THE MOKAU LANDS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 77, 21 September 1911, Page 6

THE MOKAU LANDS

THE INQUIRY CONmUBD. By Telegraph—Proes Association. Wellington, Wednesday. Before the Mokau committee this morning, Mr. Archibald William Blair, partner of Mr. Skcrrett, Iv.C.; said his firm, since 1000, had acted for the natives in the Mokau transactions. All accounts for costs were sent to Eketonc and others, and they were not acting for the Government. Witnesses had stated to .Mr. Bell that Mr. Skerrett was not then representing the majority of the native owners, meaning that nonsellers were then in a majority,' but not that he had ceased to act, as he was still acting, for Eketonc and a few others. Witnesses tok the responsibility for unintentionally conveying a wrong impression to Mr. Bell concerning Mr. Skerrett's position.

Mr. Kensington, I'nder-Sercetary for Lands, said that in 1907, when Jones' interest jn the block was ordered to be sold by the Supreme Court, an effort was mode to induce the Government to acquire the block for closer settlement, but, as it was native land, this could not be done. A little later Mr. A. It. Hislop, acting for Mr. Jones, offered to sell to the, Government for £150,000, but this was not accepted. Early in 1010 the natives offered the land to the Government for £1 per acre. The Government had- a valuation made by some of the Crown officers. The result of the valuation showed that the Government could not give more than £35,000 for the block of 50,400 acres. ' Then, owing to the number of claims of interests in the block, the Government declined to take further action until all doubts as to ownership were removed. To Mr. Jennings: He had put in all the correspondence in connection with the block. He had 110 personal knowledge of the block, but he knew the cost of loading it would be very heavy. To Mr. Xgata: The dip on the eoal seams went the wrong way to make their working profitable. To Mr. Herries: The anomalous difference between the values of the Department and that of the companies interested in the block was probably a question of the value of the minerals. ll© had recommended that not more than £35,000 be p;iid for the freehold, free of any mortgages or encumberances. To Mr. Massey: He did not know that the block bad been offered to the Government at ally set price. His estimate did not take the minerals into considcra tlon.

The committee adjourned till to-mo; row.