1.-14.

Moved by Mr. Allen, to insert, after the word " owners," the words " a majority of." Mr. Massey asked the Chairman to rule whether the amendment was in order. The Chairman ruled that the words " a majority of " (referring to the Committee) could not be inserted as proposed. . .. Moved by Mr. Massey, to strike out the words " or of any established parliamentary practice-.' On the question being put, the Committee divided, and the names were taken down as follow 1— Ayes, 4.—Mr. Allen, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Fraser, Mr. Massey ]S[ oes> 6.—Mr. Graham, Mr. Hanan, Hon. Mr. Millar, Mr. Myers, Mr. Reed, Right Hon. Sir JG. Ward. So it passed in the negative. Moved by Mr. Allen, to insert, after the word " practice," the words " but is a direct contravention of a resolution of the House agreed to on the 14th July, 1886." The Chairman ruled that the amendment could not now be moved. Moved by Mr. Buchanan, to add a new paragraph as follows : — " The Committee further finds that Mr. Kaihau did receive from the vendors a sum of £2,000, which included commission for the sale of the Te Akau Block." On the question being put, the Committee divided, and the names were taken down as follow : — Ayes,l&.— Mr. Allen, Mr. Buchanan, Mr. Fraser, Mr. Massey N oes> 6.—Mr. Graham, Mr. Hanan, Hon. Mr. Millar, Mr. Myers, Mr. Reed, Right Hon. Sir JG. Ward. So it passed in the negative. Resolved, on the motion of the Chairman, to proceed with allegation No. 8. The Chairman's draft report, with a statement of the evidence, and his finding as Chairman, reads as follows :—- Second Charge. 5 The second charge against Henare Kaihau is as follows: — ' That Henare Kaihau, in the years 1900, 1902, 1904, 1905, and 1907, while a member of Parliament,' charged and received from the persons named in the annexed particulars, on whose behalf he prepared or presented, or undertook to present, petitions to Parliament, payments or sums of money for his services relating thereto or in connection therewith." Particulars. — (a.) A payment by Horomona Watarauihi, in the year 1905, in respect of a petition which was to have been, but which was not in fact, presented to Parliament. (6.) A payment by a member or members of the Ngatireko Tribe, in 1905, in connection with a petition to Parliament. (c ) A payment by Kaahu Huatare, in the year 1900, in connection with a petition presented to Parliament, (c/ ) A payment by or on behalf of Mohi te Wara, in the year 1904, in connection with a petition to Parliament. (c. A payment by Rewatu te Hirako, in the year 1907, for alleged services in connection with a petition presented to Parliament. (/ A payment by Hakiaha Tawhiao, in or about the year 1902, for alleged services in connection with a petition presented to Parliament. 6. The same counsel appeared as in the first charge. 7 The evidence taken at length shows, — (1 ) That Mr Kaihau received the following payments either in respect of services rendered as Native agent prior to the preparation of the petitions or for promoting the petitions before the Native Affairs Committee, namely,— («.) In the month of March, 1905, the sum of £15 from Te Awa Horomona in respect of the petition in reference to Waipana No. 66, presented to Parliament in the year 1904. (6 ) In the year 1900, the sum of £10 from Kaahau Huatare in connection with the petition presented to Parliament in the year 1900. (c ) The sums of £15 and £5 respectively in respect of a petition to Parliament presented in the year 1904 on behalf of Mohi te Wara. (d.) The sum of £25 received from Rewatu te Hiriako in respect of a petition presented to Parliament in the session of 1907 (2 ) That the charge (b mentioned in the particulars was not established, and charge (/) in such particulars was withdrawn. Finding 8. The Committee is of opinion that the receipt by Mr Kaihau of the aforesaid payments in connection with his duties as a member of Parliament was improper Report read and agreed to.

XXXVI