MR REES'S CHARGES.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 9336, 4 April 1893, Page 2

MR REES'S CHARGES.

The Otago Daily Times of a recent date has a rather laughable artiole on the letters sent by Mr Kees to the Premier. The flrai part of the article was evidently wiittan at a time when only the first letter had been seen, and when the writer had before him a statement made In an Auckland paper to the effect that Mr Cadman dissolved partnership with Mr Smith eight or ten years ago. The artiole therefore in a mild way condemns Mr Bees. Here is a sample:— "ln his earnest effort to accomplish his desires Mr Kees eeems to us to have mode use of methods improper and little calculated to advance his views. Finding that successful measures were not taken to carry a Native Land Bill to his liking, he lends a too attentive ear to the lying jade Humor, ' and builds up a theory that Mr Cadman had delayed legislation until he had carried out, in partnership with Mr W. C. Smith, M.H.E, (who is also Government whip), certain large purchases of native lands which were likely to be extremely profitable to him. For this assertion, oft repeated, he gives no other authority than • I am informed aud believe, 1 or again 'it is rumored. 1 Now, in the first place, it will be found that, so far from attempting to delay legislation on the native lands question, Mr Cadman was urgent in endeavoring to get a measure passed which would have satisfied Mr Eees himself, but was blocked in his efforts by the House; and, in the second place, we have not a fragment of evidence to show that Mr Cadman is at present in partnership in native lands with Mr Smith, or that he has been in partnership in auch lands with him at any time since ha (Mr Cadman) beeatns Native Minister." Then comes a sudden change. If the writer had not stated that he had eeen the second letter, the fact could have been easily deduced from the complete change of position, but aa a matter of fact it is explicitly stated that the second letter had been seen. The writer therefore goes into the question of the valuations as stated by Mr Rees, and demands an inquiry in the following terms;— " The public have a right to demand an inqniry into all the circumstances attending Mr Rose's appointment, especially if it be true, as Mr Rees asserts, that he is now acting as agent for the purchaser, and that he is successfully selling at from £5 to £15 per acre land which he had previously valued at £1 5i 6d per acre. Who recommended Mr Rose's appointment ? and by whom was the appointment made? were any objections urged against it ? how does his valuation of adjoiniug properties compare with this? -these are questions to which the pnblic have a right to demand explicit replies. Mr Rees says he believes Mr Rose was appointed through the political influence of Messrs Cadman and Smith, but Mr Rees will undoubtedly be oalled upon to give evidence to show upon what grounds his beliefs are based. If his last statements are correct a very ugly tranoac* tion has been disclosed, bub it is necessary to hear the other side in explanation before arriving at the conclusion suggested by Mr Rees that a member of Assembly has used his political influence to fill bis pockets and should be made to disgorge at once."