made recommendations. They recommended further improvements tot he drainage which were carried out. The department ran the scheme for some years, and then formed a board. The board has been running ever since. The land board further recommended that a subsidy of £100 a year should be paid for three years, and the last payment of the subsidy is just about to be made. The board now has to carry on, either by collecting rates to cover maintenance, or by levying labour on the different owners to maintain the works.

12296. The board is responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of the drains?—Yes.

12297. By the CHAIRMAN: I am rather in doubt as to whether the board is responsible or irresponsible. What is its responsibility?—It is a board formed under the Drainage Act. The Act provides that drains are vested in the board and the board is responsible for the maintenance of the drains.

12298. What form does that responsibility take? Can the board be forced to do the work if it does not do it?—The Governor can dissolve the board and the Minister can take over the duties and responsibilities of the board.

12299. By Mr VENN: Has the drainage been a success?—Yes, taking it all round. The place has settled in a wonderful manner since the drains were constructed. It is a very thriving district, due, to some extent, to the drainage, and in addition to the introduction of water couch, which could not have been used without the drainage.

12300. BY Mr PAYNTER: Have there been any complaints as to the drain not being large enough?—From time to time we have had a little trouble which has now been put right. The latest difficulty occurred during last year's abnormal floods. We had a record year then. The banks which were built to confine the Capel river and carry it to the sea were broken. This necessitated further breakages in other places to let the water back. A report was furnished on the matter some little time ago and it was found that a great deal of the difficulty was due to the fact that the country between the banks was allowed to overgrow with suckers and that these blocked the water. On an understanding which had been made with the board at the beginning that the Minister would favourably consider any application for help if it could be shown to be due to some abnormal occurrence, the Minister recently agreed to assist to the extent of 1850.

12301. BY Mr VENN: Do you think it would be better if this country was fenced in from stock altogether?—It might be better, but on the other hand, if this were done, it would rob the board of a fair amount of revenue. They have now leased the land between the banks for, I think, about £1 a week, which they reckon is sufficient to cover maintenance. The position will be perfectly sound as long as they make up these banks before the winter. Then this difficulty would disappear. The banks are gradually becoming grassed over.

12302. The grass will presently stop the water from flowing?—Yes. The present position is all right with grazing stock. Before the area was leased stock was allowed to graze there uncontrolled and the position was very bad.

12303. By Mr PAYNTER: By whom was the Torbay-Grassmere drainage scheme authorised?—By the Scaddan Government.

12304. Who was the engineer in charge?—I was.

12305. What was the total estimated cost?—It was £10,448 15s. 6d.

12306. What was the actual cost with interest and charges?—The bulk of the expenditure was accepted by the Government as being national, namely, the erection of flood gates and the construction of the main drains. The sum of £2,000 was put down as the liability which the board had to carry, and it is on the £2,000 that the rates are supposed to be collected. The estimate was practically the expenditure because the work was not done in one big piece but from time to time. It was done on authorities issued from year to year, and these authorities were just expended.

12307. Were the growers represented by a board, and has the work been carried out with that board's approval?—They were not represented by a board because the procedure of the Drainage Act was carried out. This provides that on receipt of a majority petition of the ratepayers within an area the Minister may construct drainage works. Prior to the carrying out of the works there was an informal board at Torbay which the Government subsidised to the extent of about £30 a year for the purpose of opening the bar. An agitation was made for an improvement of the position and the present scheme was put up. A petition was received from the majority of the ratepayers asking for a scheme, and the work was carried out. So, while they were not represented by a board, the majority of the people agreed to the scheme.

12308. Subsequently, was the control vested in a board?—Yes. The board was abolished because rates were not collected.

12309. Why were the rates not collected?—The board claimed that they could not collect the rates. The Government then instituted proceedings for collection of rates against two parties, representing two particular classes of benefits. The Government won one case and lost the other. Since then no rates have been collected. Some say that it is prejudicial. Others claim that it is beneficial. Reports have recently been furnished which give the thing in a nutshell, and which the Commission might desire to peruse.

12310. We would like your opinion as to what you consider the results of the scheme have been?—I can give you the position, but it is only my opinion. Some of the settlers, I should say, hold very diverse opinion. The scheme consists of two parts—a series of drains and a flood gate, a rather extensive flood gate, at the mouth of the Torbay Inlet. That flood gate was erected for the purpose of keeping the salt water back. Before it was erected, we had a good many representation made to us that crops had been spoiled, and that properties were being spoiled, by the inroads of the sea. The flood gates were put up to prevent that. We have a great deal of data in the department showing that the flood gates have, in that respect, very considerably improved the position. There have been instances where the sea has stood as much as four feet higher on the sea side than the inlet water on the land side, in case of big blows; and if the gates had not been there, the whole of the inlet would have been filled to the highest tide levels, and a lot of property would have been inundated with salt water. A great deal of the land is