I—2a

20

265. By whom ?—I do not remember by whom—there was nothing unusual about the voucher we saw. 266. Could it have been paid unless it was certified to ?—No, certainly not; but if had not been properly certified to we would have at once drawn the attention of somebody to it. 267. And could not Mr. Larcombe or those other two who thought it was irregular or improper not have certified to the man who signed it ?—No; those particulars were the less prominent of the whole thing. 268. Then, when the voucher was complete, who sent them from your office ?—They are returned to the Paymaster-General. 269. Is there no record taken of what they are forwarding ? —Only a copy of the record I have shown you—only the number and amount. 270. Is it in the letter-book?—lt is in the rough memorandum-book, a copy of which I have shown you. 271. There is no letter accompanying them ?—No letter with them. 272. If they went astray they are lost ?—Yes. 273. That is the way it is done in the office ?—Yes. 274. Mr. Taybr.] If you went to the Audit Office could they tell you a single person to whom public money is paid without goitig to another Department to turn up the voucher?—No, they cannot. 275. Was yourself, or Larcombe, or West, or Lundon permitted to examine or be present at the examination of each particular witness called to give evidence or not?— No. 276. Mr. Mills.] When the claimant came for this money —say Captain Seddon—would not the Postmaster ask who he was before signing—would he sign it for any one who came in ?—He is supposed to satisfy himself as to the identity of the payee before countersigning the cheque. 277. Apparently the Postmaster must have been satisfied that Captain Seddon got the cheque before he signed it, and before Captain Seddon signed the voucher ?—That is so. 278. Mr. Fisher.] With reference to that question of the signature, it is a fact that Mr. Mcßeth frequently countersigns a cheque, and does not see the voucher receipted ?—Yes. 279. And in many cases does not see the man who signs the voucher? —Yes; he does not attend to anybody, but prefers to leave it to the clerk. 280. Assuming Captain Seddon cashed the cheque at the Bank of New Zealand and that you had power to search the Bank of New Zealand to-morrow, could you find the cheque? —We could find the cheque. 281. But you could not identify it with Captain Seddon?—■Nβ, I should require the number of the cheque 232. You could not walk into the Bank of New Zealand and find it ?—No. 283. And Mr. Litchfield does not know whether he has that cheque here ?—lt is quite impossible for him to know. 284. Have you any idea if that is the signature you saw before [signature on document produced] ?—The " E " in this signature and the "J" I can remember very distinctly. This signature is like the one I saw. I can remember the " E"—the top of it was curved to the left. It might easily be the signature if it had started a little bit straighter—a little more back-hand. 285. You are quite certain that vouchers are transmitted from the Treasury to the Post Office and back to the Treasury without there being any covering letter at all ? —Yes. 286. The bare vouchers go in an envelope? —Yes. 287. And if one voucher went astray it would be lost ?—Yes. 288. The substitution of a voucher would be the only possible theory?—-That appears to me to be so —there may be others. 289. The fact of the matter so far as the voucher you saw is this, that if Captain Seddon never signs vouchers "E. J. S. Seddon," and the one you saw was, then the document you saw must have been a forgery?—lf he never signed, I suppose it would be, unless he signed the voucher on this particular occasion "E.J. S. Seddon." He signs other things "E.J. S. Seddon." 290. Have you got the dates on which Captain Seddon was in Christchurch during the period of your affidavits ?—I could get them. He was in Christchurch several times during the period. 291. Mr. Warburton extended to you every possible courtesy, and strained the order of reference to assist you ?—Yes ; he was most kind. 292. But at the same time he would not allow you to see any book ?—He would allow me to see nothing but the voucher. 293. Not the register ?—Nothing of any kind. 294. Mr. Davey.] In regard to the question of the signature, is that the signature you saw ? —The signature I saw was very like this signature. I would not say I could identify that with the signature I saw. 295. Mr. Kidd.] Do I understand you to say that you have the dates of Captain Seddon's visits to Christchurch —you denied that when I asked you ?—I cannot say from memory. 296. Yet you say that you have them somewhere ? —I took it out at different times. 297. You have taken sufficient notice of his movements ?—Since the inquiry. I say now Ido not know, but I believe I could find in my home some record of the particulars, because I took them after the inquiry. 298. How did you get them ?—I got them from the papers—l went through the files. 299. It would be also reasonable to suppose that if a large sum of money was waiting for him he would be there, and if it was not in Christchurch he could wire to Wellington that the money be forwarded to him ? —Yes. 300. Because you make a point that payment was made in a different place to where the work was done?— Yes.