NATIVE LAND DEAL

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2841, 4 August 1916, Page 6

NATIVE LAND DEAL

THE MANUKAU BLOCK

MR QUARTLEY'S EXPLANATION

Iha' Native land transaction in connection with the Manukau Block, in the liangonui district, North Auckland, which came before the House of Representatives on Saturday last, in' connection with a report from tho Native Affairs Committee 011 a petition froin the.' Natives concerned, wus again referred, to in the House last evening, when the. Native Washing-Up Bill was under consideration.

Mr. A. Harris (Waitcmata) said that ho had received a letter from Mr. A. G. Quartley, whose uaino had been mentioned as one of the purchasers of tho block-' When tho petition was being heard, Mr. Quartley's. Co-partner in tne purchase had been asked to attend the sitting of the Committee, but the Committee was told that Mr. Quartley could Dot attend, as he was absent from tho Dominion as a member of the Expeditionary Force. This information was incorrect, Mr. Quartley being still at Trentnam. He read the letter from Mr. Quartley as follows:—"As one of the> purchasers in the block, and as I was. not advised that the petition was to be heard, I would bo obliged if you would mention' in the House the following facts: (1) That the petition of tho Natives reliects upon tho action of the T'okerau Maori Land Board and the proceedings in front of same. Tho Crown. Solicitor in. Auckland, however, N who appeared for tho board in respect of proceedings, - commenccd by the Natives holds from tne solicitor to the Natives a letter withdrawing all imputations against the board; (2) that the Natives commenced, a writ of prohibition board, and the purchasers, and subsequently, both personally and through their then solicitors, Messrs. Earl and Kent, F. G. Massey and W. E. Moore agreed to a settlement of tho action commonced by .them, and tho action was withdrawn. The purchasers have always been agreeable to abide by their settlement; (3> that Judge Wilson, through his Registrar, made inquiries from me regarding the* purchase price, and,' in reply to my answer, I received a communication from the .Registrar, stating that my statements were deemed satisfactory in accordance with tho records of the board,. and 110 further action would be taken; (4-) that in justice to myself, and as I unfortunately "have had no opportunity of otherwise placing these facts on. record, I ask you to mention them, ss what lias already been said may be calculated to prejudice me.. ' •

"I would emphasis© tint I understand tliese facts were not placed before tho committed at the hearing of tho petition. Yours faithfully~(Sgd.) Arthur CI. Quartley." Mr. J. A. Young, chairman of tho Native Affairs Committee, said that it was no fault of the committee that Mr. Quartley had had no opportunity to appear before the committee.' Mr. Dunlop, one of Mr. Quartley's partners in the purchase, who had been communicated •with, did not appear before the committee, and in a letter to tho committee he stated that Mr. Quartley was absent at the frqnt. Since last week, Mr. Quartley had asked to be heard before the committee, and this request had been granted. It was only fair to Mr. Quartley to say that he frankly answered all questions put to liim, but nothing was adduced to convince the committee that it had not done right in recommending <>ii inquiry. Personally, he considered that Mr. Dunlop's conduct called for strong comment. Mr. Young gaTe 6ome further details of the history of the case, and said that although the purchasers had agreed to hand sixty acres of the best part of the land back to th» resident Natives, this land had not yet been handed back. .The committee, ir. recommending that an inquiry be hcl<l, had done no injustice to Mr. Qaartlej,