ROTORUA LEASES.

Press, Volume XL, Issue 5755, 28 February 1884, Page 6

ROTORUA LEASES.

AUCKLAND, January 31, Judge Smith gave judgment in tho Djj, trict Court to day in the Eotorua case, Tole v Cousins, a claim of £97 Kkßi, Hie Honor said—Thia action has brought to recover rent alleged to be da»' on a lease made between an aboriginal tribe (the Ngatewhakane) aa lessors aad the defendant as lessee of certain lanfo leased to defendant for ninety-niao jeer*. The defendant contended that the leaa» waa void, and in support of that contention raised four objections to the lease, two o{ which were as to its form and two as to its substance. The first of the former via, that the lease had not been properly <&.. tested in accordance with the Conveyancing Ordinance, and second that it had not been duly executed by the plaintiff in pursuance of the Thermal Springs Act, 1881. Objeotiona as to the substance wero— 1. Thatlessors were not a corporate or quasi cor. porate body as a tribe such as that named in tha lease; and (2) that the leaee did not comply with the provisions of the* Thermal Springs Act, 1881, and that these ; defects were not cured by the Amendment Act, 1883. The first objection was overruled, and the second being loft in abeyance, his Honor held the third one to bo fatal. It was quite clear that a tribe was neither a corporate nor a quasi corporate-, body, for if the Legislature had intended it to be either, the intention would not have been left to inference, but would ■ have been expressly stated. The use of the words "Native proprietora" in Act fortified ■- the opinion that there was no intention to incorporate the tribe. He, therefore, held' that the deed was a bad one. There wa», no need to decide the fourth objection therefore, seeing that the defendant was entitled to succeed upon tho third one. Jfr Button said he bad been instructed to gin : of appeal, but he doubted whether it wofii be continued. Judgment was alio given ; for the defendants with costs, which vera assessed at J63 17s. As this was a test case, Mr S. Hesketb, on behalf of defendante in other cases asked that they should be struck out. Mr Button consented, and the cases were accordingly struck out. .