17

H.—loa

374. There was no division or voting upon that?—l do not think there was. 375. Can you say whether the general opinion was in favour of it, or whether there was any difference of opinion?—The Trustees, I think, after it had been checked, were satisfied with the amount; but they considered themselves powerless in the matter. 376. Not powerless as to the amount they were to receive ?—As to the power of the Government. 377. As to the taking of the land ?—Yes. 378. Can you say what members of the Board went into the calculation ?—Mr. Upton, for one; and I think, likewise, Mr. Burrows. 379. Do you know whether it was mentioned at the Board that the lessee was to acquire the freehold ? Was anything said about that ?—I was under the impression that reference had been made to it, but, as the other members of the Board say it was not, I must have been mistaken in the matter. I was under the impression when the matter was raised a month or two back; but going over it at this distance of time it is quite impossible for me to say that such took place. 380. Is your own impression now that the Board were aware of that ?—I thought that it was mentioned at the time, but they were unanimous against me that it' ■was not. There were five of them. I must have been mistaken. 381. Did you know it ?—I did know it to this extent: My brother had mentioned to me that the Government were going to take the whole of the land, but he was desirous of getting a portion of the freehold back. He was desirous of getting the value of the lessee's interest ascertained. I informed him that I could not or would not take any part in it, and referred him to the Trust Board; upon which he went to Mr. Upton, so he informed me. 382. Is that before he wrote the letter to the Board?—That I cannot tell you ; at all events, if it was not before the first letter, it was.before the second. 383. That is, before Mr. Brewer's letter to the Board ?—Yes. 384. You believe that he called on Mr. Upton before Mr. Brewer's letter was written to the Board naming the sum ?—I believe he did. 385. Did you go into the calculation at all?—I did not. 386. Are you aware of any expression of opinion on the part of the Board, or of any members of the Board, that the ultimate arrangement was not a fair one, or that the Trust had not been done justice to, or anything of that sort ? —Not until the question was raised—last year, I think. 387. That is, raised in Parliament?—Yes, in Parliament, by Sir George Grey. Several members of the Board expressed their dissatisfaction at the land having been given back ; not at the Board, but in conversation. 388. But they had known it long before that, had not they?—Yes, I think so. I should certainly say so. 389. I think you wrote to the Government on behalf of your brother, urging on the settlement of the matter, did you not ? —Yes. That was after the Act had passed. 390. How was it you wrote for him?—He came and asked me why the grant had not issued, and I happened to know Mr. O'Connor, and I wrote to him; that was all. 391. Was there any reason for your writing rather than his writing himself?—No; he asked me if I would write. 392. Had it any connection with your position as District Land Registrar?—Yes ; he wished to register a dealing. 393. That was after everything was settled excepting the payment of the money, was it not ?— Yes. 394. Mr. Napier.} Then, I understand you to say that you did know at the first meeting of the Diocesan Trust Board that your brother wished to acquire the freehold of this land ?—-Yes ; he mentioned to me that he wished, to do so. 395. Did you also know that the Government land-purchase agent had been negotiating with him on that understanding?—No, I did not. 396. Did you know at the first meeting that the Government did not require the whole piece for defence purposes ? —I knew at the first meeting that they were not in occupation of it. 397. That they did not, in fact, require it for defence purposes ?—Yes. 398. The 19th November, 1885, was the date of the first time the subject was mentioned to the Board. You knew then that the Government did not require the whole of the land for defence purposes, and you knew your brother was desirous of getting the freehold of the major portion of the land ?—My brother informed me that the Government contemplated taking the whole of the land, and he also informed me that he wished to obtain back a portion of the freehold. I then strongly urged him to take the compensation. 399. Did you not know that during the whole of that week prior to the 19th November, and one or two days subsequently, Brewer and he were having interviews on the basis of your brother getting the 3 acres 2 roods of the land ?—I cannot say I recollect it. 400. Were you present at the meeting at which the letter was read from Mr. Brewer offering the £632 ?—Yes. 401. Did you hear that letter read ?—I believe I did. 402. That letter was headed, "Be land required for battery at Point Resolution," and it then goes on to say that the Government required the whole of the land for defence purposes. Did what you heard from that letter lead you to change your opinion that the information from your brother was not accurate ?—I understood that the Government were going to take the whole of it. 403. But you knew that they were not going to take the whole of it for defence purposes ?—I understood that they had power to take the whole of it. 404. You are a barrister and solicitor, 1 think ?—Yes. 405. You knew, I think, the provisions of the Public Works Act?—No, I did not, 9—H. 10a.