THE NEW SOUTH WALES LAND COMMISSION.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1746, 23 August 1905, Page 23

THE NEW SOUTH WALES LAND COMMISSION.

The recent -developments in eonnecrfcion ’with the Lands Commission took a definite shape on the 12th inst., when Senior-Sergeant McLean, Senior<Dan stable Gallagher, , and •. Constables Coomb.es, Corbett, and Malone arrested George McNair, and Bernard Hoskins, clerks to Mr W. N. Willis, on a charge of conspiracy under the Crown Lands Act, and a warrant was issued en a simi-. lar charge for the arrest df William. Nicholas Wdilds, who is expected to arrive at Durban in the course of a few days. The warrant sets out —“That William Nicholas Willis, George McNair, and Bernard Hoskins did, at Sydney, on or about October 20. 1903, knowingly and with intent, commit a fraud upon the provisions of- the Crown Lands Act of 1884, and the subsequent Acts amending the ’same, amongst themselves, and did unlawfully -conspire together to make use of one, Jo seph Bonn can Stephens to make conditional purchase of 640 acres in the land district of Coon amble, otherwise than for the use, benefit, and advantage of the said Joseph Bonno-m Stephens, an offence punishable in the State of New South Wales on indictment.”

The information, signed by Mr EL H. Wilshire, S-M.., was sworn upon the evidence given the Commission concerning the -acquirement of conditional purchase l and conditional lease lands by Joseph Bonnom who deposed to. having been employed on the Munna Muima lease granted to Patrick Rea. Stephens hesitated to tell the Commission what he knew., and the examining counsel, Mr Hanbnry Davies, put him through a -severe cross-examination.

Tn 'Stephens’s name, areas of 640 acres conditional, lease and 1920 acres conditional purchase , lands were acquired on the Wingadee holding, and bis signature to the document appoint-: ing Bernard Hoskins to make application was witnessed b.y George McNair, J.P. Stephens stated that he did not remember signing a statutory declaration to the effect that lie did,not hold a homestead selection, but he admitted signing a paper at the local Land Board. The following examination took place on this point:— His Honour. Is vhis your signature (on declaration) ? —lt is like mine. Mr Davies : Did you ever sign an application for a conditional lease ?—I don’t recollect.

See this document: ©id you ever see that .before ?—I don’t recollect. Hi® Honour: ©id you make that declaration on an application for a conditional lease ?—I did not; I don’t remember.

Mr Davies: What have you done with your C..P. and C.L. leases since you took them up P—l have been killing rabbits and clearing. X have been "working for Ilea Brothers principally. The cross-examination of Bernard Hoskins was to the following effect:— Mr Davies:.* Is that Stephens s signature giving you authority?-—1 believe it is. •

Did you see him sign it?—l am not sure that I did, but I was there at the time Mr McNair witnessed the signature.

Were .you present when the statutory declaration was signed ?—Yes. Did you see Stephens sign that ? J —I remember him signing it. Yon,saw him sign, both ?—Yes. “Very well, then,” said Mr Davies, as he -passed the documents on to His Honour for perusal. Expert evidence on handwriting was called by the Commission concerning exhibits, which had reference to the following matters.:—r247„ .authority to Hoskins ; 248, application for conditional purchase by Stephens; 249, depositions signed ‘before the local Band Board regarding the conditional purchase; 250, application by Stephens for ,a conditional lease; .251, the signature on the manuscript of the evidence before the local Band Hoard at Goon amble ; 253, the signature of Stephens, written at the request of His Honour, and another specimen of his signature given by Stephens to the Commission on a receipt for his expenses. Mr Walter Herbert Forrest, a.n officer of the Grown Baw Department. and Mr Walter Raleigh Sayers, assistant accountant in the Commercial Banking Company of Sydney, each an expert in handwriting, said in effect that the writing “Joseph Bonnom Stephens” on exhibits numbered 2499, 251, »nd 253, was not the same as the writing on exhibits numbered 247, 248, and 250. The writing on the first three was that of an uneducated man, and that of the last three was, in his opinion, written by an educated man, who had disguised his writing. In reference to his homestead section in Brewarrina, comprising 10,240 acres. Stephens said he put it into Mr Willis’s hands, because he had no money to carry out improvements,'- arid ‘he :signed away his selection. The, examination proceeded thus:— I: i,

Mr Davles:Who asked you to sign the paper?—Mr Willis said. “There is a paper that has to: be signed,” and I signed it. I did not know what I was signing, *

Was Mr Willis’s sheep cm the land? — I do not know. His Honour : Were they your sheep—:(No answer.) j „ _ , Did you live on the land? —Yes, and I looked after the sheep which were put tdlGT 1 © Who put the sheep there? —I think it was the bank. Mr Davies: Did you get paid for looking after the sheep?—No. How long did you live on the lease? —About seven years. Who ihajs the homestead selection now P__l think the A.J.S. Bank got it in the long run. • McNair and Hoskins were released on bail later in the day by Mr El. H. Boultbee, at the No. 1 (Clarence street) Police Station, themselves each in £2OO, and one surety each of £2OO, the sureties being Mr Stephen Sullivan, (commissdon agent, of the firm of Messrs Smith and Sullivan, and Mi’s W.. N. Willis, of Rand wick, the former for Hoskins, and the latter for McNair. Hoskins made no reply to the information. McNair said: “They do not want us ; they want to bring Willis back, that is all. The warrant for the arrest of Willis was cabled to the Natal police on Saturday. McNair and Hoskins will be bruoght before the Water Police Court, and formally remanded. —S.M. “Herald.”