I.—7a.

120

3. Are you well acquainted with the country in and around Eeefton '?—-Yes. 4. How many years have you been stationed in that part of the country ? —About fourteen years. 5. During that period what has been your business or work principally?— Surveying and laying off quartz mines. 6. Have you a general knowledge of the run of the reefs in that district ?—Just from the ground surveys. 7. And from the mining claims taken up which you have surveyed ?—Yes. 8. Are you acquainted with the Midland Railway Contract and the question of laying off mining reserves under that contract ?—I have not studied it much. I only got it a month or so ago. 9. As far as the contract is concerned you do not know much about it ?—No. 10. Do you know anything about the laying off of the mining reserves in connection with it ?— Yes. 11. Relative to the marking off of the mining reserves, when were you first notified on this question—were you asked in 1886 to mark off certain lands for mining purposes ?—I cannot state on what date I was instructed. 12. Do you remember any map being sent down, known as Larnach's reserves?— Yes. 13. Have you seen any map, coloured, showing the reserves in that district prior to the letter of instructions ?—Yes. 14. Will you look at this map [Mr. Larnach's map produced] ?—I have seen a similar map before. 15. From your knowledge of the locality, the known workings, and the position of the mining claims marked off, what is your opinion in respect of that land reserved ?—The maps were sent down in 1891 to the different societies there, and the reserves were marked off by a number of experts, also the County Council. I only placed them on the map. 16. Then these reserves as marked on the map were placed there by you, acting under the advice of the experts and local bodies ?—Yes. -17. In -your opinion, are they too large or too small ?—I do not think they are too large. 18. Are they, as marked on this map [map referred to], marked to the best advantage ?—There are quartz and alluvial workings right down to the boundaries of the block where they have been searching for gold, towards the road. I do work in connection with quartz-mining; very little alluvial. 19. And you say they are properly marked off, and show the workings of both quartz and alluvial ?—Yes. 20. Would it be feasible, or in the interest of the mining industry, to simply follow out the creeks and streams, and to reserve portion of the land on each side of them ? —No, I do not think so. 21. Will you state to the Committee your objections ?—ln the district I am in there are one or two creeks—for instance, Boatman's Creek—where they cannot be worked by alluvial miners on account of the land having been sold, and therefore there are always complaints with regard to the taking-up of creeks, as land is required for tailings sites, battery sites, and so on. 22. Then, to follow out such a system as that would be of no service?— With regard to the lower portions of the flats, it is hard to say whether there is payable gold there or not. That is, the flats towards the railway. 23. Has the country that is shown on these plans been surveyed by triangulation ?—Yes, it is all triangulated. 24. Then you could, if required, mark off all these blocks shown on the plan—you could lay them off?— Yes, from the description. 25. Has due care been taken in laying off these blocks so as not to exceed 10,000 acres in anyone block ? —Yes, I think so. 26. Would it be possible, in any block so laid off and described, to say that it contained 3,000 acres more than stated ?—I did not lay them off. They were laid off in the Survey Office at Nelson. 27. You gave the description?—l only gave the description along the road as near as I could judge it. 28. Have you gone into the question of these blocks ? —No. 29. From the country being triangulated, it would be impossible to get so far out as mentioned —3,000 acres in one block—it would be almost impossible ?—Almost. They would, no doubt, check it in the office as well. 30. On the question of triangulation, what distance are the trigs, apart ? —About three miles. 31. Then, as they are only three miles apart, it would be almost impossible for a man to get so" far wrong as indicated ? —You could not get wrong. Of course you might have a slight error. 32. How many years do you say you have been in the district? —Thirteen or fourteen years. 33. Have you known any cases where the surface has been held for one purpose, and the underground portion held for mining, or is the whole held by one company ?—By one company. 34. Would it lead to complications if the surface were held by one party, and the ground beneath were held by another ?—Yes ; it would lead to litigation, and so forth. 35. What are the areas of alluvial and quartz—has the quartz always been the larger area? -—Always. 36. An acre per man for quartz-mining would not be much?— No. 37. As to the direction of the reefs and the bearings, how do they run?— They average north and south. There are some east and west. 38. Would it be possible to run a narrow strip and say that should be reserved—would that be conducive to mining ? —No.