I.—7a.

32

12. Is it possible, should timber in large quantities be found on the western side of the lake, to send the timber by water to the railway as now laid out'? —Yes; the lake gives means of transit, so that on whichever side the timber is it could be punted across. 13. So that practically it does not affect the value of the timber on the other side?— Not sy- reatl--14. Can you tell the Committee whether, in making the designs, it was specially arranged to have a harbour at the Arnold ? —Yes ; a branch line and wharves are provided for —that is, where the Arnold runs out of the lake, and it affords a very safe harbour. It is the only absolutely safe place, with the exception of Cashmere Bay, where a branch line with wharfage is also designed. 15. You have been over the country on the site of the original line as laid out ?—Yes. 16. Did the old line pass over a considerable summit, about 192 ft. ?—Yes. 17. This being an objection from a railway point of view, you heard it suggested that it should be taken round this hill instead of over ?—lt was; and when the railway operations were begun the first thing done was to endeavour to find a way round, or to find a lower summit. 18. Do you confirm me in stating that it would have necessitated a longer line to have obviated going over this summit ?—lt would be necessary to double round the spur. 19. Do you know whether, since the survey of the Government trial-line on the west side, any changes have occurred by which a deviation was necessitated ?—At Glen's Creek the water had undermined and cut away the ground close to the old pegged line, rendering deviation necessary. 20. Since my examination I have asked you to examine our plans completed to get the exact distance from Springfield to Brunnerton. You have done this, I think?— The exact distance from Springfield to Brunnerton is, subject to small corrections, 95 miles 9f chains. 21. That is a close approximation ?—Yes. 22. Attached to the contract is a map marked 81, which gives the mileage as 95 miles 50 chains; consequently our line, notwithstanding the deviation, is a little shorter ? —Yes; although the Bl mileage is subject to a correction of 15 chains for a piece of line at the Brunner end of the Government railway between Brunuerton and our initial point, which reduces it from 95 miles 50 chains to. 95 miles 35 chains. Thus our line is 25 chains shorter than the total original. 23. So that practically we have got the same length of line, and the deviation has not increased it ?—Practically, yes. 24. Dr. Newman.] With regard to the reserves marked yellow on the map, are there goldworkings all over them? —In patches all over them. 25. As regards the proposed reserves Nos. 75, 64, and 60, has gold been discovered on all these? —There is gold on some of them. I have not been through the whole of them. I know parts, and I think it may be taken for granted that there would be gold, in small or large quantities, in every one of them, but not enough to warrant the reservation of the whole area by any means. 26. You are aware that the Crown has the right to take 750,000 acres ?—Yes ; for bond fide mining. 27. Could the Crown get 750,000 acres of gold-bearing country anywhere else within the area of the Midland Eailway reservation ?—lt could take an equal area on other parts of the Coast, which would not monopolise this land close to the railway. There is no reason why the railwayarea should be specially selected. 28. The Crown has the right sooner or later to take up the 750,000 acres ?—Yes. 29. Could the Crown along your line, or anywhere else, take the 750,000 acres ?—The right is not specially along the line, but over the whole of the West Coast. 30. It is suggested that the Crown is going to take 500,000 acres of gold-bearing country: could the Crown get it anywhere else ?—The right of selection of the locality would, of course, rest with the Crown ; and the area of selection extends from a line drawn due west from Belgrove, and near Mokihinui; down to the Waih.o River, so that all this area could be selected from. 31. Within this area, in the authorised district, could the Crown get 500,000 acres of auriferous country outside where it has been taken? —It depends upon the interpretation of the word " auriferous;" because it may be taken for granted that the whole of the country is auriferous, strictly speaking. There is no part of it where you could not get the colour of gold. 32. Could you get 500,000 acres anywhere in the authorised area where miners have been at work?— You could get areas all over the coast, down South and up North, and inland. The Grey Valley is a small portion in proportion to the auriferous area. The Government is not, by any means, confined to the Grey Valley. They might have made the area up without taking land actually adjacent to the railway. 33. Supposing they had taken land further away, could they have justified it on the ground, not that it was auriferous, but because it was payably auriferous —that is to say, sufficiently auriferous to justify them in taking it ?—lt is so much a matter of opinion as to what will be payably auriferous. Places actually worked can be defined, but there remain places which may be defined as not being required for mining purposes, but for purposes conducive to them. 34. In the area the Government propose to take is there a reasonable supposition that gold can be found all over it?-—ln patches and leads, but not by any means all over the area reserved. 35. Could you mark out on the map the sections where there is a reasonable probability of gold being found ? —I could not do that, except in a very large-scale map. That map is a very small-scale map. 36. Then, do you consider that all over these sections the land could be occupied for mining purposes ?—Not the whole area of them. There is no gold-mining carried on, or likely to be carried on, in some portions of them. They are not all required for gold-mining. 37. Would it be possible to map out and say that gold could not be found on any of these sections? —It would be possible to arrive at a strong presumption that gold would not be found in some places, and the presumption would be stronger than that gold would be found in any particular places.