H,—l4

18

321. Did you see Mr. Smith while you were valuing?—>No. I never spoke to him but once, then at railway-station, when I asked him to recommend me. He never knew from me what value I was putting on. Before I fixed the values I had conversations with Mr. Kennedy—the Inspecting Assessor. I did first, 13th November. He came to my place that day after I started, rating. I showed him the book—the valuation of the special settlement had begun. I saw him again when it was about finished. 322. What was said? —On the first occasion he looked over the book—l3th November -*—and said it was all right—that I had to remember in valuing large blocks that I had to value them as they would sell, as a whole. The whole in one lump. 323. Nothing more then?— That I was right in putting the special settlement high. 324. On second occasion you saw Kennedy had you any conversation with him about values? —I did—all the large blocks were mentioned. He saw that the valuations were right. The Umutaoroa was mentioned as one of the large blocks. 325. Did you ever see Mr. Smith on the matter at all of the valuations?— No. The first time I knew of it was a note from Mr. Crombie, stating an objection made by Mr. Smith. As objection, I omitted their names out, That was the first time I knew Mr. Smith had to do with the land. [Mr. Smith's letter to Commissioner of Taxes, 29th June, 1892.j 326. Did your assessments come before the Revision Court ?•—Yes. I attended before the Court. 327. When? —Some time in June, I suppose. They sat in Woodville. Only one amendment made by the Beviewers. I was the cause of that. Some objections were made to my valuations. Jensen did, on account of the Hawke's Bay Timber Company —5,000 acresin the Tamaki. I think that the whole. Knight was not an objector. I understand Carkin had to pay part of the rates. Objected. I explained to Eeviewers I understood all had to pay share of land-rates. In Jensen's case no alteration was made. In Tahoraiti amount of value not altered, only division of interests. 328. Is there any unimproved value of any in the road district valued by you at £8 ?—No. 329. Have you sold any of the Umutaoroa Black ?—I introduced one purchaser to Mr. Smith, Mr. Charles'Baddeley. I did not make the agreement. I have not made any arrangement for any of the land. I have introduced several. I have made no written contract for the sale of any of it. I left Mr. Smith to complete. lam not aware that they are completed. If any completed I expect commission. 330. Have you any power from Mr. Smith about Umutaoroa Block ?—I have the power to let him know if I have a customer; no other power. 331. Have you any power to sign contracts?— No. Land about Danevirke has risen very much. There are several reasons: The main road to the coast; £7,000 spent on the road. Danevirke going ahead fast. I bought a property for £160. I refused £350 in the town. I bought it three years ago. I bought another in Block XIII., Section 18; 105 acres. I paid £220 for it, my own valuation. I bought it after the valuation. It was improved—2o acres in grass, and 20 or 25 acres fallen, not burnt; and whare valued at £10 ; and some fencing. Unimproved value, 30s. an acre; improvements, £65. There was money to pay to the Government, £40. It was deferred-payment section. 332. Cross-examined by Mr. Hees.] I only got one memorandum from Mr. Crombie about Umutaoroa Block. I cannot say at what time I got it. I got it after I sent in my report, my valuation. I was to rectify Mr. Smith's interest in it. "That I put down, Tamaki Timber Company," but did not note their interest in the block. 333. Look at your note-book ?—lt is down here, but not definite. What I had to do was to define Mr. Knight's interest and the company's. The note-book entry is in form I sent it in, except red ink. I never had the book back; the black ink is all my writing. I valued the leasehold at £3,000. [Smith's letter to Commissioner of Taxes, 29th June, 1892.] Had eight interests out of ten ; willing to pay on that. I did not see Smith about amendment. I knew that Tamaki Timber Company had interest for years. I knew that Knight had lease. As to Smith's interest in freehold, I had got information from Mr. Crombie. At the time I made the return I did not know that Tamaki Timber Company had any freehold interest. 334. How did you assess the value of Tamaki Timber Company on leasehold ?—lt had three and a half years to run. I saw that the timber was worth that for that time—£3,ooo. I thought freehold, less leasehold, worth £3,300. 335. Are you not working for Smith and Cadman as agent for them? —No; the same as anybody else. If I have to do anything for them I do it. I get no directions as to surveys. I know nothing of Mr. Cadman as' owner. 1 heard of it. I do not remember hearing that Mr. Cadman was owner. I knew that it was always called Cadman and Smith's bush. I knew Tamaki Timber Company was composed of Menteath at one time, and Mr. Smith and Mr. Cadman. I introduced purchasers to Mr. Smith—Mr. Baddeley, 300 acres, at £5 per acre; Dennahey, 300 acres, at £5 per acre ; Tansey, 100 or 150 at £5 per acre ; Eev. Wallace, 100 acres at £5 an acre. I cannot remember any others ; not Mr. Clayton. I saw him—not about this land —that is a different part of the land. The large blocks are behind a shop in front. What Clayton spoke of was in front. I mentioned £12 ; it was a fancy price. I do not know that a larger price was mentioned. 336. Did you mention £15 ?—I did not that I know of. I could not. I did not to Mr. Hunter, nor make any arrangement. I have spoken to a goqd few about this land. Mr. Smith was in Danevirke. I told him if he had any land for sale I thought I could get him a purchaser. I cannot recollect when this was. Not the slightest idea. It was this year. About fortnight before sale to Baddeley—l should suppose three or four months ago. He said he would let me have the same commission as anyone else if I introduced a purchaser. I was in treaty with some one else before Baddeley. I was talking to several before Baddeley about it.