R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1212, 25 October 1882, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

v -.Jm™wn-^tuesday. R.M.J ' i Natlianiel'Tone v Iriatawa Kingi and Hoani Rnngita Kawatio,-Breach of trigo metrical Surveys; Act,. Seotion-4. Mr Gray appeared for the defendant. The informant deposed as follows 11 .araSnassistantßurveyoron the Government staff, and from verbal instructions from the Chief Surveyor proceeded' to survey that piece-of land kuown as Tarnata/or Manerawhia. I put in certain pegs and poles there about ten days ago, on Friday last saw the defendant Hoani remove arranging pole i bad 'stuck in the ground. (To Mr Gray) I was instructed to cut tho land up into small sections for : sale by the Government. The land is an island containing about 640 acres. I saw no sheep on it but cattle were there. I gave no notice that I was about to surrey the land, I was told by settlers prior to the survey that the natives' claimed the land, .' William Boyle deposed he was a laborer employed on the survey party, and saw the defendant Iriatawa knock a peg ,out of the ground and pull it up. It was a traverse peg used for the purpose of tbe survey, He then handed the peg to Hoani who threw it into the river. (To Mr Gray) He had himself driven the peg in question deep into the ground. N. R. Swan, another laborer on the survey party, stated that on Friday last he saw Hoani fling a ranging rod and a survey peg into the river. Mr Gray asked for the case to be dismissed on tbe ground that a ranging rod was not a survey peg. Wi Mahnpuku, for the defence, stated that the laud in question belonged to Rihari, Ti Ariri Pirika, Te Po Ihnka, Naraana, and to the defendants, and produced a letter signed by Mr Halse, assistant Under Secretary for Native Affairs, statins that the land in question was under Native title. The Court dismissed the case on the following grounds:—lst, That the Court had no jurisdiction, the defendant having committed tho act of which he was accused in tho exercise of a bona fide claim to the property in question. 2nd. There was no evidence to prove that the survey was authorised by the Government ,of the oolony. .__ '