CASE AGAINST A MAORI MEMBER.

Evening Post, Volume LXXX, Issue 113, 9 November 1910, Page 7

CASE AGAINST A MAORI MEMBER.

PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS. ADDITIONAL CHARGES. The case against Hcnare TCaihau, menu ber for tho Western Maori electorate, was then taken. IWr. If a nan presided. Mr. Myers appeared for Mr. «Hln&. and Mr. SkerreAt, K.C., with him Mt ' Blomfield,;sßßea;recLfor Mr^ JJaihau,*~~ J

At Mr. Skerrett's request, Mr. Myers landed in the following additional charges against the member in question :—: — That Henare Kaihau, in the years 1900, 1902;- 1904, ;L905,' and 1907, while a member of Parliament, charged, and received from, various persons .on who^e beKalf" "he -prepared or presented, . or undßrtook to present, petitions to Parliament, payments or sums of money for his services relating theieto or in connection therewith. Particulars as follows- :— (a) A payment (by * Horomona Watarauhi in the " year 3.905 in respect of a petition which was to have been, but which was not in fact, presented to Parliament, (b) A payment 't>y a member or members of the Ngatireke tribe in 1005 in connection with a .petition to Parliament.' (c) A payment 'by Xahu Huatare-in the year 1900 In connection with a petition .presented to 'Parliament, (d)' A payment by or on jbehalf of Mohi te' Wara iriithe year 1904 an connection with a petition to Parliament, (c) A payment by Rewatu te •Hirako in the year 1907 for 'alleged serftrices in connection with a petition presented to Parliament, (f) A payment by CEakiaha Tawhaio in -or about, the year '1902 for , alleged services in connection fwifih a petition presented to Parliament. j(f). v A payment by Hakiaha Tawhaio in pt about the year 1902 'for .alleged services in connection with, a petitiompresented to Parliament. ' , At the outset, Mr. Skerrett protested ©gainst the general charge being made 08 well as a particular case. It was. agreed that 'the particulars should be regarded merely as an elaboration of paragraph one. Mr. Myers said that the charges now <made were all he had. He did not think jany further charges would be made against Mr. Kaihau. Several members of the committee said 'it would be necessary to fix a final date iot the acceptance of charges, otherwise jfche proceedings would be interminable. Mr. Myers said he was prepared to Bay no further charges would be made against Mr. Kaihau, if it was agreed (that no further .charges were to 'be ptade by any person. • Eventually it was decided to defer th* (matter for deliberation. TE AKAU BLOCK. - The case against Mr. Kaihau in reference to the Te Akau Block ■ was then taken, the charge being as follows ; — "That Henare Kaihau, in or about €h© year 1906,' while a member of Parliament, conducted the sal&' to '- the Government of- a portion of the JFe Akau Block, and received from (the Vendors, a, commission or other • sum of money." iWilliam C. Kensington, Under Secretary for Lands, saidf he supervised *the (purchase 'bfc- the Te Akau Block 'arid made tlie payments.., : Witness "explained jfchat under the Native Land Settlement JAofo he was appointed •as the - person jwiio was to decide what lands should ibff^rjnrchas'ed': H - ' "Witness "had" the' sole /control of purchase under tbe^ jurisdic r ',tkra.. of . the Minister of v Lands' and the Native Minister. He could not remertiflber- how Te Akau Block first came nintder- his. notice, but his. impression was ,th«t'Mr. Carroll, Native Minister, said .the natives were -willing- to sell to the .Crown. He (thought this was in January, 1907. ..Witness, instructed Mr. jGrace,' the.; land purchaser, to make the ineeessary ' enquiries. 1 • Up to this time ihe did~ m ot remember having any conversation with the native owners.' The ■block was not purchased till June, ,1907. No payments were made .prior to this. 'Advances were made by witness. (List of payments put in.) Witness produced % a- list showing that' advances of £100 ' ' .were made to four of the owners on 24th November on the recommendation of the Native Minister. If counsel .looked at the Native Land Settlement Act he. .■wonld see that it gave the' Minister ipower to make advances to owners before purchase. < -', Mr. Myers: I notice where payments have been made that in each, case, there jwere two cheques or more;' in one case there "were two, in another there were three, in another four. Do you know Show that came abSut? I' " Witness : No, but the chief accountant can tell you' that.' ' J, personsally, passed every voucher paid. v Proceeding, witness *>a£d 'that the purchase was made in June, and all the .payments were made by an officer of (■witness's department. r No doubt there .would Be"* 1 file in the Native Department relating to the bJock. , ■ ' ABOUT AN AGEEEMENT/ TMr. Myers: Did you see any agreement in writing between KJaihau and the Datives. . , , - .. Witness : Yes. You are referring to some sort of a deed ? I can tell you .what I^know . about it..-, I think it must have been in January that Mr. .Carroll sent him down, confidentially, a copy of a 'deed which 'he had received from somebody. Did you see who the parties were ?—? — iNo. It was sent down to me so that I xnight be forewarned. Mr. Carroll sent me the deed confidentially, and I returned* it to him in about a quarter of an 'hour. There were two objectionable things in the document — something about the natives .wanting to pay 10 per cent. to Kaihau for advances he was -supposed to have made to them, and that* 90 per cent, of the purchase money should be paid to the native owners. Mr. Carroll said : "We cannot have anything of the kind," and I agreed with him. I think that, so far as my memory serves -me, the document I saw % was a copy of the original. . ' 1 Mr. Myers then put in certain documents which were handed to him, at his request, by Mr. Blomfield (who appears in the case, and who is to be called tomorrow). ' - tj ■ Mr. .Myers said that one was between the "native's and Mr. Kaihau and the other between the natives and the Native Minister. Witness said that the latter was probably the one he saw. Mr. Myers explained that one was for the sale to the Crown of Te Akau,_ and the other between Kaihau and the native .owners. In both there was, a.provision that ten per. cent, should be paid to Mr. Kaihau. ' ' ■■ Mr. Myers : I 'understand that your department, and, ' so far' as you know, the Native Department, , had nothing' to do -with the preparation of these deeds. Witness : No. They are prepared by Messrs Parr and Blomfield, solicitors, for some other parties than the Government? — I do not know. Mr. Skerretfc suggested ihat the documents should be read; but Mr." Myers said he was going to call Mr. Blomfield on the following day, and there would be no point ;n; n reading them then. Mr. Myers asked witness : Supposing the natives wanted to pay money to Kaibau ifter they had received payment, would that be any concern of bis? Witness replied in the affirmative. He said it was his business to see thai the full- payments were made to the owners of the land. Mr. Myers and Mr. • Skerrett were given permission to go through Mr. Kensington's file. To Mr." Skerrett witness said he had given instructions by -letter, dated 28th January, 1907, to Mr. ,W. H. Grace, agent for the Laud Purchase Board, telling him that he was not to conduct any of the negotiations for land.-in. the Te> Akaa- block through Mr. , Henare Kaihau, as tho native owners strongly objected to., him. The area , of- the land which was the subject of the agreement between Kaihau and the natives was 13,894" acres. As far as witness could

remember h» had told Mr. Blomfield, solicitor representing Kaihau, that tha department did not recognise Kaihau in these land transactions. Answering Sir Joseph Ward, Mr. Kensington said that the deed which he had mentioned had not been referred to the Prime Minister, and no statement on thfe subject had been made to Sir Joseph. A CLOSURE FOR THE CHAEGES. Before rising at 1 o'clock to-day, the committee decided that no further charges for investigation and report to the -House , of .Representatives would be taken after the close of next Friday's sitting.