29

1.—17.

J. JONES.]

declining to recognize the action as frivolous. He directed the case to proceed." It also appeared in the Dominion and New Zealand Times of 4th November. [Exhibits U and V.] Mr. Justice Parker expressed doubt about the jurisdiction being in England. Notwithstanding the decision of the Judges here, 1 hold that Mr. Justice Parker was right, although 1 am bound to bow to the decision of the Judges here for the present. 6. Mr. Bell.] Was that a .subsequent order?—He did not make an order. It was an expression of opinion for both sides to consider. 7. What did they do? —I spoke to Sir J. Lawson Walton, who said he thought the Judge was right. He went down to the law-courts and saw Lord Alverstone and Mr. Justice Chennell. They said, " The property is in New Zealand, and we think you should go there to settle the matter." 1 got the best opinions I could to the effect that it was no good going on with the action in England, and I said to the other side, " I am going to bring the action in New Zealand, and I want you to be warned of it." 8. Hon. Mr. Anstey.] You simply allowed the action to lapse?— Yes, 1 instructed my solicitor to let it be struck out or lapse. The Judge did not make an order, but expressed an opinion. I saw Sir John Lawson Walton and told him that it was not a decision, but an expression of opinion, and he said it was just as good as a decision. That is what brought me out to New Zealand, and I lodged a' caveat. This is held in New Zealand by five Judges on the bench to be a dishonest action. They ordered me to remove the caveat, and commented very strongly on my conduct. One of the learned gentlemen said, " A man who will compromise under one statute and repudiate under another would be capable of anything." He said it was dishonest. I asked what his name was, and was told that it was Mr. Justice Williams. 9. Hon. Mr. Luke.] In whose name are these lands? —On the 10th August, 1911, the executors put the property up in New Plymouth and bought it in at the upset price of £14,000. When the judgment was given by these five Judges there was an agreement to take the property over, but whether the transfer was effected or not I could not say. I, by counsel, said, in effect, "Will you not allow me a trial of action?" They said, " Xo, certainly not." I then said, " Will you not allow me to appeal to the Privy Councils " They replied, " No, we will not." 10. Mr. Bell.] Is that case reported ?—Yes", on the 21st July, 1908. 11. What is the name of the case?—l believe it was " Jones r. Lewis," or " Jones v. the Executors." 12. Are you certain it is in the Law Reports?—I think so. I have it here somewhere. Botli the Times and the Dominion reported it, also the Post. [Exhibit X.] Following this decision I laid the matter before Sir Joseph Ward, when Mr. Jennings, M.P., was with me. Sir Joseph Ward said, " I know all about the case, Mr. Jones. It is a very hard one, but I cannot interfere with the Court. I suggest that you petition Parliament, get a report from a Committee on which I can act, and I will do all 1 can to give effect to any recommendation you can get. , ' I petitioned both Houses. The Lower House was very busy, and some understanding was come to that the Upper House should hear the petition, and their recommendation was that the Government should set up a Royal Commission or other competent tribunal to inquire into the merits of the case, and in the meantime take steps to see that the property should be withheld from any further dealings. The Committee would have none further into the petition, but you must remember their report is dated the 7th October, and the House rose on the 10th, so that they had no time to go further. They did what they could. On the day the report was laid on the table I said to my solicitor, " The report says that the Government had better set up a Royal Commission, and in the meantime withhold the property from further dealings. You go up at once and see Dr. Findlay and get him to set up the Commission as quickly as he possibly can; it is a matter of anxiety to me." He went up, saw Dr. Findlay, came back and told me that Dr. Findlay said the Government would not set up any inquiry; they would not protect the property; they would give no effect to the recommendation. I said, " What on earth did Sir Joseph Ward tell me to petition Parliament for?" He said, "I am telling you Dr. Findlay's reply. But here are certain terms proposed on behalf of Herrman Lewis," and he pulled out a scrap of paper. "If you agree to those terms you may get something out of Mokau, but if not the impression on my mind is that you will get nothing at all." I said, "Do you mean to tell me that Dr. Findlay, as a Minister on the one hand and a solicitor acting for others on the other hand, proposed certain terms? Do you know that he is acting in a dual capacity? Are you sure about all that you are saying?" He said, "Certainly; I am not a fool." I said, "What the deuce has Dr. Findlay got to do with Herrman Lewis? " and he said, " Dr. Findlay tells me his firm are solicitors in this case." I said, "That accounts for it." The litigation did not commence until the 2nd or 3rd August, 1908, when Lewis was in trouble. He had no title to the property, and the people in Hawke's Bay wanted to buy it off the executors. I wrote a letter to Mr. Treadwell that same month (October) —not afterwards : it is not trumped up now : " Wellington, 24th October, 1908. —Messrs. Stafford and Treadwell. —Mokau lands petition : Dear Sirs, —As some form of agreement is about to be brought forward with the view of a settlement herein it may be as well to commit to paper the circumstances attending such proposed agreement should reference thereto be required at any future time. The Select Committee, as Mr. Treadwell is aware, were unanimous in their report, and the same was adopted on the 9th instant without dissent or discussion by the Legislative Council. Mi , . Treadwell subsequently had personal interviews with the Hon. Dr. Findlay, M.L.C., Attorney-General, who represents the Government in the matter, and also in company with Mr. Dalziell, Dr. Findlay's business partner. I note by the documents that the firm of Findlay and Dalziell are solicitors for Mr. Herrman Lewis in this business, and are also acting in connection with Messrs. Travers and Campbell, solicitors for the executors of the late Wickham Flower, in common interests. It is stipulated amongst other things in the proposed agreement that the surface lands—excepting two small reserves for myself—shall be dealt