LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1365, 16 February 1912, Page 3

LAW REPORTS.

MAORI CASE

THE LAW STARTS OUT AFTER IT

Tin; I'LAV of Tin-; woiids,

Matters jiortnini iik to n leiife "f Nnlivo land formed tin- groundwork of a rather important ra.-o in I lie Supreme Court yesterday. it was taken before the Chief ■luslicp (Sir Hobcrt Stunt).

'Die i)l:iintiir in the action is Mnrtlia M'Gregor (f'merly Martha Miilnipiikii), of Greylown, wife of Ourgr Stewart M'Gregor, sli n> ji-f armor. The defemlanls are the district I .mid IvYgMrur. Wellington, and William Harris and Tliimiiis Harris, sheep-farmers, of Miirlinlmnmgh.

Mr. t'.-P. Skerrett, ICC, with him Mr. I'. K. Ward, appeared for (lie plaintiff, ami Mr. 11. J). Hell. K.(\, with him Mr. C. B. Morisoii, for the defendants, Harris. The District land Koifistrar, who was not represented, submitted to the judgment of the Court. The Legal Attack. In the statement of claim it was set out that, on April I, ISM, Hamuera Taniiihim Mahupiiku and lloriiina Natanaliira leased to Charles Harris (father of the defondents, Harris) for a term of 2\ years, (illi!) acres of land, knnivn us the Ngawaknakupe Hlock. The memorandum of lease was not only contrary to slatnle, but the lc.ise was granted at a grossly inadequate rent. It was in fact granted, by the two natives to William anil Thomas Harris (as the nominees of Chas. Harris) from feelings of friendship to the father, and out of gratitude for financial assistance, which the latter had rendered to Miihupiiku. In addition the lease was to commence in future.

When application was made to the Xative Laiiil Court (presided over by .liidfro Jlackay) to confirm the memorandum of lease, it was not granted and, according to Mnrtlia M'Clrcgor, the negotiations worn then abandoned and not reopened until after Mahupiikti's drath, which occurred on. January U, 1904. Martha Malnipiiku, who was then II years of age. was appointed his successor to the block, H. Stratton Izard, solicitor, being appointed her trustee.

On August 3, 1504, William and Thom.'is Harris made another application for th» confirmation of the lease, this time to (he Native Land Court (presided over by Judge Gilbert Mail , ) at Wellington. A valuation was ordered and, though there was no record of such valuation, an order (without authority of law nnd without further hearing) was issued by the Court on August 3, IMM, purporting to confirm the document, which (purported to be a memorandum of lease.

This order was without jurisdiction, inasmuch as the order of -Tudgo Mackay was final, and had not set aside. Moreover, tho Court had no jurisdiction to confirm the lease on account of the fact that the grantor was dead. In addition to this it was alleged that the arrangement between H. S. Izard (Maltha Mahiipuku's trustee) and the defendants, Harris, to consent to the confirmation of the lease, and to the proceedings, which resulted in the confirmation, was (to the knowledge of Win. and Thos. Harris) a collusive arrangement, and a fraud on Martha Mahupuku's rights and interests because that arrangement contemplated a lease at a firosslv inadequate rental, and also a direct* payment of -£500 to Izard. This was in 'violation of the law, and both fzard and the defendants, Harris, knew, cr ought to have known, that the intercuts of Martha Maliupuku (then a minor) were being sacrificed under tho arrangelll?!lt.

For these reasons, Martha M'Gregov risked for n declaration thot. tbe memorandum of lease b« declared wholly illegal and void: that the order of confirmation, dried August 3. 1304. lie declared void also: and that the District Land be ordered to cancel the memorial of the memorandum of lease. The Legal Defence. By way of defence, William and Thomas Harris said that a-proper valuation was submitted before tlie Court adjudicated. They were proprietors of the leasehold Citato created by the lease duly registered (without fraud; under the provisions of the Land Transfer Act, upon which they relied. They denied that the lease was illegal, or void, that the rent was inadequate, or that motives proinptiii" Makupuku to grant the lease were as Martha Jl'Gregor now alleged. Further, I hey declared that Ihe proceedings for confirmation of the lease were not abandoned after tho first application; and the order of August 3, 1901, was (they maintained) valid. While they admitted that it had been the duty of Izard to safeguard Martha Mahupuku's interests, they denied that thei« was any collusion or fraud in the negotiations, which led to the obtaining of the lease, and also denied the statement that the minor's interests were sacrificol

The Legal Sparring. Mr. Skerrett, in the course of a lengthy opening address, reviewed the transactions in connection with the lease, and quoted numerous authorities in support of his contention that the leai-e was not a valid contrail for confirmation. He argued that tho confirmation was contrary to the express provisions of tbo statute, and quite farcical, considering that the real "owner of the land was a minor, 14 years 01 age. The District Land Registrar" apparently had no information that at the time of the registration Maliupuku was dead. Evidence was given by G. A. Fairbrother, Government laud valuer, and 11. A. Welch, Native Land Court Registrar.

Mr. Bell objected to the evidence on the ground that it questioned the subject mutter of Judga Mair's decision. His Honour noted the objection. Mr. Skerrett closed his case, subject to tbe right to call " surveyor. The'henrinj was then adjourned until 10 o'clock this morning.

CLAIM OF J. O'DEA. DEFEXCE 2COT CALLED ON. Mr. Justice Chapman was ou the Bench for the hearing of the caso in which James O'Deo, architect, of Wellington, proceeded against T. G. Macarthy, brewer, of Wellington, to recover the sum of iITS 13s. Id., alleged tu be due for work done.

Plaintiff conducted his owu- ca-e, while Mr. J. G. Peacock appeared for T. G. Macarthy.

In his statement of claim, O'Dca. stated that ,T. G. Macarthy retained his services as architect and engineer, and that he (O'Dea) rendered certain services in connection with tbe subdivision of property in Daniel Street, Xcwtown, for which ho claimed ,£162 135.. i<3. He was also employed by T. G. Macarthy to advise.too latter in connection with the importation of a cargo of Oregon pine from Canada (805,504 ft., valued at .£6800). O'Dea made out quantities and measurements for the shipment, which arrived on April 10, 1006, and, for this his fee was .Ml. On February 3, 1911, O'Dca received £3 on account, but-still claimed, in regard to both items, a sum of .CITS 13* Id.

The defence was a denial (liat (lio sc-r----vices were rendered in reference to tho subdivision of tiu-Daniel Street property, or in connection with the importation of the -timber. The payment'of Jin r«f«rri'd to in the claim was not on account of any amount due, but was a charitable Sifi. Plans and specification-;, which O'Dea was (<inployed to prepare, were not in accordance with iiislructiuns, and cuiiw<|iU'iitly. in Oelober. 10U5, 'J' .(! Ifac-iuihy abandum-d intvnlion u{ procw-diiiß with tin- ereitioa of (ho Ijnild-injf-4. On Xovemher 111. liKl.j, O'Den agreed to aectpt .Col) in full >alinaction for work done, ami duly received payment of Hint amount, for which lie tendered a receipt. Further, his claim was harred l)y tho Statute of Limitations.

Several witnesses were called hy tho plaintiff, whose'case was not closed till late in the afternoon. His Honour did not call o;i Hie defence He staled that he was satisfied that, when (lie payment of ,t."il| was mode i( wa- the intention of both par'jes to i-loso up matter? relatiii!! (o the Daniel Street property, and O'Dea wns fairly paid for the work which he had done by receipt of .tI.JO. Hi; receipt al-o f.howcd that he did not consider it a payment uu ai> coimt, As foj , the payment of £5, Ms

Honour i!i,| mil ,- O u>iili-r il neir-eary In hear 111,' dHendilllf-. evidence mi llmi. fur. «lii.lovcr llm :miminl im*. Ills Ilinioiir Miis s-ilU(icil (h:il il whs not mi ;n--toiiiil «( -illi.T of I !:■• items in Iho claim. After mtcrriiiK ic. the sUilcm-f-s r>l the claim. (In; ,lu,lkp save decision for (ho defendant wii.li co<ls on tho lowest -cale mill wil nesses' expenses and ili.-lmrrc-mollis to lie fixeii bj the Ke::i-tiar.