I.—3a.

128

[A. W. BLAIR

11. Did Mr. Skerrett inform you at all as to the result of the voting at the first meeting of assembled owners —that in two blocks there was a majority for selling? —No. I think his remarks referred particularly to the big bloc,k, because that was the only block, as far as I understood, that there was very much difference of opinion about. 12 As a matter of fact, the voting shows that there was a majority for selling?— Yes. His remarks referred to the big block. * 13. Although on the whole Mr. Skerrett may have considered that a majority had gone over td Mr. Bell's side, that did not alter the fact that the voting in respect of the big block resulted in a majority in favour of selling?— That might be so. 14. Mr. Herries.] Was there any sum mentioned when you talked about these writs being issued against the Assurance Fund? —No. At that time no particular sum was mentioned. As a mattei of fact, what 1 should have had to do would have been to ascertain what was considered to be the loss, and see that necessary steps were taken not to allow the time to expire. 15. Hon. Mr. Ngatu.] Was there no sum mentioned in the writ? —Yes, I think it was £20,000 that was mentioned in the writ which was issued. There were several writs in connection with the other blocks. 16. The £20,000 was in connection with If? —Yes, the big block. 17. Mr. Massey.] Speaking as a member of the legal profession, will you tell the Committee this: did you ever hear of any party or parties who had signed a lease or leases making a claim against the Land Transfer Assurance Fund on account of those leases having been registered?— Frankly, Ido not pretend to have considered the matter in any way at all. Ido not pretend to have any knowledge of Native land. 18. My question relates to European land as well? —Frankly, my experience in Native matter* has been very small indeed. I have not had any experience of a claim on the Assurance Fund in connection with any Native matters. 19. Did you ever hear of such a case as I put to you?—No, I do not think I have. William Charles Kensington sworn and examined. (No. 21.) 1. The Chairman.] Please give your occupation? —Under-Secretary for Lands. 2. The Committee have requested you to attend to give information in connection with the Mokau—Mohakatino Block: are you prepared to make a statement regarding what you know?— As I understand it, I am called to give evidence as to what the Crown has done in the direction of purchasing the block known as the Mokau—Mohakatino Block. 1 think it will be the best way, and will give the Committee the most information, if 1 start from the beginning—that is, from the 10th .July, 1907 —and read all the correspondence regarding the proposed acquisition of this block by the Crown. Amongst it will be the letter that you specially asked me for, if I could produce— the letter from Mr. Kemp Welch. [Witness read and handed in correspondence referred to — Exhibits 53 to 86, both inclusive.] I have also three other letters. The first is from Mr. W. H. Skinner, the Chief Draughtsman in the Taranaki District Office, who made the survey of a great part of this block. I asked him to give me a report upon it, in case the matter came before the Committee. The other two are from Mr. H. M. Skcet, now Commissioner of Crown Lands at Invercargill, who did the whole of the triangulation over this Mokau Block when District Surveyor in Taranaki. and who is referred to in Ranger Toltne's report. This is what Mr. Skinner says. [Letter read—Exhibit 87.] 3. Mr. Massey. ~\ What is the scheme of settlement that Mr. Skinner refers to in that letter?— Be refers to Sladdeu and Palmer's scheme. That is the one, I believe, which is being got out for the syndicate. It must be that. I know that those surveyors have been engaged to cut up the block. i. The Chain/Kin .] There was a proposal by Mr. Stubbs to cut. up his land for close settlement? —I did not know of that. I will now read Mr. Skeet's letter. As I said just now, he was the District Surveyor in Taranaki, and did the whole of the triangulation over this block and explored for all tin roads. [ asked him confidentially to give me his opinion of the block, and he replied as follows. [Letter read —Exhibit 88; also Exhibit 91.] That is all the correspondence I have to lay before the Committee. I attach a map showing the coal-outcrops that have been traced for the Department. They are all marked with red crosses. [Exhibit 89.] You will see that the more emphasized coal-outcrops ai~e outside the Mokau-Mohakatino Block and more on the Crown land, of which about 20,000 acres has been r4served—that is, where our surveyors have reported considerable outcrops to exist. There is no doubt about there being coal on the Mokau-Mohakatino Block, but the greater area of coal-measuros will be on the Crown land, or land leased under the lease-in-perpetuity system, in respect of which the mineral rights have been reserved. I want now to take up that question which is raised by Mr. Skinner in his letter, about the Crown survey liens. Mr. Skinner speaks of parts of the block being cut off by the Native Land Court and awarded to the Crown, and it having been decided to hand these over to the syndicate. Well, he does not quite make clear the position. It is this : The Crown was awarded by the Native Land Court about 5,153 acres in different subdivisions of the block. That award was made on the supposition that the fee-simple of the block was held by the Maoris, and that the Court could apportion an area for Crown liens. As a matter of fact, at that time there existed Mr. Jones's leases and other subleases over the block, and heavy mortgages. The consequence was that the Department could not cut out those areas that had been awarded the Crown. My opinion was that the order of the Court had been made under a misapprehension. 5. lion. Sir J. GarraU.] Any way, they would be subject to the leases already in existence?— Yes. What I mean is that we could not cut out this Crown land and make use of it and subdivide 125. The Chairman.] As Under-Secretary, you have a full knowledge of the working of the Maori Land Boards? —Yee.