THE MOKAU LANDS.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXII, Issue 66, 15 September 1911, Page 7

THE MOKAU LANDS.

SOLICITOR GIVES FURTHER EVIDENCE, POWERS UNDER DEED OF TRUST. PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY. The enquiry into the Mokau lands transaction wa-s continued, before the Native Affairs Committee to-day. F. G. Dateiell, solicitor for Hermann Lewis, gave further evidence tinder cross-examination by Mr. Herries. Witness said that Lewis purchased the Mokau lands as he had purchased ethers, Tt was & speculation. He admitted that at one time tho Government could have purchased for £50,500 what the company paid for, Lewes purchased the leasehold interest for £14,000 and the freehold for £25,000. and he sold for £71,000, 400 shares in the company, and k«pt 7000 acres, which was sub-lot for thirty years.- In addi> tion Lewis had to pay £3000 interest and many other sums for various expenses. M". Herri** asked th« witness seyera* qMesfcioiis with, a view to astSertainmg what security there was under the- deed of trust executed to flowW that the l»nd would be cut up in three years. Witness replied tfiat there were the covenants. Mr. Berries: Is there any clause in the Native Land Act empowering the Native Land Hoard to deal with Euro* pean land? Witness: There may bvj some doubt on that point, bub we have provided that if the board has nnt power, then Mr. Bowler has tinder the agreement. Then if depends on the honesty of Mr. Bowler?— No ; Mr. Bowler is in just the same position as aay other trustee would be. He could be removed at any time by an order of the Supreme Court, Ifc would be exactly the same if the Public Trustee were acting. After witness had • given a good d«al of information relating to the mortgages executed in respect of the land to Messrs. M'Nab and others, Mr. Merries asked : Supposing the company went into liquidation, what would bs Mr, Bowler's position? Witness: There would be no difference ; he hold* for the company or its assigns— the owners for the time being of the equitable interest. Does Mr. Bowler get any extra remuneration for acting as trustee ?— I understand an arrangement has since been made by which he gets a small salary while he is trusteei , Is that paid by the company ?— By the company. What is the sum?— JBp per month. If the company does lot cut up how could Mr. Bowler reconvey to the board/—H e does not need to do «o. What the board would do would be to advertise the land for sale, Under what authority ?— Under part 14 of the agreement. There ia espm* provision to that effect. Is there statutory provision?— No; for that very reason the clause was put in. , Witness added, in reply to other questions, that Messrs. Skerrett, Tole 4 K.C. (Auckland), the Solicitor-General, and himself were all o{ opinion that the clause of the agreement would effectively carry oub the intention— that is to say, the provision for cutting up, QUESTIONS BY LEADER OS\ THE OPPOSITION. Witness was examined at some length by Ut. Mftssey. Mr. Dateiell adhered t» his opinion concerning the validity of * claim against the Land Transfer Assuranc* fund. Me admitted it would not be so in the case of a petsftn who acted in" respect of the sale of fights in land as a free agent, but, he submitted, the natives wete Rot free agents, Mr. Massey: You were asking for legislation prior to the passing of the 1009 Act Witness j Yes. Had that request anything to 3o with the insertion in -that Act of the clause providing for alienation under the Order-in-Council ?■— No. * n 'fP Jv to «th«f questions witness eaid Mr. Lewi* could not hate purchased th© freehold interest without the Order in Council but it was pursuant to the limitation provisions of the Act that the Order in Council was issued. He admitted that had it not been for the issue of the Order in Council Mr. Lewie would not have been able to have purchased more than 3000 acres of thirdclass land or 1000 acres eecond-elaes land, The resolution to sell was con* firmed by the Maori Land Board subject to the condition of the Natives having other land (m required by th* Act) and the ieeuo of the Order in Council. POSITION OF THE MINERALS. Sir James Carroll put some further questions to the witness to ascertain the exact position of tho minerals in the block. Mr. Maeeey, he reminded witness, had said the company intended to reserve the minerals. Witness said he did not know what the comjp&ny had intimated. Mr. Massey (interjecting) : It was published in. tho New Zealand Times. , Witness added that the limitation, provisions held good in respect of the whole of the land which had to be cut up. Sir James Carroll ; And the minerals go with the land? Witness: Yes. Mr. Massey again interjected that it wad quite competent for the company to Jfesfervfe the minerals in areas where they occurred ; it was competent for the company to reserve up to 3000 acre«. EXTENSION 01? TIME. Mr. Dive, pointing to the fact that if t-lie subdivision. *vas not canted out in three yoaws there was power to apply for an exloneiofl, aftked if it wae nob unfair to place Mr. Bowler in tho position^ of tiustoe. Witness replied that he thought the arrangement wa» the best possible for all parties. Mr. Dive said that Mr. Bowler was ft paid trustee. Wa« it not likely that he would be influenced because, of this fact? Witness s I don't think the amount ho is receiving is sufficient to influence anybody. Mr. Dive : Would it have a tendency to influence him?— l think not; I think it k casting a reflection — Mr. Dive: I don't wish it to be inferred for one moment that I am making a reflection. After unswerinjj ae-ine further que-i. ttoiw th<s examination of this witness concluded. MR. HfiRRMAN LEWIS FURTHER EXAMINED. Herrmtiß Lewis waa then called on to be further cross- examined. When he »a« Iset before the committes Mr. H&rrtes wns cross-examining him, and the member for Tauranga, continued hia examination to-day. In answer to a question as to why he had changed his solicitor And employed Mr. DaMull, he said he employed ma-ny aolwitoM. As a matter of fact, four different firms were acting for- him at th® present ume. Mr. Dalslsll had a«ted for him in many other matters previously— in tho forming of the Empire Hotel into a company, to give a. ea«e in point. Witness had never doubtedf'th© validity of the leases. My. Herries ; What object had you in retaining 7000 acres? Witneefl : I have got three boys, Wae that the object ?— A man lia* s, lot of object*,;

[ Proceeding, witness would not admit that the 7000 acres were tho best of the Mohan lands. The present lespeepwere improving" it. Ho did not think there was any coal on his 7000 acres. [ In reply to Mr. Massey, witneee eaid ho had no reoponsibilitieo now in respect of the 46,000 acrps ho had Bold. He had not sold a-ny of his 7000 acres. Air. "Massey : Is it not a fact that you , have had an offer of £2 an acre for it, or that jou have offered it at £2 per acre ? Witness : That in hearsay, Have you had an offer ?-^-No, You are qu'to sure?— l am' here to speak the truth. I don't suggest anything else. You are quite cfcor you have had no offer?— No (after hesitation). Are you acquainted with a Mr. Coverdale ?<— Yes, I saw him this morning. Was he connected with you in this transaction ?— No. The committee at this stage adjourned till Wednesday next at 10.50 a.m.