A.—4

21. That the Court shall have all the powers over persons and property needful for enforcing its judgments which are possessed by any of the English Courts; and, for the maintenance of order in its proceedings and obedience to its judgments, may punish any persons guilty of contempt by fine or imprisonment, provided that no judgment as to contempt of Court shall be" given until after open hearing, within not less than twenty-four hours after the offence has been committed. 22. That in the absence of a public gaol the Court may declare any dwelling-house or other suitable place a temporary gaol for a special time and purpose. Dated at Earotonga.

Enclosure No. 7. Jueies Bill, 1897. Be it enacted by the British Eesident and the Parliament of the Cook Islands, — 1. That it is desirable to empannel juries to try causes in the Federal Court. 2. That the President of the Federal Court is hereby empowered to draw up a list of persons whom he may consider competent to serve as jurors. 3. That every person whose name appears on such list shall receive written notice from the President, or some person appointed by him for the purpose, notifying such person of his liability to serve as a juror. 4. That jurors shall be drawn by ballot, but not more than twelve jurors shall be summoned at one time, out of which four jurors shall be drawn by a second ballot to serve on the trial of the cause. 5. That the usual right of challenge may be exercised by the parties, but the President may at any time prevent the challenging of jurors should he consider that either party is using his right to prevent or delay the cause being heard. 6. That any person who shall approach or attempt to bribe or threaten a juror shall be fined a sum not exceeding fifty pounds. 7. That jurors shall be summoned by notice in writing from the President or some other person appointed by him. 8. That the attendance of jurors when summoned is compulsory, and any juror neglecting to obey such summons may be fined in a sum not exceeding five pounds. 9. That the exemptions under this Act shall be infirmity, insufficient knowledge of the English language, or any other reason which the President may consider sufficient, but that no juror shall be exempt on account of his profession or nationality. 10. That jurors shall be paid ten shillings each for every cause heard by them, and that the party applying for the jury shall deposit with the President two pounds on the granting of his application for such jury. Dated at Avarua.

No. 2. Mr. F. J. Moss to His Excellency the Govebnob, Sic, — Cook Islands, British Eesidency, Earotonga, 25th July, 1897. I have the honour to inform your Excellency that on several occasions during the last few months I had reason to believe that there was a gradually increasing relaxation in the administration of the liquor-law of 1891, which had created, and still maintains, a condition of affairs far better than that existing under the attempt at forced prohibition which it succeeded. Still, it was necessary to check the relaxation, and with this object I wrote to the Arikis, with whom rests the sole power of issuing permits for liquor to natives. Unfortunately, the Arikis depute this power to one of their chiefs, and a system has grown of charging for the permit, the money being made, Maori-like, a perquisite for the chief. To check this and other growing evils I have been getting general information, returns of the liquor issued under Arikis' permits, and data on other points, with a view to bringing the subject before the Earotonga Local Council at its approaching meeting. I had hoped to get the papers complete and in print before submitting them to your Excellency, but find that the Hospital Board have published in the Torea newspaper the day before yesterday one of the letters that had been obtained on my application from the Medical Officer in charge of the hospital. I have therefore thought it best to send the whole of the medical information obtained to the present time, and enclose communications numbered 1 to 7 herein. Dr. Caldwell's letters will be found specially full and interesting. The information given by him can, I feel sure, be thoroughly depended upon as correct, and he is so thorough an opponent of alcohol in any form that his percentages may be safely regarded as not under the mark. His experience extends over the last four years. Dr. Craig's experience is much shorter—between four and five months only. His objections to the use of alcohol are only those of most people who denounce the abuse, but his statement is incomplete till the reply to letter No. 4, of the 15th July, is received. Dr. Craig's remark as to the " special facilities and encouragement given to the liquor traffic among natives " is incomprehensible. I should have sought an explanation direct instead of through the Hospital Board, to save time, but unfortunately Dr. Craig resents much the interference of the Government, on my advice, in seeking to uphold the statute-law which was infringed by the terms of the arrangement under which the hospital and its subsidy from the Government were handed over to him by the Board.

2—A. 4.

9