A. D. THOMSON.]

9

I.—lβ.

38. When was the large parcel opened by you ? —Probably on the Monday night. My office, where the delivery was made, was downstairs, and the office where my assistant was working was upstairs. The latter place was where they were counted, and the room where we were working was locked up at night. 39. Who was your assistant ? —Mr. Harry McKenzie. 40. What is he ?—He is a son of Mr. Thomas McKenzie, and is a general clerk. He has been accustomed to acting in connection with elections for years past. 41. What age is he?—l should say about forty-five. 42. Is it possible for a mistake to have been made in putting the papers into the ballot-boxes— for instance, for ninety-eight to have been put into one box and 102 into another ?—lt is, of course, possible, but very unlikely, because when I had counted them Mr. McKenzie counted them before they went into the ballot-boxes, and when he counted first I counted them again after him. 43. Mr. Taylor.] There were two distinct counts ?—Yes. 44. You did not take anything for granted ?—No ; I am sure of that, because Mr. McKenzie had started to put them into the ballot-boxes before I went up to help him, and I took those out he had put in, and checked them. 45. Hon. Mr. Hall-Jones.] Do you know of this—" No. 14 booth, schoolroom, Pirie Street: 700 counted into ballot-box and received by Returning Officer, an additional 100 supplied and received; after ballot 803 accounted for " ? —I do not remember whether it was that one, but I know that one of the booths returned two or three extra. 46. In the Sydney Street booth the report says 700 were counted into the ballot-box and 699 were received by the Returning Officer?— Yes. It may have been through our mistake in counting. 47. In Victoria Hall, Adelaide Road, 700 were counted in the ballot-box and received by the Returning Officer, and after the ballot only 699 were accounted for; and in Buckle Street 700 were counted in the ballot-box, 698 were received and accounted for by the Returning Officer. You account for three of these ballot-papers by there being an excess of three in one booth ?—Yes. 48. Do you think it possible that there would be errors in counting them into other boxes? —It is possible ; but I would be very much surprised to find that our count was in error. Of course, the deputy in counting might make a mistake as well as we. 49. Eight hundred and three are accounted for in the Pirie Street booth, and you say you only sent out 800?— I did not see the number that was returned unused. I have no means of checking them. They are all sealed up when returned, and I have no power to break the seal. The number of used papers is counted, the number of disallowed papers is counted, and the number of destroyed papers is counted, and the balance left is counted. The total was 803, and the Deputy Returning Officer might have made a mistake in returning them just as well as we might have made a mistake in sending them out. 50. Of course, the whole point is this: that a few more might have been sent in this case and a few less in the case of others ? —Of course, it is possible. 51. But here it is said that what is said to have been a genuine ballot-paper is found to be in the possession of some one ?—I believe it was a genuine paper intended to be used. 52. Have you any idea of how it could have come into the possession of Mr. Isitt?—No, I cannot account for it in any way. 53. You looked upon the ballot-paper as State property ?—Yes. 54. And that any one who had it in his possession or abstracted it would possess it illegally ?—Yes; no one had a right to have possession of the ballot-paper at the time it was held. 55. When was it brought under your notice that the ballot-paper was improperly in the possession of some one ?—On the morning of the election. 56. At what time ? —I could not give you the hour, but it was before dinner. The first communication about it I got was by telephone. I had been out visiting the booths, and when I returned one of the clerks in the office told me that an urgent message had come for me, and that Mr. Isict was anxious to see me —that there was something wrong. He wanted me to telephone, I think it was, to Mr. Hoby. I rang up, I think, Mr. Hoby, and was informed that the matter was so serious that it could not be mentioned by telephone, and would I come up and see Mr. Isitt. I said No, that if there was anything Mr. Isitt wanted to see me about he must come down to the office, and that I would be there at 2 o'clock. At 2 o'clock he came down to the office, and he then told me that bogus ballot-papers, similar to this one unused, were in the hands of outsiders. I did not see the ballot-paper then, because Mr. Isitt had not got it then in his possession. 57. I understand that there were bogus ballot-papers in circulation —coloured papers?—l do not think so. Ido not remember seeing any list of names on papers at the Licensing Committee election except on the cards—not an attempted copy of the ballot-paper. 58. Mr. Isitt came to see you ? —Yes, that afternoon. 59. Did he give you any indication as to where he had got this paper ?—No. I understood that there were numbers of them in circulation, and that it might be a very serious matter, that would upset the whole election. 60. You did not know at that time that there had been only one ascertained? —No, I did not. I went round to every booth immediately and warned all the deputies that it had been alleged to me that bogus ballot-papers were in circulation, and urged them to be very careful in making up the count in the evening, and to examine the papers to see that every one had the genuine official stamp on it, and in every other respect was genuine. Of course, I pointed out to them that the ballot-papers to be counted must have the official stamp on the back of them, so that if bogus ballotpapers were used they would not have that official stamp. 2—l. Ib.