THE MOKAU INQUIRY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1233, 15 September 1911, Page 3

THE MOKAU INQUIRY.

*

MR. DALZIELL CONTINUES HIS

EVIDENCE.

COMMENT ON MR. BELL'S

STATEMENT,

Tho Native Affairs Committee continued the Mokuu Inquiry yesterday. Members present wero Mr. W. T. Jennings (chairman), Sir James Carroll, the Hon. A. T. Ngata, Dr. To Eangihiroa. nncl Messrs. B. Dive, W. H. Herries, W. D. S. Macdonald, and T. l'arata. Messrs. W. I'. Massoy and J. Jones attended.

Mr. P. G. Dalzicll continued his statement commenced on the previous day. He explained the steps which were taken to get a meeting of assembled owners and tho application by Mr. Skerrett to the Government for an Order-in-Council, which application had first to go to tho Maori Laud Board. A meeting was called at To Kuiti on January 6. Mr. Skorre.tt and witness were present. 'i!ho former advised the Natives to sell or to test the leases by litigation. Witness offered tho Natives .£25,000 in cash for the freehold, on behalf of the lessee. Tho Natives unanimously elected Mr. Bowler chairman of tho meeting. He put the resolutions, and the voting was as stated by Mr. Bowler in evidence. Afterwards Mr. Skerrett and witness discussed tho position with Mr. Bowler. Tho latter stated that he would be very reluctant to confirm tho resolutions in tho circumstances. Tho meeting, he said, was not sufficiently well attended. Mr. Skerrett aud witness then discussed the position wjth tho Natives. The opiniou of the sellers was that it would be better to sell all or. none of tho blocks. The non-sellers also considered that a further meeting should bo held. It was agreed .by both parties to adjourn to a dato to be subsequently fixed by the chairman. Mr. Bowler suggested that they should take steps to get a more representative meeting and get proxies from those Natives who could not be present. On tho evening of tho same day Mr. Skerrett and witness went before the board and the application for the Order-in-Council was considered. Tho board resolved to recommend the issue of the Order-in-C'6uncil. It was held that expensive litigation would thus bo obviated. After these meetings Mr. Skerrett and witness had a conference with the sellers. "Pepene's Mana." . They wero informed that there was a bitter feeling between the two sections of the Natives. The sellers wero controlled by*Pepone. Some of those at Mokau w«ro not inclined to take his advice and they had a row. Pepene told them that if they' approached tho non-sellers at all they (tho sellers) would not agree to sell. They wero bent on getting back Pepene's tr.ana. . The sellers said they would do what they could to bring the other side in, but witness and Mr. Skerrett must not interfere. Tho Natives had at this time been informed that the leases wero defective and that they had a claim to .£IO,OOO damages. The Natives were pressed by two alternatives: either to sell for •£25,000 or to raise money to fight the leases. No suggestion was made at any time that the Native should sit down and accept the rent from the leases. In theso circumstances they had two opinions given to them, Mr. Bell's and Mr. Skerrelt's. Bolli gentlemen practically agreed as to the value of the title of the leases. But Mr. 801 l arrived at the conclusion that the Natives ought to fight and Mr. Skerrett at tho conclusion that if they, wero satisfied with tho price, the Natives ought to sell. On January 25, 1911, witness applied to the chairman of the Maori Land Beard to hoid another meeting at To Kuiti. Ultimately by consent of witness and Messrs. Bell and Blair February 21 was fixed upon. Afterwards the same parties agreed that the meeting should be postponed to March 10. Before this,, meeting ho was advised bv the Natives at To Kuiti that it was doubtful if the owners would sell. Mr. Dalzicll read a number of telegrams to show that it was at the request of himself and other counsel engaged that Mr. Bowler fixed the date of the lastmentioned meeting. Witness received a telegram from Mr. Grace, stating that it was doubtful if the Natives would sell. In coming fo the conclusion to withdraw the offer and test the validity of tho leases, witness had considered that Messrs. Bell and Skerrett had both advised that tho titles to Blocks G, H. and J were good. Mr. Rkerrclt had advised tho Natives to sell, and the Chief Justice, speaking as a Commissioner, had said that he thought the Court would relieve tho lessee of Block IF from forfeiture, once. Mr. Hosking, K.C.. of Duncdin, bad advised that the covenants to form a company and to employ surveyors did not bind anyone save the original lessee, Mr. Jones. The other covenants, to spend .£3OOO a year on the property, and to resido upon it, were binding upon. Lewis. The latter would not be liable for any breach of covenant prior to his taking up the leases. Mr. Hosking was of opinion that probably the whole of the covenants had gone, and that in any event the Court would probably grant relief from forfeiture. . Witness therefore coacluded that Lewis's title to the leases was good. At this time Lewis had agreed to sell tho leases to Mr. Mason Chambers for ,£46,000, and the freehold, if he could get it, for an additional .£25,000.' Mr. Mason Chambers had tho option of purchasing within three months if he liked. It had seemed to witness the best course to withdraw the offer, and put the leases before ,tho Court. He was at this time being pressed verv strongly by Messrs. Travers and Campbell. Ou March 6, Mr. Bell applied for a further adjournment. Witness would not agree, and the meeting was held on March 10. The meeting was adjourned at the request of the Natives, in order that they might hold a private meeting. They conferred practically all day. Ho was informed that tney were now all coming together and becoming inclined to tell. The assembled owners met in tho afternoon Witness told them that unless they arrived at a conclusion on the resolution on that day he would withdraw the offer. Jvater. Macdonald made a speech, in which he said that the Natives were inc.ined to' accept tho offer, but desired an adjournment in order that thev might hold a meeting at Mokau. Witness agreed to an adjournment to March '1 There was no question about 'the Natives not understanding the position at that hmc. .Macdonald s speech was made publicly in Maori. The Feeling of the Natives. Neither was there any question about tho feeling of the Natives at this time— they were all agreed to sell, and it was only a question of getting a confirmation at tho meeting at Mokau. At this time witness hai had no communication, direct or indirect, with the non-sellers, nor had anyone, he believed, on behalf of the purchasers. Theso remarks apolied to after this meeting as well as before. Before the dato fixed for the Mokau meeting Grace telegraphed witness that Hardv was coming down to Wellington to see witness and to Palmerston to see Mr. Loughnan. Ho telegraphed. Mr. Loughnan begfring him not to see Hardy as he considered that the Natives would sell, and it was unnecessary to negotiate with Hardy. However Mr. Loughnan apparently saw Hardv and acceded to his demands. Witness was not acting with Mr. Loughnan, but rather against him in a sense. The resolution to sell was passed without dissent by the Native owners on March 22. Witness then went to Auckland to get the sale confirmed. Tho board fully considered the question, and concluded' that if witness could satisfy them as to the issue of the Order-in-Council and that the Natives had other lands, they would confirm I ho sale. There was no 'question of the Iward taking his word. They confirmed subject to the production of evidence touching the points mentioned. The chairman of the Maori Land Board verv rightly insisted that in the matter of the agreement regarding the subdivision of the land they should have the advice of tho Crown Solicitor in Auckland (Mr. Tole). Mr. Tolo approved the agreement and all subsequent documents between the purchasers and Mr. Bowler were also submitted to Mr. Tole. The agreement contained provisions intended to enforce the cutting up of tho property. It had ken suggested that tho Natives had not received value for their land. Ho had gone into tho (ijtestion of the actuarial value of the resnectivo interests in this land. Taking the value at XI nn aero, and the leases to be good, the value of the Natives' interests was less than .1:15,000, and before the value of their -interests could exceed the sum paid to 1 tho Natives tho land would ro-

quire to be worth .£90,000. He had not heard from anyone connected with these negotiations that ,£25,000 was not a sufficient price. Tho Chairman: The trouble was the division of tho boodle after. Comments on Mr. Bell's Evidence. Proceeding, Air. Dalziell remarked that whereas Air. Alassey refrained from making any reflections on private individuals concerned in this transaction, Air. Bell's statements, when he was called as a witness, were largely made up of matters which had seriously reflected upon these individuals. Air. Bell had said that Air. Skcrrctt was not employed by tho Natives but by tho Government. This witness knew to" bo incorrect. He knew as a fact from Mr. Skerrett that he was .

The chairman said there was a member of Air. Skerrett's firm in Wellington who confirmed this also.

Air. Arassey: Do you mean by a section of the Natives and not by the Natives as a whole?

Air. Ngata said there were no< sections at that time, but Air Alassey insisted that thero were two. Witness: I think you are not correct there, Air. Alassey. It was at a later meeting that Pepene had a quarrel with some of them. Up to that time he was acting for them all. Air. Alassey said he might have something to say about the matter later. Ho knew the position. , Witness continued that Air. Bell had said that at tho first meeting thero was an overwhelming' majority against the sale. This statement was not correct. There was in fact a majority in favour of selling the principal block (IF), the only one as to which the title was in any way defective. Tho total area of tho blocks in reference to which sale resolutions were carried was 31,000 acres, tho total area of all the blocks being 53,000 acres. Air. Bell had stated that Air. Skerrett had told him that he had retired from tho matter, in favour of Afr. Bell, after the first meeting, and Air. Bell said he had confirmed that statement by reference to Air. Skerrott's office. Witness had the authority of Atr. Skerrett's firm—if necessary Air. Blair would appear—for stating that, far from Air. Skerrett retiring The .chairman interposed to suggest that Air. Blair should be allowed to speak as to that particular question. It was open to any member of Air. Skerrett's firm to ask to bo called.

Witness said Mr. Blair had told him that ho could make use of his (Mr. Blair's) • statement, and that, if the committee desired, ho would attend. After Mr. Skerrctt left New Zealand witness arranged with Messrs. Blair and 801 l to consult their mutual convenience as to tho date of the second meeting. Mr. Bell was nwaro that Mr. Blair was also gojng to attend this second meeting on behalf of the other section of the Natives. This was as late as February IG. Mr. Bell had stated that,the Natives were misled into believing that they must either raise ,£BOO or sell, whereas the proper alternative was fo hold on. Witness suggested, with all respect to Mr. Bell, that this was pure imagination. There had never been any question of holding on without litigation, so far as he was aware. All but four or five of the Natives were anxious to sell if they could not set aside the leases.

To Mr. Massey: He spoke of what was within his knowledge. All but four or five of the Natives out of the 108 owners were anxious to sell in the circumstances stated. Tho four or five were To Whitiites. Witness went on that tho Natives were in an extremely awkward position if they had done nothing. Lewis was accumulating the rents and Ihey got nothing at all. They could not raise the necessary funds to litigate and to carry out Mr. Bell's advice. They chose, therefore, to carry out Mr. Hkerrott's.

Mr. Massey: Was Mr. Skerrctt in NewZealand when tho salo took place?—" No. but Mr. Skerretfs advice was as apt for tho last meeting as it was for the first." Witness continued that Mr. Bell had also said that the Natives had no advice on the resolutions at tho meetings of assembled owners. It was suggested further that the chairman of the Maori Land Boardi should have seen that they had. Tho reply to that was that the resolution at each meeting was the simple one that the Natives should sell and the beard knew that .Mr. Skerrctt had advised on this at the first meeting. They wore informed by Mr. Bell before the second meeting that he wa's advising the Natives' and they were never informed by Mr. Bell or anybody else that he had "retired or that his advice* had been withdrawn from tho Nativos. Mr. 801 l had assorted that tho Maori Land Board had used its power to coerce the Natives by calling meeting after meeting to forco them to sell. _ This again, witness said, was pure imagination. The first meeting was adjourned at the request of tho sellers and non-sellers. The second meeting was fixed for a dato to suit Mr. Bell's convenience, \i°> having said that he would bo present. The original date was altered to suit the convenience of all the counsel engaged, including Mr. Bell. The latter applied for a further adjournment, but the others declined to agree. The second meeting was adjourned on the motion of Mr. Bell's clients, who wished to consult their people at Mokau. There were only two adjournments.

Another statement by Mr. Bell was that Mr. Skerrett could not have believed in the claim for -£80,000. Witness took part with Mr. Skerrett in .these negotiations, and know that the latter had advised the Government that tho Natives had a valid claim upon tho Assurance fund. The sum of iCSO.OOO was simply mentioned as the outsid* limit. Mr. Massey: That claim holds good, does it not? Mr. Dalziell: I think you will find not. Mr. Bell had based his opinion on the fact that the Natives, having been parties to the lease, could not claim on the Assurance fund. Witness suggested that Mr. Bell had not given sufficient consideration to the fact that, the lease being prohibited by statute, tho Natives must bo treated as not having signed except \vhere the question of the title to tho land was concerned. Their act in signing tho leas? was illegal nad void, and it would defeat the purpose of the statute if, by signing, they were deprived of a claim which they wouid otherwise have had upon the assurance fund. Mr. Bell had «iid that the board had directed that £2M should be deducted for expenses. Mr. Herries: Mr. Bell withdrew that, I think.

Mr. Dalziell: The answer to that is that no such order was made. Mr. Bell had further stated that he thought Messrs. Ilardy and Macdonald bad arrived at the conclusion that it was a vcit good thing that he should not attend the meeting. It was an extraordinary thing that Mr. Bell had stated in tho first part of his evidence that he had advised Macdonald and Hardy that .his presence at (his meeting was not necessary if they were not going to pass tho resolution to sell. Later ho stated that he thought they did not desiro him to attend. Tho <>nly implication to be taken from that was that they had some sinister motive in view. Mr. Bell had said that he thought Macdonald must have licen bought. Mr. Bell had stated in his evidence that he was quite sure that neither Mr. Lewis nor witness had anything, to do with the misleading, as he termed it, of his clients. Still, a statement such as this, that Macdonald must hav9 been bought, necessarilv reflected upon all who had acted on behalf of tho purchasers. It was implied that someone, acting for the purchaser, must have bought Macdonald. Mr. Bell made no attempt whatever to give the committee any evidence of any kind in support of that statement. There was no foundation for it, of any kind. Witness suggested that it was a very extraordinary statement for one in Mr. Boll's position to make. "Unusual and Complicated," Examined by Mr. nerriep, witness stated that Mr. Skerrett was iirst employed by the Natives, after tho renort of the Native Land Commission had been delivered. 110 thought it probable that Sir James Carroll or Pcpene had employed Mr. Skerrett on behalf of the Natives. It was impossible to move for tho Ordor-in-Council under tho old Act. Tt was only under tho Act of 191)9 that the matter became possible. This was the only occasion on which ho had applied for an Order-in-Couucil under the Act of 1909. Tho Act only came into force on March 31, 1910. Tho whole transaction was a very unusual and complicated one. Witness was first to propose the Ordor-ii:-Council, but Mr. Skerrett had urged the Government to consent to issue it. Witness had seen (he Prime Minister and Sir James Carroll on the subject. Practically there were tiro options. The first was an agreement to sell. The second was an option which Iwcame a binding agreement as soon as the freehold was purchased.

, -Mr. llorrics: Then there were two binding agreements?

Witness: The second, so far as Mr. ■Mason Chambers was concerned, did awav with the first, Witness continued that lie just heard about tho formation of the company, 'at somo time in January after the dato of the first meeting. Ho did not see Mr. Hardy when Air. Grace wired, alter tho second meeting, to say that Hardy was coming to seo witness and Air. Lougimnn. llardv saw Lougimnn, and apparently tho latter acceded to his demands for c£2ooo worth of tho shares, and that tho company should pay the expenses ol the Natives up to .£IOOO. The agreement with the Alaori Land Board was originally drawn before tho first meeting by Air. Skerrett, and was read to those present at that meeting on January C. Witness did not consult with Air. Bowler about the agreement. They went fully into its terms at the first meeting. Air. Bowler fell in with the arrangement that tho land should be transferred to him. It was at first proposed that tho Alaori Land Board should accept tho office, but witness suggested that statutorydifficulties might intervene. Then the I üblic Trustee was suggested. It was found that having tho Public Trustee in Wellington concerned in tho matter, and the Alaori Land Board at Auckland would involve a largo amount of inconvenience and cost. Ho therefore suggested that Air. Bowler himself should take the office, and he agreed to do so at the meeting of Hie board in Auckland. The transfer to Mr. Bowler, though tho sale was to Air. Lewis, was an everyday transaction. Air. Bowler gave Lewis and the company a deed of trust. It contained a provision in which these parties indemnified Air. Howler. The mortgage of =£1000 from Lewis to witness was a second mortgage coming after the mortgage to the English trustees. These mortgages, with another to Air. Al'Carthy, had been paid up on the transaction being completed. The Committee" adiourned until 11 a.m. to-day.