THE MOKAU LANDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14766, 23 August 1911, Page 8

THE MOKAU LANDS.

INQUIRY OF COMMITTEE. MR. MASSEY EXPLAINS HIS CASE. [BY TELEGRAPH.PRESS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, Tueeday. When the Native Lands Committee resumed its inquiry into the Mokau lands to-day Mr. Jonnings, the chairman, corrected a report which appeared on August 19 in which a statement made by Mr. Massey, to the effect that he did not want to narrow the scope of the inquiry, was attributed to him (Mr. Jennings). Mr. Massey then made a statement traversing tho history of the case, which has already "been explained at length. These, ho said, were the main facta, and up to the present time they had not been contradicted or explained away. He did not profess to bo absolutely correct in every detail, because that would be impossible without having access to departmental papers. Ho was very strongly of opinion that the Government had made a mistake in allowing the block to bo purchased by a private company. Tho proper thing would have been for the Government to have purchased the land, reserved the best of the coal-bearing areas, and then disposed of the land on the optional system.

Sir James Carroll said there were one or two points in Mr. Massey's published speeches which have not been covered by his present statement. He was made to say that Jones's title to tho land had become null and void.

Mr. Massey said the report was a condensed one and did not convey exactly what he had said.

In answer to a question by Sir James Carrol], Mr. Massey said he believed that Jones's interest in the land passed to Hermann Lewis, but it was impossible for Lewis to deal with the natives without an Order-in-Council. The land was bought at 10s 4d per acre. Sir James Carroll : Do you say the Government could have purchased at that?

Mr. Massey replied that he hoped that evidence* would be forthcoming to show that it could have been purchased at less. Ho did not, however, suggest that the Government should purchase land at less than its worth. He had not calculated the value of the interest of Lewis, but he presumed it was worth what he paid for it. Sir James Carroll : And you presume the Government could have cot it for that?

Mr. Masse}' : I don't know. That is for the Government to say. Sir James Carroll said lie had answered this in.his statement to the House. It was evidently a matter of opinion between the .Government and Mr. Massey as to what should have been done.

Mr. Massey : Yes. Replying to a further question, Mr. Massey said he was aware that tho land was to be disposed of under limitations provided by statute (cut up and sold within limited areas in three years), but he was also aware that the mineral rights wero to -be retained.

Sir James Carroll : You are aware that the mineral rights had already been parted with for a certain number of years? .Mr. Massey : Yes. Sir James Carroll: And that covenants were broken and voided so far as the natives were concerned?

Mr. Massey : Yes. Hon. A. T. Ngata said he thought tho issues could be boiled down to two, and ho would like to have Mr. Massey confirm them : (1) That the Government in issuing the Order-in-Council committed a breach of public interest. Mr. Massey : Something which was detrimental to public interest. Hon. A. T. Ngata : And (2) that the transaction was not in the interest of the native owners.

Mr. Massey: Yes. ; I am also of that opinion, 'but I don't want to limit the inquiry. I think you should add : (3) That tho Government should havo purchased the property itself. Hon. A. T. Ngata': Of course that is involved in the first.

In reply to Mr. Ngata., Mr. Massey deprecated the idea that he had suggested that Sir John Findlay had used his influence with a member of Cabinet. What ho had said was that Sir James Carroll had presided at a meeting of the Council. At the same time ho did not think that Sir John Findlay should have allowed himself to be put in the position ho was. He did not make any suggestion of impropriety. The Chairman said that three independent valuators acting for tho Government, local bodies, and private valuators, had valued the land below tho price at which tho transaction had been made.

Mr. Massey said this was a point on which information could bo obtained.

Mr. Jennings also asked Mr. Massey whether he was aware that in 1897 the mortgagees spent £5000 in cutting up 24,000 acres for settlement.

Mr. Massey said ho was aware of it, but he presumed tho facts could bo disclosed by the inquiry. The committee adjourned till to-morrow morning at 11 o'clock.

ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES.

CONSIDERING OBJECTIONS.

[BY TELEGRAPH. —SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.]

Wellington, Tuesday. Objections to tho electoral boundaries proposed by tho Representation Commissioners must bo communicated to them in writing by September 14. The Commissioners will sit at the office of the Surveyor-General at 2.30 p.m. on the following day, and after considering any objections submitted to them will publish their final report. The Legislature Act makes no provision for a personal support of an objection, but this course has been permitted on previous occasions, and it is presumed that the same privilege will be .allowed in the present instance.

TE AROHA . PROTESTS.

[from our own correspondent.]

Te Aroha, Tuesday.

Nearly every member of the Chamber of Commerce was present at a meeting held last night to consider the proposed alterations of the electoral boundaries. Mr. Mclndoe, the president, opened the proceedings in a brief speech, in the course of which he emphasised the fact that Te Aroha is exceptionally situated, being a tourist and health resort, and protested against the closing of hotels except by a vote of the people. He expressed the opinion that the transfer of the borough to the Ohinemuri electorate will, if carried out, depreciate the value of property here by at least 25 per cent. Mr. Morrison dissented from this estimate, and gave it as his conviction that the very reverse would happen. As a pronounced no-license believer, however, he was in favour of having the issue settled by a fair vote, and on other grounds he opposed the change of boundaries. It was unanimously resolved that the Commissioners be asked to reconsider the position, on the grounds that sufficient consideration had not been given to the conditions referred to in the Act, namely, natural boundaries, community of interest, facilities of communication, and topographical features. It was also resolved to ask the Mayor to call a public meeting to discuss the whole subject. The Mayor has complied, fixing to-morrow (Wednesday) evening for the meeting.