SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1565, 8 October 1912, Page 7

SUPREME COURT.

:"MAfoGATAINOKA 1.8.C. NO. 2." (Before,a Jail Bench.) RATHER WEIRD STORY.. • OF TEE NATIVE LAND COURT.: i Questions regarding the ownership of a block of Native land, known as "Mangatainoka 1 B.C. No. i," came before.a Full. Bench of the Supremo Court yesterday, in the form of a. case stated by the Native. Appellato Court under Section 59 of. the Native Land Court Act, 1909, The Bench was occupied by the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout),' Mr. Justice Williams, Mr-. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice Chapman. Origin—February 10, 1875. Incidents connected with the case extended as far back as February 10; 1875, when the Native -Land Court commented the partition of 1710. acres of land in the Wairarapa district, kiiown as "Maiigatainoka No. 1 B." On June 2, 1887, 799 acres 3 roods 2' perches were set aside under the name 1 of "Mangatainoka 1 B.C. No. 2," and .declared to bo owned by certain owners of whom Huru te Hiaro was one. Subsequently various partition orders wore made, until, in 1888, "Mangatailioka 1 8.C.. No. 2" was left with an area of- 728 acres 2 roods 12 perches. * This is the block with ! which the Court is now concerned. It was declared to be held by five owners, of whom Huru te Hiaro was one. T- • June, 18!)4—Thing Still Going On. ; On Juno 24, 1891, Huru to Hiaro died, and, by his will, devised his interest in this land to three Natives, namely, Karepa Waata, Rihi Huapango, and Wen Painetu, Probato of the will was granted on April i, 1895, and the three Natives named were appointed executors, but on May 20, 1899, the Native Land Court revoked these appointments, and made Geo. Harold Smith, solicitor, of Pahialua. the sole executor of the will. 1896—A New Phase. A now phase of the caso arose in 189G, H'hen Mr. P. E. Baldwin made application to the Native Laml Court for a succession order to the interest of Huru te Jliaro, ignoring the will. In support of this application, it was claimed that the persons entitled to succeed, should bo ascertained according to the Native custom. Jtldgo Butler, who dealt with this application, made an order of. succession in favour of five Natives (Maihi Hangina, Hetariki Matao, Tiweta Whatahoro, Maata Apirana, And Wera Painetu), of whom only one (Wera Painetu) was a devisee under tho will. The Chief Native Judge Not Sure That He Was Right. On November 1, 1901, on account of representations lunde to him, Chief Judge Davy made an order setting aside Jihlrc lintier's order, just referred to. Two ye:m later, however (August. 1903), tho Cliicl Judge reconsidered his decision, and form ed the opinion that he had acted wronglj in setting asido the order made by Judg< Butler. Uo therefore cancelled his ordri ' of November 1, 1901, making a memo . randum to the effect that, ."it luul beer proved to his satisfaction that the Inn< i was actually restricted." and Hint "tin , facts were nut properly before. him at th< [ original hearing." ! The Story Up Till 1310-12. i Karepa Waata, one of the devisees undei > tho will of Jluru te Hiaro, died on Juh 3 13, 1910, and l.ho Public Trustee, who wa; i appointed executor of his will, applied ti f the Native I,and Court to determine tin 1 sutcesiion 'to Hum te Hiaro in tin - "Mansatainokn II).C. No. 2 Block." Tin I application camo before Jiuhe Gilfedde ' nji Spptfiul;-:. 1 !' 15, ; 1911, and it was thm :1 agreed Hut the only question to b: f answered was as to whether Judge Butler' order was valid and subsisting, and a r to whether the Chief Judge had an.' . power to interfere with that order. .Tiidgi t Gilfedder decided that the Chief Judgi - had no mwer to'annul the order made b Judge Butler in lS9G,;and the order there ■, fore was still valid and subsisting. From ihia ,the PuWia Jrujtei

appealed, and the Native Appellate Court stated a case for the opinion of the Supreme Court. Over a dozen questions were submitted to the 1 ull J3ench yesterdav, but tho main point to be settled is: "What, is the exact, position in regard to the order made by .limpe Bullor in 1890, and tho order mailc by t liict Jm\ge Davy in November, 19H1, and Uio cancellation of the latter in August, 190:1. Mr. ir. D. Bell, K.C., with linn Mr. 11. F. Ayson, appeared for the_ I'iiblic I rusteo (executor of the will of Knrepa U aula, ouo of the devisees of (lie interest ut Huru le Hinro).. Sir .lolm I'lndiay, K.C., with him Mr. D. XI. f'indlay, appeared for tho Public Trustee (trustee for the infant children of Hctariki Matao, tin interested narfcv). Mr. P. E. Baldwin, of ■Palinerstoii"North, appeared for Jlnihi Hnngina, another interested party, while Mr. 11. H. Ostler, of tho Crown Law Office, appeared for tho licgistrav-Gcneral of Lands. :i Legal argument proceeded throughout the (lav. and. was not concluded at 1.15 p.m., when-the Court adjourned, until 10.30 a.m. to-day.