'Not Prepared To Answer Questions'

Northern Advocate, 18 June 1947, Page 6

'Not Prepared To Answer Questions'

LAND SALES VALUER

(Special) KAIKOHE, This Day. “NO, sir, I am not prepared to answer any more questions.” These words were spoken by a private valuer (Mr W. H. Perham, of Kerikeri) after having been sworn-in on oath m the witness-stand during yesterday’s Northland Land Sales Committee sitting at Kaikohe. i

Several lengthy discussions between committee members and both Crown and private valuers had taken place regarding aspects of valuation ot Kerikeri properties under sale. Cne cf these, going into great detail, concerned methods of assessing the value of citrus trees.

Committee members wanted to know why a workable basis for computation of value on pre-crop costs and on actual crop production could not be provided for general use to aid the committee in the admittedly peculiar problems arising out of Kerikeri deals.

IF COWS, WHY NOT TREES? They drew the parallel cf dairying, where a farmer must count his nonproducing heifers of seme actual value, and they saw little difficulty in coming to some satisfactory conclusion on such a 1 point. Why would it not - work for a citrus orchard? A vendor's valuer and a resident of Kerikeri, Mr C. R. Birchall, also the . Department of Argiculture’s local citrus and viticultural instructor (Mr P. E. Everett), had both been subjected to barrages of questions from the committee and from the Crown representative (Mr L. A. Amodeo). The matter was far from having been concluded to the satisfaction of everyone when, in another case, Mr Perham took the stand as witness, in the capacity of valuer, for the contracting parties. Counsel for the parties in this case was Mr C. Freyberg, of Kerikeri.

questions were asked by committee members. The Crown representative then rose and sought, as he had done from the previous witnesses, the basis of computation for Mr Perham’s value grven to the orchard trees in the property under review. Mr Amodeo carried Mr Perham’s figures to conflicting conclusions and Mr Perham finally told him that he was not prepared to answer any questions. He would not again appear as valuer to give evidence at land sales sittings. The committee chairman (Mr E. H. Burton) took a hand. Witness, he said, had come to the hearing to give evidence and had been asked civil questions, which he was on oath to answer. He then put Mr Amodco’s question in slightly changed wording, asking if he would be prepared to answer that. "YOU MAY LEAVE THE BOX”

Mr Perham once more indicated clearly that he was not prepared to answer any more questions, whereupon the chairman said: “Very well, Mr Perham, you may leave the box.” After he had done sc, Mr Burton pointed out to Mr Freyberg and to the courtroom in general that the committee was there to do a job laid down by statute and that it had to find a workable and uniform method of assessing all property values, whether they consisted of land, buildings, animals or citrus trees. To do this it needed the evidence of private valuers, who must be prepared to come along with figures computed on some logical basis. Decision in the case was reserved pending further evidence regarding a separate item on the property.

Several questions were asked of Mr Perham by counsel, and interjectory