11

H.—l4

matters worse, that is why I opposed it. I have the Bill here. I see Part XV. That is called " Administration by a Board." That was not in accordance with report of the Commission. Commission proposed a Board, but partly elected by Natives. This Bill provided for three members—it does not say how many. My name was mentioned by Sir Patrick Buckley. Mr. Ballance spoke to me about being a Commissioner, and afterwards about being on the Board. I told him I did not think the Board would work. The appointment was not seriously spoken of. During the second session of 1891, I was continually waiting on Mr. Cadman about these reforms. Mr. Ballance pressed on Mr. Cadman the advisability of effect being given to the recommendations of the Committee—at any rate, to some extent. On one occasion I was asked to attend a Cabinet meeting, which I did. Then Mr. Ballance asked Sir Patrick Buckley to meet me and the Chief Judge and frame clauses for the management of Native land, and. also dealing with those claiming as equitable owners, and also relative to past disputes. Mr. Cadman asked me to frame clauses, which I did, and gave them to Mr. Cadman. They are substantially comprised in the Bill introduced next session by Mr. Carroll. My scheme of reform was not limited to management by Native committees, but claims of equitable owners and past transactions. "When the report of the Joint Committee was brought up, Mr. Ballance suggested in the House that I should move to set up a special Committee. He indicated the persons that should be on it —I and Captain Eussell and others—and that we should bring down a Bill. I gave notice of motion, and next day brought down notice of motion and moved it, consisting of Captain Eussell, Mr. Mitchelson, Hone Taipua, myself, and Mr. Carroll. I submitted names to Mr, Eolleston and Mr. Cadman, I believe. When Mr. Ballance made the suggestion, Mr. Cadman said nothing; I assumed he assented. Next day Mr. Cadman said if the House was determined to carry out my plans as set out in the Commission, it was time for him to pack up his swag, and leave the Government benches. The Committee was appointed, and met every day, and we brought down a short Bill. The Bill was read a second time, but it was evident Mr. Cadman and Mr. Smith especially against it; many clauses left out, and it was knocked all to pieces. There was evidently no intention of.carrying it. It passed second reading and went into Committee. In 1891, nothing was done except to stop Natives bringing actions ; subsequently to throwing out Mr. Cadman's Bill, Natives were perpetually—and Europeans also—pressing him to do something, but nothing was done. Promises were made that during recess something should be done, and when Parliament met should be done. During the recess Mr. James Carroll was appointed member of the Executive Council. He had taken an active part in desiring reforms. I thought that meant that something was going to be done. He knew all the phases of the Native question. All the newspapers had the statement that Mr. Cadman was to cease to be Native Minister and Mr. Eeeves to be so. After some little time things reverted to their former position. Before the session of 1892, there were large meetings of Natives about the management of their lands.' They were unanimous in asking permission to manage to some extent their own property. At the beginning of session 1892, it was understood something would be done. He introduced the same Bill he had before brought down, and few clauses altered. I think it was somewhat worse. It passed first reading, was referred to a Committee, and was not brought on to a second reading. It was rumoured Government would not allow it to be brought on to a second reading. There was a general desire that something should be done. I again interviewed Ministers and saw them. Again clauses were prepared and. drafted by me. Then Mr. Cadman agreed they should be carried into law—l understood in a measure of his. Next thing was that Mr. Carroll and Mr. Cadman told me it was thought advisable Mr. Carroll should introduce the clauses in the House, not in Mr. Cadman's name. I supposed it was because Mr. Cadman had opposed them. Mr. Carroll drafted the Bill; it was read the first time, but not carried then. Our Bill was to extend the Committees and the Equitable Owners Acts. That Bill was read a first time. At that time Mr. Cadman was called away to Auckland. I can tell what Mr. Carroll did. Mr. Carroll shwed me a telegram, and in consequence he would not go on with the Bill. After that Mr. Carroll did not go on with the Bill. Sir George Grey introduced a Bill on the same lines—a Native Empowering Bill. That went to a first reading, then to the bottom of the list, and was seen no more. I remember also introduction of Tahoraiti Bill, 1892. Mr. Cadman introduced that. It was to rectify an error of the Native Land Court putting in wrong names into order. It was referred to a Classification Committee—that and other Bills—to say whether it was public or private. I was on that Committee. I objected to all these Bills that they were dealing with private property, and notices ought to be given. I admitted this Bill to be a correct Bill in itself. I urged on members to bring in a general Act, and not to put out one or two things. At first the Committee was against me, and the Bill passed as a public Bill. As to several Bills, the Committee yielded to my arguments, and threw them out as private Bills. When report of Committee was brought up I moved it should be referred back. When that debate was going on Mr. W. C. Smith took a prominent part in supporting the Bill—he spoke of it as " his" Bill. Mr. Ehodes complained that Mr. Smith threatened him. There was a scene. Mr. Ehodes wished to bring it up as a question of privilege. It was July 19th. [Volume lxxv., Hansard.] 235. Chaeles M. Ceombib, recalled by Mr. Sainsbury.] I produce letter from C. D. Kennedy to me, dated 19th April, 1893, and certain telegrams attached. [Exhibit C for pfaintiff.] Admissibility held over till plaintiff calls in reply. 236. Edwaed Algeenon Haggbn, examined by Mr. Bees.] Live at Woodville. Editor of Examiner at Woodville. In 1885, was living at W 7 oodville; was then member of Hawke's Bay Land Board and Education Board. 237. While member of the Land Board, did Board have anything to do with sale of Maharahara Block ? —The Maharahara Eoad District is far up in the Euahines, and comes down to the Napier-Woodville Eoad. The nearest part of district is eight or ten miles from Danevirke byroad. The land was sold at prices running as high as £5 an acre ; that did not include totara bushes ; it was not totara land. Totara land ran up to £10 to £15 an acre, so far as I remember.