1.—.8

1877. NEW ZEALAND.

PRIVILEGE COMMITTEE. (REPORT ON THE CASE OF H.H. LUSK, ESQ., MEMBER FOR FRANKLIN, TOGETHER WITH MINUTES OF EVIDENCE AND APPENDICES.)

Brought up sth October, 1877, and ordered to be printed.

The Committee on Privilege in the case of Mr. Lusk have the honor to report that they have unanimously agreed to the following resolutions, and taken evidence, which is attached to this Report. Resolutions. 1. That Mr. Lusk has received the sum of £50 from the City Corporation of Auckland for services rendered previous to and during the session of 1876, in connection with the Municipal Act and the Auckland Waterworks Act. 2. That certain clauses appear, from Mr. Lusk's evidence, to have been inserted in the Municipal Corporations Act at the instance of Mr. Lusk, afier interviews with the Government on this subject, which clauses the Auckland City Council desired to have passed into law, and for drafting which clauses, Mr. Lusk was subsequently paid on the 16th of November, 1876, after the close of the session. William Fox, sth October, 1877. Chairman.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Monday, Ist Octobee, 1877. Mr. J. S. Macfaklane, M.H.E., examined. 1. The Chairman^] Have you any statement to make in this matter? —Only that I have heard that Mr. Lusk has received payment of money in various ways, and this particular case was brought under my notice by the document which I have put in—that is, the extract from the Auckland City Council books—which was forwarded to me in a private letter, and which was sent as being sufficient evidence to allow of my bringing the matter before the House. Last night I received another telegram to this effect, " Have you the items of Lusk's city charges, or shall I send a copy?" I now offer these two telegrams to be sent: one to E. Carr, a burgess of Auckland, who sent me the telegram of yesterday which 1 have alluded to, and the other to the Towii Clerk or Mayor of Auckland. 2. Is Carr the party who sent you the extract ? —No. 3. Tour present charge rests upon the document ? —Entirely. 4. Cannot you say by whom it was sent ?—I could not well do that, or give up the letter, because it is quite a private letter, and contains many other things as well as this. When I got such a letter I could do nothing else than bring the matter before the House.

Wednesday, 3hd Octobee, 1877. Mr. H. H. Lusk examined. Mr. Lush made the following statement: Some months or so before the House assembled last year, I was waited upon at my private office in Auckland by the Mayor of that city, Mr. Tonks. He informed me that the City Council was very desirous to have certain amendments made in the Municipal Corporations Act, in respect to Auckland. He said there were a number of amendments desired to be made, and he had a great quantity of papers with him containing suggestions by different Committees of the Council, and he wished to put them in my hands in order that 1 might embody them in a Bill. I said such a work would take up a large amount of time, and that 1 could not undertake to do it, except as a professional matter. He said he came to me as a professional man, and he wished me to do this work. I undertook to do it, and he asked what would be