W. H. BOWLER.j

47

I.—3a.

23. You got a letter from Mr. Joshua Jones objecting to the sale, did you not?— Yes. 24. On what date did you get that letter? —That date has been stated in evidence. I think it was 22nd March, speaking from memory. 25. What was the reason that you got it so late? —I do not know. I cannot account for delays in transmission. 26. The Chairman.] Did you keep the envelope?— No. 27. Mr. Dive.] Was it a registered letter?—l could not say. lion. Sir J. Carroll: It is not relevant, beyond the fact that that letter was sent in by Mr. Jones. 28. Mr. Dive.] I understand that the Natives retain a certain interest in this land —£2,500 worth of shares?— Yes. '2.). How is that going to affect local taxation? Will this company be exempt from taxation tor local purposes?— That is a question that would be better answered by a solicitor, I think. You should take legal advice on the point. 30. On looking through your minutes I notice they are pot signed by yoni —No. 31. How is that? —It is the usual practice not to sign them. 32. Mr. Berries.] How long have you been President of this Maori Land Board?— Since the Ist April, 1910. 33. Is it the usual thing to get instructions from the Minister with regard to meetings of assembled owners? —It is not unusual. 34. Is it usual in a case of private alienation, or is it generally done when the Crown has an interest J —It is usually done when the Crown lias an interest. 35. Have you had any other rases, since you have been Chairman of the Board, in which instructions have come from the Minister and the Crown has not been interested? —No, I cannot recollect another. 36. Have you got that letter of instruction?—l have put it in. 37. Did it contain anything beyond the instruction to hold the meeting of assembled owners t - -That was all. 38. Did it say for what purpose?— Yes, to consider the question of sale to Mr. Herrman Lewis. 39. Did it mention the sum?— No. 40. In the Gazette notice the sum is not mentioned, is it? —No. 41. What was the exact offer made at the first meeting of assembled owners?—To purchase at £25,000, or such greater sum as was found to be the Government valuation of the owner's interest. 42. Who made the offer? —Mr. Dalziell, on behalf of Mr. Lewis. 43. Was Mr. Dalziell present at the first meeting of assembled owners? —Yes. 44. Was Mr. Skerrett? —Both were present. 45. Mr. Dalziell made that offer, and mentioned the actual sum? —Yes. 16. And the Maori owners voted on that proposition?— Yes. 47. Then subsequent to the meeting of the assembled owners, the Board held a meeting in the evening of the same day? —That is so. 48. And you had before you an application for the removal of the restrictions?—An application for a recommendation for an Order in Council. Our meeting was held both before and after the assembled owners' meeting. 49. I am speaking of the meeting that took place in the evening?— That was a continuation of the proceedings of the morning. 50. At that meeting there came before you an application for recommendation for an Order in Council? —Yes. 51. And you recommended it?— Yes, the Board did. 5 v>. You knew at that time that the Natives were not at all agreeable to the sale? —We knew that in the case of two blocks there was a majority in favour of the sale. 53. You knew that proportion of the Natives were not favourable to the sale? —Yes. 54. Yet you recommended that the Older in Council should be issued? —Yes, recognizing that the issue of the Order in Council would not in any way prejudice the Natives if they did not wish to sell. 55. Why did you recommend it? —Because we considered it in the interest of all parties that the Order in Council should issue. 56. Have yon got the application that was sent to you —the application for the recommendation?— Yes. 57. Whom was that signed by? —Chapman, Skerrett, Wylie, and Tripp, solicitors for applicants, on behalf of the Native owners. 58. It whs the Native owners who applied?— Yes, through their solicitors, Chapman, Skerrett, Wylie, and Tripp. 59. I/on. Mr. Ngata.] Was there not an application also from Herrman Lewis? It is so gazetted?— Yes, there was also an application by Findlay, Dalziell, and Co., solicitors for Mr. Lewis. 60. Mr. /TerrieH.] 'Ihcre were the two applications?— Yes. 61. At that meeting of the Board in the evening, were Mr. Skerrett and Mr. Dalziell both ii resent?— Yes. 62. Did they argue the matter before you?— The proceedings are fully reported in the minutes. They both addressed the Board at some length. 63. Wlio applied for the adjournment of the meeting of the assembled owners?—l stated yesterday tlifit I think I was mainly responsible for the adjournment. Seeing there was no prospect of unanimity, I suggested it. The Natives all welcomed the suggestion, and acquiesced.