THE NAPIER LAND TITLE CASE.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 11278, 20 May 1902, Page 6

THE NAPIER LAND TITLE CASE.

(nrja association' telegkam.)

NAPIER, May 19. ' At the Supreme Court to-day, the native ca««, PHikete Takerci against Shrimpton and others, was continued. The evidence for the plaintiff v went to show that the plaintiff was.not horn when the Court eat at which the Matapiro block wan ' put through. All those (who were jregent in the Court at tltat time were now" dead. Mr Bell ebjected to certain evidence, on tdie ground that the witness wan not present in Court at the time, and tbat the evidence was inadmwsable. His Honour said that tho evidence waa of occupation and. of non-inclusion :n the certifioate of title, and in'his view this was the only kind of evidence which was possible in'ord"? to grant au attack on the title. If the Court's duty was to pat all the owners in, and it only put in ten of the number living on the land, there was a prima facie case to go to the Native Land Court. Mr Bell aaid:—"The real question is what did the Court do. The present evidence is of those who were not in tl«e Court, and is of a kind that <we cannot meet, and had no notion of in the pleadings. Although tha occupation is relevant, the relationship cannot ba." His Honour— I don't think I can exclude thin evidence. For the defence, it was stated that there were no native cultivation* on the land since 1874, when Messrs Rich and Shrimpton took possession, though Mr Rich and ethers had been in possession prior fo that date. The natives had been employed on the property from Hapus at Omahu. bat at no time until the present had objection ever been made to Mr Shrimpton** possession. The £37.000 represented the improvements effected over the whole property. Mr Baldwin's application for the right to examine Judge Smith and Judge Munro, of the Native Land Court, was granted. His Honour made a note of counsel's application foT i*sue directing the Native Land Court as to who were the lawful owners of the land at the date of the investigation. This closed the caee. Leave to more the whcle of the evidence in eanh of the three ca«e* into the Court of Appeal in Wellington waa granted, all questions of costs being reserved.