SUING A NATIVE.

Taranaki Daily News, 4 August 1922, Page 6

SUING A NATIVE.

x\N INVALID DOCUMENT. PLAINTIFF NON-SUITED. A case which illustrates one of the many pitfalls besetting the path of those having dealings with Natives over land matters came before the Magistrate (Mr. A. M. Mowlem) at the New Plymouth Court yesterday. Carlin Gill and Frank L. Gill, for whom Mr. R. C. Hughes appeared, claimed from Tamati Rapua (Mr. A. Bennett) the sum of £B3 12s 3d. the case ending with a nonsuit of the plaintiffs without calling on the defence.

Plaintiffs’ case appeared to rest on the fact that in 1915 they had executed a document with Tamati giving them the right to occupy some land for a period of 15 years. This land had previously belonged to defendant’s sister and she had parted with the rights to a Mr. Greenway, from whom one of the nlaintiffs had purchased them for £BO. Matiti. the defendant’s sister, had, however. died. Tamati. as far as the plaintiff giving evidence knew inheriting the estate. To make the claim good and secure the plaintiffs entered into an agreement with Tamati which cancelled Matiti’s document. This document gave them the right to occupy the land in consideration of the money which had been paid to Matiti. Plaintiffs had «uhsequently paid a couple of accounts for Tamati and had also provided th? •naterial for a whare. At the end of 1918 they had had to get off the place as Tamati had sold the land to the

Crown, flie Gazette notice stating that the land had been declared freehold in 1916. Now they claimed for the sum stated, contra having been allowed Tamati for rent to which he was entitled.

The document above referred to was put in as an admission by defendant of his debt and was impounded by the Court for contravention of the laws relating to stamp duty.

Cross-examination was directed towards ascertaining the actual period the witness had occupied the land, work performed by Tamati on the place and the personal and written demands made on defendant for payment. Tn the correspondence that was produced different amounts from that stated in the claim had been given as being allowable for rent due.

‘Without calling on the defence the Magistrate said that the plaintiff must he non-suited. They had not established their case. The document put in was invalid. It did not comply with the Native Land Act. as there was no translation and no proper execution by the Native. There were also other faults. Then the statute of limitations mgiht be applied. His Worship- went on to a review of the case and once again stated that the plaintiffs had not sustained the onus of proof which was od them, and they must be non-suited with costs.

Mr. Hughes applied for a copy of the notes on the judgment so that he might lajlYfreIajlYfre clients