Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

NATIVE LAND LAW

TWO IMPORTANT CASES. By Telegraph—Press Association. Wellington, Last Night. An interesting point in native land law was argued before the Chief Justice to-day (Sir Robert Stout), when the Solicitor-General proceeded to obtain -a declaratory judgment as to whether, un-' der the Native Land Act, 1909, certain land, required for road purposes, might be taken without payment tion. The defendants in the action were Henry Bernard Cave and Aubrey Oldknow Cave, of Wanganui, owners of the land, and William Edgar Smith and Thomas Allison, of Wanganui, mortgagees.

The land in question was known as Tunuharere D Block and Te Korito Block, Section IX V Waipakura Survey District. It was originally vested in the natives of New Zealand by the Native Land Court, the certificates of title being dated February 14, 1867, and Harch 1, 1867, respectively, and was subsequently comprised in Crown grants dated April 2, 1867, and October 24, 1867, under the Native Lands Act, 1865 and 1866.

A similar case was that in which Zoe Louisa Smith, owner, and A. W. Owena, clerk in Holy Orders, mortgagee, and Claude Edgar Churton Smith, of Wanganui, tenant, proceeded against the So-licitor-General to obtain an answer to a similar question. The land in this case was originally vested in the natives under a memorial of ownership dated February 8, 1879, and under the Native Land Act, 1873, but was now comprised in a certificate of title in lieu of a grant,

In the latter case it was contended that Smith had been entitled to a land transfer title, but had not made application for nor obtained confirmation of his rights until 1898. Now, if the interpretation placed by the Solicitor-General on the Statute were correct, he and the other plaintiffs would be in the' position of losing by retrospective legislation the right they had acquired. Mr. J. W. Salmon, Solicitor-General, appeared in person in each case, and Mr. A. J. Treadwell represented each of the opposing parties in each case. His Honor reserved his decision.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19120302.2.50

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 209, 2 March 1912, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
336

NATIVE LAND LAW Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 209, 2 March 1912, Page 5

NATIVE LAND LAW Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 209, 2 March 1912, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert