Mokau Inquiry

Horowhenua Chronicle, 28 September 1911, Page 3

Mokau Inquiry

[PEB PRKBS ASSOCIATION.] WELLINGTON, This The Mokau inquiry wasresil^jßjj May. Joshnajgggtftt***MgH 1L»Q8, fISHMMEBMB ness did hot mean t& convey Jennings was there on that Witness wished the production of letters written by witness to tlhe committee during the course of the inquiry, and this was agreed to and letters were put in. Witness then rca:l a lengthy written statement. He contended that two previous commissions reported; in witness's favour, yet the Government ignored the recommendation. Witness considered that a Governmnet which so acted would stop at nothing to defeat justice. Witness would have been able to sell ibis interests in London in 1907 'but for damaging reports circulated in London by interested New Zealand agents. In 1906 Lewis told witness as there might be trouble about the title he had specially engaged Sir J. Findlay and Mr Dalziell as lie thought tli'is engagement would prove worth while. Witness considered subesquent events had justified this action of Lewis's. Witness contended that Sir J. Findlay had spoken in the Upper House in a manner that was practically in advocacy of Sir J. Findlay's own firm's clients' case. At the 190S Commission Lewis stated that he had not paid any money for the purchase as he 'had not a clear title, but he or someone else would pay when a clear title was obtainable. Yet tihis statement did notappear in the report of the commission. Witness could not account for this omission. In witness's opinion the Stout-Pal-mer commission liad no le-jzal authoritv to deal with the Mokau case. After dealing with the Order-in-Counc.il, witness complained that this inquiry would not give the eo'imtrv any idea of the importance of th:s transaction.