NATIVE OBSTRUCTION AT MATAMATA.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2232, 28 October 1886, Page 2

NATIVE OBSTRUCTION AT MATAMATA.

It will be remembered that some tjhne »ga the natives laid olaim-to some of Mr Firth's land at Te Wahavoa, the site of the special! ■ ittlement, and that Mi\W. M, Hay, who was sent for, failed to convince them that they had no legal standing. On Saturday night Mr Hay }Vas informed by telegraph that the natives had taken possession of a piece of land occupied by Mr Robinson, one of the new 1 feettlers, andjiad commenced ploughing operations. Mir Hay accompanied by Mr J. M. Fraser, proceeded to Matamata on Monday, and at once proceeded to interview the obstructionists. He found that they had repaired an old fence and secured .the gateway with saplings and wire. , A consid- r ible number of natives were prespnt and questioned by Mr Hay as to their object. They replied they claimed the land. Mr Hay informed them that the fence and barricade would be at once removed and desired to know what further action they proposed taking. To this they replied that they "would not use force, but would reerect the fence as often as it was demolished. The fence was then taken down and a gate wag hung. A bevy of Maori mations and iniids then bwre down on the pakeha contingent and carried off the gate in triumph, and replaced the barricade. Subsequently the position was a'-^in reversed, the barricade taken away and the g*te re-hung. Before leaving qn Tuesday morning Mr Hay advised Mr Firth to erect a cottage on the land just in- • s ; do the gate, and put a man it* charge. Tdis has been done, since when the natives have made no demonstration. Mr Fraser left Matamata yesterday,, and reports " all qui^t along the Potomac.*' *

It is stated by persons well acquainted with the native case that the m.itter will assume larger dimensions than is at present thought of. We understand the natives are advised that they have a good case for two reasons : -(1) That at the sitting of the Native Lands Court, which originally investigated the title to the land, the whole of the owners were not ascertained ; (2) That in 1884, when Mataiaata was subdivided and the portion in question awarded to. Mi Firth, all the parties interested were not present, and that the court 'took, a wrong view of the case. IVEr Hay is still sanguine that a peaceful solution of the difficulty will be effected. ,