Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. Saturday, January 28, 1882.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1029, 28 January 1882, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. Saturday, January 28, 1882.

Ofr and on for the past three years efforts have been made to set aside the certificate title of the Kaiti block, on the alleged grounds that it was not in accordance with law. Over seven years ago, the title to the Kaiti block was determined by their Honors Judges Kogan and Monro, of the Native Land Court, and the land w as awarded to one hundred and ten persons. Certain of the owners, being dissatisfied with the decision arrived at by the Court, applied that the title to the block should be re-investigated. The application was granted by the Governor in Council, and when the time arrived for the re-hearing to take place, the dissatisfied parties withdrew their application. The Court thereupon confirmed the original decision. A subsequent effort was made to induce Judge Symonds to adjudicate upon the block as if it were purely Native land. His Honor declined to do so, and so far from upholding the views of the contestants he re-affirmed the original judgment. On looking over the list of claims to come on for hearing at the sitting of the Native Lands Court to he held in Gisborne shortly, a number of Natives we see have applied for Kaiti to be dealt with by the Court precisely as an original claim. Many persons relying upon clause 58 of the Native Land Act, 1873, have steadily maintained that the certificate of title was void. It is stated in the clause referred to that upon the Governor in Council ordering a re-hearing in respect to any claim heard under the said Act, “upon such order being made, all proceedings theretofore taken by the Court in such matter shall be annulled, and the ease shall commence de novo.” It was, therefore, assumed that the Native Land Court had no power to do otherwise than to proceed to enquire into the title to the Kaiti block, in the same manner as if the claim had not been previously investigated. Further, that the action of the Judges in affirming and re-affirming the original decision was ultra vires. A parallel case with the Kaiti one recently came before the Native Land Court in Hawke’s Bay. The owners of the Owhaoko block, a valuable tract of country in that district, applied for a re-hearing which was granted. When the case came before the Court the counterclaimants withdrew their opposition, and applied to the presiding Judges, Messrs Fenton and O’Brien, to reaffirm its original decision. The Chief Judge doubted the power of the Native Land Court to do so. A case was set down for appeal, and the matter was argued before Judge Richmond. The decision of the learned Judge is very clear. It states:— “ I am satisfied that the Court has jurisdiction, notwithstanding the letter of section 58, to confirm its original order, even when the appellants do not appear. The sections of the Act

cited by counsel sufficiently establish this. It would be an absurd construction to hold that the appellants could by abandoning their claims have the order annulled. lam perfectly clear upon that point. Section 50 is in the point. The original decision stands unless amended or reversed on rehearing. The Court clearly has jurisdiction to confirm its own order. I shall certify my opinion on the case, but it will not be necessary that I should state my reasons. Certificate made accordingly in the following terms: —I am of opinion that the Native Land Court has power to make an order affirming its own decisiou. —• W. C. Richmond.” The original decision was, on application to the Chief Judge, accordingly affirmed. The opinion of the Supreme Court upon the legal rendering of clause 50, comes in at an opportune time for the district. A precedent has been established upon a knotty point. There can be no doubt a hard fight that would possibly have taken place over the Kaiti case has practically been averted. That valuable tract of country, comprising the finest land in the district, has been too long lucked up-

The committee appointed for the ensuing year 1882, for the Waerenga-a-hika School are Messrs A. F. Hardy, J. U. Colebrook, J. Cooper, J. Bailey, E. Boland, G. Davis and E. Haydon. A. F. Hardy, Chairman ; J. C. Colebrook, Treasurer j E. 11. Ingpen, Secretary. Mr D. Buchanan, a N.S.W. member of Parliament, thus describes a teetotaller : —A lean, emaciated, yellow-faced creature, who has no fear of God, but all sorts of fear of man ; a miserable being, whom he could not look upon without feeling an almost irrepressible hankering to take him by the heels and pitch him head foremost into a puncheon of rum. From exchanges to hand yesterday, we learn that the recent rains caused floods in Napier and further south. In Napier, Nelson, New Plymouth and Timaru the weather has been very severe, a heavy gale having prevailed and much damage done. In Napier the gale was at its height on Friday night. At Nelson much of the ballasting of the railway was washed away. The crops seemed to have been in no way damaged. The wheat crops at New Plymouth are very good, and a bountiful harvest is evpected. Joseph Rainbow of Gisborne, who was sent by the Magistrate to the Napier gaol, some time ago, was brought before the Resident Magistrates, Napier, by constable Shannahan for being without lawfuf excuse in an enclosed yard, belonging to Mr A. Ramsden, in Carlyle-street. The constable deposed that the prisoner feigned to be drunk at first, but when brought out upon the road he walked quite steady. His Worship said it was a clear case, and the prisoner, against whom a previous conviction for larceny at Gisborne was recorded, must be imprisoned for one month, and kept at hard labor.

The Melbourne papers are unanimous in praise of Pollard’s juveniles, who, however, fail to draw. The Bulletin says of them : — “ We were agreeably surprised to find that anything so good could be accomplished by juveniles. The performers are the best juveniles ever seen in Melbourne, and the opera is rendered in a manner that would do credit to a collection of superior operatic singers. They are all stars in their own way, and the acting, as well as the singing, is highly finished.” It predicts that young Sallinger, if capably trained, will develope into a great exponent of histrionic art. Strange to say, a report found credence in Hobart for some days that little Julia Simmonds had died in Melbourne. The clever little woman, however, is alive and well. The New Zealand Herald says:—The amounts paid to Crown Solicitors during the year ending the 31st March last were no less than £5,607 13s 3d, as follows :—J. Barlevman, Hawera, £77 19s lOd ■ H. D. Bell, Wellington, £907 19s ; F. M. P. Broo\field, Buckland, £705 7s fid ; A. J. Cotterell, Napier, £263 Is ; T. S. Duncan, Christchurch, £640 6s lid ; C. Y. Fell, Nelson, £42 14s4d ; S. T. Fitzherbert, Wanganui, £315 Ils 10d ; B. C. Haggitt, Dunedin, £1,483 Ifis 8d ; T. M. Macdonald, Invercargill, £265 19s ; J. T. E. Rogan, Gisborne, Cl 10s 8d ; W. Sinclair, Blenheim, £7-1 Ils 2d ; S. M. South, Hokitika, £1419s 2d ;A. Standish, New Plymouth, £ll9 6s Id ; W. Taylor, Tokoinairiro, £lB Os 4d ; Wesley Turton, Queenstown, £l3 Ils 6d ; T. W. White, Timaru, £l7O 9s 3d. Medical men giving certificates to witnesses, jurors, and others, asking for exemption from attendance at the Supreme Court should consider the remarks made by His Honor Mr Justice Gillies in respect of certificates of this description. The occasion of these remarks occurred in this way :—A juror presented a medical certificate to the following effect: “ I am of opinion that A. B. is not well enough to attend the Supreme Court.” Whereupon His Honor said : “ I must object to medical opinions in this form. We do not want to know the doctor’s opinion, but what is the condition of the person to whom it refers. The Court can form its own opinion, if that, condition is fairly and intelligibly described. It is very improper that certificates of medical men should be made out in this form, and I wish it to be publicly known that I shall not in future accept, medical certificates of that description.”—Auckland Herald. The Herald, referring to the silkworm industry for Auckland says : —“ Mr Griffin, the Americian Consul, has set himself to the task of seeing if it is not possible to put the produce of boys and girls of Auckland upon the same footing in the United States us that of Japan. It. is to be hoped Mr Griffin will succeed in inducing the silk manufacturers of the United States to open a market in Auckland for the purchase of all dried cocoons, perforated cocoons, or floss silk that our young folks can produce. If such a market were opened here, by which small as well as large quantities could be disposed of, Mr Griffin is quite satisfied from what he has already seen that the trade would be a yearly expanding one. It is to be hoped that he will succeed in his laudable endeavours to create a permanent local market at a fair price for the produce of the silkworm reared in New Zealand.”