Tuesday, 27th January.

Tuapeka Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1115, 31 January 1885, Page 3

Tuesday, 27t h January.

The inquiry into the alleged cases of dummvism at Waitahuna West was commenced at the office of the Land Board on Tuesday morning. There were present — Messrs Maitland (Chief Commissioner), Clark, Bradshaw, Duncan and Green. The Chief Commissioner staled that he had received a telegram from Mr M'Kenzie stat> ing that he had missed the train, and should not be able to attend before two o'clock.

Mr Haggitt conducted the inquiry ; Mr Connell appeared for Mr Smith ; Mr Mouat for the objectors} and Mr Macgregor to watch the proceedings for other licensees.

Edward Herbert, J.F., stated that John Martin Smith, Robert Low, William Smith, James Smith, junr., John Hughes, and John Gilland signed their declarations before him at Greenfield Station. He asked them the usual questions but did not have any particular conversation with them about taking up land. He had several conversations with Mr James Smith, senr., who assured him that tbe men were bona fide settlers. He had no reason to doubt this.

To Mr H. Clark : It was utterly untrue that witness went to Greenfield for an improper purpose, as had been insinuated in a letter by Mr Gooday, of Lawrence, which had been published in the "Otago Daily Times." Examination continued by Mr Haggitt: Witness had paid the half-yearly instalments due on some of these selections. He received cheques for a larger amount on "James Smith and Sons," got them cashed, and paid the Rec iver of Land Revenue. He had so paid instalments for John Martin Smitb, James Smitb, junr., William Smith (head shepherd for J. Smith and Sons), John Gilland, and Alexander Wvmar. He supposed someof the men were still in the employment of Smith and Sons. John Martin Smitb deposed that he was the licensee of section 17, block V, Waitahuna West survey district. He purchased after considerable competition. The section was formerly prt of run 106, which had been held by his father. The land belonging to the other selectors had not been ploughed with the firm's teams, but witness had personally helped the men by lending them money. He had assisted in this way William Durant, Wm. Jamieson, Robe-t Low, John M'Kay, John Gilland, John Hughes, Alexander Wymar, and Henry Edie. He lent them money without security, and without having any control over the expenditure. The money had been spent on the sections. Until recently the whole of the sections were surrounded by one fence. So far as witness knew, the selectors put it up themselves. He bad reason to believe that the money lent bad been partly spent in this manner. It was not a condition of the loans that tbe money should be thus spent. He could not say how it was that the sections were all included in one ring fence, and that there was no subdivision until recently.

Mr Hagfgitt: What inducements, if any, did you hold out to these men if they became purchasers ? Witness : That I would give them every assistance I couW. I did not specify in what way, beyond that if th- y wanted work at any time it would be given to them. There was no written agreement and no understanding that I was to have security over their land for the advances made, although they offered two or three times to mortgage their property. There was no agreement, express or implied, that I was to acquire any benefit from tbe fact of these men becoming selectors.

What advantage did you derive from these men taking up the land in preference to others? —l had two reasons. The first was that I knew I was giving assistance to good men— men who were useful and could be relied upon for service vrben wanted. Secondly, I scoured very good neighbors. No term was fixed for the repayment of the money. I t^l most of them they could have the money for tea years at 6 per cent. They could pay the money back any time they liked before that time — the sooner the better, so far as I am concerned.

To Mr Mouat, witness said that before the declarations were made there had been no arrangement made by him that they should all be at the station for the purpose of making them, but they were working on the station. Some of the men had asked for leave to go to Lawrence to get their declarations made. Witness had advanced in all about £1000 to the men. He kept an account of the amouuts in a book of bis own, which he had not with him, and which could not be obtained unless he went for it. Edie had left his place, and witness wou'd be at the loss of the money he had advanced. This was not much. Ball had also lefty but his successor bad taken the responsibility of his debt. The men could get their meat from the station if they liked, but were not obliged to do so. Jamieson and Low came to witness for advice after making their purchases, and be suggested what portion of the land they should clear first. Witness did not advance money specially for the fenc ing. He heard the standards came from Reid and Gray's. He made no advance to William Smith. The sheep running on William Smith's section belonged to him (William South.) Tfo arrangement was made as to paying the interest at stated times. It was to be simple interest, and way to accumulate. Mr Mouat : I almost wish I had been one of your friends, Mr Smith.

Witness : lam not sorry you were not. — (Laughter.) Alexander Anthony Wymar, the licensee of section 11, block v, Wuitahuna district, was next examined. He stated in his evidence that, before the purchase he entered into an arrangement with John Smith to get the loan of money at 6 per cent. Witness and his family were living on his section. He had borrowed between £200 and £300. Witness was a fencer, and, in partnership with Ball, did most of tbe fencing. He was paid by John Smith. Witness paid for his own fencing. Witness found, the standards on the ground, but did not know where they citne figm. He got his own wire and standards from John Smith. John Oxenbould did his ploughing. Witness paid him with money borrowed from Joh.n Smith. Mr Smith's sheep were running on wit ness's land- for some time, and he wag paid 2s per acre. Witness had made nothing as yet out of the laud, He would get his finfc crop off it this

year. He had no agreement with anybody to take the land off his hands. Witness gave no receipt to Mr Smith for the money he borrowed. He believed he had done borrowing. If tbe value of his own labor was estimated, he bad spent altogether on the land upwards of £450.

To Mr Mouat : Witness's cottage cost about £70, not including some extras. John M. Smith supplied the money. When he went in for the land he had £50 or £60 of his own, partly in his possession aud partly owing him by John Smilh. Witness had an idea of the amount he owed Mr Smith from what the latter told him—about £200. Witness kept no accounts.

James Smith, jun., the licensee of section 18, block V, Waitahuna, was examined. He had lent no money to the other licensees, nor had the firm done so. He had bought his section entirely of his own motion and for his own benefit, and had sufficient funds to enable him to do so. The fencing of his land had been done by tbe same man who fenced his brother's section, and the amount paid for it was debited against him in the firm's books. The advances made to the men were debited to his brother. Witness resided on his section, which he hal improved by planting trees and cultivating 114 acres of it. For his section he paid £3 Is 3d per acre.

To Mr Mouat : Witness was not the owner of any other land. The sheep were taken off tbe sections about the end of tbe winter of 1883 ; but he could not say whether the 2s per acre bad been paid or credited to the settlers.

Shortly after five o'clock the inquiry was adjourned until half-past ten o'clock next morning.