THE MOKAU LANDS.

Clutha Leader, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11, 11 August 1911, Page 3

THE MOKAU LANDS.

HISTORY OF THE DEALINCB. i -, SIB JAMES CARROLL EXPLAINS. WELLINGTON, Aug. 8. In the House of Representatives this afternoon Sir James Carroll (actingPrime Minister) made a statement re- " garding the Mokan lands in reply to ]ir Massey (leader of the Opposition), ge said that the matter was first brought under the Government's notice by a letter dated September 25, 1908, from the solicitor for Mr Herman Lewis, the registered owner of the -leases formerly held by Mr Jones. The letter stated that the lessee was willing to join with the native owner in any scheme which would facilitate the immediate settlement of the block, and it was suggested that a Native Commisgion consisting of Sir Robert Stout (Chief Justice) and Hon. A. Ngata (representing the native race) should inquire into the matter with a view to the area being disposed of under the Native Lands Settlement Act, 1907. It also was suggested that the respective values of the interests of the natives and lessees should be determined by an independent tribunal. Just then Mr Jones petitioned Parliament, and Mr Lewis' application was hung up in the nope that he and Mr Jones would arrive at a settlement. In February, 1909. Sir Robert Stout and Native Judge Palmer dealt with the matter and found that there were four subdivisions of the block, containing 53,000 acres, leased to Mr Jones and the lease contained a clause requiring an expenditure of £3OOO yearly in development trork. It appeared, however, that Jones obtained from some of the lessors of the main block a deed purporting to release him from this expenditure. The Commission decided that there were serious doubts regarding the validity of the leases, and reported against Mr Jones' proposal for disposing of the lands. Consequently caveat was directed to be lodged against dealings with this property, and it was not removed until the Registrar-General satisfied himself that it was impossible in law to support the caveat. Then the Government was approached by solicitors {or the natives, Jones and Lewis with a view to a settlement. The Government thought the best way was to purchase the natives' interest, but a careful valuation resulted in a report that the land was only worth £30,000 at most, ( so the Government decided that it could not purchase. The law did not permit the Government to compulsorily take the natives' interest, but the latter's representatives said they were willing to sell their interests to the Government for £22,500, whereas the Government officers computed these to be worth only £14,300 and the lessees' interest worth £20,700, and if it did purchase the Government would either have had to admit the leases as good or j enter into costly litigation and face a claim by a lessee for the loss of occupa-) tion rights and the right to work the , coal on the property for a period of i nearly 30 years. The natives also , threatened claims against the Land j Transfer Assurance Fund. Then (continued Sir James) Mr Skerrett on behalf of the natives wrote asking for authorisation of the acquisition by Lewis. He said Jones' interest had become vested in Lewis and the latter's leasehold interests were mortgaged to Flowers' estate to secure the sum of £14,000 and interest and subsequent mortgages to Dalziell for £IOOO and McCarthy for £25,000. Thus amounts were owing totalling £40,000. The letter further stated that if registration of Jones' leases gave him an indefeasible title the natives would claim a large sum against the insurance fund , for improper registration. Mr Skerrett | also stated that after negotiations between himself and Dalziell, represent-1 ing Lewis, he thought an arrangement could be made for the natives to sell I their interests for £25,000, to be paid | in cash within three months, making I it a condition that Lewis should within three years subdivide and sell the land in areas not less than prescribed by section 12 of the Native Land Act. Mr Skerrett concluded by stating that Lewis and his mortgagees agreed that the proceeds of the sale of the block would be held by them subject to any claim or right thereto established by Jones in a court of law or equity. Sir James Carroll further stated that Cabinet on December 5, 1910, decided to agree to Mr Skerrett's proposal, and issued an Order-in-Council, being influenced by the fact that this was the speediest method of ensuring closer settlement of the block. Everything done subsequently was purely Departmental. Regarding Jones' claim the Government, as no doubt Jones' solicitors would admit, did all in its power to obtain for him an interest in this land hut was finally driven to the conclusion that he had no claim. The position today was that the title of the block was vested in the chairman of the Maori Land Board. It was being surveyed and roaded and must be sold in areas not exceeding 400 acres of first-class viand within three years. The Government had four courses open—first, to do nothing in the matter; second, to purchase the land; third, to purchase the interest of the natives and take compulsorily the interest of the lessee; and, fourth, permit the natives and the lessee to come to an arrangement under which the claims against the assurance fund would disappear and the settlement of the block be secured. By adopting the fourth course the Government had obtained the immediate settlement of the block in small areas without the risk of a penny to the State and had saved the assurance fund from serious attack. Sir James Carroll concluded by opin- | ing that the statement probably gave : sufficient information to enable the \ Government's part in the matter to be | Understood, and that the Government [ would be glad to assist in every way in I giving the transaction the fullest pubI "city. | REFERRED TO A COMMITTEE. \ GOVERNMENT ON TRIAL. I WELLINGTON, Aug- 8. I In the House of Representatives Hon. I Sir James Carroll'laid on the tahle the I official amendment setting forth th«

i dealings in- connection >vith the Mokau ! lands (dealt with above) and moved : "That the statement be referred to the Native Affairs Committee to consider and report." • ! Mr Massey asked that the report be referred to a committee other than the Native Affairs. Such a committee was not a fair one to refer the matter to, as it was composed of 13 members, ten of whom were Government supporters. Sir James Carroll said he wished to meet Mr Massey in any way he could. 11)3 Native Affairs Committee was quite competent to deal with the matter. Mr Massey asked that a committee consisting of Messrs James Allen, Herries, Herdman, Okey, Jennings, Millar, Macdonald, Ngata, Hogg and himself should deal with the matter. Sir James Carroll said he failed to see the necessity for a special committee. Mr Massey said that not a single important statement which he had made in connection with Mokau lands had been challenged in the statement Sir James Carroll had read. What the Crown should have done was to have set j up a Compensation Court as provided by the Native Lands Act, which court could have fixed the amount to be paid to the owners of the leasehold interests. He would like to know how many native owners were present when the meeting of the assembled owners took place, and the amount paid to Mr Lewis when he sold the land to the syndicate should come out. The Mokau Company did j iiot intend to sell the land in the ordini.y way to intending settlers. They intended reserving the mineral rights. Ho was not satisfied with the tribunal < which it was proposed to refer the matter to. He. moved as an amendment: "That the special committee named by him be set up to consider and report on the statement." i Mr J-'iimngs (Taumarunui) pointed out that all the committee had to do was to civs : der the statement and report to the House. Mr Luke (Wellington Suburbs) supported the amendment. The country i.ho said) vas entitled to all the information obtainable concerning the deal.

Mr Fisher (Wellington Central) thought that the matter should go before some tribunal outside the House. He asked Sir James Carroll if he did net think the outcome of the inquiry would be a most important factor in the forthcoming election. Hon. A. Ngata said the only charge really was that the interests of the native omurs had not been safeguarded. The object of the committee which went into thf matter would be to elicit th>- facts bi ought up under the charges made by by Mr Massey. The Native Affairs Committee would bring the facts out just as well as any other committee. Mr Wright (Wellington South) stated that the Government could have purchased the freehold of the whole 53,000 odd acres of the Mokau lands from the natives for £15,000. but it let the chance slip through its fingers. He supported the setting up of a special committee. Mr Lang (Manukau) said tho Government was on its trial in this matter. It had allowed private people to get hold of the land instead of settling it itself. After further discussion the motion was carried by 33 votes to 26. Sir James Carroll stated that he had given all the information in possession of the Government in regard to the case. A plain, pure exposition of the facts had been given, and he was sure it would prove satisfactory to the people of the country. Ayes (33).—Messrs Arnold, Buddo, Carroll. Colvin, Dave', Bon. T. Duncan, Ell. Field, Forbes. Fowlds, Glover, Graham, Hall, Hanan, Hogg, Jennings, Lauri'nson, Lawry, Macdonald, Hon. H. McKenzie, Hon! T. Mackenzie, Millar, Ngata, Parata. Poole, lie? "-'.hiroa, Heed, Russell, Smith, Stall worthy, Steward, Taylor, and J. C. Thomson. Noes (26).—Anderson, Bollard, Buchanan, Buick, Clark, Dive, •). Duncan. Ki--!u»r, Frascr. Guthrie, .Hanly, Herdman. lierrio.,: Him*, Long. Luke, Mel.areii . Malcolm, Massey, Newman, Nosworthy. Okey. Phillips', Scott, G. M. Thompson, and Wrisrht. The following are the comprising The Native Affai s Committee : —Government—Messrs (x. ecnsladc, Jennings, Kaihau. McDonald. Ngata, Partita. Tc Rangihiroa, Scldoii. and Sir Janus Carroll : Opposition—Herries, Mander, and Rhodes.