81

1.—6

The following written replies have been received: — The Treasury, Wellington, 17th July, 1886. Be Shannons Evidence sent to me. The following are replies or comments : — 1. I have no knowledge of what is alleged to have taken place with Mr. Ballance. 2. Neither have lof what is alleged to have taken place with Mr. Tole. I think Mr. Shannon must have misunderstood Mr. Tole, as the remark as to bow Ministers vote could not have enlightened Mr. Shannon, and Ministers at Cabinet meetings (to which I suppose such a remark, if made, would apply) do not always vote unanimously. 3. I deny that Mr. Shannon has correctly rendered my opinions as to the duty of nominated members. 4. My view on the subject was and is that I made no conditions with nominated members, and wished to make none; that there might be occasions on which, on behalf of the Government which nominated them, I might appeal to them to support me on questions vitally affecting the Government and the association; that such occasions had not arisen, and I thought it was unlikely they would arise, though conceivably they might do so. 5. I owe it to Mr. Shannon to add that of all the directors he appeared to me, up to the period of the proposed change to which he refers, to be the one most ready to support me. The Chairman, Select Committee Insurance Association. Julius Vogel.

Sir,— Wellington, 17th July, 1886. I have to acknowledge your note, covering extracts from Mr. Shannon's evidence before the Government Insurance Committee, and asking for any remarks I have to make thereon. I have no knowledge of the proceedings of the Board at the time referred to, my appointment being more recent. No suggestion has ever been made to me ; but that I was free to act as seemed to me best. On the contrary, Mr. Ballance, the only member of the Ministry with whom I have been intimate, well knows that I was not a political friend, and when the offer of the seat vacated by Mr. Shannon was made to me by Sir Julius Vogel—supposing that possibly, since he had been some years out of the colony, he was unaware of my political sympathies—l wrote mentioning this, to which he replied that the Government was aware I was not with them. I never supposed nominated members were expected "to vote with the Chairman on all large questions of policy," and the circumstances of my appointment confirm my belief that nothing is expected but that I will act in all matters to the best of my judgment. I am, &c., W. Mitchell, Esq., House of Eepresentatives. Jno. Duthie.

Observations on the portion of Mr. Shannon's evidence, a copy of which has been sent to me : — I have read Mr. Shannon's evidence relating to alleged control exercised by the Colonial Treasurer at the Insurance Board. I do not in the least agree with the inference he invites the Committee—by his answer to question 1268—t0 draw. Sir Julius Vogel has frequently stated that he never on any occasion endeavoured to influence the vote of any member of the Board otherwise than by argument at the Board ; and I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of his statement. The occasion referred to by Mr. Shannon, when Sir Julius stated that there might be large questions of policy on which the Government might expect the nominated and official members to vote with it, I well remember. It happens that I took exception to the theory, while Mr. Shannon offered no objection to it—at the time, at all events. In answer to my objection, Sir Julius explained that in his view the object of having a majority of nominated and official members was to give the Government a control in large questions of policy, where the interest of the Government—that is, of the taxpayers, who guarantee—might seem opposed to the interests of the insured, or rather opposed to the views of the representatives of the insured on the Board. I was dissatisfied then, and said so; but further reflection has convinced me that the position adopted by Sir Julius was correct, and that the object of Parliament in creating a Board in which Government officials and nominees formed a large majority must have been to give the Government a practical veto on anything it thought unwise. But I consider that the suggestion that views advocated by Sir Julius were carried into effect by Government pressure upon nominee and official members is answered by the honourable reputation of the public officers and the nominated members with whom it has been my pleasure to serve as a colleague. H. D. Bell.

Sir, — Government Buildings, 19th July, 1886. In reply to your note of Saturday, forwarding certain portions of the evidence given by Mr. G. V. Shannon before the Committee on Thursday last, I beg to say that my recollection differs from that of Mr. Shannon in several particulars. I have, &c, W. Mitchell, Esq., Government Insurance Inquiry Committee. W. S. Eeid.

Sir,— Wellington, 19th July, 1886. I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your letter of Saturday last (July 17), in which you inform me that you are "directed by the Chairman of the Government Insurance Inquiry Committee to make any remarks I may think proper on the enclosed portions of the evidence given by Mr. G. V. Shannon before the Committee on Thursday last"—the portions of the evidence referred to me being questions 1204, 1205, 1206, 1207, 1208, 1267, 1268, and their accompanying answers. I would have preferred not to be asked this question, because the notes made upon my agenda

11—I. 6.