NOT THE "PROFESSOR"

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 213, 3 May 1932, Page 6

NOT THE "PROFESSOR"

maori in court STARTED WILD GOOSE CHASE AFTER GOLD AN UNUSUAL STORY Rapid exchanges in Maori, accompanied by much gesticulation, ornamented a story which provided the Rotorua Magistrate's Court with some amusement yesterday morning, when a Maori named Matene Te Huaki, alias Billy Martin, came before Mr. S. L. Paterson, S.M., charged with obtaining money from Ernest Thomas Johnson, land agent of Rotorua, by means of a false pretence. According to the police, one of Te Huaki's aliases was "Professor Martin" and His Worship put some questions to the accused to ascertain whether he was in fact, identical with the individual under that name, who some time ago was convicted of oil frauds in the Taumarunui district. The story unfolded during the case centred round a small piece of goldbearing quartz, which the accused produced to Mr. Johnson and claimed he found in an outcrop on the upper waters of the Whakatane River near Ruatahuna. Mr. Johnson, as a man with some knowledge of mining, was interested in the specimen, and made an arrangement that the accused should take him to the spot where he had found the stone. On the strength of this arrangement, it was alleged that Te Huaki had obtained a sum of £1 15s in cash from Mr. Johnson, but when he was asked to point out the place where he claimed he had found the quartz, it was at once perceived that the ground was not of a gold-bearing nature and that a hoax had been perpetrated. The discovery was not made, however, until Te Huaki had conducted Mr. Johnson and a friend on a 20-mile tramp over rough country with the monotony broken by frequent river fordings. The accused pleaded not guilty and was represented by Mr. R. Potter, who asked for a short adjournment as he had only just been instructed in the matter. After hearing the evidence, however, the Magistrate said that Te Huaki's story could not be believed and senteneed him to 14 days' imprisonment.

Been Hoaxed Outlining the case, Senior-Sergeant Carroll, stated that the accused had shown the piece of stone to Mr. Johnson on April 18 and the matter had been discussed for some days. Finally Te Huaki had led Mr. Johnson and a friend to a spot on the Whakatane River where he claimed that he had found the stone some time before. Mr. Johnson had some knowledge of mining, and he immediately perceived that the stone could not have been found in that vicinity and that he had been hoaxed. Ernest ThOmas Johnson in evidence said that Te Huaki represented to him that he had found the stone some time before in an outcrop on the banks of the Whakatane River in the Ruatahuna district. Witness said that the stone was a good specimen of gold bearing quartz, and he had been interested in the matter. Te Huaki had promised to show him the , reef but had bargained for the sum of £50 for disclosing the location. Witness finally agreed to pay the accused this sum if the reef was as he represented it to be, and at Te Huaki's request, gave him a sum of approximately £1 15s in cash. A Long Tramp On April 24, proceeded witness, in company with a friend he went to Ruatahuna with accused. When he went to pick up Te Huaki at Ng°n_ gotaha, however, the chief Tutanekai, with whom he was living asked for £10 security for the payment of the amount of £50 promised. As witness knew. the old chief, he gave him a post-dater cheque for £10, payable on his return. They then proceeded to Ruatahuna, where the accused led them on a long tramp to the spot where he alleged he had found the stone. On the way, however, Te Huaki appeared to be indefinite as to the route, as he several fcimes asked directions from Maoris. He also led them on a route which caused them to ford the river 12 times instead of twice as would have been the case if he had followed a direct line. Witness, however, had not ascertained this until afterwards. As soon as witness inspected the spot, however, he perceived that the quartz produced by Te Huaki could not have come from that place. It was not gold bearing country. In reply to Mr. Potter, the witness said that he did .not know that Te Huaki was generally supposed to be a little sub-normal. He had had some previous experience of mining and considered the quartz a good specimen. He considered that its appearance of age might have been due to the fact that it had supposedly been found in an outcrop. Te Huaki had never told him that he- had obtained the stone from the old chief Tutanekai. Chiefs Evidence The chief was then called, and through an interpreter, said that the quartz had previously belonged to his half-brother, now deceased, who had entrusted it to his keeping. Accused had no right to take the stone, which witness said that he had missed after Te Huaki departed with Mr. Johnson. The chief, in reply to Mr. Potter, said that he was sure he had not given the accused the stone — he was not allowed tp part with it. Thomas Angus McKinnon said that he lived with the chief; the accused lived in the same kianga. Witness knew that the stone was the property of Tutanekai who usually kept it locked in a box. Constable Kelly was then called and produced a statement signed by the accused, in which he denied receiw ing- any money from Mr. Johnson and claimed that he had had the stone in his possession for about five years. Accused's Story Mr. Potter then called the accused, who told his story through the interpreter. Te Huaki said that he had met Mr. Johnson one day in the street and had shown him the stone. Mr. Johnson had been very interested and had asked him to come into his office. ' He had then told witness to say nothing about the matter to anyone else, and ! witness had given him a promise to

him that if he was asked any questions, to say that the stone came from Ruatahuna. Proceeding, Te Huaki said that he was asleep when Mr. Johnson arrived to take him to Ruatahuna and he was awakened and instructed to go by Tutanekai. "I went because he was my chief — I was living with him," he said. When he went out, Mr. Johnson told him that he would be accompanied by a friend, Mr. Lewis, who would be of assistance because he "had plenty of money." They then proceeded to Ruatahuna where the accused alleged that Mr. Johnson told him to demand a guiding fee from Lewis. "I was not game to ask him," said the accused, "and Mr. Johnson said that if he did not give it to me, he would leave him in the car." Not The "Professor" Te Huaki protested that he had told Mr. Johnson that the stone belonged to Tutanekai and said that he only went to Ruatahuna on Mr. Johnson's instructions. He had never procured any stone from this district, but thought that if Mr. Johnson wanted to go there he had better go. Johnson had never given him any money although he had given him a bag of flour. "I did not ask him for it and I do not know why he gave it to me," added the accused. The Magistrate: Then why did Mr. Johnson go out to Ruatahuna? Probably to take Mr. Lewis. But why would Mr. Lewis go out there? That was Mr. Johnson's business. He made all the arrangements. Did you ever find oil at Taumarunui? No. Did you ever say you had found it? No. Were you ever before a court in connection with a story about oil at Taumarunui? No sir. I told no story to any court about kerosene. Then have you ever taught music at Palmerston North? I don't know anything about music. Are you sure you are not the man who called himself "Professor Martin?" There are many Martins in the world, sir, but I don't know whether I am a professor or not. The Magistrate (to the SeniorSergeant) : Is this man, "Professor Martin," sergeant? The Sergeant: I don't know, sir. It is one of his aliases, but I don't think so. Mr. Potter said that Te Huaki had a conviction for theft but it had been entered ten years ago. He had not been before a court since 1927, when he had been convicted of a breach of his probationary license. He was generally known about the town as being "a* little peculiar." No one took a great deal of notice o-f his stories. "The accused's story certainly cannot be believed," said the Magistrate in passing sentence. "He comes along here and wants us to believe that Mr. Johnson, a well-known and reputable man, made use of him as a tool to mislead someone else. He certainly cannot be believed."