The Telephone. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE : SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1883.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 10, 17 November 1883, Page 2

The Telephone. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE : SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1883.

In our last issue we published, verbatim, the able judgment which His Honor Judge Bbooktield gave in the Katebina Kahutia inquiry, which has been before the Court for some time past. To say that it confirms all that has been written on this subject is to say too little, for it goes much further. After confirming, to the uttermost, all that has gone before it brings out into the light of day another dark spot in this already notorious matter. In approaching this subject we ask our readers to remember who these parties are to whom those scathing words of the Court were addressed. They are men who hold Her Majesty’s commission to set in judgment upon their fellow creatures; they are men who are returned by the voice of the district to set in solemn conclave, and exercise a potent power in the framing and passing of those laws which, for good or for bad, must, for generations to

come, influence the future destinies of the whole of thesU fair colonies. Were we to shirk the great responsibilities which undoubtedly devolve upon us as a public journal and neglect to lay this matter before our reader* in their true light, and to direct their attention to the salient points in this somewhat complicated case, we should undoubtebly be not alone betraying our trttet, but should also prove ourselves utterly unworthy of that support and confidence which is so necessary to our welfare and so requisite an ingedientin giving prestige and force to our utterances in the cause of truth and justice-. In introducing the case the Court made some pungent remarks calculated to show that; notwithstanding that every opportunity had been given for compliance with its strongly expressed wish that tardy justice might be done to the wronged Katarina Kahutia, no notice had been taken of the recommendation other than to treat it with silent contempt. The Court then, in that plain ana fearless meaner for which its utterances have been so justly noted, says, “ This is a case in which Captain Tuckeb claimed to have the interest of Katarina vested in himself, with McDonald and Riperata, as trustees for Katabina, and it presents some rather curious features. When this application was first made on the Sth of October last, Captain Tuckeb stated that he claimed under and by virtue of a deed dated in 1878 (which was not produced at the time) tut which he alleges was a conveyance from Katabina to himself, McDonald, and Ripebata, upon trust for the payment of an annuity to Katabina for life, and after her death to convey the properties therein mentioned to Ripebata and her children. This dasd appears to have existed only in Captain Tucker's imagination.’’ Now, the opinion of the Court is here expressed in no ambiguous language, but in clearly unmistakeable words, that the most prominent individual in this case did, on the Sth day of October last, in open Court, state “ that he claimed under and by virtue of a deed which appears to have existed only in his imagination." The judgment then goes to show clearly the real state of the case, and we would ask all our readers who wish to thoroughly understand the importance, force, and justice of the remarks therein contained, to read the same side by side with the statements which appeared in our fearless predecessor. “The real state of the case turns out to be as follows: —Katabina having quarrelled with her sister, Ripebata, appears to have desired to get rid of all her properties, so that her sister or her children should have no chance of obtaining any share of them. TtCKBB then, in the' interest of all parties, induced Katabina to convey everything to him, which she did, for the consideration, as stated in the deed, of £1,000." This closed the first stage in this matter, and then follows a clear review of the whole transaction in the following words;—" The next step in this matter is the conveyance by Tuckeb to McDonald, which we presume is brought forward in the interest of McDonald, and as a proof that neitheir Katabina. nor any persons as trustees for her, have any title to a share in Taruheru—such share being included in the conveyance now under consideration, and the consideration in that deed is somewhat peculiar, being an indemnity to Tuckeb against the payment of the £lOOO consideration mentioned in the former deed, and a covenant with Tucker to pay Katabina an annuity of £l3O during her life, which appears to us to be anything but a good consideration moving to Katarina. However, at a subsequent date McDonald does, by deed, covenant with Katabina to pay £l5O per annum during her life, but this annuity, is only secured by the bare covenant. There is no security by way of rent charge, or otherwise, for the’ payment of it, and it is stated on oath by Katarina that, in fact, the annuity has not been regularly paid, and that the only amount she has received is about £35. This statement is entirely uncontradicted, though ample time has been allowed for the accounts to be made out. That the annuity has not been paid is, we think, evi* denced by the fact that Katabina has been induced to take proceedings in the R.M. Court against McDonald for the recovery of £lOO, being arrears of annuity alleged to be due upon Whataupoko. This block having apparently been absolutely sold by him to Tucker for the sum of £2OO, which she says she received, and no annuity being payable to her in respect of her interest in this block. This action, we think, has been brought solely in the interests of McDonald, and without the effect of it having been explained to Katarina. Whoever advised her to bring this action while the validity of the annuity deed was under consideration by this Court is, in our opinion, deserving of the gravest censure, seeing that the result of that action, if it had been allowed to proceed, would have prevented Katarina from further disputing the validity of the deed in this Court, and would have further prevented her from prosecuting any claim for other arrears of the annuity, and would have operated as an admission on her part thaii the £2OO consideration money paid for Whataupoko was to be taken as a part payment of the annuity covenanted to be paid to her.” We feel constrained to point out the able manner in which the above explains what appeared, to most people, a very mysterious feature in connec-

tion with the legal representation pf poor deluded Katabina in. thp JI.M. Court—" Whoever advised her to bring this action ” '(ill tile R.M. Court) is, in otlr opinion, deserving of the gravest censure The judgment next goes on to explain another most extraordinary part of the transaction: —“ The next proceeding in this case is a conveyance from McDonald to himself; Tuckeb and Ripebata of certain shares in Makauri and Matftwhe'ro Upon trust; not to pay Katarina any. thing, but to pay him (McDonald) £6O per annum during Katabina’s life, to pay the balance of the proceeds of the land to Ripebata and after Katabina’s death to reconvey the property to Rifehata’s children." Ana concludes as follows i—“ We are of opinion that the consideration set forth in the deed to MoDonalß has not been paid and has failed, and that the transaction was not fair and just, We shall; therefore; order that a land transfer certificate shall be issued to Katabina for 16 acres Br. 62p. and that such portion shall adjoin the land already awarded to Tuckeb, and that it shall be inalienable. The order already made in Tahoka on the Bth October must be amended in accordance with this judgment.” Need we add anything to the foregoing ? The facts of the case Are now, so far, plainly before this public, But it must not be supposed that the whole of the skeleton is laid bare, for such is not the case. Much more, of a like nature, in connection with this miserable affair has yet to meet the light of day which will tend to remove any cause for surprise at the actions of a Company which owes its origin and promotion to the soiled hands which appears in their true color in this matter. The Court has justly and fearlessly done its duty in this case, we have also endeavoured to do ours, and the matter is now left to the greatest of all human tribunals—viz., Public Opinion.