I.—2b.

17

32. Did you not use the words that he was holding the office temporarily?—l think I quoted the very words of my speech in the debate; it will be seen by a reference to Hansard. 33. Why did the Government, when referring to his candidature, use the term that he •was "holding office for the convenience of the Government"?— For this reason: that it would have been very inconvenient for the Government to be suddenly deprived of an AgentGeneral. When he was contesting the seat for Falmouth it was convenient for the Government that, at that particular time, he should not suddenly pease to hold the office, and I said so distinctly in the House; my remarks did not and could not refer to the time long before at which the Five-million Loan was floated. It was six months previously, or several months previously at any rate. 34. You made some comments in your letter as to the use by Sir Julius Vogel of the letter of the 26th February, the one marked " private." I would like to point out—it may perhaps appear to the Committee that letter was not used in the light that I think you took it, as helping to prove a case against yourself, if I may so put it, as of the one purport of showing what in some other person's opinions the value of that appointment—for the purpose of proving what a valuable appointment it was, your opinion being a very valuable one on that point—that it was used only for that purpose ? —lt appeared to me that it was used for the purpose of settling the question that we undertook to give Sir Julius Vogel an appointment, and that I had practically broken faith with him. My complaint is that he produced a private letter, and did not produce the official letter written at the same time, which was of more importance to the question. 35. There are several other extracts in the evidence of Sir Julius Vogel, which would go to support my idea. Just below your letter he says: "If you consider the letter Sir J. Hall wrote me, and what he says of the position in London which the appointment carried with it, you will, I think, be able to see that a money payment alone would not be sufficient to compensate me." That letter was put in for the purpose of showing what the value of the appointment was; and, in several other places, a reference is again made to that letter for the purpose of showing what a valuable 'appointment he had lost ?—That does not touch the question of Sir Julius Vogel having produced a private letter without my authority, and having withheld an official letter upon the same subject and written at the same time. That is my complaint against Sir Julius. 36. lam only trying to defend his action; he did it after consulting many friends, and not on his own responsibility?—He does not say "many friends." It might have had more weight if he had mentioned who those friends were. 37. The Chairman.] That is a strong point, which can be cleared up by the records of Parliament : Sir Julius says, " I would like to add half a dozen words to clear up points which I have, I think, left obscure. First of all, this claim was never absolutely submitted to Parliament, or a vote taken upon it. The Government brought down some resolutions in reference to future conversions, but withdrew them on finding that the House was not inclined to support them " ?—lf you will refer to Hansard, you will find that they were negatived. 38. That would, of course, make a great difference ?—You will see by the debate that our own supporters were against it. 39. As you have expressed an opinion, I would like to put this before you. Mr. Vogel states that "it is not an uncommon thing for the family of a man who has done great service to his country to be granted an honorarium or grant in recognition of those services ; and he asks that, if the Committee consider that such a thing might then be thought of, it might instead be done during Sir Julius's lifetime." You see the suggestion is made that if it should happen after his death, his family would not call upon Parliament to make some consideration for his services; he asks the Committee to deal with it now. That is what I understood you to say, Mr. Vogel. Mr. Vogel: Yes. Sir J. Hall: Is Mr. Vogel authorised to say so ? Mr, Vogel: Parliament is not even a Court of law, and it would not be bound by anything agreed upon. 40. Mr. Joyce (to witness).] There are three suggestions made by Sir Julius Vogel, what do you think of them : what is your opinion ? —I am of opinion, as to compensation for alleged wrong done to him, in the matter of the conversion or negotiation of the Five-million Loan, or any claim arising out of that, Sir Julius has no claim upon the colony whatever. 41. The Chairman.] Then, as to the alleged promise of office—the alleged promise of office, I can hardly call it a recommendation?—lt was distinctly subject to the approval of Parliament. The Government brought the matter before Parliament, and Parliament, both by debate and its resolution, put it out of the power of the Government to do anything of the kind. [Mr. Mitchell, shorthand-writer, at the request of the Chairman, read the transcript of his notes bearing upon this particular point.] 42. Mr. Joyce.] What I understood Mr. Vogel to say was, that, so far as the £2,000 is concerned, it is only a mere technicality—that Sir Julius should have made his claim within the twelve months, and that, had he done so, he could have succeeded in Parliament?—lf he had made his claim within twelve months, the probability is that he could have brought the matter into a Court of law; but, whether the Court would have given him £2,000 is another question. 43. Did not Sir Julius Vogel cease to be Agent for inscribed stock on the same day as he ceased to be Agent-General?—No. 44. How long after? —I think it was from the loth February,lBBl, till the 7th June, 1881. 45. If the conversion had taken place, is he not entitled to some remuneration ?—My letter gives my opinion upon that question. I think it states that he would be entitled to adequate remuneration for whatever services were rendered between these two dates ; but, in point of fact, if there was anything done at all, it would be of the most mechanical character—all the important service required from the Stock Agents had been rendered long before he left the Agent-Generalship—all the important parts of the Stock Agency work, such as considering and determining the time, the 3—l. 2b.