1.-8

VI

Tuesday, 10th August, 1886. The Committee met at 11 o'clock. Present: Mr. Conolly (Chairman), Hon. Mr. Bryce, Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Seddon, Mr, W. D. Stewart. Minutes of last meeting read and confirmed. Paragraph 3 read and agreed to. Proposed by Mr. W. D. Stew T art, as paragraph 4 : — That your Committee are not satisfied, from the evidence adduced, that a rehearing should be granted in the case of Kaimanawa-Oruamatua Block, but they are of opinion that there is fair ground for allowing an application being made to the Native Land Court for a rehearing, and that reasonable time for making such an application should be allowed. Proposed by Mr. Seddon, as an amendment, That all the words after the word " That" be omitted, with a view to insert the following : " your Committee are of opinion that a prima facie case for a rehearing has been made out in the case of the Kaimanawa-Oruamatua Block, and recommend that the necessary legislation to give effect to the same be passed." On the question being put, " That the words proposed to be struck out stand part of the question," the Committee divided as follows : — Ayes : Hon. Mr. Bryce, Mr. W. D. Stewart. Noes : Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Seddon. The Chairman gave his casting vote with the Ayes. So it was resolved in the affirmative. Debate. Proposed by Mr. Seddon, That this debate be now adjourned. On the question being put, the Committee divided as follows : — Ayes: Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Seddon. Noes : Hon. Mr. Bryce, Mr. W. D. Stewart. The Chairman gave his casting vote with the Ayes, on the ground that, the Committee being equally divided, he should vote for further time, although against his own opinion. So it was resolved in the affirmative. Resolved, That a copy of Mr. W. D. Stewart's motion be sent to each member of the Committee. Resolved, That this Committee do now adjourn till Thursday at 11 o'clock. Adjourned accordingly.

Thursday, 12th August, 1886. The Committee met at 11 o'clock. Present: Mr. Conolly (Chairman), Hon. Major Atkinson, Hon. Mr. Bryce, Mr. Menteath, Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Seddon, Mr. W. D. Stewart. Minutes of last meeting read and confirmed. Letter from Mr. Holmes received and read by the Chairman, and ordered to be printed. Resolved, That the preamble and paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the report as adopted at previous meetings be set out in the minutes. Preamble : The Committee have the honour to report that they have perused and examined the Bill, and the memorandum of the Hon. Sir B. Stout annexed thereto, and the petition of Mr. Fenton, and have taken evidence, and have heard Mr. Bell of counsel for Messrs. Fenton and Bogan. Paragraph 1 : With regard to the lands called Owahoko No. 1, Owhaoko No. 2, and Owhaoko, it appears that a rehearing was ordered as alleged in the first paragraph of the preamble to the Bill, and that no such rehearing ever took place. It also appears from the evidence that some at least of the parties who had applied for a rehearing did not intend that their application should be withdrawn. Paragraph 2 : The Committee are therefore of opinion that there should be a rehearing with respect to Owhaoko No. 1, Owhaoko No. 2, and Owhaoko. Paragraph 3 : With regard to the Kaimanawa-Oruamatua land it appears that on the hearing a witness, Noa Huke, stated that "Natives not present had a claim;" that the people then living on the land had a claim. But, after endeavouring, without success, to obtain from Noa Huke and Benata the names of Natives other than were put in the memorial of ownership, the Court, notwithstanding Noa Huke's evidence, made an order in favour of five Natives only.. Two of the absent Natives have been examined, and another has been represented by his son, before the Committee. They object to Benata being made a part-owner with them, and also complain that the hearing was held in their absence. It is stated by them that they had only three days' notice, which appears to the Committee to have been unreasonably short. It is however material that an application for a rehearing was received and considered, but refused by Sir Donald McLean, apparently on the ground that the Natives had had sufficient time to appear. Mr. W. D. Stewart's proposed paragraph 4 was further considered. On the question being put, the Committee divided as follows : — Ayes : Hon. Mr. Bryce, Mr. W. D. Stewart. . Noes : Mr. Menteath, Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Seddon. So it passed in the negative. Debate. Proposed by Hon. Mr. Bryce, That the debate be adjourned. On the question being put, the Committee divided as follows : — . .