THE MOKAU CASE

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10436, 29 September 1911, Page 5

THE MOKAU CASE

MR JONES' STATEMENT.

By Telegraph—Press Association. WELLINGTON, Last Nigttu. . The Mokaoi inquiry was resumed to-<lay. Joshua Jones said that 31st March. 1908, was the date of .witness''interview with Mr McNah.

. Witness didaiot mean to convey that Ali- Jennings was- 'there- on that date.

I Witness wished tlie production of letters written by him to tine .Committee during the course of the inquiry, and this was .agreed to, and I the- letters were put in. | Witness then read a lengthy statement. He contended that two previous Commissions, "had reported in his favour, yet the Government ignored their recommendations-. Wit- , ness considered that the Government which had .so acted would stop at nothing to defeat witness- in his demand for justice. Witness would have ■been .-able to. sell his interest in London in.' 1907 .but for damaging reports circulated in. London by an interested New Zealand agent. I u 1906 Lewis told witness, as there might be trouble about the title, lie kid specially engaged Messrs; Findlay and Dalziell, a* he thought this engagement would piove worth while. Witness considered that subsequent events, had .justified this action of Lewis. Witness contended that LY Findlay had spokei- in the Upper House-an a manner that was practically in .advocacy of Da- Findlay'® own. firm'©' client's case. In 1908 tlhe Commission, Lewis stated, had not paid any money for the purchase, as he had "not. a clear •title j but he or- someone-else- would pay when a clear title was obtainable . Yet this statement did not «appear in the report of the Commission. Witness could hot account for this Comimisisi'on. In witness' opinion, tibe Stout-Palmer Commission had no legal authority to deal with tfie Mok-au case.' ;- .-,

After dealing with the Order-iri-Cbuncil, witness complained"that this inquiry would .not ,give the country any idea c£ the importance of the transaction.

Mr Jones is'aid that when he foegan negotiation® regarding . Mokau in 1882 the Native Land. Court had never sat in, the King Country. He could assure the Committee that' there had iheen. no improper conduct on has part all the way .lirough. the proceedings. •''"■

This concluded the jvhole of. the evidence. ....,'