Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ORAKEI BLOCK.

QUESTION OF TITLED

PARTITION APPLICATION

ADJOURNMENT GRANTED,

The Orakei block again came up for discussion at a sitting of the Native Land Court to-day, when Judge Achcson presided. An application was made by the Crown Lands Department to partition the interests of the native owners in Orakei blocks 4A2 and -lA4. Mr. O. R. Darby said that the application was made in November and adjourned in the hope that some compromise or arrangement could be made. He asked that the block be partitioned and thai the interests of the natives and of the Government lie defined.

Mr. «!.- J. Sullivan, who appeared for the natives, said that lie had just been instructed in the matter, and applied for an adjournment. lie understood that the judge would be engaged in the North with ii list of cases which would keep the Court busy for a month. He asked lor an adjournment of about six weeks. He expressed surprise that thy Government had approached the Court in the present way, as it had already requested the judge to investigate the position of'the native reserve at Orakei. After hearing evidence, the judge had made a report, but so far the Government had done nothing. He wished to be fully instructed by the natives, and he wished, if necessary, to confer with the Department and the Government. Mr. Darby said that the Department bad submitted a scheme .to the Court, but it was not accepted by the natives. As certain points bad been made clear, he would not oppose an adjournment.

Judge's Comment. Judge Acheson said that he had made a full report to Parliament in 1931. When tho title was investigated, the Crown grant was not placed in the names of the then owners, as the law in force did not permit it, and although three tribes were owners. only one name, that of its chief, was put in the title, an! trustee for the tribes. That, he thought, was the root of the trouble. It could be followed clearly from the judgment of the Chief Judge given in ISIiS. The Orakci question had had repercussions amongst t lie Maoris in the Waikato and at Thames. He was precluded from discussing his report, but it contained all the information that the Government required. .He would like to see the matter settled in a way that would be satisfactory to pakeha and Maori alike.

The judge said that he would adjourn the case for six/ weeks and fix a time of hearing later. Ho wished to make it clear to the natives that when the matter came before the Court again it would be dealt with one way or the other. Finally, the judge remarked that he appreciated the attitude of the Crown Lands Department.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19350114.2.78

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 11, 14 January 1935, Page 8

Word Count
462

ORAKEI BLOCK. Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 11, 14 January 1935, Page 8

ORAKEI BLOCK. Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 11, 14 January 1935, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert