.THE MOKAU LANDS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 65, 14 September 1911, Page 8

.THE MOKAU LANDS.

, ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. I Mil, DAL2IELL CONTINUES HIS !' STATEMENT, f MR. MASSEY'B ALLEGATIONS. t '> , • , TT*" ■> { The enquiry into the Mokau lands transaction was continued to-day before |fae Native Affairs Committee. Mr. W. If. Jennings presided. • 5jF. Q. Dalsiell, solicitor for Herman Xewis,> resumed his statement from th« $oirtt where it .was interrupted yesterday- . , . „ Before taking steps to, acquire the Natives' interest, Mr. SkcTtetfc and witkeas went very carefully into the procedure necessary to' get the' title, otherwise the title might at' any time be 6ubijecfc to attack. He explained the atep3 which werfi taken to get a meeting of assembled owners and the application $m"ade by Mr. Skewetb to the Govern* ioent for an Order, in Council, which Application had first to go thvough the jJVlaori Land Board. • Accordingly a, me«tdng was called, for 6th January at ,Te IKuiti. Mr. Skerrett and witness were f 'resent". The former told the Natives lately what he thought about the titles sfto the leases, and he advised them to ••ell or go into the difficult and expeii..ddve litigation that seemed to be anew! •«f them. Witness also addressed the Natives and made an offer of £25,000 (in cash on behalf of the leasee. The iNativ'efl elected Mr, Bowler chairman i^of the meeting. After the voting Mr. tftowler said that the meeting, was not Sufficiently attended' t-o jusify him in jjjjprftceeding on the resolutions. It was 1 **greed that the meeting should be ad' gjjourned to a date to be fixed by the ffcha,ifffian. Mr. Bowler suggested that [•iiteps should . be taken to get a more •^eprefienfetive meeting. Witness And $fr. Skerrett on 1 the" evening' of' the .<««n« day went before the Maori Land *Boavd, and the application for an Order J/n Council was considered, and the Iboftrd resolved to 1 recommend the issue tht the Order. Subsequently witness and ]3Hr. Skerrett had a conference with the. >#ellers, They had been informed that ■there was * very bitter feeling between 3£h» two sections. Witness explained >that there was never any suggestion ' >horn anybody at this time that it was hi good thing to sit dowu and accept 'the rent under the lease* and do nothing. Both Messrs. Bell and Skerrett ■advised against the acceptance of rents. ••On the question of the value of the &itle of the lease* Mr... Skerrett and Mr. Bell were' in agreement, but Mr. Bell Uhought they .should fight,, while Mr. ISkerrett counselled sale ' at the- price, doming to the second, meeting of the "Natives, at T« Kuiti. witness said he Jiad been advised by Mr. Grace that the issue was doubtful. He read a> series of telegrams which passed between Mr. Bowler and himself, with. & view (to showing that the president of the 'board took careful steps to see that the Natives were given ample notice of <the second meeting, and the witness •fcated that he requested both Messrs. 'Bell and Blair (Mr. Skerretfc's staff) to «cc that the parties they were acting dot were duly advised of the meeting. .LEWIS AGREES TO DISPOSE 01? HIS INTEREST. WitiMM detailed the position of the .various block* at this stage, particularly in regard to block 1 f. He also stated ,that he got Mr, floskiag, K.C., of Dunedin to advise on the covenant* in reepecfc of thi« block, Mr. Hosking adwsed that Lewis wa« not liable in respect of the breach of any covenant* before hei bought. His final opinion was ihat thews wa« a very strong case for argument that the whole of the covenant« had gone and in that case that the •Jea«e was good. In any ewe he advised that there would be relief from forfeit4ire. Lewis entered into an agreement <witb Maaon Chamber* that he should ,g*t #46,000 for the leases and £25,000 in, additional for the freehold— if he could •get it. It was next decided to withdraw th« otfer to the Native* and put th» question of the lease* before the court/ ■Mr. Campbell's firm of solicitors for trustee* were constantly pressing to have •the matter completed. PROTRACTED PROCEEDINGS. Oq 10th Match (when the second meeting wa* held) witness went to Te Kuiti to attend the meeting .which was adIjoitrned at the request of the Natives in order that- they might hold a private meeting. Witness was informed that they were making up their quarrel and cowing to the conclusion that they ought (to sell because they could not raise funds to carry oa th« litigation. A meeting of assembled owner* was again iheld lit the afternoon, and witness intimated that it they did not come to ■a conclusion the oSer would be withdrawn, This was not- made uc a threat, ■but the money fof' the deal was avail*ble and such a large sum could not ibe he}d indefinitely. Meos private (meetings were held and in the evening the formal meeting wa« again resumed. Tttiti M'DonaM moved that the meeting should be ftirthe? adjoutntd till 21st •March iti ostler that another assembly ahould be held at Mokau. Thwe wa« no question tiow about the Natives being willing to sell. Witness had no cony awunieatiofl either directly or indirectly with the non-sellers—either before or after the meeting in question, fie spoke of & visit made by Hardy bo Palmerstfiii to see Mr. Loughnan (who was acting for those parties, who had art option to purchase from Mason Chambers). > The meeting previously referred to took pla«e in due course, and the resolution to sell was agreed to. Later wit- j ness went to Auckland to attend a meet- j ing of the Maori Land Board, and to see, that the natives had other lamb (this was necessary in order to comply i with the requirements of the Act). SUBDIVISION PROVIDED FOR. Witness furtHef explained the uatme of the agreement entered into with the chairman of the Maori Land Board relating to the subdivision of the land. He mentioned that tho agreement had the approval of Mr. Tole, Crown Solicitor. Auckland. t It had been euggested that the natives had not received sufficient value I'or their land. That must necessarily be a matter of opinion, He had gone into the actuarial position. Taking the value* of the land at £1 pet' acre and the lessees' interests, the natives' interests were worth less than £15,000. He added that he. would be glad to ■answer any .questions relating to the subsequent dealings, and said that before the value of the natives' interests could exceed the pries paid, ' the land would have to b» worth over £90,000. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS. The witness proceeded to deal with tht* two specific complaints marie by Mr. Massey— that the public interest has not been sufficiently safeguarded, and that the natives' interest 1 * had stiff eret", Mr. •Massey had refrained, from making *pedfic ftlleaatiofl9 against private individuals, »ufc' Mf. Bell's evidence was ] (largely made up of statements that did gefioit&Jy reflect on individuals. Witness mfflrmed that he knew as a fact tnat Ut. Sfewretfc w»s employed directly by the natiy**, and not by the Goveiftwent. „ , ... The Chairniaa said that a principal gf Mr. Sfcerrett's fl«a could be called.

Mr. Ma&sey said that Mr. Skerrett represented only .a section of tho native*, ■ Mr. Ngata: There were no eections then. Mr. , Massey persisted that he knew the facts. Witness further denied that there wa« an " overwhelming . majority "' againet selling at the flre* meeting. The statement was incorrect. It was also incorrect to «ay that Mr. Skerrett had retired from the negotiations ac stated by Mr. Bell. Witness had the authority of- Mr. "Blair for .this, and Mr. Blair could bft called in support thereof. The chaitiftafi s*ia ii. would be better to get the direct evidence of Mr. Blair on. the point., t Witnees went on to say that after Mr. Skerrett left New Zealand, he (witness) arranged with Mr. Blair to consult his convenience in regard to. a meeting of natives a* late as 16th February. Mr. fikewott left New Zealand early in January. Mr. Ngata.'. Yes, Mr. Bell eaid he tememl«fed that Mr. Blair's convenience had been consulted. Witness described a* "pure imagination" Mr. Bell* statement that the natives were misled into the r belief that their only alternative to raising money to contest the leases was to cell. All the natives save four or five were anxious to sell. The natives could not raise funds to carry out Mr. Bell's- advice, so they therefore' decided to follow Mr. Skerrett'* advice. Mr. Massey: Was - Mr. SkerreH ther**;? Witness said he was not, but Mr. Skerrett's advico wa« just as apt for the final meeting as it was for the firet. NO COERCION. , The' Land Board, it had been said, had used its power to coerce the natives to sell. This, too, was pure imagination. The first meeting was adjourned at the request of the sellers and ncmsellersj the second was adjourned to suit) Mr. Bell's convenience, and oa the motion of Mrv Bell's* clients who wished to consult their people at< Mokau. Then it had been stated that Mr. Skerrett could t flot have believed the genuineness of the claim for £80,000 against the Land Transfer Fund. Witness was aware that Mr. Skerrett had advised thfe Government that tfae natives had a vtdid claim. , Mr. Massey : That' claim still hoHa good. ■ Witness expounded his opinion as to the legal questions involved to support the validity of "the vie\v espfftssed and also stiated that no resolution had been passed by the Maori Land .Board to set aside £2600 for expenses. Witness also dealt with the allegation or suggestion that M 'Donald "must have been bought." While Mr. Bell said that he (MrY Dalziell) was' not involved it still implied that some one acting for the purchasers ' had /'bought" - M'DonaM. Yet T Mr. Bell made no attempt to givo any evidence in support of hi« state'merits which was an extraordinary piie for a man. in his ptsitioa to make. CROSS.JBXAMIN ATION. &r. Ngata examined the witness and quoted from evidence given by Mr. Skerrett. befofo the A. to L. Petitions Committee last year to show t-hat Mr. Skerrett then held the opinion that there was a claim against the Land Transfer Assurance Fund. Witness! That *«& th« opinu* Mi. Skerretb always expressed to me. Concerning the final meeting of the natives, at which' Judge Holland presided, witness said the Judge advised the natives only on questions of procedure. He eaid nothing whatever about the advisableivsßs or otherwise of selling. t Mr. Herries asked a riumber of questions as to the original negotiations with the HawkeiS Bay people. He also questioned witness as to whether he knew that Mr. Skerrett had acted on Government authority before the Native L,md Commission for the- natives. Mr. Dalaiell's reply was that this was befor* Mr. Skerrett was employed by ihe natives themselves ia the Mokati matter. Ho had no doubt Mr. Bell was genuinely mistaken in the matter. He admitted that the whole transaction, was un- . usual, but no one would suggest that the whole position of the Mokau lands was not unusual. They had been the subject of litigation for thirty years. Witness approached both the Prime Minister and Sh 1 James Carroll in reference to the issue of the Order in Coun- i oil. ENTER THE COMPANY. Mr. Herries : When did you first tear i of the company (the purchasing compah,y). being formed ? Witness i Some time in January— after the first meeting. t Then you knew at the second meeting thftt th« «al« would not be to your client but to the company !— » That would be so. Witness gave some details of a visit made to Pakaerston North by Mi. Hardy to see Mf. Loaghnan. The Ist- , ter agreed to Mr. Hardy's demands for £2500 worth of shares, and he believed agreed to pay the natives expenses up to some £1000. Tho agreement regarduig subdivision was drawn up by Mr. Skefrett. Witness had no consultation with Mf. Bowler on the matter prior to the meeting. The first suggestion was that the Public Trustee should act, but it was considered that ms being in Wellington would involve too mack incon. v&nienco and cost. Witness made the suggestion that Mr. Bovlef should act. The resolution for sale was for a sale to 'Mr. Lewis. Having a.grced'Ho sell tho natives as vcftdors were bound to transfer to any on© named. Such a proceeding was an ordinary everyday transaction. In reply to another question, witness said Mr. Lewis got £71.000 in 'cash and 400 shares. Mason Chambers- got the balance of the purchase money. The deed of trust to Mr. Bowk? covered both Mr. Lewis and the company, the trustee being indemnified by both parties. Witnoss put in the deed. .At this stage the committee adjourned until 11 a.m. to-mortow.