THE HOROWHENUA CASE.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 9883, 13 November 1897, Page 7

THE HOROWHENUA CASE.

SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT.

(PSUESS ASSOOIATIOS TKLEQRAM.)

WELLINGTON, November 12.

The judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of re Horowheuua sub-division No. 14, was delivered to-day after the conclusion of the Court of Appeal business. The Court were unanimously of opinion that the only question into which the Native Appellate Court has power to enquire under the Horowhenua Block Act, 1896, ia whether on the making of the sub-division order in 1886 in favour of Major Kemp in respect of sub-division No. 14, it was intended either by the Court or by the registered owners that he should take aa sole beneficial owner or as trustee, and if so upon what trusts; and that it was not intended that the Court should, under that Act, ascertain whether, by reason of faulty proceedings of the Native Land Court or partition in 1686, the original trust in Major Kemp as to tbe whole block had. not, as to subdivision 14, been effectively determined, and therefore continued. The Native Ap* pellate Court must treat the subdivision order in favour of Major Kemp as well made, and enquire only whether under it be was intended to be sole beneficial owaer or trustee. In view o ( this decision, many of the questions put by the Native Appellate Court became immaterial, and were not answered. Oi the answers given to other question, tbe most important was that, in considering whether Major Kemp was intended to be sola beneficial owner or trustee under the subdivision order in his favour, the evidence of the Judge of the Native Land Court wba made the order, though to be accepted as of great weight, was not to be treated as conclusive, but weighed with other evidence.