I.—sb.

14

[C. B. POLLEN.

were delayed being sent to you, so as to include it with other lands about to be opened. Your letter of the 29th January was laid before the Board on the 6th instant, and, after consideration, adhered to their former resolution of the sth December, that Section 20 should be offered under renewable lease, and on the same terms. There are three local people who have asked for this piece of land under renewable lease, and the Ranger reports that it is a good piece of land. The applicants will be disappointed if the land is not offered under a good tenure." That was your opinion at the time you sent the letter forward—that if the section was not offered under a good tenure there would bo disappointment among the applicants?—By "good tenure" I meant something other than a year-to-year lease. 75. You said that the question of selling by auction was not discussed by the Board?—No; I do not remember its being discussed. 76. This letter was sent to you from Wellington, under date 29th January : " Referring to your memo, of the 17th instant, No. 3713, I have to state that it is not considered advisable to offe> such a small section as the above on renewable lease. If it is to be disposed of it should be sold for cash. The better plan would be to treat it as a reserve and offer it for lease for a term of seven or ten years." So the letter that yours is a reply to makes the suggestion that it " should be sold for cash, or, better still, treat it as a reserve and offer it for lease for a term of seven or ten years." So the matter of auctioning must have been before the Board when you wrote that letter of yours?—l do not remember the question of auction arising. It was merely the second part of that letter —the suggestion to make the section a reserve. 77. The suggestion is there —the proposal for auction? —I do not remember sale for cash being mentioned. It was making it into a reserve that was mentioned. 78. 1 suppose that letter would be before the Board when they were discussing the matter? —Yes. 79. There was clearly the suggestion, in that letter that the section should be sold for cash. We may take it that the members of the Board, then, would know that was one of the suggestions? —That is so. 80. Your letter says, in reply to that, that the Board adhered to its former resolution that the section should be offered under renewable lease?—Yes. 81. You said in reply to Mr. Massey that word having conic down from Wellington from the Under-Secretary that such-and-such was to be done with the section you recorded what was to be done? —Yes. 82. You consider it your duty to carry out the orders that come from headquarters?— Yes. 83. Does your Board ever resist the decisions of the Minister?— Not that lam aware of. 84. You have never had an instance in which the Board has set its opinion against the Minister's and contested the position? —No, not that 1 remember. 85. With regard to the suggestion that the section should be offered on temporary lease for seven years, that would give the right, would it not, for anybody to apply? There are no special conditions attaching to a temporary lease—l mean in the way of residence?— No. 86. Such a lease can be taken up by anybody?— Yes. 87. How would a temporary lease be offered: would it be auctioned? —It is sometimes offered to the adjoining occupier. Sometimes we have offered it by tender. I do not recollect a temporary lease being offered by auction. I have offered temporary leases by tender. 88. The Board has the power to offer a temporary lease to the adjoining owner or to invite tenders for it?— Yes. 89. Did you consider that the reason given applied —that the section was too small to let on renewable lease?—lt was a matter of opinion. 90. Your Board held a decidedly different opinion, judging from your letter : they adhered to their former decision ?—The former decision to offer the section under renewable lease instead of making the section a reserve and offering it for a short term. 91. Are your Rangers practical men?— Yes, both of them. 92. Are you guided by their advice in dealing with sections of land? —Yes. 93. Are the members of your Board practical men?— Yes, all practical men. 94. Would you think that their decision in connection with dealing with a piece of land, and the question whether it was large enough to afford a living for a man, was a decision that you would be safe to go by ?—Yes. 95. Your Board had an application from a beekeeper among others?— Yes. 96. Rentoul?—Yes. 97. Ashworth had applied also?— Yes. 98. You did not look upon a temporary lease as being at all likely to give a man an opportunity of making a permanent home on the place?— No. 99. The Board did not consider that at all as a solution? —No. 100. Your Board is guided entirely in matters of policy from headquarters. You say the Board does not resist the decision of the Minister or the Under-Secretary—the Board does not set up its opinion?—lf you look at the Land Act I think you will find that the Minister of Lands has charge of the administration of the Act, and all the Proclamations, and so on, that are signed by the Governor have to be submitted by the Minister. The whole thing is administered by the Minister. I may say that it is not an unusual thing to put these small areas up at auction. I have had one or two cases in other districts. 101. The letter telling you that the section should be sold for cash —that was a letter from the Minister, I take it, to the Board : was it?—lt was signed by Mr. Strauchon. 102. lion. Mr. Massey.] Communications between you and Wellington are between the UnderSecretary and yourself?— Yes. 103. Mr. Forbes.] And as a matter of course you feel it is your duty to carry out the decisions that are conveyed to you? —Yes. Even supposing I did not, the matter would not proceed any