I.—3a

114

[P. ». DALZIELL.

84. It was Mr. Jones's action that stopped that? —That was the trouble. 85. It was not the Government's objection? If Mr. Jones had agreed to it the Government would have agreed too?— The Government had not expressed any opinion. They simply would not move, in view of the agitation on behalf of Mr. Jones. 86. Ihen we come to the passing of the Act of 1909. Is this the only occasion on which you have applied for an Order in Council under the 1909 Act?— Yes. The Act did not come into force until the 31st March, 1910. 87. It is not a usual thing to apply for Orders in Council? —It would be very usual, I should think, in special circumstances. I would suggest, in reply to that question, that no one can say that the Mokau situation is not unusual. 88. You agree that this transaction is a very unusual one? —Yes. The matter has been in litigation in some sort of way for thirty years. Mr. Mousey: Mr. Herries is referring to the Order in Council as being unusual, I think. 89. Mr. Herries.] The whole transaction is unusual? —Yes. 90. From the very first it would have needed either an Order in Council or special legislation? —That is so. 91. Who first had the idea of applying for 1 his Order in Council— Mr. Skerrett or yourself? —It was my proposal. 92. You both put in applications for the recommendation of the Board?—l am not sure. 93. Mr. Bowler says so?— Then that will be right. 94. Did you communicate to the Government or any member of the Government thai you were going to apply for the Order in Council? Did they know? —Yes. You see, Mr. Skerrett had made written application for their consent. !>."). Did you personally make any application or see any member of the Government? —Yes, 1 saw both Mr. Carroll and the Prime Minister. 96. With regard to the issue of the Order in Council? —Yes. 97. And you, I suppose, gave the reasons much the same as Mr. Skerrett did? —That is so. His letter was submitted to me and approved by me. 98. When was it that Mr. Lewis gave the second option to Mr. Mason Chambers? —I am not sine. That was not a transaction in which I was concerned. As a matter of fact, it was kept from me, and I have no papers relating to it. I was not aware until, I think, some time in February —at any rate, a long time after the option was given—that it had been given. 99. But you'know the terms now—£46,ooo for the lease and £25,000 for the freehold?—Oh, yes, I have seen that since. As a matter of fact, there was another action pending in which it was involved, and I had to see it in connection with that. 100. Was that second option in lieu of the old option?— No. That is one of the most mysterious things about this transaction. The old agreement had never been rescinded. I put it to them that all parties should remain as they were; and that was never altered until the transaction was completed. 101. There were at the time, in fact, practically two options?— The first was an absolute agreement to sell; it was not an option. 102. The second was only an option?— Yes. So far as Mr. Lewis was concerned, as soon as the freehold was purchased the option became a binding agreement. 103. You mean the second option?— Yes. 104. Then there were two binding agreements, practically?— Well, of course, once the second was entered into, that, as far as Mr. Mason Chambers was concerned, did away with the first. 105. When did you first hear about the company being formed ?—That would be some time in January—after the date of the first meeting. 106. How did you become aware of it —through your client or through communication with Mr. Loughnan?—l do not remember. Mr. Johnston, of Palmerston, T think, sent me a prospectus; but I do not remember whether it was the first intimation I had. 107. Did you know at the second meeting, when the resolutions were confirmed, that the sale would not be to your clieijt, but to the company?— Yes. 108. You stated that Mr. Grace wired to you to say that Mr. Hardy was coming to see you and to see Mr. Loughnan ?—After the second meeting. 109. Did you see Mr. Hardy?— No. I think the telegram was that he was coming to spp me and Mr. Bell. But I never saw him, and Ido not think he came to Wellington. 110. You say that he saw Mr. Loughnan?—Yes. 111. And I think you said that Mr. Loughnan apparently granted Mr. Hardy's demands?— Yes. 112. What were Mr. Hardy's demands?—.£2,soo worth of sharps; and Mr. Loughnan also agreed to pay the expenses of the Natives up to £1,000. 113. You say these were Mr. Hardy's demands. Do you know whether Mr. Hardy asked for them, or whether the company offered them?—l do not know. T was not present, and do not know what form the negotiations took. 114. With regard to this agreement made with the Maori Land Board as regards cutting the land up. had you consulted with Mr. Bowler beforehand as to what was to he put into the agreement"? —The agreement was originally drawn before the first meeting. 115. By whom?—By Mr. Skerrett. It was. in fact, read to the Natives at the meeting of the fith January. 116. Mr. Mousey.] For whom was Mr. Skerrett acting at that time? —For the whole of the Natives, I understood. 117. But the Natives would not be concerned in an agreement such as this, regarding subdivision ?—Nevertheless, the agreement was read by Mr. Skerrett to the Natives present at that meeting. Mr. Bowler Drotested. He said the Natives could not possibly understand it.