SUPREME COURT—THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume XIX, Issue 143, 18 June 1888, Page 5

SUPREME COURT—THIS DAY.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Gillies.)

THE MAORI CONSPIRACY CASES. David Asher and Pine AwANtTI were charged that, being evil disposed persons, wickedly, and with intent to defraud Her Majesty the Queeu, in order bo receive ocr j tain moneys, they did on. the 21,-fc September, 1887, combine to . falssly and fraudulently procure certain aboriginal natives to personate certain other aboriginal natives (who were dead) entitled to a certain block of land, and so purporting to convey the interests of the natives so impersonated, and in order that David Asher might receive certain commission for procuring these signatures. There was a further count against both prisoners that they did unlawfully combine to conspire by. divers falsepretences oodefraud Her Majesty. —Mr Button appeared with Mr H. Williamson for the Crown, and Mr E. Hesketh and and Mr Humphreys for the defence. Mr Hammond was sworn in as interpreter. —Mr Hesketh drew attention to the fact that Mr Hammond was a witness in the case and bound over, and that he had been'sworn in as interpreter.— His Honor replied that Mr Hammond had declined to sign recognisances. Mr Hammond had merely to produce papers. —Mr Hesketh then raised an objection that tins being an indictment for conspiracy it could not be preferred against his client unless ho was committed or unless by the written consent of the Attorney-General.— Mr Williamson put in the consent of the Solicitor-General to the prisoners being indicted fordefrauding Her Majesty of certain moneys by false pretences. —Mr Hesketh argued that this did not contain upon the face of it the charges contained in the indictment now read over. He took a similar objection to the second count in the indictment. —Mr Button submitted that the consent was ample and sufficient to identify the charges as the same His Honor ruled that the objection had been taken too late, and that it was the duty of the Grand Juiy to see that the consent was given. Ho must therefore presume that all tho necessary steps had been taken to satisfy the Grand Jury. He would, however, make a note of the objection. —David Asher pleaded "Not guilty," and Pine Awanui said, "lam guilty, but it is through this European (pointing to Asher) that i committed the offence."—Pine Awanui was thenordered to stand down, and Mr Button having suggested that he might be required as a witness, he was removed from tho Court Witnesses were also ordered out of Court.— Mr Button, in opening- the case, said that the matter at issue would resolve itself into a very simple one, and ho also explained that the entering into an agreement was what constituted the dime of conspiracy. The facts of the case briefly were these: The Crown or the Government of New Zealand was in treaty for the purchase of a block of native land at Papamoa, some eight miles from Tauranga by road. The prisoner Asher was connected with the Maoria, and had interests in this block, being a brother-in-law of the prisoner Pine, ho had pleaded guilty. The prisoner Pine had certain children by a native wife who were entitled to a certain interest in the Papamoa block. Asher was employed by Government to purchase shares and interests in this block at a commission of £5 per head. The alleged conspiracy was that Asher entered into an arrangement with Pine Awanui, and other natives perhaps, to produce persons who could personate natives having had interests in this block, in order that they should obtain money coming to the certain deceased persons—a deceased son, a deceased wife, and a deceased daughter of Pino Awanui, also a living son and living daughter of Pine Awanui. Having obtained their signatures, Asher applied' for and obtained his commission. It appeared to him (Mr Button) that the real issue would bo as to whether the prisoner Asher knew of the facts of thecaso, and he supposed it wouldbe the main defence that Asher himself was imposed upon, and that Awanui was the arch conspirator aud Asher the victim. The jury would, however, take into consideration that Asher was residing in the distriot for a considerable number of years, and was acquainted with the natives alleged to have been personated.— Herbert Frank Edgar, clerk in the Native Land Court, deposed that application had been received to succeed Raropua, Parewaitai, Tohungarau, Te Rakaherea, Rarapua, and Parewaitai. There were two applications for Raropua at different dates. . He produced a list of the owners of Mangatawa and Papamoa blocks.—GilbertMair'deposed that he was a land purchase officer for the Government.. He authorised the accused to purchase a portion of the Papamca block by a letter written on July 13th, in which the accused was offered £5 for the signature of every original share or interest. In the list of grantees there were the names ot Te. YVbaretaroa, a son of Pine Awanui, 11 years old; Te Awapirangi, 12 years old, daughter' of Pine Awanui; Te Rakaherea, son of Pine Awanui, dead five or six years : Tohungarau, sister of Pine Awanui, deceased three years ; Rarapua Parewaitai, wife of Pine Awanui, died in ISB4 ; Hiremana, daughter of Hernia Ngawaka, died in 1876 or i 877. The Papamoa block was distant from Tauranga 8 miles by water and . 3 miles by land. The deceased persons mentioned lived at Kirikiri. In the early part of March witness met accused in Tauranga, and mentioned that there was something wrong with some of the names he had obtained to the deed. He mentioned the names of Rarapua, Parewaitai, Tohungarau, and Te Rakaherea (all dead). The accused said, " They cannot be because their names are on the deed." Witness then told him that succession orders had been applied for, and accused replied that they would be withdrawn by the people who made them. Subsequently Asher asked witness if he (witness) would object to these applications, and whether he would authorise accused to represent the Crown. Witness told thoaccused that he would be present at the Court. He also told the accused that he had discovered several other' cases of personation. The applications were adjourned from day •to day by the Native Lands Court, and were finally dismissed, the accused being present. —By Mr Hesketh r There were twenty applications in the prisoner's writing. Two other applications were witnessed by himself (witness). It was a common thing for natives to have more than one name. The total number of owners of the Papamoa block was 105. Two of the names were one and the same person.

(Left Sitting.)