33

1. OB

T. GEE

17. Have they taken into consideration the question of obtaining more population for the settlement by settling the sections that were leased temporarily?— Not perhaps temporarily. 18. I am referring to the Mina sections?—No, I have not taken any active steps recently. 19. But the settlers were generally anxious to have more settlers on these sections? —There has been closer settlement with regard to Mina, but I am inclined to think it will be a failure. 20. What do you consider the best tenure for a settler with limited means? —The optional tei -ire. 21. I am speaking to you now as a member of the Canterbury Land Board. If you were con ■ dering the case of a resident settler of limited means, would you prefer to give him an opportunity to pay for the section in cash or to take it up on renewable lease?—lt depends: you must give him sufficient area to make a living. With this section under discussion, containing 8£ acres, Ido not think the area is sufficient for a man to get a living off. Only a month or two before I was appointed the Board granted a man who held 25 acres of land, valued at £30 an acre, an additional 22 acres of equal value. That runs the capital value of this particular block into about £1,500. 22. Was there any other reason why this transfer was made? —I suppose the reason was that the man who held the 25 acres could not make a living. The Land Board saw fit to grant him 22 acres alongside of his holding so as to give him what they considered sufficient to make a living off. 23. Who was the occupier of the 22 acres? —A man named Burnett. 24. Was he quite capable of managing his section?—A very capable man —a very energetic young man. 25. How long ago is that?—-I think it took place about October last. 26. Was that man living on his section? —Yes. He could not make a living off the section, and he had to go out to work, doing contract ploughing, contract harvesting, &c, to help to make a living. The Board, when his application came before them, realized that the man could not make a living off 25 acres of land valued at £30 an acre. 27. Were you on the Board at that time?— No. 28. But you assume that that is why they granted this transfer? —There appears to be no other reason for it as far as I can see. 29. With regard to the case of this 7J acres, were you a member of the Land Board when they decided to change the disposal of the land from renewable lease to sale for cash? —Yes. 30. Were the Board unanimous? —Yes. 31. Quite unanimous? —Yes; no vote was recorded against it. 32. What was the reason for their changing their minds? —There was no reason advanced. 33. Had they any communication from any one?— They got a communication from the Under-Secretary. 34. What was the nature of that communication?— The Under-Secretary considered that the section was too small for a man to make a living off, and that it was better to put it up for cash. And I quite agreed with him. 35. Do you consider that the Under-Secretary was in a better position than the Canterbury Land Hoard to decide whether it was the better system?—l do not think the Canterbury Land Hoard were fully aware of the position. They did not know the section. None of them excepting Mr. Stevenson had ever visited Cheviot and seen it. 36. They just accepted the Under-Secretary's statement and altered their minds? —Yes. 37. Is that a usual thing for the Land Board to do? —I have only been appointed a short time, and it is the first case that has come up. It is the only case lam aware of. 38. The only case that has come before the Board? —During my time on the Board. 39. On this occasion they did not assert their opinion?—No decided opinion was expressed, and the Board had never seen the section. I think it is impossible for a man to make a living off the 8| acres. The value of the area is only £100, and the Board have granted this man Burnett land with a capital value of £1,500. 40. There are some holdings that run to many thousands of pounds, are there not?— Yes, there are all sorts of values. 41. And there is settlement on areas even smaller than 1\ acres, is there not?— Not for a man to make a living off : they are residential sections only.

Wednesday, 20th August, 1913. Thomas Gee further examined. (No. 7.) 1. Mr. Anderson.] Do you know this section of land? —Yes. 2. I understand from the evidence of Mr. Holton that a road was to be made through the centre of the section? —Yes. 3. And he told us that if that were so it would go up against a steep hill?— Yes. 4. If the Land Board were to give him a practicable road on to his section would that in any way destroy the section instead of making it a straight road into the hill I —The Crown Lands Ranger went up there and picked a road out. Ido not think the question of where the road is would make much difference to Mr. Holton. 5. So that where the Ranger has placed the road Mr. Osborn was wrong in what he said? Ido not think he is wrong. It is certainly a steep place, but Ido not see any other place of getting the road in. He has been able to zigzag up the hill, but he would be tied down to p. half-chain road, and it would make it a good deal steeper for him to get in.

s—l. 08.