[A. C. HUBBABD-

C—l 4.

Amounts paid to Iml ust rial Suppliers, 1906-7 —continued. Not affected by Flood. December. January. February. March. April. £ £ £ £ s. (1. £ Alexander A. X 47 45 38 43 0 0 35 dJ.exana.er, a. ix..... ._,., Morrison, W. ... ••• ■•• lx ■'•' 1909-10. £ £ £ £ s. d. £ Fisher Bros. ... 118 HI \[ ];] J 0 58 Adamson, F ... 36 36 2 22 6 Moore, W. ... 74 62 40 32 10 Robinson, I. ... 60 52 36 30 16 Alexander, A. X 72 6 44 4b 44 Morrison, W ... 55 42 30 31 26 Stock, R 52 53 35 35 25 Thomas, J. ... ... 44 39 25 23 0 0 1? Total Amounts paid out to Suppliers at Hikutaia Creamery. Season. December. January. February. March. April. 1906 _ 7 345 260 215 22b 208 Falling-off, December-April, £137, or 39 per cent. at Netherton creamery, corresponding period. ,8 per cent. 69. Mr. Myers.] When you took up your land at Komata, was there much bush in the neighbourhood .—Yes, on the hills. . 70 Has much of that bush been felled?— Yes; there is always a quantity being cut. 71. And that process of felling the bush has been going m, for the last seventeen years: Yes. to a greater or less degree. ~,,.- n i t ,i 7" Would you expect that to make any difference to your land?—lt is generally understood that if you cut down the bush on the hills the water will come down quicker. 73." You say about 200 acres of your land was affected : how much ol thai was swamp land when you went there?—l could not give you the exact area. 74. A considerable area has been drained? —Yes. 75 Taking into consideration the felling of the bush and the sinking ot the drained swam], land, do you think those two causes would affect your land to any extent J-The area of swam,, land I have drained is outside the 200 acres that was Hooded It is not the swamp lam It ha is affected. I consider there is sufficient fall off our place to allow that flood-water to get oil it the Waihou water did not back up the Komata water. 76. Your land used to flood—did it not?—before these rivers were proclaimed sludge-channels? 77 Are there any willows in the Komata J—Yes, a good number. 78. Do you think they affect the question at all so far as you are concerned?—l hey do not to the accumulation of silt?_Yes: but there is plenty of silt to be found where there are no willows. ... „ „ „ , ,- t ~ , 80. I suggest to you that they also conduce to the backing-up of the waters?—! admit that is 0 you eyer taken . my steps with a viow t0 nav i n g the willows cut down or removed?- -"" B*2 f DO you not think that the cutting-down or removal of the willows would to a considerable extent reduce the injuries of which you complain?— They would to a certain extent. 83 Do you not' think the three things I have mentioned have a very greal eltecl in producing the iniuries, assuming the injuries to exist? —No. 84 What is it you blame then? What do you say the damage is caused by >.- Ihe damage caused by the llood-wa.ers would not be so great if there was not Silt With it. Ihe fl 1-waters ol -, creek like the Komata would enrich our land if it were not tor the silt. . M Do you not think that if the willows did n„t cause the accumulation of silt you would not have so much to complain of?—I admitted that before. , 86 You have spoken of the falling-off of the receipts o your dairy company be ween 1 -- cember and April: is there not a natural falling-ofl between those months?-Yes. 1 articulars in ti„. fhnires 1 have riven to the Commission. . "' T Mr C/euiilon.] Did v„„ take any steps to oppose the making of the Komata Stream into -, sludge-channel ? At that tin,,- I had no interest in the property It was my ather s p,„,e n. 88 your father take any steps to oppose lb,- Komata Stream being declared a ludge-channei?-He' was under the impression it was exempted. I remember assisting him to draft a Utter asking if it was exempted. SQ When was that? —When the matter was mooted. , 90' Didl your father make any claim for compensation?-No. He was under the impress,,,,, tHat Ol 6 oTSw'come down the Komata Stream with every f, 1 , Yes. Il What is your property at the present time? -Fifteen pounds per acre ,s what "*? *£?£ tie value of it in 1895?-It would be simple a guess on my part. Approximately it would be from £8 to £10 per acre.

58