NATIVE LAND

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2812, 1 July 1916, Page 14

NATIVE LAND

'J'HE GOVERNMENTS POLICY. Allegations in connection with": some Native land at Rotorua made in a local newspaper yesterday, were, made t!,e subject of a question without notice to the 'Minister of Native Affaii-s yesterday afternoon by. Mr. C. E. Stathamj who asked the Minister if he could make seme statement, upon Ihe matter. The Hon.- A. T. Ngata raised a point of order, on the ground that, the matters referred to were at present - Muler consideration by the Native Affairs C'.n-niit-tee, and a discussion in the House, would be prejudicial to the interests cf petitioners. Mr. Speaker: The matter can not be dealt with, Lilt 1 do not know-hew far that will prevent the question. being answered. ' The Hon. W. t Ilprries said that fo fains he understood the article, it referred to three points. The first was that there were certain' people . who had 'tot liases from the Natives in an illegitimate'nan-• ncr. Tile-second was that they were proposing to sell these leases r.t a large increase in price. - The third point was that, the general policy of the Government in allowing the purchase of Native land-by private individuals was wrong, and should .be stopped. (Hem - ;, 'hear.) Sir. Herries said he would give- the.exact facts in regard to the alienation.of this, land from the Natives t'o the people named in the article. He had a report.on the subject. < . . ■ Mr. Ngata here again toss to a: point of order, and declared that the first two points wero-covered by the petitions before the committee,' and a Ministerial statement - at. : tliis juncture would. he prejudicial to the interests of petitioners; The Hon. Mr. Herries.said that, in this case lie would ' deal'. ionly 'with, the third point—that' of Government-policy. Honourable members knew perfectly well that: from ISM 'to 1909 the alienation of Itind by Natives to private 'individuals was practically .stopped; except in.'1905, when a slight relaxation in.ihe'way of leases was granted by Parliament. In 190!), howover, the position was re.-ersed, 'and both Crown and "pakeha" alienation was allowed—that was ibc Crown and private' individuals could purchaso on certain terms. , 111 these particnlar case.s the terms laid 'down 1.-y ti:e 190!) Act had been rigidly enforced—at least' that was his information—and everything was done according to law. The article went 011 to say that purchase oy private individuals should be stonped. Parliament'in .190!) decided to allow 'this purchase, nri'il lie was only, carrying cut the nolic.v that was agreed upon then. . Legislation that, he .had introduced had restricted the power of purchase :,y private individuals anil increased the power of the Crown. Purchases by private individuals were hedged round with all the restrictions they could -possibly think of, and he was quite satisfied 'that such-an upright man as Judge Brown would see that the-law was carried out. ;f honourable members wanted tho law plterod that was a different tiling—his business was to see. that, the law-as laid down was carried out.' ;': -■ ' .