P. G. DALZIELL.J

119

L—3a

71. You mean, not according to the law, but according to the agreements ? —No, according to the law. 72. Can you name the section of the Act ? —lt is the last section of the alienation provisions, Part XII; but in addition to that each mortgage contains a subclause to the efiect that the land may only be disposed of in accordance with the limitation provisions of the Native Land Act. Here it is—section 206 of Part XII : " All Native land which after the commencement of this Act becomes European land shall thereupon become and at all times thereafter remain subject to Part Xlll of the Land Act, 1908 (relating to limitation of area), in the same manner as if it had then been first alienated by the Crown, and all the provisions of that Part of the said Act shall apply thereto accordingly. , ' That, of course, is an actual prohibition of future dealings except in small areas. 73. Supposing the company went into liquidation, what would be Mr. Bowler's position?— It does not make any difference. He holds for the company or its assigns—the owners for the time being of the equitable interest. 74. Mr. Bowler does not get any extra remuneration from the company?—l understand an arrangement has since been made by which he gets a small salary, I think, while he is trustee. 75. Is that paid by the company?—By the company. I think it came about in this way: there was an objection raised by the Department to his acting at all in the matter, and I think they were not sure whether he could legally do ; t, and I went with Mr. Fisher, at his request, to confer with the Solicitor-General. The conclusion come to was that Mr. Bowler could act, but that he ought to be paid for it. 76. The Chairman.] Do you know of any other case where a Government servant has been placed in such a position as that—l mean, receiving money from private people?—Oh, yes. There must be many acting as trustees —with the consent of the Department, of course. 77. Mr. f/erries.] Do you not think it is putting a Civil servant in rather a peculiar position? —No, so long as it is known to the Department. 1 think it is fair to the Crown, as he has to do this extra work which takes part of his time. It is beneficial to the community, as he is carrying out this purpose of subdivision. It strikes me as fair that they should ask for it, and the company agreed to pay it. 78. Have you any idea what the sum is? —Yes. 79. What is it? —£5 a month, 1 think, during the continuance of the trust. 80. That is paid by the company?— Yes. 81. Does Mr. Lewis pay Mr. Bowler anything for being trustee for the 7,000 acres? —No. 82. If the company does not cut up the land in the proposed time, how can Mr. Bowler re convey to the Board? —He does not need to reconvey to the Board. 83. I think the agreement was that, if the company did not fulfil its conditions, the Board could cut up?— What the Board does then is to advertise the land for sale. 84. Under what authority?— Under the authority of the agreement. 85. But under what section of the Act? —Under Part XIV. 86. Is there any section in Part XIV which allows the Board to cut up European land?— To cut it up subject to the terms of the Act. There is an express provision here to the effect that the Board is to have power to carry out 87. What I want to know is, is there any statutory provision] —There is no express statutory provision, and for that very reason this clause was put in, to the effect that if it is suggested at any time that the Board has not the statutory power, then the trustee for the time being shall have that power. 88. Mr. Bowler can cut the land up himself, or whoever is the trustee?— Yes. 89. Without having anything to do with the Board?— Yes. 90. The trustee may be a person absolutely apart from the Board? —Yes; but you see he cannot get rid of the land except in these areas. Nobody <-:m sell the land except in these areas, and there is a trust there, and an express provision also to the effect that if any person applies to the Supreme Court he can have the terms of the agreement enforced. 91. But who would apply to the Supreme Court?—l take it the Board would, or some officer of the Native Department. 92. Is there any agreement to that effect?—-No, it is not necessary. That is part of the arrangement. They could do this under the agreement as it is drawn. You see, you put a lot of suppostitious cases which cannot arise at all. It is somewhal difficult to give you the correct answer to a question which cannot arise. 93. I want to know if there i> any statutory authority by which the Board could cut up and sell in case the company did not do it?— There is statutory authority enabling the Board to cut up lands vested in it. 94. But is there any statutory power to vest this laud in the Board? —That is doubtful, and that was the reason why we put this clause in enabling the trustee for the time being to dispose of the land. I may say that this was a clause that was very carefully considered by Mr. Skerrett, myself, and Mr. Tole, and it was also referred to the Solicitor-General; and everybody agreed that it effectually carried out the purpose intended. Ihat is the only answer I can give you. Of course, one can never know that a document will hold until the test comes. But I do not think any question should be put concerning the supposititious difficulties which you have suggested can arise. 95. What I want to find out is whether this arrangement effectively insures that the land shall be cut up?— All of vs —the Solicitor-General, Mr. Tole, Mr. Skerrett, and I—were anxious to carry it out in such a way as would make it effective, and we believe we have done so. 96. Mr. Massey.] Are you quite sure that this block of land comes within the definition of " Native land "as provided in the Native Land Act, 1909?— I do not think there can be any doubt about it at all. 97. You know the definition of " Native land " [Statute handed to witness]? — Yes, it is Native freehold land.