THE MOKAU INQUIRY.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 212, 6 September 1911, Page 6

THE MOKAU INQUIRY.

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.) WELLINGTON", Tuesday. The Mokau inquiry was continued this , morning, when the examination of E. H. Hardy, surveyor, of Te Kuiti, was pro--5 ceeded with. With regard to Mr. Bell's statement that he was prevented from . attending a meeting of assembled owners, . witness read telegrams from Mr. Bell \ saying that he (Mr. Bell) would be greatc ly relieved if his attendance at the meet- . ing was unnecessary. He later wired; ? that he would not attend the meeting. I 5 Witness was against the sale of the 1 bloek. Me was linked to take shares - in the company being formed in Februi ary to work the coal in the next block to the Mokau, and to acquire the Mokau , lands if the primary venture was suc--1 cessful. He refused. Witness believed a that the capital of the company was - £IOO,OOO. The natives got £25,000 in f cash, and £2,500 in shares for the block. • At the Last meeting the owners unanii mously favoured the sale. 5 Sir James Carroll: The price paid for 3 the bloek was a very fair one. He would i not have given half the amount. f To Mr. Ngata: He had no communi- ' cation with any members of the Governi ment on the matter. 2 To Mr Seddon: Coal prospects on the " Mokau Block were, economically speak- j '- ing, not worth anything. The lime depos--5 its were poor. He had never heard of | ! gold on the block. He was considerably ; 1 out of pocket over the part he hSd 1 played. i " TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS. ' (By Telegraph.—Tress Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. - At the Mokau inquiry to-day the ' cross-examination of Mr. Hardy was con--1 tined. To Mr. Dive, witness said that ! although he thought the land was not ] worth £25,000 he did not advise the 1 natives to sell, as his advice had not been asked. The coal on the bloek was below ! the river level, and witness thought it could not be worked economically. ' To Mr. Herries: If the natives could ' have raised £BOO to carry on, witness did \ not think they would have sold the j block. To Mr. Jennings: Prior to the sale the natives -were receiving 1/4 per acre J for the lease of the land. The native ', owners had other lands besides this block. When witness inspected the bloek he noticed that the only suitable ] locations for homesteads were already . taken up under 27 years' leases, and tbj , company could not shift tbeee lessees, i r The opening of the block would be a fine r thing for Te Kuiti and neighbouring . places. Exclusive of the sub-leased land t and other encumbrances, the block was i worth on the average rot more than a * pound per acre. ! To Mr. Massey: Witness had never : heard of any negotiations with the < i natives 'by the Government for the pur- ; chase of the block. The area of the j Mangapapa Block, which was on the i other side of the river to the Mokau 1 block, wa/9 14,000 acres. t To Mr. Dahael: The natives had been » since advised to claim £ 10,000 damages 1 for non-compliance with the agreement. MR. McNAB'S EVIDENCE. , R. JMxNab called, said lie wished to remove the inference made by Mr. J Massey at Auckland that he (Mr. Mcj Nab) had acted with Sir John Findlay j and Sir J as. Carroll in connection with s the purchase of the block. The first a knowledge he had of the matter was t through the agent who called on him to i ask him to take shares in the company 1 to be termed to acquire the block. He agreed to take 1000 shares in the coms pany, the capital of which was £IOO,OOO ) The price to be paid for the bloek for > the freehold was £85,000, and for leasei hold, £56,000. His company bought I from Mason, Chambers, and Company, - being registered on 18th March. No one r had ever been asked by the company i to represent them at the meetings of the I natives. He was chairman of the comi pany, and he had never had communil cation with any members of the Minis- ! try in the matter. 1 To Mr. Ngata: The company had no 1 dealings with Herman Lewis. To Mr. Massey: The company was ; registered on March 18th. Lewis got ) confirmation from the Land Board on i March* 22nd. The company had come i to no decision in regard to working t minerals on the block. 1 To Mr. Jennings: The surveyors had i been working for the past three months i on the land. The company intended t quitting the land at once. 5