61

a—B

Colonies. We will produce a certificate to that effect from a responsible person known in this city. . • Mr. Macdonald : Did Mr. Seagar consider him a competent man ? Mr. Mafcarthy: Yes, or he would not have employed him. I apprehend that the whole of Mr. O'Conor's statements are not entitled to the slightest credence, for on the crucial point of the instructions he has made a statement to the committee contrary to facts. It is hard to have to make such a statement, but he is evidently prepared to go any length. He apparently did not know that these documents were in existence. I am not sure whether Mr. O'Conor makes any reference to the running of the " Lawrence " in his statement here, but he does in his circular. He states that the " Lawrence" was run by the directors during the labour troubles at very great disadvantage and at very great risk. Here are the minutes of a meeting of directors held on the 2nd September, 1890, where it is proposed by Mr. O'Conor, seconded by Mr. Eoskruge, that an informal meeting of shareholders be called to authorise the directors to run the " Lawrence," and resume operations at the mine at Mokihinui. That informal meeting was held on the 3rd September. Twenty shareholders were present, including Mr. O'Conor. It was proposed by Mr. O'Conor, seconded by the Hon. Eandall Johnson, that the directors be authorised to make the best arrangements they could to work the " Lawrence " in the interests of the company, and that the shareholders give an indemnity to the directors for. doing so. [A deed of indemnity was here put in, signed by three-fourths of the shareholders.] You will find further that on Tuesday, 18th November, Mr. O'Conor, being a director, handed in a list of the Westport shareholders who had signed an agreement authorising the running of the steamer " Lawrence." A further resolution at the same meeting is standing in the name of Mr. O'Conor, where it is proposed that, in consequence of the excessive rate charged for insurance of bar risk at Mokihinui, the insurance on this head be discontinued. This motion, not being seconded, lapsed. As a fact, when the steamer was lost she was insured for her full insurable value, £2,000. That was the highest amount we could get on her for a bar risk. For the ocean risk I think we had £5,000. I do not know that I am following the sequence of Mr. O'Conor's statement; lam taking the circular. The next item refers to Messrs. Johnston and Co.'s commission. I produce a copy of agreement, signed by Mr. O'Conor, between the company and Messrs. Johnston and Co. [Agreement produced.] Mr. O'Conor's charge is this: that Messrs. Johnston and Co. received as commission _\ per cent, in place of 1 per cent. I think he also said that the mine was kept at work to enable Messrs. Johnston and Co. to earn their commission.. Here is a statement furnished by Messrs. Johnston and Co. of the whole of the transactions. Examination will show that a material portion of it is 1 per cent., not 2\ per cent., as Mr. O'Conor states. In some cases _\ was charged, but they were for ordinary sales and sales of coal which took place outside the scope of the agreement. For these Johnston and Co. charged 2\ per cent., except on contracts, which were charged 1 per cent. My limited knowledge of commission on transactions of this kind justifies me in stating that had Johnston and Co. charged 5 per cent, they would have charged the usual rate —that is, for sales of the coal and collection of the money. Their highest rate is.2J. This account was discussed by the directors (Mr. Gale not being on the board), by myself and Mr. Eoskruge particularly, and the conclusion that we came to was that Messrs. Johnston and Co. could have charged a higher amount for sales outside the scope of the agreement. Looking at the circumstances, and at the times when the sales were made (not then contemplated), and also looking at the fact that Johnston and Co. might have, made some of the charges heavier than they were, we thought it better to leave the account as it stood. There was another reason. There is a guarantee that the amount to be received from the company should reach a certain sum. That amount has not been reached, nor did it appear likely that it would be reached. Mr. O'Conor was very anxious to know before he left this room whether there was any possibility of Messrs. Johnston and Co.'s claim reaching a higher amount than had been reached on these sales ; and he also stated that they received 2\ per cent, on all sales of coal from Greymouth. When I mentioned that Mr. Eoskruge and myself had come to the conclusion that Johnston and Co.'s charges on the whole were not excessive, I should have added that we attached considerable importance to this fact: that through Messrs. Johnston and Co.'s business connections in Wellington we were able to sell to the Shipping Company some 1,200 or 1,400 tons of coal at very remunerative prices—some as high as £2. This was simply for coal-dust, and was a transaction which resulted in very large profit to the company. I have asked the attention of Messrs. Johnston and Co. to the other charges made by Mr. O'Conor, and they have furnished me with a memorandum on the subject, which shows the complete inaccuracy of Mr. O'Conor's statements. I invite the attention of the committee to a perusal of this memorandum. While I have Messrs. Johnston and Co.'s name before me, I may as well call your attention to the statement Mr. O'Conor made in reference to Mr. Gale having been elected a director in the interests of Messrs. Johnston and Co. The shareholders elected Mr. Gale on the understanding that he would resign if the Westport shareholders wished to elect a Wellington director. No such nomination has ever been made. If they had had any objection to Mr. Gale they could have nominated some one else in Wellington, which they have not done. Mr. Miles: Would you say something about the charges for bunker coal? Mr. O'Conor seemed to think that no commission should have been charged for bunker coal. Mr. Macarthy: These sales of bunker coal were for the "Terranora" or the "Queen of the South," not for the " Lawrence." The sales were made and the money collected by Messrs. Johnston and Co. here. There are business ramifications in reference to these which cannot be exposed; but I have no hesitation in saying that we could not have earned a penny of that money from the sales to the "Terranora" and the Shipping Company had it not been for Messrs. Johnston and Co. The commission on bunker coal was not for the " Lawrence," but for the steamer "Terranora." Mr. Miles: That is to say, they had to buy coal for the use of their own steamer ?