I.—3a

Shortly after that report was made the estate was let to the Eev. Mr. Williams, at a rental of £500 per annum, the lease expiring in February, 1878. It appears to the Committee that the sum so agreed to be paid was the full annual value of the estate at the time the lease was entered into, but that, on the expiration of the term next February, it will be worth a mucb larger sum, probably three times as much ; but the Committee have no reason to suppose that there is any intention on the part of the trustees to let the estate for less than its actual value. The Committee have arrived at a very decided opinion that the management of the estate by the Rev. Mr. Williams has been good, and that its increased value is largely due to his exertions. .Nor hiive the Committee reason to think that the conduct of the school has been deserving of the blame which the petitioners attach to it. It appears to be true that the children at present attending the school come from a distance, and no children of the original owners of the land are at present in attendance; but this, in the opinion of the Committee, cannot be attributed to any mismanagement on the part of the gentleman in charge, and it seems to be certain that in no case has admission been refused to children of the petitioners or other of the original owners. The Committee are scarcely of opinion that it comes within their province to recommend to the trustees any special mode of securing the greatest advantages from the estate, as these gentlemen act according to their own judgment on their own responsibility; and especially as the Committee have no reason to think that the management has hitherto been injudicious. John Bryce, Bth November, 1877. Chairman.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE. Monday, 29th October, 1877. Mr. Takahoana, M.H.E., examined. 1. The Chairman.] You have heard read the petition from Te Hapuku and others in reference to the Te Aute College Estate ?—Yes. 2. Are you fully acquainted with the matter referred to in that petition ?—Yes. 3. Are you aware of the purposes for which the ground was given by Maoris originally ? —Yes. 4. What were those purposes ?—lt was the Governor and the Bishop who asked the Maoris to give some land for a school for the children. 5. Was it understood that the school was to be for the Native race? —It was to be for the Maori children only. Those were the only children mentioned at that time. 6. Was it to be for the Maori children generally, or only for the children of a particular tribe ? —I am not clear about that. 7. What quantity of land was given at that time ?—I do not know what extent of land was given, because the land had not then been surveyed. 8. Was a school erected on this land by the trustees in accordance with the understanding made at the time the land was purchased ? —Yes. The children had previously been sent to school at Otaki, and Mr. Williams went to Otaki and took the children back with him to Napier. 9. When was this ?—I cannot say what year it was. 10. Did the Maori children avail themselves of the educational facilities provided by the school? — Yes, when Mr. Williams went there. 11. Then, was the original intention and understanding carried out in its integrity ? —No. 12. I understand you to say the school was opened on the land in accordance with the original intention, and the children availed themselves of the school ?■ —The school was not upon the land when Mr. Williams went there. It was upon land belonging to the Maoris. 13. Has there been any breach of the original understanding with respect to affording facilities for the education of Native children? —Yes. 14. In what way?— The school was objected to by Eenata and myself when we put up our schools. 15. Where is your school situate—how far from this school ?—lt is at Pakowai, about a day's walk from Te Aute. Ido not know the distance. 16. Was the ground of your objection to Mr. Williams's school that it was likely to interfere with the attendance of the children at your school ? —There was no school then, because we urged that one should be put up, and one was put up at Te Aute. 17. Near it ?—On the other side of the lake. 18. And maintained from the proceeds of the Te Aute estate ?—1 do not know. 19. Was the ground of your complaint that the school had not been put up on the Te Aute estate, but somewhere else ?—The objection was that a house was put up on the Te Aute estate, but no school. The school was put up on Maori land, but that was closed. 20. Is there no school open now ?—Only lately, since we urged upon the Government to put up schools. 21. Was there any reason why the Native children should not attend that school of Mr. Williams, notwithstanding that it was not exactly upon the Te Aute estate? —The school was broken up. 22. Why ? —The children left because they were not being educated ; they were only employed in chopping wood. 23. The children were withdrawn by their parents and friends?—Xo; they went away themselves ; they were grown up.

2