17

L—4.

124. You now say the answer you gave was this : The proprietary, who are now represented by the Albion Company, and the Albion Company themselves, have spent £1,600 on that river, and the expenditure is still carried on ? I say it is equivalent to that. I did not go into the accounts of our predecessors. 125. You state the proprietary now represented by the Albion Company spent £I,GOO on that river, and the expenditure is still continued. Do you say that the first statement is incorrect, and that you stated what you have now substituted ? The proprietors and the Albion Company have spent a sum of about £1,000, or from that to £2,000. 126. Tou included the proprietors of the former company as well as the Albion Company ? Certainly, I meant that. 127. Do .you remember whether you mentioned that ? I do not remember what I said, but I meant that. 128. The statement occurs again at another part of your evidence. You there state, " The Albion Company have already spent £10,000, and they have now fourteen or fifteen men improving the river." And again, "I feel interested not only as a managing director, but as a largo shareholder. I have had opportunities for studying the subject to a much greater extent than Mr. Higginson has had." The whole of that is struck out, and you substitute the words, " a number of men " ? I believe that is the right number of men that is stated. I thought it unnecessary to offend Mr. Higginson, and I was sorry I had said it. Had I been answering questions I would not have made these statements before the Committee. I was sorry for having made them, although they were perfectly true. 129. Hon. Mr. Riehnrdson.'] You state that you did not make use of these words—" that £10,000 had been spent " ? Yes, Sir ; I did not make use of the words £10,000. 130. Mr. O'Conor.] You say that you are a large shareholder of the company? I think I did. I presumed I had liberty to strike out what I thought was unnecessary because it was not right. The next morning after the evidence was taken, I made the alterations in presence of the reporter, and with his consent. I did not wish it to appear in print, because it would have the effect of hurting people's feelings outside. 131. Mr. Sheelian.~\ At another part of your evidence you have struck out the following : " Messrs. Adams and Kingdon, of Nelson, are the agents, and will furnish copies of the articles of association and memorandum, and 1 have no doubt have by this time registered the company." You will observe you have struck out the most of these words ? I thought that it was unnecessary that they should appear in print, still it is all perfectly true. 132. Were they in a position to furnish the articles mentioned ? Tes. At that time they were in Dunedin, but they have since come up. 133. Are we to understand that you still adhere to the statement that £1,600 or £2,000 was spent upon the river. I mean in clearing it? Yes, from £L,OOO to £2,000. 134. Mr. o'Conor.] Have you got the documents or vouchers to show how that sum was expended? No. I merely took the amount from their statements ; and judging from the appearance of the river, I assume the statement to be true. 135. Do you wish to convey the impression that that sum of £1,600 does not include the mine and management, aud all expenses put to by the persons who had the ground before the Albion Company got into possession ? The original proprietors took 10s. per ton for all coal raised from their mine ; and they explained that their expenses were £2,000, which was affirmed, or at least it was considered to have been affirmed that their total expenditure was £2,000, the greater part of which had been expended upon the river. 136. Mr. Of Conor.] Relative to Mr. Higginson's report. Did you make yourself acquainted with that report before giving your evidence before the Committee ? I had read the report previous to giving my evidence. 137. Did you submit that report to Mr. Henderson ? I had not seen Mr. Henderson when I gave my evidence. 138. Or before you gave evidence before the Public Works Committee ? I had seen him before I gave my evidence before that Committee. 139. Did you show Mr. Higginson's report to Mr. Henderson ? Ido not know whether I showed it to him or not; Ido not recollect. 140. Do you remember that you stated in the Public Works Committee that Mr. Henderson concurred with what you stated as to the cost of piers for the river; that price being £200 per chain ? Yes. 141. Are you aware that Mr. Higginson estimated the price at £1,000? I know he did not. I have got a letter from him upon the subject. 142. If Mr. Henderson stated before the Public Works Committee that he did not concur with you in your estimate, would that be right; or can you explain why you stated that ho concurred with you ? I have a letter from Mr. Henderson stating why he did not concur with me. He explains it in that letter. I have asked him why he did not concur with me, and he explains it there. 143. You stated in your evidence that the Albion Company would certainly never use the railway if made. Do you still adhere to that statement ? What I meant to say was, that the expense would be so great that it would never pay the Albion Company to use it. That view I have always maintained. It never will pay them to use it at that price. I mean the expense per ton for travelling on that railway. 144. Mr. SheeJian.] Can you say from your own knowledge what amount has been spent by the Albion Company ; I mean that company of which you are the director since the company started ? I cannot say. 145. Have you no idea ? What I have already stated; about fourteen or fifteen men were employed. 146. Can you state what amount was spent by the company to the date of your giving your evidence ? I cannot say. 3—l. 4.