THE HINE CHARGES

Evening Star, Issue 14515, 5 November 1910, Page 12

THE HINE CHARGES

' ALLEGATIONS AGAINST MR ! MAJOR.. 1 The following concludes our report of' 1 yesterday's proceedings beforo the Select Committee of tho House ; Mr Myer3 put in a quotation from ' Han--1 sard' of" a speech delivered by Mr Walter ; Symes, then member for Stratfofu, in tho House of Representatives on October 9, 1905, on land tenure and settlement. -The extract ran: I know next to nothing about the Land for Settlements Act. There is only one estate in my district that has been acquired under the Land for Settlements Act. That estate was not wisely acquired, and whether it was tho Government or tho Board who wero to blamo lam not sure. But whoever it was they gave £2 10s per aero more for that land than I could havo bought it for, and tho strange thing is that when they bought that land tho owner of it was cutting it up, whilst lands that had been offered to them that wero not being cut up they would not, look at. I am not quite certain whether it is the head of the department who is at fault, but tho Government seem to bo quite powerless or quite indifferent about the wholo matter so far as my district is concerned. lam satisfied that if they had asked my opinion in regard to the estato they acquired I should at once have advised them not to buy it at the price they gave for it. Mr Myers added that tho estato referred to must have been Mr Bayly's estate. F. W. Flanagan, Valuer-General) stated that the property of Mr Fred Bayly was valued at £B,4o4'(unimproved) and £12,602 !capital| in 1903, on a special valuation made for loan purposes for the Public Trust Office, and in 1905 for taxation purposes at £7.246 (unimproved value) and £12,360 (capital). On Alfred Bayly's property the valuations were, as follows (unimproved and capital) :--1897. £5.000 ami £10,374: 1907, £6,107 and £13,009; 1909, £13,258 and £23,377. In reply to Sir Joseph Ward witness said his experience was that the prices asked by owners of estates wore invariably considerably in excess of the Government valuation. " When people wanted loans they desired to have their valuation raised, and reduced when it was a quest ion of taxation. Mr Buchanan : Do you know the case of an estate of 10,000 acres at MastertonSir Joseph Ward (interrupting): Well, if you are going into these matters I will bring up the case of Mr Bnelmnan waiting upon me with a deputation and asking that an estate, should bo purchased at £8 over its value. The Chairman said the matter had been referred to before, and he could not disallow tho question. Mr Buchanan: Would you he surprised to know that a property of 10,000 acres near Masterton was offered to the Government at £7 per aero and refused, and that it has since been cut up and mostly disposed of at £ll to £l3 per acre? Witness: I am not aware of it. Charles Bayly, brother of the late Alfred Bayly, suited that he was an. executor in tho estate. Amongst the documents of his late brother was a promissory note dated September 10, i&vJb, from A. Bayly to Walter Svmes for £3OO, duo November 13. Mr Myers wished to ask witness what the £3OO promissory note was for, but Mr Skerrett objected, and said that the question in the form it was put was inadmisiblc. Witness said ho coidd not say whether his brother had any business dealings with Mr Major. His brother kept no books. Chas. E. Major, land agent, now residing at Auckland, and an ex-M.P., said in reference to the Alfred Bayly estate, that he divided a commission with Mr Symes, he denied it absolutely. Ho wrote a letter to tho Prime Minister at the instance of one Amet. Arnet asked him to bring land under the notico of the Prime Minister, and beyond that ho had no connection with the matter whatever. He knew nothing of anv eommision being paid. In°reply 'to Sir Joseph Ward, he said he had not attempted to influence "the purchase of any estate by the Government, nor had ho" ever received any payment from the Government in reference to the sale or purchase of any land. Concerning the sale, of Fred Bayly's property, he said that ho was within his rights, both legal and moral, in making a .sale. He was of opinion then, and ho was still of opinion, that lie had done something commendable in tho interests of the State and the settlers who wore anxious to acquire land. He had been instrumental ii. selling two properties to tho Government—tlwt Livingstone property before ho became a member of Parliament, and Fred Baylv's after being a member of Parliament. ' Tho lattcr'6 land was sold through him to the Government at lees than its value, and had it not been, sold to the Government it would havo been disposed of to a syndicate, and the syndicate would have made a profit out of it. There was nothing secret about it. His ledger showed an entry against Frederick Bayly for commission and credit for it. There was no entry with respect to Alfred Bavlv or Mr Symes. .\ii" Mvers: Do you mind saying when 1 thia property was "put in your hands for sale.—Witness : I cannot say. U'a.s it not in your hands for a considerable time''—l don't ireniombor. Did not you try to dispose of it to other people?—l "am not 6ure. Was it not vour suggestion to Mr Bayly to try and sell it to tho Government?— Thai'l don't know. ' . Were voti not trying for a considera.blo time to 'sell this property privately, and was not tho proposal to sell to tho Government an afterthought?—No, I think not; 1 cannot answer definitely. Were you in tho House when Mr Symes made the speech I havo referred to in regard to this estate?— Yes. Do vou know that ho complained then about 'this purchase?— That is the first I heard of i*. I may have known it at the time, but it is completely obliterated from inv memory. "At what price were you offering this estate to private people beforo you offered it to the Government at £l2 10s?—It was offered to the Government at less than it was likely to bo offered to anyone else. I have offered a number of properties to the Government, and I knew tho difficulties there wero in getting Mr Barron to consider them. He is a princo of pessimists. No matter how good land is, he always undervalues it Can you say at what price you were offering this land to private poeple beforo it was offered to tho Government at £l2 10s ?—lt would not be offered to any person at a less price than it was offered to the Government. Was it ever in your hands at a less price than £l2 10s?—No, I think not. It may havo been at a higher price. • When you were trying to 6ell for Frederick Bayley, were you trying to sell as a wholo or in subdivisions ?—As a whole. I could have sold it in subdivisions, but Bayley did not want that. As one rea--1 son, ho thought he could sell it to the Government. Was Bayley himself about to cut up the property, not being ablo to 6ell it as a whole ''.— l can't tell. The matter was discussed, but nothing definite arrived at. Sir Joseph WaTd : I understod you to I say that you offered a good many pTO- > purties to*the Government. How many? Witness : Half a do?cn. i How fnany properties were purchased that you recommended to the Government i or tne Land Purchase Board?—rTwo—- > Livingston, before I became a member of i Parliament, and Fred. Bayley's after- ' wards. f In connection with this particular prot. perty, which is the only one you offered to t the Government when a member, did you receive any payment of any kind from the Government or any Government officer?— , No. B Did you make any payment out of com- . mission to anyone connected with the Go- . vernment or any Government Depart- - ment?—No. Such things never occurred to my-mind.

Did you ever inform any member of the I Land Purchase Board or* Government or any Government officer that you wero putting this property under offer on condition that you received commission, from the seller of the land ?—No. Did you ever bring pressure on the Government in connection with the sale of . Fred Bayley's estate?— No. I would like ■ people who think these things to try it ; and see what chance they have. The Hon. J. A. Millar.- You were deal- . ing as a land agent? .• Witness : Yes, as a land agent. Most of 3 the letters were written by my clerk. Mr Massey: Was there any objection on > the part of Bayley to pay this commission? —Ho paid less commission because he had , accepted less for the land than he expected a to sell at. The original arrangement was . that I should receive per cent. 1 re- \ ceived a net sum of £3OO. , The Chairman asked if witness thought it inconsistent with his position as a member of Parliament to havo conducted a sale. i to the Government. Witness: Well, lam living in Auckland i now, and I don't know whether the integL rity of Mr John Bollard Thero was a chorus of protest, and tho I Chairman reminded Mr Major that the Committee were not inquiring into a charge I against Mr Bollard. Mr Major said that so far as he was concerned it was quite a legitimate busi- \ ness. What ho had done should havo been \ commended rather than reproved. Mr Allen: Supposing two agents were , offering an estate to tho Government, one , a member of Parliament and tho other , not, who would bo likely to get the busi- , ness? Witness : My experience is that it would be the man who was not. Mr Allen : What would be the public ' view ? Witness : I don't know. Like some members of Parliament, they mignt be ; unable to conceive honesty in any other num. Mr Massey strongly resented this state- j ment. Mr Major complained that it would have been only reasonable for Mr Hine to have made'inquiries before launching; the charges. v _ \ The Committee adjourned, and will sit again on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday of next week. The Flaxbourac case : 'will bo taken last. j