—individually, in some cases, objected to the pipes going in, and in other cases where they raised no great objection, they signed the agreement for the alteration.

12171. The original are you say was 3,365 acres; how did that area come to be reduced? -There is no alteration in the area, but there is a difference between the area served and the rateable area, in that the rateable is only that land which has channels actually provided for it, land for which water is available on each block. That is the only portion of private land which the Government has the right to rate.

12172. Who decided that certain portions of the area were to be supplied with water and certain portions were not? -It was a question of division between Crown land and private land. All private lands were supplied.

12173. The Government did not supply its own land with water? -No.

12174. Who decided that? -it was not supplied immediately with water because the land was not sold.

12175. Did the Harvey people or did you personally decide it, or was it decided by the Irrigation Commission, who was, I understand, really directing the affair? -It is difficult to say who decided it. The estimate and plans of the scheme were accepted by the Minister. These showed the area which was served, and it only showed the smaller area of 2,657 acres. At the same time, it was arranged, as you will find by working out the rate, that the devisor used into the estimate annual cost was not the smaller area, but the 3,310 acres. The Minister for Works at the time, Mr Collier, agreed that until the Government land was sold and provided with channels, although it could not become rateable, yet the Government would bear their share of the annual expenditure.

12176. The area served, to use your own words, is approximately 3,350 acres and that area has since been reduced to 2,657 acres. I want you to tell me who reduced that area? -The Act decides that.

12177. Does the Act override the agreement made with the Harvey people? -There was no decision to reduce it as regards the payment of annual costs. The rate shows that the annual expenses were spread over the whole area and that only a portion of the annual expenses would be collected from the settlers, the Government having to stand the balance. There were 3,350 acres included in the scheme and the weir was constructed big enough to provide for it; the channels were constructed only so far as the land was sold and ready to use. Under the Act that land is rateable. It was agreed that the balance which could not carry a rate under the Act and which was Crown land would bear its proportion just as if it was rateable, that is, the devisor into the annual cost was taken as 3,500 acres and not the smaller area.

12178. By whom was it amended? -It never was amended; there has been no amendment.

12179. But the Government repeatedly claim that the area is 2,657 acres? -They do not claim that is the area of the scheme; that is the area rateable under the Act.

12180. Your words are "The are served is approximately 3,350 acres? -That ,means the total irrigation area declared by Executive Council.

12181. Then you have only supplied water to 2,657 acres? -Yes, but all arrangements are there to extend the channels to supply the rest.

12182. So that the agreement with the Harvey people to supply water over 3,350 acres has not been kept and the area served has been only 2,657 acres? -So far, yes. The reason that the channels were not constructed through the whole area was that the Crown lands were unalienated and not cleared. At the time it was expected that when that land was disposed of, it could be sold at an upset price sufficient to cover the cost of the reticulation channels, and that the work therefore would be carried out without any further increase of capital.

12183. What would it cost to supply the water to the area not served by channels? -I should have to get you those figures.

12184. Was there a proposal to substitute 500 acres in another portion of the district for a portion of the land which had not been supplied with water? -Yes.

12185-6. What was the departmental estimate of supplying that other 500 acres of land with channels? -£1,800.

12187. In the files it is stated to be £2,000? -The engineering estimate was £1,800; probably with overhead charges it would be £2,000. But that was only a portion of the Crown lands. There was another portion which required £1,000, making it £2,800 all told. The exchange was made because the price of land we secured had been cleared and was available for irrigation. It is the area on which the returned soldiers are being settled.

12188. Reverting to the agreement with the Harvey people, it has been admitted that £2,800 for lining certain channels was absorbed in the general expenditure, and the £2,520 saving as between the pipes and the work actually done was also absorbed in the general expenditure, and the £2,800 being the cost of laying the water to the 500 acres as arranged between the parties was never spent. That makes a total of £8,120 off the £34,000 original estimate? -It was never arranged that the land should be provided with channels from the £34,000; the estimates and the plans showed that very clearly.

12189. You did not explain that to the Harvey people? -It was explained to them very clearly.

12190. Can you point to any portion of this minute of yours to show where it was explained? -It was explained in discussion with the Harvey people.

12191. The Harvey people were entitled to assume that £2,800 was a portion of the money which should have been spent out of the £34,000? -I do not think that any Harvey man has claimed that. They thoroughly understood that the Government was going to take care of its own land. The plans showed in detail the work which was to be done for the £34,000 and it did not include those channels.

12192. Are these channels, Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 actually constructed? -Yes, with slight modifications. The Engineer in Chief, in his report, states that the scheme has been carried out with some small differences; otherwise it has been carried out as arranged. The main difference was the excision of the pipes.

12193. You contention is that the Government agreed to pay rates on its portion of the 3,350 acres. but did not agree to supply water to 3,350 acres? -That is practically it.