NATIVE LAND COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 12, 22 November 1883, Page 2

NATIVE LAND COURT.

i Hij Honor Judge Brookfield aud Native Assessor.) : . it Jud ■ ' . icz .• .-viib. ’’5 a.. ■>.*■ . »’• he . ihe app:tca- '. the par feta I Maka it Blcok.—Ab ffie judgment :a ' .uc 1. . L ,olappeiioy iot yc ■■ on .• cßivaa. d j 01 '.. . . • .-.uv’i . c<>;e coming hex c the Court considerable amount of • r \l.. y.j.u. .C JLCir.od by the Jd.’.t ;• 4 . <• ;• '.v : th'.- aibxtvu'vitjii exp .lb , bit ’ V. ,IV .U’.c. not agree to , J * t _,i /j.- J te., repu- ; ' n cr. tuna

A discuMion next ensued as to the dis* posalof deceased claimants’ interest, some claiming that they should be equally divided amongst the remaining survivors, and others that they should go to deceaseds’ relatives, The latter equitable plan was adopted, The following were the awards made Tucker (2 shares), 33a. 2r. 26; Reperata Kahutia, 26a. Or. 37p; Katarina Kahutia, 16a. 3r. 13p ; and Wi Haronga, Wi Torna, Orepara, Karakane, Wi Parone, Mere Aue Parone, Tamati, Hape Kahutia, and Rawiri Tokitahi, each 14a. Ir. 28p, On the Court resuming at 2 o’clock the arbitration fees were paid in, when his Honor opened and read the following award :— •• Re Taruheru Block—l having been appointed umpire by mutual consent to decide as to the value of certain structures now existing on the south-west of Taruheru Block, beg to submit the following results of my calculations. H.aving received those of the two arbitrators, Messrs R. Cooper and J. R. Hurrey, my position became very difficult from the very great discrepancy which exists between the conclusions of each arbitrator—viz., £53 Ils. on one side, and £457 4s, Id, on the other. The case being that the arbitrator for one side contending that the decision should be based on how much the land in question has been enhanced by the structures as at present existing. On the other side it is contended that the decision should be based on the amount expended on these structures by the late Captain Read. The principle which I have adopted is ; I have carefully made out the original cost (or what they could be built for new) of the works in question, and deducted a certain amount for what I consider they

have depreciated by time and usage, my decision being that the present value of the works which I have been called upon to l decide is £2lB 9s 6s—W. P. Finneran.” M Mr. Tucker asked that the decision with V respect to this arbitration might be suspended for a time until he could get advice as to the nature of the application he should make to the Court with respect to the same. This request was granted. Te Puninga Block.—The subdivision of this block next came before the Court and was dismissed, Maraetaha.— Struck out. The Court ordered the following cases to be set down for Friday next: —Matawhero B> Tapuhikutia, and Waiohiharore. Wednesday.

Haiti.—On tire opening of the Court today, his Honor informed those present as to the result of his visit to Rutene, who, he said, had consented to a boundary line being struck, commencing at Otepi and ending at the island in the Waimata, but Rutene refused to consent to a sub-division with respect to the other portion, which belonged jointly to him and Riperata. If a majority of the owners asked for a sub-division, the Court had full power to do so. He did not see how the Court could do otherwise than strike the case out.—Riperata Kahutia asked that her application be not struck out, and wished for another opportunity to arrange a settlement.—His Honor thought it very improbable that any arrangement would be come to. There wsre only 36 owners present out of 106. Until the portion referred to was divided, the shares could not be allocated. — Captain Porter explained that the Nn.tiven were not aware that a majority must be present before a sub-division oould be made. When that became known, no doubt they would attend. Mr. Gannon reminded the Court that a document signed by about 40 of the owners f had been put in, praying for a sub-division. If others were to sign so as to make a majority would the Court then sub-divide? The majority certainly wished for sub-divi-vision—only a few interested dissentients objected.—Mr Rees said it was the custom of all Natives to follow their party. No doubt a majority wished for a subdivision. He would ask for another opportunity for arriving at a settlement. Il the case was dismissed it would lead to serious loss to many parties, Raniera Turoa said that the case had been a long time before the Court and he saw that great difficulty had been experienced in attempting to deal with this block. At the first meeting between those interested, some 50 or 60 had agreed as to the subdivisions (proceeding. He felt grieved that because a majority of the Natives interested in the block were not present it could not be gone on with. He would ask the Court to proceed and set things right, as there were some owners in the block who wished to prevent the subdivision. He hoped the Court would not dismiss the application. Mr. Rees now asked the Court to grant him an opportunity of again seeing Rutene in company with Riperata, when ne would try his utmost to bring them to some satisfactory arrangement. His Honor said he would grant another opportunity, and with this view would adjourn the case until Saturday next. If a majority of the Natives agreed the case would proceed, but if not, the case would be struck out. This block was not like an ordinary one, but was of such importance ♦ hat he must bavo a substantial majority in f nvor <'f going on, before ho could «feal with epan. If this wsa not Homo by Saturday next, the Ck’urt would ileal with the matter as it thought fit. Ranieva wished to knnw whether s letter signed by th* l sick persons inte»y ested in the block, wb<» were unable to * attend, would he recognised by the Court. < His Honor said that providing they wer** I too sick and infirm to attend, a properly attested document would he received. The further hearing of the block accord ; ' adj< I until Stn • at 10.30 a.m