NATIVES AND ORAKEI.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 74, 28 March 1930, Page 5

NATIVES AND ORAKEI.

CHURCH SITE QUESTION.

EIGHT" BY OCCUPATION.

Subsequent to making known his decisi.on that certain matters in connection with the claims of natives regarding Orakei would have to stand over mean-, time, Judge Acheson heard evidence in the Native Land Court yesterday afternoon concerning the claim* of the Maoris for the return of the church site in their settlement. This particular part of the Court's procedure wae stated to have no direct bearing on the papakaihga question. , Mr. Sullivan, who appeared for the claimants,. eaid the* site consisted ■ of 4 acres 36 perches. In 1858 the chief trustee, who represented all the owners in the Orakei block, conveyed the site by deed of gift to the Crown for the express purpose of a burial ground, and for a school for the Church of England. In 1859 the property 'was granted by the Crown to Bishop Selwyn. in trust for the purpose named. That position obtained till 192 C, when a special clause in the- Washing-up Bill authorised the sale of the; site by the ■ Diocesan Trust Board to the Crown.. The sale was effected for a sum of £ 1000. Mr. Siiili; van contended that the Orakei Maoris had an- undisputed right by occupation to the site: ■ They had paid- rates ;on the land amounting'to 12/ a year every year from the time rates were first paid till 1926. V . '. Church Burned Down. , . Several witnesses gave evidence, some of whom -had lived practically their whole • life ■on the Orakei block. They stated there had been no school or church on the site during their lives; but they had been told that a school, which was formerly erected, had been destroyed by fire. .Other witnesses stated that they had'paid rates to the Orakei Road Board. Wiremu Watene, an old native, said he was. born near Orakei 84 years ago. There had been a school .and a church on the site, and the buildings had been burned'down. They had not. been reerected. Several people had been buried on the ground. Mr. Sullivan .said-the Maoris, had trusted the. Church, to conserve I'.ieir interests. Referring to the. burial ground, counsel said it was sacred>to the natives, and it would'be almost sacrilege should the property be: cut up and sold. . ;

The judge eaid the Court was .being asked to override a proclamation which really established definite proof of ownership. • ~ . ■'•■■■,'.-• , Mr. Meredith, for the Crown, said the "objections of the Crown were -based on the question of a proclamation having been issued, and the- fact that, there was no evidence to set up, a prescriptive title to the land.

The judge said he would consider the question when , the v 'claim for the papakainga was again before the Court. He wished', to hear legal ai'gument as to what extent the proclamation debarred the carrying out of the conditions of the inquiry. .■.;" -, .. ■■ ... . :.