I.—lc.

8

[BT. HON. B. J. SEDDON

temporarily employed to carry out the necessary work connected with the same. This work has up to the present been carried on by an officer of the headquarters staff, but to the detriment of other business, nor is contingent work up to date. It is most important that matters connected with the contingents should be adjusted without undue delay. The period for which the officer will be required will be three months, and I recommend pay at the rate of £4 per week." This is signed by General Babington, and is minuted, "Approved.—9th July, 1902.—W.H.-J." That is the authority. We do not want to go further than to ask whether there was Ministerial authority. The Ministerial authority was for this particular work, and it was reckoned that it was worth £4 a week—that an ordinary officer of the staff getting 10s. a day could do it, and there was £1 a week in addition to that. The work was intended for Captain McGee. There is no question as to who was responsible. In accordance with this authority I offered the £4 a week for the three months 4. The Chairman.] I understood you to say that it was a general order issued to all officers that they were to submit;monthly vouchers for their pay ?—Yes. 5. Then Captain Clark would naturally know that it was a general order ? — He was working in the office alongside of Colonel Chaytor, and I will call the officers and ask them as to what the practice is. I may say that I have one or two more vouchers that I intend to submit later on—l refrain from doing so at present—vouchers which, I think, ought to have been submitted to you at the last meeting, but which were held back. 6. Mr. B. McKenzie.] What the Department want to establish now is that Captain Clark was aware of this Ministerial authority for his employment. He denies that ?—-Of course, if Captain Clark denies that it will not alter the position so far as the Government are concerned. General Babington has distinctly stated in his memorandum that the instructions were given, and given on a particular day, for Lieutenant Clark to go on with this work. I will find out what the instructions were, probably. As to why this Ministerial authority was kept back from Lieutenant Clark— the feature of this is that presumably Lieutenant Clark was not a millionaire—he had sent in his voucher for a month's work before, and had been paid for it; and why did he not send in vouchers each month after that instead of going on without doing so? Ido not suppose he thought that the Government—or rather the Imperial Government—were so hard up that they could not pay his salary from month to month ! I may say that the job was a good one. I intend to bring evidence to show what was a reasonable time for the work to be done in, and what was done in the case of other contingents. £1 12s. 6d. a day is extremely good pay. 7. Mr. Barber.] You put in two vouchers for £600-odd and £422. These vouchers were certified to by some one ? —They are not recommended. 8. But they are certified to by some one ?—No, they are not. The voucher for £277 is certified to by Major Smith, and the two vouchers for £50 each by Colonel Porter. 9. In reference to the question that Mr. McKenzie asked just now, you inferred that Captain Clark had no right to assume that Major Smith ,in telling him to go on with this work, had authority for doing it. I would like to point out what would be the state of the Civil Service if subordinates were allowed to question the authority of their superior officers in giving instructions to them to carry out work ?—I hope that there are no cases of this kind going on. The first thing to do is to tell a person his duties, and in the second place to tell him what he is to get. If a man were put on without being told what he was to get, he might claim £2 a day. 10. Captain Clark was paid for doing similar work previously, up to a certain period, and was then told to go on with similar work. It would not be right for him to question the authority of his superior officer —to ask him what authority he had for telling him to go on with the work. It "was the business of the superior officer not to have employed the man without authority ?—My answer to that is this: The Imperial authorities would say : " You are paying for similar work 10s. a day; why should this work cost £1 12s. 6d. a day? Why should you pay 12s. 6d. a day for detention in Wellington, when the person is resident in Wellington, as shown by the roll? " 11. Mr. B. McKenzie.] But Captain Clark was working for the New Zealand Government, not for the Imperial authorities ? —No ; it was Imperial work. 12. He was employed by your servant, any way?—No; he was simply told to go on doing it. The making-up of the rolls and so on was all Imperial work. 13. Do you not pay him ? —No. Whatever I certify to will be paid out of the fund given to us by our principals. 14. A trust fund ?—Yes; and as trustees we are bound to keep within reasonable limits. 15. The Chairman.] All the officers and men in the contingents from the Sixth understood that they were Imperial men and officers, did they not ?—Yes. The compilation of the roll for the Seventh Contingent was done on board the ship between Africa and here, completed, and handed in by Colonel Davies. 16. Captain Clark.] Mr. Seddon has stated that the New Zealand Government are acting as agents for the Imperial Government. I would like to ask Mr. Seddon how it comes then that Mr. Hall-Jones is competent to give an authority for three months' employment at £4 a week. Has he got the Imperial Government's sanction to do that ?—Yes ; he was the Minister of Defence for the time being. We made the appointments to all our contingents; that authority still remains until the thing is completed. We have instructions to complete this from the Imperial Government under certain limits. There is a paymaster appointed, and the Minister for the time being—in this case the Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones —-was acting as Defence Minister, and it was within his authorities to give this approval, and on that the Paymaster would pay. 17. Previous officers having been paid at the rate of officers for the rank which they held, why should there be any special reason for reducing the pay to £4 a week ?—Each such officer was still an officer of his contingent, and you were treated the same in respect to your contingent. After you had completed your own contingent's work this was general work for the other contingents, and it was different entirely from finishing up the same duties as an officer. The alteration of