33

I.—3a

£100 to £120. That would have paid the whole of the incidental expenses. First of all, it was intended that Mr. Bishop's services should be made available, but it was found that he could not spare the time from his other duties. Mr. Kapa, M.H.E., examined. 128. Mr. Lundon.] Did you call at the Metropolitan Hotel about five weeks ago, looking for me ?—I did. 129. Did you tell me that Mr. Mitchelson had given you a petition to present ?—No, I did not. I said that I had received a petition, and I had presented it to the House. 130. Did you present the petition before you saw me ?—I presented it the same day that I saw you. 131. What did you go and look for me -for ?—I wished to inform you that I had received a petition, and I was going to present it. 132. Did not I ask you who you had received it from ? —You did. 133. Did not you tell me Mr. Mitchelson had given it to you ?—lf I ever made such a statement show me the document in which I stated it. The Chairman : What has this to do with the case, Mr. Lundon ? Mr. Lundon :I do not know that it has got much to do with the case. I felt aggrieved that the petition was here four weeks before it was presented. Mr. Kapa : I never told Mr. Lundon that the petition had been here four weeks, or anything of the sort. 134. Mr. Lundon.] Did I ask you why you asked to have it read in the House ?—-You did. 135. Did you tell me that it was the interpreter (Captain Mair) who asked you to read it ?—■ Yes, I did. 136. Mr. Parata.} How many days did you hold the petition before it was presented ?—I do not know, but I gave it to the interpreter to translate, and, when it was translated, I presented it to the House. 137. Was it more than a week? —-It was only a short petition, and it took the interpreter no long time to translate it, and I presented it immediately afterwards. I received it through the post. I found it in my pigeon-hole; it came there through the post. Questions submitted to G. A. Clark, J. P., Bawene, by Telegraph, and Answers to same. Q. 1. When witnessing the signatures to the deed of transfer, did you believe the consideration paid over to each Native by Mr. Millar was the value of the interest of such Native, and was exclusively his own property"? — A. Never having seen the land, I knew nothing of the value of it. As to the latter part of the question, I can give no answer. Q. 2. Did the interpreter, Mr. Cochrane, carefully translate the deed of transfer in your presence, so as to lead you to suppose that the Natives thoroughly understood they were selling their land to the Government at the rate of 7s. 6d. per acre? — A. In every case I heard the interpreter read over the deed of transfer. The Natives at once signed the deed without hesitation in any instance. Not being a Maori scholar I cannot tell what the Natives understood by what was read to them. Q. 3. Were the deed of transfer and vouchers the only documents signed by the Natives in your presence ? If not, state the nature of such other document?— A. The deed of transfer, its duplicate copy, and the vouchers were the only documents signed by the Natives in my presence. Q. 4. Did. you see the Natives after they were paid hand the money to John Lundon, or did you see Lundon take the money from the Natives, and, if so, when, and in which case ?— A. I saw the Natives in every instance after they were paid voluntarily place the cheques in John Lundon's hands. Q. 5. Did you know of an agreement between the Native owners and John Lundon, appointing him their agent, and by which they agreed to accept 4s. 6d. per acre, and to allow him all moneys paid by Government in excess of 4s. 6d. per acre as his profit on the transaction?— A. I knew of no such agreement as that named in Question o, or any other agreement between the Natives and John Lundon. Q. 6. Add any facts within your knowledge outside the above questions if you consider them of sufficient importance, and tending to elicit the whole truth ? — A. I have no knowledge of any facts other than those I have stated bearing on the case. Questions submitted by Telegraph to Mr. Thomas L. Millar, Postmaster, Bawene, and Ansiuers to same. Q. 1. When you paid the money did you know of an agreement between the Native owners and John Lundon appointing him their agent, and by which they agreed to accept 4s. 6d. per acre, and to allow him all moneys paid by Government in excess of 4s. 6d. per acre as his profit on the transaction? — A. When I paid the money I understood Mr. Lundon was acting as agent for the Natives. I did not know of any agreement. I never saw any agreement, nor was any agreement referred to in any way to me by either John Lundon or the Natives. Q. 2. Were the deed of transfer and the vouchers the only documents signed by the Natives in your presence? If not, state the nature of such other document? — A. Deed of transfer, duplicate copy of same, and voucher were the only documents signed by the Natives in my presence—that is, each Native signed the three separate forms. Q. 3. Why was not each share paid for in one cheque?— A. At first I proposed to pay the shares in one cheque for each share; but Mr. Lundon, acting on behalf of the Natives, strongly objected to it. He informed me that they would decline to receive one cheque ; that they could not get such large cheques cashed in Hokianga, there being no bank nearer than Kawakawa. The s—l.5 —I. 3a.