1.—4

16

Hon. Mr. Bonae in attendance, and examined as follows : 102. Mr. 0' Conor.'] You arc proprietor of the West Coast steamer "Waipara"? Yes. 103. Upon several occasions during the past year did you send her to the Ngakawau Eiver for coal ? I sent her to Westport for the purpose of going there. 104. What was the result ? She was never able to get in. "When at Westport information was got that the bar was not in such a condition as to make it safe for her to enter. 105. Did she go down at any time and make the attempt to enter ? She went down for once that I know of for certain. lam not sure but she went down a second time. 106. What draught of water does the "Waipara" draw? She draws about 5 feet when light, and probably about 7 feet when loaded. 107. The Chairman.] Do you know Captain Eiley ? I know he is captain of a small steamer of his own, called the "Eesult." 108. Mr. O'Conor.] Have you ever been at the Ngakawau yourself? I went down with the " Waipara." That was the only time she went there and entered that port. 109. Did you take in any loading? No, they had just commenced to mine then. We took two tons, just to try .the coal. That was all that they could give us. I went down just to examine, and sec the prospects there were of working the river with the " Waipara."

■Wednesday, Ist Octobek, 1873. Mr. Albert Beethah in attendance, and examined as follows: 110. The Chairman.] Ton have made certain alterations of importance in your evidence given before this Committee on a previous occasion. For instance, you have altered the words £LO,OOO and substituted the words £1,000. How did you come to make those alterations? I did not say £10,000, and when the reporter showed me the proof I struck it out. What I said was ': £1,000 or £2,000."* 1 put in £1,000, as I think the sum was nearer that than £2,000. I did not want to mislead any one in my statement. I fully believe the sum was about £1,000; at all events, I put that iv as being nearer the mark than £2,000. Still I believe that it was not over £1,000; but lam safe in setting it down as £2,000. If you will allow me, I will put in a letter from Mr. Curtis. I asked him to state in writing his views as to the words I made use of. I also asked Mr. Beeves, who was Chairman of the Committee, and he states also that it is his impression that the words I made use of were £2,000. 111. Hon. Mr. Richardson.'] "Was the evidence produced the evidence you gave before the Industries Committee ? No, Sir; in some cases I had to correct it. I explained to the Chairman that I was sorry I had made some personal allusions to parties in Westport which I would rather not see in print, as it might hurt their feelings. 112. You see that a large amount of evidence was given ; that evidence was taken down in shorthand, and it is quite apparent on the face of the corrections you have made either that the evidence has been taken down wrong, or on reading over your evidence you see alterations to be made so as to express your ideas, or else you gave evidence which you did not intend to give; one or other of these must have suggested themselves to you ? The reporter was in fault, and the Chairman had repeatedly to correct him. For instance, the Chairman would ask the reporter what he had taken down, and on reading it over both ho and I had to correct him, because he had evidently misunderstood what was said. In one instance, at least, he took down exactly the opposite of what was said. 113. Mr. O'Conor. .] What expenditure was made by the company in improving the harbour and river ? The Albion Company paid £2,000 to the four gentlemen owning the mine, and they paid £2,000 for improvements; at all events, from £I,GOO to £2,000 has been spent. Since that time the company have spent money upon the river. lam safe in saying that from £1,000 to £2,000 was spent on the river. 114. Do I understand you to say that a sum of £1,600 has been spent by the predecessors of the company on the improvement of the harbour and river at the Ngakawau. Is that the case? The lessees did not show mo their books, but £2,000 was the amount they claimed to have expended. 115. You bought out the old firm? No, Sir. 110. You have got 100 shares in the company? Yes. 117. Are these not part promoter's shares ? No. 118. In the evidence as taken down, you are reported to have said, " The Albion Company have already spent £10,000 on that river in clearing it, and on pontoons and other necessary apparatus." Is that what you said ? I never said £10,000 ; I could not say anything about pontoons. I believe the reporter was behind me, and frequently the Chairman stopped me to correct him, which I did. I was not asked questions; I made a statement. 119. Did you not say that the company had spent £10,000 on that river, and on pontoons and other necessary apparatus ? I never made such a statement. 120. Your statement now is that the proprietors, who arc now represented by the Albion Coal company, have spent £1,000? What I stated was that the company have spent that amount, and arc still spending money upon it. 121. At what date did you give your evidence? Three weeks ago. Wo were at work at that time oil it. 122. Mr. Slicclian.~\ The evidence as originally written states, the Albion Company have already spent £ 10,000 on the river in clearing it, and on pontoons aud other necessary apparatus ? I did not make that statement. 123. Do you deny making that statement or any portion of it ? Ido not think I made any portion of it. I made a general statement, but not to that effect at all. The word pontoons is a word I never use. . * Reference is here made to evidence given before the Public Woi-ks Committee. (See Appendix, No. 14)