57

I.—2a,

1G 6:5. Then, so far as you are aware, from conversation with Mr. Coleman, he was opposed to the reserve ?—That is my impression. 1664. How s long did you remain in Napier after the deed was signed ? —Let me see. I think I left Napier in November, but I am not sure ; perhaps it was in November, 1870 or 1871. 1605. Did you see Mr. Coleman or Mr. Sutton in respect to this matter between your leaving Napier and the completion of that title ? —Well, Ido not know. I had a good deal of talk with Mr. Coleman at odd times about this block. I was staying out at his house for some days. IGG6. _Tou never heard from Mr. Coleman himself that such a reserve had been made ?—On the contrary, my recollection of the conversation I had with him about it was that he desired that there should be no reserve in the Awa-o-te-Atua Block. Mr. Coleman had portion of the Mangaroa Block, and Mr. Campbell and Mr. McLean had other portions of the same block. There was an understanding amongst those three parties that the reserve should be made in the Mangaroa Block. I just give that explanation for what it is worth. 1667. Then you had no knowledge that a reserve of this kind formed part of the consideration for Paora Nonoi's share ? —I cannot say that I had. I cannot at present remember. I would require my memory to be greatly refreshed to recollect anything of the kind. 16G8. Were you uot formerly in the public service? —Tes. 1G69. In what capacity ? —I have been General Government Agent on the West Coast. IG7O. But before this transaction took place? —Yes; I have been several times in the Government service. 1671. Tou left the Government service on the East Coast?—Tes, and afterwards served again. 1672. Where did you serve again? —On the East Coast. 1673. Was that before you went on to the West Coast ? —Tes. 167-1. What whs the reason of your finally leaving the Government service ? —I left it, I think, at the change of Ministry, or something of the kind. I know that Mr. McLean ceased to bo a member of the Government, and I left my work there and then. 1675. Was there any other reason ? —Tou refer perhaps to my first connection with the Government service. 1676. Tes.—A dispute arose between myself and a Native named Ihaka Whanga, which has been the subject of parliamentary papers containing but half the truth. I beg to repudiate altogether the imputations against myself in those papers. 1677. The accusation against you, Mr. Worgan, was that you embezzled money belonging to Ihaka Whanga?—l give that the flattest denial. 1678. But you left the Government service in consequence of that accusation ? —Tes. 1679. Did you leave on your own accord ? —I resigned. IGBO. Did you have no intimation that you would be called upon to resign ? —Tes. After I resigned I was sent a letter saying I was dismissed. 1681. After that you were taken back into the public service ? —Tes, twice ; and after that I did Ihaka Whanga's business for years. 1682. Tou were examined, Mr. Worgan, as a witness before the Hawke's Bay Land Commission ?— I was. 1683. Do you remember the evidence you gave in respect to that examination of yours ? —Tes ; perfectly well. Tou are referring to the Kiwi Block. 1681. In that case I understand that you had certified as interpreter that you had seen nine persons sign the lease, and that actually you had only seen five of them sign ? —I cannot recall the exact evidence, but it is a matter in black and white. I discovered after that that two of the Natives who gave evidence before that Commission undoubtedly perjured themselves. 1655. Did you not admit in the box ?—I admitted that I had made a declaration that was not strictly true. There was a technical mistake. 168 G. Was it not that you had certified that a certain person had signed in your presence who really had not signed ? —That might have been. IGB7. Tho point was, you will remember, Mr. Worgan, that you made a declaration that you had seen A, B, C, and D, sign a deed, and that declaration was not correct ? —Tes. 1688. And that is what you refer to as a technical mistake? —Tes. 1689. Of course you are aware that the declaration you made had the force of an oath ?—I am quite aware of it; but you will bear in mind that there was no use made of that deed. IG9O. That is not the point. The declaration had the force of an oath, and, if false, subjected the interpreter to a charge of perjury ? —Possibly, if it had been looked upon in that light, I would not have had much consideration shown me. 1691. In consequence of that your liceuse as interpreter was suspended? —No. 1692. Are you sure it was not suspended for twelve months ?—I am quite certain that it was not. 1693. Was there not a recommendation made by the Commission that it should be suspended ?— Tes ; but it was not acted upon ; and I say that the recommendation was made in default of a thorough knowledge of the subject. IG9I. What do you call a "default of a thorough knowledge of the subject 1'? —One of the Natives before that Commission deliberately lied when he said that he had not signed the deed. He said that he met me at Waihua. In looking over papers subsequently I found that he had been actually present aud signed the deed. There were two Europeans to verify the fact. 1G95. But there were some other Natives referred to in the declaration as having signed who had not done so?— The moral integrity of that deed I would stake my life upon, notwithstanding what you state. 1G96. I am only asking you the question —-notwithstanding the moral integrity of the deed —there were some Natives who did not sign, but who were certified to in the declaration as having signed ? — The Blue Books are there, where the circumstances can be referred to. It is hardly fair to call upon me in regard to the matter. B—l. 2a.

Mr. Worgan,

sth Dec, 1879.