I.—2a.

2

to A. Karaka this deduction was to recoup him for the survey, which had been paid for by him previously. According to Mr. Sheehan and Mr. Brissenden's account, it was to meet a refund due to Mr. Stannus Jones in respect of an abandonment of lease of part of the Pakiri Block. According to Mr. Nelson, £50 was for Stannus Jones, and £50 for Arama Karaka himself. This deduction being made for somebody, leaves £300 lodged at the Bank of New Zealand on 13th May, 1874, in the joint names of Mr. Sheehan and A. Karaka. In December, 1874, a cheque was drawn payable ,to order, signed by both trustees, for the purpose of paying Mr. Gittos' expenses connected with Wi Ajno and his brother, and there remains at present £80 to the credit of the trust-account at the bank. The above statement leaves £200 to be accounted for. Leaving out Arama Kanaka's evidence, which we consider entirely unreliable, Mr. Sheehan says that he and Arama Karaka signed a cheque for £200, dated 14th May, 1874, of the proceeds of which Karaka kept £150 to pay for the survey, and handed him (Mr. Sheehan) £50 for Mr. Jones on account of the cancelled lease before mentioned. Mr. Brissenden says that he paid this money in his own office, in bank notes, to Karaka, which notes he had personally obtained on his own private cheque, given in exchange for Karaka's cheque on the trust fund, being no doubt the cheque above mentioned. Mr. Nelson says that he got Brissenden's cheque for the £200, went to Oliver's shop in the town, found A. Karaka there, took him with him to the bank, drew the money in notes, and gave them in full to Karaka in the presence of a Mr. Hargreaves, and that he knew nothing of the way in which Karaka disposed of them. There is also a great conflict of evidence as to the amount paid to Jones, the amount paid on account of survey, and to whom paid, and on other matters. It seems pretty certain that Arama Karaka himself received the proceeds of this £200--cheque; but whether to recoup cost of surveys paid by himfor towards the expenses of maintaining Wi Apo and his brother, or to repay Jones his advance, or some and which of these objects or any other, is quite unproved by the evidence. It seems to the Committee, however, that there is no evidence to show that Mr. Sheehan handled any part of the £200. The Committee, however, thinks it its duty to call the attention of the Legislature to the expediency of providiug some direct control on the part of the Government over trusts in which Natives are concerned, either as trustees or beneficially. Probably it would be well that such trusts should be administered by the Public Trustee. But, at all events, the evidence in the case proves that, in the interests of the Natives, a periodical audit of such trusts by a Government officer should be established. 28th August, 1880.

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Thttesdat, 24tii June, 1880. Mr. E. J. Gill, Under-Secretary, Land Purchase Department, examined. Mi. Gill: The first paragraph in this petition, that Wi Apo died about fifteen years ago, is correct. The second, that in his lifetime he was interested in several blocks of land —a block particularly, called Pakiri—is correct. The third paragraph, that he committed the two minors to the care of Mr. Gittos, I know nothing of. The fourth, that the said block of land was agreed to be sold to the Government, and the share of Wi Apo of the purchase was £400, is not correct: the share was £800. The fifth paragraph,the chief Arama Karaka, who was also interested in the block, acted in conjunction with John Sheehan, the late Native Minister of the colony, as trustee for the boys herein referred to, and I was informed by Adam Clark that £400 would be the share of the boys in the purchase-money. I do not know what Mr. Gittos may have been told. 1. The Chairman.] Do you know whether Adam Clark and Mr. Sheehan were trustees ? —They were trustees. 2. Who appointed them ?—They were recommended by the Native Land Court, and appointed by the Government. 3. They were officially appointed P-nYes. 4. Mr. Wakefield.~\ Under what Act ?—Under the Maori Real Estate Management Act. The Native Land Court recommends and the Governor appoints. This is the original document. [Document produced.] As to this paragraph, that the two boys were attending school, I have no knowledge; nor have I any knowledge as to the fact of the £20 cheque between the trustees and Mr. Gittos. It is not possible that I can have any knowledge of the other parts of the petitioner's statement. 5. The Chairman.'] That is, the statement in reference to the money transactions ?—Yes. 6. You will observe that there is another portion of the petition in reference to land. I should like to ask whether any questions will be asked in reference to these particular transactions?—l would remark that I am well acquainted with the history of the Pakiri Block from its first being negotiated for. It has been the subject of inquiry upon which I have had to expend a good deal of time. 7. Mr. Walcefield.] You are accountant in the Native Office, I believe ?—I was some years ago. 8. Have you any official knowledge that this £800 —Wi Apo's share of the proceeds of Pakiri— was paid to Mr. Sheehan and Adam Karaka as trustees ? —No ; the £800 was not paid. Hori te More on behalf of his son Panapa, and Mr. Sheehan and Adam Karaka as trustees for Wi Apo, sold to the Government two interests in the Pakiri Block. This block contains 31,408 acres, and the land was awarded by the Native Land Court to three Natives. This is the original memorial of ownership [memorial produced] of the block of land. The Government were to buy the two interests for £1,600 —that is, for two-thirds of the block. £800 was paid, of which, it was understood £400 was for the Natives intereated, and for whom trustees had been appointed, and £400 for the other interest. The

Mr. K.J. Gill June 24, 1880.