I.—3a.

12

[j. JONES.

Hon. Mr. Ngata: Are we going to have Mr. Treadwell? Mr. Massey: Ido not propose to call him. Hon. Sir J. Carroll: Mr. Jones is repeating what Mr. Treadwell told him. It would be better to get it from Mr. Treadwell. ll 'it ness: Here is his own handwriting. 105. Mr. Massey.] Will you read the letter, Mr. Jones?—To make sure as to what did take place, and having some knowledge of men, I thought I would get Mr. Treadwell to reduce it to writing. Here is a letter, dated 24th October, written to Mr. Treadwell asking for the par ticulars of what took place between him and Dr. Findlay. 106. Hon. Mr. .\gata.\ Is that a parliamentary paper that you have there'/ —Yes, the report of the A to L Petitions Committee last year. This is what Mr. Treadwell says, under date 29th October, 1908: " With reference to your letter of the 24th instant addressed to us, we cannot say that it quite correctly states what the position is; it would be better for us, therefore, to detail the facts in so far as they appear to be material so that you can understand the present position. As you say, the Select Committee reported, and the report was adopted by the Legislative Council, we believe., without discussion or dissent. The writer several times saw the Attorney General with reference to the matter, and a perfectly plain intimation was given to him by Dr. Findlay that the Government would not either appoint a Commission to deal with or investigate the allegations in the petition. The Government, of course, cannot prevent dealing with the land, but we had an intimation from Dr. Findlay before the end of the session that no legislation would be introduced. Mr. Dalziell is acting for Mr. Herrman Lewis, and an agreement has been arrived at provisionally between the writer and him which your statement does not tally with. This agreement, of course, has not yet been completely approved by you, though we have understood from you from time to time that you will acquiesce in its terms. In order that you may quite appreciate what the position is, we enclose a copy of the draft (see note) which we have to-day sent to Messrs. Findlay, Dalziell, and Co. You will see that in some respects it does not accord with what you state in your letter. We cannot, of course, say that it has been conveyed to ue either by Dr. Findlay or Mr. Dalziell that these terms will be approved by the Crown, nor apparently is it necessary that they should—the matter is more one of private arrangement between you and the other parties in dispute than for the Crown ; but the Attorney-General certainly told the writer that he had submitted a memorandum prepared some little time ago of suggested terms of settlement which are little different from those embodied in the draft to the Hon. Mr. Carroll, and that Mr. Carroll thought it was a fair arrangement in so far as the Natives were concerned. We have, of course, stated to you our opinion as to what the effect of not coming to some settlement is; but, of course, that is a matter of deduction from the circumstances, and not a matter of what has been put to us by Dr. Findlay or Mr. Dalziell. There is one other matter in your letter which is not correctly stated : that is, that Messrs. Travers, Campbell, and Peacock, solicitors for the executors of the late Wickham Flower, are acting with Messrs. Findlay, Dalziell, and Co. in common interests. We cannot see that that is the position. The interests of Mr. Lewis and the executors of the late Mr. Flower, while they are in both cases antagonistic to yours, may conflict, and undoubtedly in some respects they do conflict. We trust this letter is sufficient for your present purposes. If you require any further information kindly let us hear from you.—Yours truly, Stafford and Trisadweli,. —Note.—The £5,000 in the draft agreement was increased to £11,000." I will put the original in. [Document put in.] 107. Mr. Mast-eij.] You petitioned the Upper House and got a favourable recommendation, but nothing has been done: is that the position?— Yes. I drummed at the Government's doore for nearly two years, but they would not give it to me. . 108. You got no inquiry?—l asked Sir Joseph Ward, " What is the reason why you will not give me this inquiry? " He said, " I think we must have overlooked it; you are entitled to it." At that Mr. Treadwell said, " Dr. Findlay told me we would never get an inquiry." Sir Joseph Ward said, " That is not my view. I never said so. I promised Mr. Jones an inquiry. I remember the circumstance, and he is entitled to it. He shall have it." But they forgot it again; I never got it. 109. You petitioned the House of Representatives last year, did you not, asking for an inquiry? —Yes, consequent on my not being able to get the one that was recommended by the Committee of the Upper House. 110. What happened in connection with your petition of last year : have you got the report of the Committee?—l have it here. 111. Will you put it in?— Yes. 112. Does it recommend an inquiry? —No. It says, " That, in view of the fact that the petitioner believed hie original lease from the Natives to be legally sound, and taking into consideration the treatment meted out to him by solicitors in England, whereby he lost hie interest in the estate, the Committee recommends that in any such mutual understanding the petitioner's claims to equitable consideration should be clearly denned." That is the wording of it. The " mutual understanding " mentioned there is something between the Government and Mr. Herrman Lewis. The Government complied with that recommendation very strictly. 113. What did they do? —They clearly defined that I had nothing to do with it. 114. You mean to say that nothing has been done to give effect to the recommendation of the Committee? —That is so. They clearly defined that I had nothing to do with it, because they gave Herrman Lewis facilities under some other document signed by the Governor. Mr. Massey: The point I wanted to establish was that you had done everything possible— that you had petitioned the Legislative Council and the House of Representatives, and got favourable recommendations in both cases, but nothing has been done. Mr. Mocßonnbl.- The petition that came before the A to L Committee was a petition to be heard at the bar of the House.