THE MOKAU ESTATE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1187, 24 July 1911, Page 5

THE MOKAU ESTATE.

> : WHY DID NOT THE GOVERNMENI BUY IT? HZ. CAKROLL PROMISES AN IN- , (By TdceraDh.-SDerial OorrcßDondsnU Auckland, July 23. .Speaking to a "Herald" representative yesterday, Mr. W. F. Masscy, M.l>., Lender of Dig Opposition, referred to tho statements made by Sir. Jas. Carroll ill reply to Mr. Massey's review of tho MoKiui Estate matter in his speech at tho Choral Hall last Wednesday. "Sir Jus. Carroll evades tho issues 1 raised," remarked tho Lender of tho Opposition. "Firstly, Uio report of the Commission was to the effect that tho leases were illegal, and, even if accepted as legal, (ho conditions had not becm complied with. Consequently they wero void, and Iho land had become ordinary Native land. Such being tho case, why was not (he land opened up with tho limitation conditions, as provided by tho Act of 1909, or why did the Government not purchase tho land on its own nocouul;, and open it under tho option system, as provided in the Land Act? What has been doao is, so far as it is possible to judge, that the land has been purcbaiod at' very much bolow its value from the. Native owners, and (ho Europeaa settlers will be exploited by a pyndieato of speculators who have received ■permission to do so by Ordcr-in-Council, weauso, presumably, they are friends of the Government. "I asked Sir J. Carroll," concluded Mr. Mfireoy, "for an inquiry into the whole of the circumstances, and up to tho pi-csmt he has not seen fit to reply in the affirmative." (IJy TclcEraph.-Presa Association.) Auckland, July 23. . In reply to a question put to him'at the Native gathering at Waahi, Sir Jns. Car-' roll stated that Mr. Masscy could havo tho fullest inquiry into tho Mokau cam matter. AN UNFORTUNATE CRITIC. CORRECTED BY MR. H. D. BELL. The follow-in;: interesting letter was printed,in the "New Zealand •Times" of Saturday. It is written by Mr. 11. D. Bell, K.C., under Friday's'date, and is an amusing exposure of our coutcinporary's method of controversy:— _ Sir,—ln your leading article this morning on the subject of tho Mokau lands you say: "If any injustice hod threatened tho Maori owners or had there been any impropriety about tho proecedi ill's it is not too much jo suppose that Mr. Bell, K.C., who advised a section of the Natives, would have protected them." You will, I do not doubt, givo me this opportunity of stating that I did not advise the Natives to sell. On the contrary, my advice tn them was to refuse tho terms offered thorn. I was not present nt tho meeting of assembled Native owners when tho resolution to sell Was carried, because the Natives, through their committee, informed mo that they did not require legal assistance at that meeting. And they had none. Mr. Lewis, the assignee of the leases, was entirely within his rights in using all possible methods to protect himself, as the Native- Land Commission—consisting of the Chief Justice and the Chief Judgo of the Native Land Court—had formally reported to tho Governor that his leases wero void or voidable, and (hat .report' had been laid beforo Parliament'..- He' accordingly offered the Natives a largo sum in cash for tho freehold, but much less than half its actual valuo as land alone, without (ho- coal seams discovered. It was clearly a. most improvident bargain for tho Nativos, but the cash tempted them, as.it has always tempted Natives, to sell their inheritngo for a, mess of pottage. I advised them to at. tack the leases in the Supremo Court, and all preparations had been made for that attack, which must have succeeded as to tho main lease in which tho coal seams lie. They elected to take thei

cash lor tho freehold, but they had not in (hat matter tho protection you sugRcst of such advice- or assistance as I 'could; afford them. , , Let me add that it never occurred to mo' to advise the Natives that, in fnco of ■. the'law limiting the acquisition of Native freehold land to 3000 acres, tho Government would, without first- laying the matter before Parliament, in direct contravention of tho recommendations of the Native' Land Commission upon those Mokau lands, issue an Ordor-iii-Counril authorising tho purchase in ono block by cno person of more than 50,000 acres of Native freehold. The Native Land Act empowers tho Governor, when ho flude it necessary "in tho public interest,", to permit tho acquisition of more than 3000 acres. I did not understand this as meaning power to authorise an extension from • iUUO to 50,000, nor did I seo what publio interest could bo served. I do not eco it noiw— l am, etc., H. D. BELL. ■ July 21.