G.—s.

4

[T. FANCOURTi

40. Are you aware of anything more than this reference of Bishop Hadfield to a school being established there ? —No ; nobody knows anything beyond that. 41. You would not suggest that these remarks of his indicated higher education ?—I should say it indicated helplessness in carrying out the trust. 42. But the beginning was not that of a college but a school ?—The amount of timber that Bishop Selwyn had brought down evidently indicated that he meant to build a college ; but his own friends would not help him, saying that he had spent all his own money and would spend his wife's too. 43. The trustees generally have a notion that nothing has been done because you thought it was necessary to establish a school or college like St. John's —something for education of a higher kind. The object of my question was, does not the way in which the thing was begun rather indicate a different intention : not what was in the mind of Bishop Selwyn, but what was actually done—viz., there was a school of a not very assuming character, and that the object of the trust was the object of the gift of the Natives and rather for the support of that kind of school ?—They would say it was part of the trust. St. John's College had a Maori school attached to it. I think my explanation is the probable one : that the big thing was tried and failed, and rather than do nothing they said, " We will do what we can amongst the local Maoris that are here." What could the trustees do except what was done, with a piece of land which was not even bringing in £30 a year ? At some date or time you were advised that it was not right to attempt to establish a school, because it would not be in terms of the trust ?—No ; that it was not right to take the money from the Porirua and attempt to devote it to another school. 45. Mr. Quick.] When did all this trouble begin—the attack on the trust, the Maori discontent, and so on : was it after the trustees endeavoured to get a scheme or before that ? —lt goes back to Wi Parata's case, and before that. 46. The Chairman.] Have the trustees ever formed a notion that when the fund attained a certain amount they would start something under the trust ?—No. 47. Supposing they had a gift of £10,000 or £20,000, would they not consider that enough to start with ?—They might have started under those circumstances; but the Porirua fund even now is not more than £12,000 or £13,000, including the value of the land. 48. Do the trustees consider £4,000 a fair valuation of the land ?—lt is the last Government valuation ; you see there is no road to it. 49. It is free of taxation ?—No ; we pay land-tax. 50. Are you sure ?—I think so ; I may be mistaken. 51. Mr. Wardell.] In the amount you mention as the present asset, do you include a sum of £800 given by Mr. Harrington ? —There was no sum of £800 given by Mr. Harrington. There was a sum of £300 given by him when the Porirua land was given to be expended on a library, firstly at Porirua College, or, failing that, for such other purpose as the Bishop might please to put it to. The £800 represents accumulations. We have used this money, for the time being, to buy the Clareville site. There is an extract from Bishop Hadfield's letter in a minute-book. The money was placed in the hands of the Porirua trustees and always kept as a separate trust; and, on the strength of the clause which allows the Bishop to apply it to another purpose, it was used for the purchase of the Clareville site. 52. It was bought without drawing in any way on what you realise to be the Porirua trust ? — Yes. 53. The Chairman.] How long was it treated as part of the Porirua trust ?—lt never was so treated ; it has always been kept as a separate trust. Bishop Hadfield used to make grants from this fund to the Wanganui Collegiate School library, for instance. The trustees are so satisfied with the scheme that they do not want to diverge from it at all. The difficulty about the West Coast Natives going to the Wairarapa is said to be that the Natives say they and the Wairarapa tribes were enemies. Well, that was a matter of fifty or sixty years ago ; they have buried the hatchet now. 54. Mr. Quick.] It was part of the scheme of the Bishop to put an end to these tribal disputes ?— Yes. 55. The Chairman.] Supposing that the intention of higher education were laid aside, and your notion that it was to be something of the higher kind is not substantial, but that it was to be really a school for Maori boys principally was the right idea, would you say the trustees' notion would be better—to send them to the Wairarapa rather than to amalgamate with Otaki ?—Yes. 56. Why ?—Because they feel that Otaki is a different sort of school; they will not lay aside the idea of higher education. 57. Supposing the right interpretation of the grant is that there is nothing substantial in this notion of higher education, but civilisation of Maori boys by contact with Europeans and education, not of a higher sort: would you say that would not be better reached by amalgamating with Otaki than by sending them to the Wairarapa ? —lt would depend upon whether you brought them to Porirua. I consider Otaki a very bad site. 58. Well, supposing a school were established at Porirua, what then would you say ?—So far as I know, Ido not think the trustees would be at all in favour of it. They have never considered it as being what you say. Supposing the legal interpretation were that the grant is only for a primary school, I cannot tell what they might say. 59. Can you give any substantial reason why there should not be an amalgamation by utilising the Otaki trusts at Porirua, or the Porirua trust at Otaki ? —Yes ; you would weaken the school that we have. Our whole scheme has been from the beginning to amalgamate the trusts and do something. Isolated they are weak, and if you were to take the money from Porirua away from the Wairarapa, it would prevent us from making a good strong school there. It would never be anything but a comparatively small school.