at the top of the paper. It is not a continuous line, but contains a little break at one end, and all the genuine ballot-papers have exactly the same defect; and, even though the printing were the same in all other respects, that is not a point that could be copied. He was quite satisfied that it was a genuine ballot-paper, and I was also. 23. It was an accident in the printing, and was not done intentionally ?—No; it was not intentional. I examined the other genuine ballot-papers and found that they were all the same. 24. There were other ballot-papers missing ?—Yes. 25. I think you say that there was one packet of 100 missing, or we have had it from somewhere that one packet could not be accounted for?— Yes; I think 16,000 ballot-papers were ordered, and they came to me in two parcels. I was anxious to get them as soon as possible, so as to get on with the counting and the arranging of them into several boxes, and one package came along a day or two before the other. The bulk of them came along last. After we had put the papers into the ballot-boxes I counted the remainder and found that there were 100 short of the 16,000. 26. You could not account for that except by assuming that the printer sent 100 short ?— That is the only way I could account for it; and I went along to the printer and saw the foreman, and asked him whether he could say if they had sent the number short in any way, but he said they were confident they had sent along the whole 16,000. The fact remains that the 100 have never turned up. 27. You had no reason to doubt yourself—you could not well have lost the 100 between your office and the printing-office ? —I think not. The whole of the papers were tied up in one big parcel. 28. Were they in bundles ? —They were in bundles of 500, and there were 100 short. 29. If a bundle had disappeared you would have been 500 short ?—Yes. 30. How were they checked? Were they delivered by the printer at your office?—By his servant. 31. Then, he had to deliver them to you? —Yes. 32. As they arrived did you check them over ?—Not as they arrived. 33. Did you give a receipt for the number? —No, not that I remember. I do no recollect giving any receipt. I would not give a receipt for the actual number without counting them. I might have given a receipt for the parcel, but Ido not quite recollect. The first lot that came I did count at the time and found them to be correct. 34. How many would be in that lot ?—Not more than 2,000, I think. The first lot was in a small parcel, and it was only after we had checked the papers into hundreds, and put 750 into each ballot-box —that was the number I allotted to each ballot-box—that I found I could only make 15,900 of them. My assistant and myself opened up the bundles of 500 and put them into hundreds, and checked each other's count. For instance, if I counted one lot of 100 he checked me, and if my assistant counted another lot I checked him, and by that means we counted the whole lot, and put them into the ballot-boxes. 35. You counted each lot you received from the printer ?—Yes. 36. And they were all right ? —-Yes, except for the 100. 37. How long after they had been delivered to you did you find them 100 short?—l should say at the most two days. The election was on the Wednesday, and I think I got them on the Monday.