AREKATERA AND OTHERS, V. THE PATETERE COMPANY.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1901, 11 September 1884, Page 2

AREKATERA AND OTHERS, Y. THE PATETERE COMPANY.

Those concerned in this case, which is now sub judice, will be surprihed to learn that Arekatera has been withdrawn from the action, which a few days ago was before the the Supreme Court in his name. Aiekatera, it appears, has been made to consider the question of cost, which up to the pre&ent has been very considerable, and as the case is anything but finished, the ultimate cost, were the case allowed to proceed, would, we understand, be something enoimous. The case, we might state, is one of a very peculiar character, and the cause of aotion arose in the disputed title of a certain 1000 acres ot land at Waotu. Theie are two sections ot the Ngatihuia tribe, one section residing at Kapiti and one at Waotu, By a ruling of .Judge Fenton the Kapiti having left their lands in time of trouble forfeited their right thereto, and consequently the court could not recognise their claim. The resident Ngatihuia, when adjudged owners of a portion of tie Waotu,' being anxious to give a portion < f their " share to their Kapititi relations (who are really the rangatiras of the'r tribe) arranged that 1000 acres should le vested in three people only, that it might be more readily conveyed to the Kapiti section. This was done, and the Court was cognisant of the transfer of this 1000 acres to the Ngatikapiti. , Subsequent to the transfer being made, an arrangement w. ■ entered into between Ngatimaihi and Ngatihuia, whereby thq divisional boundary

between the two tribes was altered. The Comfc cut off .-mother 1000 acroh, and to avoid complication made it tho same number (No. le) as tho original thousand aei\M. After tho older was nude the thiee natives concerned confirmed the deed of gift, and the land \\a, purchased by the European*. For \arious reasons, winch «ire generally known to the Cambridge public, especially t!it)--e oncjrncd in the cisc, the three n iti\es> afterwards attempted to repudiate t'lo tiansfer to the Ka])iti people, and applied that the ttamferto the Euiopeans should bi> set a^ido, tlie alleged grounds being that the position of tho 1000 acieh having been alteied, the laud acquit ed by the Europe.ins wvs not leally the land 01 iginally given by the lesidunt Ngaliluna to the Kapiti.