F. MANDER.]

95

D.--4,

8. The Chairman.] You say the petitioners were satisfied that taking the railway to Young's Point would suit the whole of the river?— That is what it states. They said that seven thousand five hundred people would be served by that deviation, and noxv they are asking for another deviation to prove that what they stated in the first case to be correct they themselves did not believe. The petition proceeds to say that " the line favoured by the Public Works Department passes over extremely bad country, liable to slips, and involves the construction of txvo tunnels." As to the statement of a population of seven thousand five hundred, xvhich comprises the xvhole population of Hobson County, being served by the xvestern line, and only nine hundred being affected on the eastern side, I take strong exception to it, because it is not correct. The Chairman: I think you are now going beyond the scope of the Commission, xvhich starts at McCarroll's Gap. 9. Mr. Coom.] Is Young's Point north or south of McCarroll's Gap I ?— South. The Chairman: I think the matter is beyond the scope of this Commission. Mr. Steadman: Would Mr. Mander's statement not be further evidence of whether the petitioners xvere in the right in regard to taking the line to Kirikopuni? Witness: r lhat is xvhat I xvant to bring out. They are asking for another deviation now to Kirikopuni to tap the same river. I think I have shoxvn that the present route is not a central one, but that the line laid out by the engineers xvas much more central. The people on the east had no objection to going three or four miles toxvards the Wairoa, as long as the line did not go to the xvest of the Tangihuas, and I repeat that the western route to Kirikopuni is not central. If the line goes to the xvest of the Tangihuas all the trade from the east of the range xvill go to Whangarei, and therefore in that respect I am speaking against the interests of Whangarei; but I believe that a Main Trunk raihvay should lie put doxvn in the interests of the whole community, and not for the benefit of any particular section. Ths densest population is going to be in the area above Hobson and Whangarei Counties, in the Bay of Islands Electorate, in the future. You do not want to handicap the people in that district in order to benefit the people xvho are already a bundled miles nearer to a market. If this line had been left to the engineers to settle, and had been carried out as they laid it doxvn, it xvould have been taken to the north in the quickest xvay, and xvould have sax-ed this country from £100,000 to £150,000. I wish to support my statements regarding the population to be served to the east and xx-est of the line by figures taken from the census of 1906. My figures hax-e never been refuted. The Year-book shows that the population is very much greater on the eastern side than on the x\-est. Sheep predominate on the west. The population on the xvest fiv-j years ago in Hobson County xvas 6,306. In Otamatea West (I deduct a thousand for the population extending to Mangaxvai) there xvere 2,328 persons, making a total of 8,634. On the east the population of Whangarei County xvas 10,381, ami adding the thousand I substi acted above to ths eastern side the total is 11,381. Natives are included in both cases. In cattle Hobson and Otamatea West Counties had 34,348, xvhile the number in Whangarei County and Otamatea East xvas 46,046. Sheep on the eastern side numbered 26,716, and in Otamatea East 6,422, making a total of 33,133. Horses—Whangarei, 5,284; Otamatea East, 217: total, 5,501. Sheep on the xvestern side numbered 71,473; Hobson County, 30,580; and Otamatea West, 40,893. Horses—Hobson County, 2,256; Otamatea West, 2,000 : making a total of 4,256. Sheep are greater on the xvestern side at present, but in every other respect the eastern side is ths greater. And I wish to say that nearly all the cattle coming from the far north beyond the Hokianga River have to head the xvaters of the Hokianga and come round them, and they are going to be benefited more by the eastern route at the present time. Of course, that xvill not apply xvhen the raihvay gets up farther north to Kaikohe. I xvish to refer to the lands on the xx-estern side. A good deal has been said about the bad lands on the eastern side. I do not wish for one moment to disparage the lands on either side. I think altogether they are pretty well equal. There is good land on both sides and bad land on both sides. But the land on the western side of the Tangihua Ranges, especially north of Kirikopuni, at the crossing of the Wairoa River, is not at all suitable for settlement in small areas except a very small proportion of it. It is broken country, and xvill necessarily have to be held in large areas. It is also badly xvatered country. Ido not knoxv that from personal experience, but I have heard numbers of men who have travelled through that country state that it xvas the xvorst country they had travelled through to gst a drink for their horses in the summer-time. Therefore it is not suitable for close settlement, and at the present time the most of it is held in large areas. Of course, south of that point it is no doubt more suitable for close settlement —that is, some portions of it. The larger portion of the country south of the river is more suitable for close settlement. But on the eastern sids of the range the countryis adapted for small settlement, and the most of itjs held in small holdings at the present time. Taking a point a little past McCarroll's Gap going north to Mangakahia, on the eastern side of the 'Tangihua Ranges, there is a very large area of country that you can get the plough into. My opinion is that the land you can get the plough into, however poor it may be considered at the present time, is going to be the land of the future, so far as the north is concerned, because if you get a raihvay through that country and give the people facilities for getting cheap manure every inch of the land xvill be brought under cultivation, and it xvill be far better land thirtyyears hence than the broken country you cannot get the plough into. I speak from practical experience. I have been in the north thirty years, and I have seen a good deal of it—for instance, I knoxv that at Paparoa thirty or forty years ago there was the most beautiful grass country I ever saxv—most magnificent country for grass. But going through it to-day you see the hilltops all covered with fern where you cannot get the plough into the ground easily. A large proportion of the land on the western side is broken country, and that country in the future is not going to be as good land as the land you can get the plough into and turn up and manure. I think the lands that are considered poor to-day are the lands the Government ought to consider and try to make rich by putting the railway through them. The Government should not run the railway