THE CHIEF JUSTICE ON THE NATIVE LAND DIFFICULTY.

Kumara Times, Issue 871, 16 July 1879, Page 4

THE CHIEF JUSTICE ON THE NATIVE LAND DIFFICULTY.

Wellington, July 7. At the criminal sittings of the Supreme Court, Wellington, on Monday, hia Honor Chief Justice Prendergast, in addressing the Grand Jury said he desired to make a few general observations with regard to the north-western portion of this judicial district. He gathered from the daily newspapers that, in certain parts of the Colony, Maoris had entered upon lands which were in the occupation of Europeans, their object being, it was said, to assert their right to occupy the land themselves. In 1873, the Legislature passed a measure entitled “The New Zealand Settlements Act,” which had been in operation in the north-western portion of this judicial district ever since. This Act enabled the Executive Government to take from those natives who had broken the laws the land which they had owned—this being done as a judgment for the misdeeds of the Maoris. The Government were also empowered to sell the lands so confiscated. The objects which the Legislature had in view were twofold—first, to promote settlement in the district in which the disturbances had occurred; and, second, to punish those persona who were causing thuse disturbances. It happened that the natives in the district to which he had referred were under the impression that they were acting in a proper manner, and that their only object in entering upon the land as they had done was to test the question in a Court of law as to whether they had a claim to the land or not. So far as he was aware there could be no question raised as to the competency of the Legislature to pass “ The New Zealand Settlements Act,” and if the Executive Government had seized the land under the terms of the Act, they could deal with it in the manner prescribed by the Act. This Act enabled the Government to give compensation for the land so taken, either in money or other land. And it was also provided that a Court of Enquiry might be held for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation to be given. He did not think that anything the Executive Government had done under the Act could be questioned in a Court of law. If the land had been taken in accordance with the terms of the Act, the natives had no right whatever to enter upon it for the purpose of asserting a right to it. It was possible that in carrying out this Act, those persons whose land was confiscated might not have been satisfied with the compensation awarded to them, but that would not justify them in entering upon the land. The Act might, or might not, have been originally expedient or politically just, but that was not the question for a Court of law to decide. Therefore, if the natives had acted, as they appeared to have done, for the purpose of asserting a right to the land, and with the view of raising a question of the political justice of the Act, it was manifest that they were pressing a question which could not be entertained iu a Court of law. If they were acting in that way, they were, to say the least, very ill-advised. He had made these observations not because he knew that any of the cases against the natives would come before the Court here, but for the purpose of pointing out that probably useless and costly litigation might be avoided by his expression of opinion. He thought that his opinion on the subject would be looked upon by the persons interested as that of one who was entirely disinterested, and who was out side of the influence of the Crown. It was probable also that the Maoris would see that the advice which he had given to a native at Wanganui on one occasion was the only proper advice to give them under any circumstance. A Maori was charged with having forcibly entered upon certain land, and upon the advice of counsel, Dr Duller, he pleaded guilty. His Honor told the prisoner, on that occasion, that if he had any grievance arising out of his right, or supposed right, to the land, his proper course was to apply to the Legislature, and not bring the matter before the Court at all. It seemed to him (the Judge) that if the trespasses which were now being committed in the north-western portion of this judicial district, had arisen out of some real or supposed wrong done to them by the Executive Government in taking their land from them, it was manifest that the best, and in fact only, remedy they had was to appeal to the Legislature, and not to a Court of law for redress, and from the Legislature they would, sooner or later, receive justice.