H.-No. 11,

REPORT OF GOLD FIELDS COMMITTEE.

4

The orders of reference Nos. 4, 5, and 6, were read. On the motion of Mr. Curtis, it was resolved, That the Standing Orders of the House, in reference to Committees of the whole, be observed in this Committee. The Petition from J. B. Golland and others, miners and residents in the Kanieri Road Board District, County of Westland, praying that such amendments in the County of Westland Act may be made as will exempt mining claims and mining plants from assessment as rateable property, was read to the Committee. The Committee proceeded to consider the petition. The sections of " The County of Westland Act, 1868/' to which the memorialists referred were read. A discussion ensued. Further consideration of the question was adjourned until the next meeting of the Committee, and the Chairman was requested to ask Mr. White, the Member for Hokitika, to attend on that occasion. On the motion of Mr. Curtis, it was resolved, That the Chairman be requested to summon the Committee for half-past 10 o'clock on every Thursday, and on such other days as the business before the Committee shall render necessary. The Committee adjourned.

Thursday, 31st August, 1871. The Committee met pursuant to summons. Present: Mr. Bradshaw, Mr. Macandrew, Mr. Collins, Mr. Mervyn, Mr. Creighton, Mr. O'Neill, Mr. Curtis, Mr. T. L. Shepherd, Mr. GiUies, Mr. Tribe. Mr. Harrison, Mr. Haughton in the chair. The minutes of the last meeting were read and confirmed. The Committee resumed the consideration of the Petition from Miners and Residents in the Kanieri District, County of Westland. Mr. White, the Member for Hokitika, being in attendance, was examined, and gave the following evidence: — 1. Mr. Harrison.~\ Do you know if this petition emanated from the large mining companies of the district ?—The petition emanated from the miners and others, as set for^h in the petition. I know that it was signed by most of the miners and storekeepers in the district. 2. Do you know if there had been any intention on the part of the Kanieri Road Board to levy a rate on mining claims and plant ?—lt was not their intention. The Kanieri Road Board, when striking the rate, especially exempted mining claims and plant from rating. 3. Can any rate be levied in a Road Board District in the County of Westland without the sanction of the County Chairman ?—No. Vide the 93rd section of " County of Westland Act, 1868." 4. Did the County Chairman object to the exemption proposed by the Kanieri Road Board? —I believe he did, and on that ground refused to sanction the rate. 5. Have you any reason to know that, on account of the refusal by the Chairman, the Road Board intended to withdraw the exemption ? —I do not know. I have not heard anything to that effect. Ido not believe that that was the case. 6. Mr. Creighton.~] What do you consider the petitioners would include in the term " mining plant" ?—-I presume all the machinery, implements, and tools used by the miners in their avocations, sucli as water races, head races, tail races, windlasses, picks, shovels, &c. 7. Mr. Mervyn.] Do you think it possible to assess mining claims upon any equitable basis ?—I think it absolutely impossible. 8. Mr. Harrison.'] Is it not a fact that mining in the Kanieri District is almost entirely confined to large companies ?—I do not think so. I think that mining in that district is principally in the hands of small parties. 9. Mr. Tribe.] By whom are the roads in the Kanieri District principally used ?—By the residents generally—settlers, miners, and storekeepers. 10. Are you aware of any Road Boards in the County of Westland having rated mining claims ?—I am not aware of any. Mr. White then made a statement to the effect that in the Kanieri District there is a Mining Conference, elected by miners. As soon as the decision of the County Chairman with regard to the exemption from rates was known, a strong feeling was created in the district, and the petition now in question was got up. The miners had no objection to ordinary rates being levied upon their huts, most of which had been assessed at £7 per annum, but they protested against their claims and plant being taxed.