45

I.—2b

240. Was it a copy ?— Yes, I think so. 241. Typewritten, was it? —No, I have an impression I saw a bluo paper, written and stamped. 242. Mr. Hutchison.] Do you remember the date when you first interested yourself in Mr. Wrigg?—lt would he previous to last session—probably two or three months before last session. 24:5. The Chairman.) That would be April, 1897 ?—Yea. 244. Mr. Hutchison. j These testimonials are dated July and August?-—But last year thore were two sessions. 245. These testimonials are dated the end of July and August?— Probably there is a little confusion in my mind as to the exact month, but I know it was two or three months before the meeting of Parliament, and as the second session was held in September, the dates you mention are correct. 246. It would be about August?— Yes, very probably. 247. Are you aware, then, that soon after -some time in September, 1 think—an intimation was made by the defence Minister declining the application ? Are you aware of that?—l cannot answer to that, but I know that the Hon. the Defence Minister was not at one time favourably disposed. 248. There was a letter from the Defence Minister dated the 27th September, 1897, intimating that the application was declined. You had interested yourself in Mr. Wrigg's behalf prior to September ?—Yes. 249. Did you renew that after September ? -Yes. 250. Here is the letter dated the 27th September, 1897. iSoo Exhibit No. 24.] You renewed your application for Mr. Wrigg after that, and organized a meeting ?—-Yes, the deputation waited on the Premier about the 11th of November. 251. 1 suppose you wrote afterwards on the subject?—[ did not. Ido not remember writing any letters. 252. Who composed the deputation to the Premier?—l think there were fourteen or fifteen ; nearly every Auckland member was present. 253. I suppose Mr. Holland was there?— Mr. Holland, Mr. Monk, Mr. Crowther, and Mr. Lawry. 254. As Wrigg says in one of his letters, he had " all the Auckland members fighting for" him?—l do not know that they were actually fighting for him. 255. Mr. Monk.] Do you say I was there, Mr. McCullough?—l think so. 256. What meeting was that ?—Where we went into the Premier's room about Mr. Wrigg's claims for the New Zealand Cross. Mr. Monk : No, I was not there. 257. Mr. Hutchison.] About this blue paper with a stamp on it, Mr. McCullough, what kind of stamp had it ?—lt was an embossed stamp. 258. Would it be a stamp they put on deeds, or an official stamp ?—lt was a blue paper with an embossed stamp near the top. 259. Who produced it to you ?—I think it wonld have been Mr. Wrigg, if any one did. 260. Was it purported to be camp orders, or something of that sort ?—Yes, that is the impression on my mind. It is certainly not that document which is on the table. 261. Mr. Monk.] Are you in any way an expert in military matters and regulations?—l would not like to say that I was au expert. I served for fifteen or sixteen years in the Volunteers, and know as much as any ordinary individual. 262. Mr. Field.] I understood you to say on Mr. Wrigg's statement and after perusal of his papers, and after gleaning information from others, thai. Mr. Wrigg was entitled to the Gross ?— That if so. 263. For the information you relied entirely upon Mr. Wrigg, and that information is the groundwork upon which you based your recommendation ? —Certainly. 264. The Chairman.] How many members of both Houses from the Provincial District of Auckland formed the deputation to wait on the Premier and the Minister of Defence in reference to conferring the New Zealand Cross on Mr. Wrigg?—Certainly not less than a dozen. 265. Did the members volunteer to accompany you ?—Yes; they accompanied me. I asked them, and explained the object in view; and I also mentioned that the deputation was organized at the request of a number of persons in Auckland who thought it advisable to wait upon the Premier. I saw each member, and arranged the hour and da> they were to accompany me to the Premier's office for the purpose of laying this matter before him and the Minister of Defence, and that is all the influence I used. 266. The Committee may infer each member of the deputation knew the object of the deputation ?—Certainly. 267. Mr. Moore.] say each member of the deputation knew the purport of the deputation ?—Yes. 268. Was that from their own knowledge or any statement that you made to them in reference to the matter yourself 9 —Oh, I dare say it would be owing to statements I had made to them and the papers I had shown them. 269. Merely on your own representation to them ?—And from their general knowledge of the matter. I did not influence the members in any way. 270. The ChairmanA Is the Committee to infer each member of the deputation was as well acquainted with the circumstances of the case as you were yourself ?—-I cannot answer as to how much they knew. 271. They had a knowledge of the circumstances of the case?— Yes. 272. They had a knowledge ol the circumstances of the case apart from that which you gave them ?-—Certainly; for months the Auckland papers had references to the matter of Mr. Wrigg being recommended for the New Zealand Cross.