The Miners' Rights Enquiry.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 1994, 26 May 1875, Page 2

The Miners' Rights Enquiry.

THIS DAY. (Before Jackson KeddelLj Esq., Commissioner.) In accordance with the authority rested in him by, the Government, Major Keddell opened a Commission of Enquiry into the illegal possession of miners' rights at Ohinemuri bn the 3rd March, this morning. The enquiry was held in the Warden's Court, Grahamstbwn.. Major ITeddell, in opening the Court, read his authority as follows:— Whereas it has been alleged that certain miners' rights to be exercised within the Ohinomuri goldfield were improperly issued from the Warden's Court in the said goldfield by certain persons before the proclamation constituting the said goldfield under the provisions of the Goldfields Act, 1868,/ had been made known or published therein, or were otherwiser granted, to t such jpei|so.ns~ as aioresala prior to tlie time at which the same ought to have been granted, and contrary to the instructions given .by or on behaif of- the Government of the Colony as to the time of the issue of such i miners' rights : ' Aad whereas it is expedient that an enquiry should be held for the purpose of enquiring into the truth of such ; allegations, and of ascertaining by whom or by whose authority the said miners' rights were so improperly issued : ■Now therefore I, George Augustus Constantine Marquis of Normanby, the Governor of the Colony of New Zealand, in pursuance v. and' exercise of; all the powers and authorities enabling me in ! that behalf "and by and with the advice and consent of the Executive Ceuncil of the said Colony do hereby appoint you the said Jackson Keddell, Esq., to be a Commissioner to enquire into the truth of the said allegations, and to ascertain on what day or at what. time and by whom or by whose authority the said miners' rights were so improperly issued or granted as aforesaid, and also by whom such miners' rights were so issued or granted, and on what terms or conditions the same were so issued or granted : And generally and by all lawful means to take such evidence and make such enquiry into the premises as you shall think expedient for the purpose aforesaid. And I hereby and with the advice and consent aforesaid require you within two calendar months after the date of this commission or as much sooner as the same can conveniently be done (using all dilli-

gence) to certify to me under your hand and seal your several proceedings, and your opinion touching the premises : And with the like advice and consent I do hereby declare that this commission j shall continue in full force and virtue; and that you the said Commissioner shall and may from time to time proceed in the execution thereof at such place or places and at such times rb you shall jad ge. convenient, and although the same be not continued from time to time by adjournment; and lastly I do hereby declare that this commission is and is intended to be issued subject to the provisions of "The Commissioners Powers Act, 1867," and " The Commissioners Powers Act Amendment Act, 1872." ; -

[Here follow seal and signature of His Excellency.] ; Mr Tyler then rose and made an application for an adjournment on bebalf of Mr James Mackay, jun., for whom he appeared. Of course it was unnecessary for him to point out the object of the enquiry—namely, to ascertain whether i the miners' rights issued on the morning of the Sid March had been issued improperly by the officers engaged to perform that duty, or surreptitiously, as it had been called. Thisenquiry involved the reputation of all the officers concerned, and Mr Mackay was one of those officers. The previous investigation not having been on oath, the Commissioner had no power, to call evidence, and the Government had thought proper to pro- ' ceed further with the enquiry in the face of the general denial on the part of the officers that the. rights had. been irn-V properly issued. From this it was evidentthat the Government suspected one or> more of issuing the rights in manner contrary to the instructions given ; and \ the disclosure of such a fact would; involve at least the most severe censure and probable dismissal from office. The officers were thus upon their trial, and according to the common principle of justice they should,be given an opportunity to defend themselves. Mr Tyler then proceeded to state the reason of Mr Mackay's absence during the previous enquiry, the illness of his father namely, and having arrived here too late to be present at that enquiry, he was, recalled to Nelson, previously retaining him (Mr Tyler) to act for him; and, imagining that there would be ample time before the' present enquiry commenced, stated that he would give him further instructions subsequently. 'Mr, Mackay had not; returned, and the first intimation he (Mr Tyler) had received of the enquiry he saw in this morning's "paper. He considered this insufficient time, and should the adjournment not be granted, he should not consider himself in a position to act for Mr Mackay. TJnder the circumstances he thought the Commissioner would look upon the request for an adjournment as reasonable. The delay would not in any way affect the enquiry. The statements of the officers having been already given, there could be no apprehension of suppression by delay. He thought, moreover, that an opportunity should be given to Mr Mackay of being present, as there was a section of the community—which appeared to be represented by the Thames Advertiser—who considered that the responsibility for the illegal issue lay between Mr James Mackay and Mr Brisaenden. He would read a paragraph from the Advertiser, in which Mr Mackay was referred to— ;....-. , . .

.^ajor KLeddell ,skid. the;-reading of the paragraph referred to would not further the enquiry, and he would rather not have it read.

Mr Tyler said his reason for mentioning that was that it appeared to him to show the necessity there was that Mr Mackay snbuld be present more than any other gentleman connected with the issuing. So far as the late enquiry was concerned, he (Mr Tyler) had studied the evidence, as it appeared in the press, and he could not see that there was any improper issuing disclosed. The evidence shewed an improper attainmeat, but no improper issuing. And, inasmuch as the several officers concerned had denied improper issuing, he thought it rather unfair to say that it was surreptitious, and to maintain such an assertion.

Major Keddell said he -had objections to an adjournment. As to Mr Mackay's not knowing of :; the enquiry, he (the Major) was inclined to think that the Government would nofc-have allowed him to remain in ignorance. '

Mr Tyler: I believe Mr Mackay was communicated with as to tha present enquiry, and ho expressed his entire approval, but be was not aware of the time at which it was to be held.

Major Keddell said he could have got the information from him. As it was the delay already had only been to suit. Mr Mackay's convenience. As to the adjournment, he felt disposed to grant it, but did so with regret, as a great portion of the two calendar months, which was the term of his Commiisiori, had already expired, and there might be occasion for delay in securing tho presence of witnesses, who might think they could resist the Commissioner's authority. He would like to commence with the evidence of Captain Eraser, as it was upon his complaint the original enquiry was instituted, and as the interruption in - the; traffic between Auckland and the Thames had prevented his being present, he would adjourn the Court until the j?jsjng of the "Warden's Court to-morrow.

Mr Tyler pleaded that the time was very short. . : . ■ , : : Major Keddell observed that he would not have delayed a week but that he had thought Mr Mackay would be present on Monday, ; J After some further observations of an unimportant character, the Court rose.