THE RESIGNATION OF MR. KEEFER.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1258, 13 October 1911, Page 3

THE RESIGNATION OF MR. KEEFER.

OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE. 9 POWERS OF MAORI LAND BOARDS. Tho Native Minister (Sir James Car- ; roll) tabled yeslerday afternoon in the House of Representatives a file of orrcs- , pondencc. between Mr. Thos. W. Fisher, ; Under-Secretary for Native Affairs, and ] Mr. Alexander Keefer, President of the i Tairawhiti District Maori Land Board. ■ The resignation of Mr. Keefer on the ground of alleged Departmental interferonce and dictation in connection with his judicial duties has already been reported . and briefly discussed in Parliament. The disagreement between Mr. Keefer , and the Department was connected with the exercise by tho lxiard of certain powers under Section 200 of tho Native Land , Act, 1009. Subsection 1 of that section is as follows:— , "When any Native land is owned for a legal "estate in fee simple by more than ten owners ns tenants in common, no Native owner shall bo capable of making any alienation thereof, unless that alienation is made either (a) in accordance with Part IS of this Act, relating to the powers of assembled owners; or (b) with the precedent consent of the Maori Land Board in whose district tho land, or the greater part thereof is situated, given in accordance with the provisions hereinafter contained in this section." Mr. Fisher wrote to Mr. Keefer on August 21, 1911, stating that it had been brought to his notice that the board had been taking a very wide interpretation of Secliou 200, in regard to the Wharekahika Block. "From the information to hand," proceeds the Under-Secre-tary, "as to the size of the block and the number of owners, it is considered no action should havo been taken by way of precedent consent. The matter was one which had been broached with larger blocks in the Waikato and other districts, and I. assured the Government, without hesitation, that there was nn danger of the boards proceeding on the lines suggested by the Lands Department in giving precedent consent to alienations of this nature. It is .somewhat a surprise to find your board has evidently cone somewhat" deeply into this position. It is presumed this section would be of very little use, and used only in exceptional circumstances, when it. would have to be absolutely in the nubile interest. Of course, without the information before me I have nothing to show me why your board has taken this position, but it requires some argument lo show that Natives should dabblo in such inchoate titles, Ihot is where lands are to be alienated Wore being specifically (ieiined. This course would hardly bo considered of benefit to the public generally, as there is only ono class, who may be termed Iho speculator, who would enter into negotiations. Tho position we aro now placed in is that a Court is asked to sit Co allocate interests that certain Europeans havo acquired from these precedent consents." Mr. Fisher's letter concludes with a request for fuller information. Mr. Keefer telegraphed in reply on August 23: "Re Wharekahika, estimated area 42,000 acres, 707 owners, 15 precedent consent's granled, assumed area 22,000 acres. No dealings whatever confirmed but applications applied for. but have been adjourned by board until Court has partitioned block." This was confirmed on same date in a letter in which Mr. Keefer stated, inter alia, that "besides Europeans, some three Natives applied, which I respectfully subrait is in tho public interest." Ho did not thinka singlo consent had been given to any but a boua-fide person intending fo farm the land. Of course, some might have to give it up if ('hey could not finance. No application had been made under Part. 18 in connection with this block, which was in its virgin state and capable of carrying a number of European .selflcrs outside, of the requirements of the Natives. II r. Fisher wrote again on August 28, stating.that .".wheii.Mr. Hicks, of Tnpnroa, and others communicated with the Prime Minister on the position, they were advised 'that the location by partition of tho various interests must, be made prior to alienations being allowed to private individuals.'" The question involved might require to be more fully considered and dealt with by legislation, though the board had the right under Section 209, if it thought lit, to refuse confirmation. It appeared from correspondence in existence that some action by way of execution of instruments had been carried out prior fo the. hoard granting consent, thereby bringing the parties under Sub-section 10 of Section 209. (This sub-section provides that anyone procuring such an execution shall bo guilty of on offence punishable by a fine of .CM.) Mr. Keefer wrote on August 30 to the Under-Secretary:—"Feeling that I cannot any longer occupy a [also, position upon any judicial board, I have to ask you lo kindly notify the Hon. Native Minister that it is my wish to resign from the presidency of the Tairawhiti D.M.L. Board, and would ask to be relieved of office on the 30th September next." , Mr. Fisher, in a letter of September 27, said that there had been very little interference with the board, but when lie found a lward misinterpreting a section of tho Act he would be wanling in his duty if- ho did not point oul the position. The course adopted by the board could hardly be conducivo to good settlement or what it was intended the Act should allow. Mr. Keefer wired on October 2 that he would definitely fix the date of Sis retirement for October 31.