NATIVE LAND COURT, CAMBRIDGE.
Thk Laud Court was continued on Thursday, liefori; Chief Jud(jo Macdonald, and opened at 10 a.m. The .Jndsre asked who were ready to go on with their cases. There being no response Mr Hay suggested that Hitiri's c-ise. should be called. This was dmiß, and after tho Judge had asked the applicant a few questions, he said that he seemed to know very little about the cause of complaint. .Mr Blake said Mr Brookfield had been engaged in tho case, and would be up by the afternoon train. Ho would therefore apply to have it adjourned until he arrived. The Judge said he would adjourn it until tho next morning, for neither applicant nor Mr Blake appeared to know what was the matter, so they had sent for counsel t>) tell them. Mr Blake said he thoroughly understood tho case, hut could not place it before His Honour as well as counsel would do. The Court then adjourned until 2 p.m., and at the time no one being prepared to go on v.'ith their cases, it was further adjourned until i). 30 a.m. yesterh riday. The Court resumed yesterday morning, when Mr Brooktield appeared as cormsr-1 for the applicants. He addressed the Court briefly, and said lie based his case upon the four following reasons why a re-hearing should be granted:-First, that no subdivision at all of Taupo-nuiatia could be made until the title to the whole block had been first ascertained, and a (inal order made. Secondly, that none i>f the subdivision cases should have been heard until regazetted. Thirdly, that no decision of Tauponuiatia block could have been arrived at, as the court lapsed on 30th September, 1880, and all proceedings after that date are consequently null and void. Fourthly, that the proceedings of the Court in September, 1887, were contrary to the express promise of Judge Scannell. He then said the title to the whole block had never been really determined. The first Gazette issued gave notice of a sitting of the Court to be held at Taupo on January 14th, 1880, tlie application being signed by Te Heu Heu and a considerable number of their natives. The Court was opened on the 14th, and adjourned from day to-day until the Kith, when a list of hapus was handed in. An order was made in favour of 142 hapus, but that did not go far enough, and the naires of the whole of the owners should have been ascertained, and a linal order made by the Court before proceeding with sub-divisions. This was not done, and has never been done up to the present. He quoted Sections 24, i"i, and :H of the Native Land Court Act, 1880, in support_of his argument. In regard to ins second objection he said a Gazette was issued, dated January 23rd, lS8(i, for a Court to sit on February 2lith, to deal within a large number of blocks within tlie Taupo-nuiatia boundary. The natives were puzzled to know what was meant by tho issuing of a second Gazette, and representations were made by Mr Grace to the Native Minister, and a notice was published that the blocks mentioned in the Gazette of January 23rd would be withdrawn, and not be dealt with until regazetted, and that the only cases that would be dealt with by the Court were succession claims and gazetted applications for sub-divisions. Among the claims that wore withdrawn by that notice are the blocks for which his clients arc now applying for a rehearing. In regard to his third point he referred to the Act as to the constitution of tho Court, and quoted to show that the presiding judge only had the power to adjourn a court after it had been once open, with the exception of His Excellency the Governor. The Chief Judge had no power to adjourn it, nor to interfere in anyway with the presiding judge. He granted that the Chief Judge had powur to postpone a, Court bofore it was opened but not afterwards. He quoted from tho 1883 Act, and Iluleu', mi ler Act of 1880 in support of his argument, the notice adjourning the Court was signed by Mr Hammond, tho Kegistrar, and not even by the Chief Judge. The fourth statement, as to tho promise made by Judge Scannell to the natives in July, 18S7, he should leave it for His Honor to obtain Judge ScanneH's version, which would doubtless be correct. He briefly referred to Taonui and Hitiri being ommittecl in consequence of their being at Cambridge, which His Honor had hoard of in the evidence. Mr Hay was about ta reply, when His Honor said he thought it was unnecessary, and said he would give Ills decision in the Ga/.etto. The Court then closed, at 10.45 a.m.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18880121.2.8
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Waikato Times, Volume XXX, Issue 2423, 21 January 1888, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
803NATIVE LAND COURT, CAMBRIDGE. Waikato Times, Volume XXX, Issue 2423, 21 January 1888, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.