Witness in explanati&n of an answer previously given to a question put by Mr. Creighton, said -The lease from the Natives of the piece of land which I now claim had been [legally*! acquired subsequent to that piece of land being proclaimed within the gold fields acquired ouJSa . Blchmm ji Are .y° u aware whether Mr. Mackay or any one else, on behalf of the Crown, obtained an agreement for mining purposes, or any agreement affecting that land?-I was not aware that Mr. Mackay had included this land within the agreement when I obtained it. lam aware now %6. Uo you know the nature of the agreement now ?—Tes I do or no?' DOeS ** ° XpreSsly indude or exclude the uso of the surface?-It is doubtful whether it does 45. Mr. Creighton.] It is part of the second agreement ?—Tes it is 46. Mr Richmond] Is this land on the flat, or does it include a portion of the hills ?—The whole of it is on the flat, and docs not include any portion of the hills mininl'p^fTf 7 If ** e J° £ Z™. confirmed > J°u would have the exclusive right of Saqlestionof £ Vallda tion Act. I had before that, but not since. & That Mn/'/'v^Tf'' 1 Does your lease bear date subsequent to the second agreement with Mr 4% V m W \ T ' it \?" " ot fware at the time that that agreement had been entered into. ' rr\ f- ll «f arlan %\}* there anything else you wish to say to the Committee ?—No. . - )0 - Tou expressed a wish to have Mr. Hay examined. What is his position of thTdeeds * ? ~ He " "™ J S ° licit ° r ' and h ° "»«»*» ™7 evidence as to tne date tl» r hG C il ainnan ' 1 J' avin S ascertained the opinion of the Committee, informed the witness that dlnen°se with 1 ""8 M B £ temen * »t0 ■*»* &Ct ' UA not beon dis P uted > a » d W«S dispense with the evidence of Mr. Hay on that point. Witness was thanked, and discharged from further attendance. The Hon. Mr. Fenton in attendance. to the^on 0 Mr. FerSn. H ° W ° rth ' th ° S* oll * H ° rne be read over The evidence adduced by tho previous witness was then read over by the short-hand writer. The Hon. Mr. Fenton under examination. <Ym2_+2*_! Ghairman -y T ™ , ha ™ heard the evidence read, have you any observation to make to the Committee concerning it?—l desire to make no observation h.r, 52 't\V ! '; IloWoril **T J™ an J , reco l rd oftlle proceedings ?-Tcs, I have ; the Judge's notes are here. (Witness produced the notes taken by the Court ) I hnvJ i 1! T n °? Tv t0 T h f d f e , the certificate bear ?-I am not aware that there is ; I have not read through the whole of the notes. (Witness produced and read the record which explained why the date was altered.) ' en 54. Supposing it had come to your knowledge that tho transaction the last witness describes had been entered into with the Natives, would you have considered it your duty, had you been Judge of the Court, to ante-date the certificate so as to legalize the transaction entered into P-H I had the power, as a judicial man 1 think I should do everything I could to validate his title, supposing the statements to be true. As Chief Judge of the Court, I have not only to decide principle!Tlaw on equ.tabeg ro und Sl f you can understand the expression, I am greatly concerned with the political state of the country and I cannot separate the two functions ; although deciding legal questions I am m many cases deciding peace or war. The first thing necessary is to keep faitlTwith the Native and obe rr,t C l th6 M 5 alS °, t0 I>reVent th6m from bre " kin S faith Supposing the statements Horiie ™ J Jto UpSe * aU tW perSOUS wh ° Seem *° become after Mr. caJ^^^:Z^ mßk the eigMl CkUSe ° f BUI Will Shut Mm ° ut ' is that 56. Do you see any way in which his case would be met P—l should not like to answer that question; I should not like to be one of this Committee to decide upon it r.*nJ!j f ir 3 * a " J k I. "• f ° rCe ' t ° 1 y° Ur knowled ge, which would allow of the certificate being recalled for the purpose of being amended or altered, when it has once gone to the Secretary for Growl Lands ?-Well I suppose the Act of 1863 would give the Chief Judge o that power. If the Secretary for Crown Lands returned the certificate, the Judge might do it. secretary mad p s ?u *" "ection B . ** -IT ,i ud ? menfc . a provision that you would desire to have of any use partlCular ' lou cannot avold havm g ifc > * you want the previous part of the Bill to be 60 W,° IT in A a iT ° f th ° A f ha V n " retros P ectivo e ffect ?-I decline answering that question. oO. Mr Howorth.] Supposing the Bth section were omitted altogether, would you be able to alter S'SS PreY IBSU ° d Sll ° U, . d not Hke t0 a — CT that <l uesti - with -t eonsidelion or to guide tho Committee m any way as to that. nf Jt The ° hairman : \ Y ou appear to be unwilling to answer the question put; is it on the ground of your unwillingness to answer the question, or on the ground that you have not given the question ' sufficient consideration and require time ?-Tou are in effect asking me for a legal opinion. q 62. Mr. Creighton] If the Bth clause were struck out, and the bill passed without any other amendment, would it have a retrospective effect ?-I should say so; there is no doubt about that. clauseLoto Sp°Bl o S° 7 T "* ** T"' recollection of th ° intents of the previous clauses up to clause 8 ?—No ; I suppose it is so, as I put it in with the view of preventing it oi.no you think the power conveyed to amend any proceeding under tho Act of °186S would extend to enable you to ante-date a certificate under the present Bill," should it become law ?-I have so considered, and the profession m Auckland generally have made many applications to me under that

Mr. Jm. Some. 18th August, 1869.

Son. Mi: Fenton. 18th August, 1569.

* Amendment by Witness when the evidence was read over to him.

8

V.— No. 6.

REPORT OE SELECT COMMITTEE