MAORI WILL CASE.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17936, 3 December 1923, Page 11

MAORI WILL CASE.

AN APPEAL UPHELD.

SPIRITUALISM AMONG THE

I NATIVES. ! (cfzcuh io "tio; rzxss."; AUCKLAND, December 2. Judgment in the appeal from the decision of Judge Holland of the Native Land Court, refusing to grant probate of the will of Ilori Kingi te Pua, deceased, late of Araparera, near Heienaville, has been given by Judgei Jones and Judge Bawson in the Native Appellate Court. The will concerned property valued at £3OOO. Mr A. 11. 1 Johnstone and Mr R. J. Ooates appeared for the appellants, the executors, Messr.-i 8.-trr and Monk, and Mr E. C. Blomfield represented the opposing Natives. The Lower Court, found that when the testator gave instructions for preparation of the will, he was mentally capable of doing ordinary business. It, however, qualified this by finding that one Te Kai, mother of the sole beneficiary,- exercised considerable influence over him by her practice of spiritualism. "It is," said the judgment, "quite clear that she, Te Kai, had sufficient control over deceased to influence him in the disposition of his estate, and this Court is satisfied that Te Kai did influence deceased by her use of spiritualism. The Court considers that circumstances surrounding the making of this will are of such a suspicious nature that it is justified in refusing to admit it to probate." The Native Appellate Court, having regard to the finding of the Lower Court, which had heard evidence and was in a position to judge of the demeanour and reliability of the witnesses, expressed its reluctance to interfere, except upon very strong grounds. The testator was in Auckland in March, 1922, and his will was then prepared by a solicitor. There was no evidence that Te Kai, mother of the beneficiary, influenced or procured that to be done at that time. She was miles away. " The will, as drawn, was read out in Maori, and the testator expressed himself satisfied with it. It appeared from the evidence that the Natives of the district were considerably interested in the belief that communication could be had with the spirit world, and that, as a result, sickness could be cured. It was undoubted that Te Kai, who was blind, acted as a kind of high priestess of the craft, and, if the evidence was to be believed, claimed that she could impart her powers of healing to others,' especially women. It was undoubted that the <testator was a strong adherent of the sect, and that he endeavoured to persuade others to join it, but he could not have had implicit belief in the healing powers, as he went to Auckland, and was treated by a European, who was not a medical manj for several months. It did not follow, the Appellate Court continued, that the testator, because he believed in this form of spiritualism, had delusions such a? •would deprive him of his capacity to dispose of his property by will. That delusion, if such it was to be called, was not confined to untutored people. Highly-endowed persons had professed a belief in it, and it could iiardly be contended that their belief deprived them of the power to make a will. How, then, could the Court say that his belief in spiritualism, or even his love for or awe of its representative, Te Kai, induce him to make a will in favour of Te Kai's childf Any undne>w influence on Te Kai's part, had not, the Court held, been proved. The Court saw nothing in the evidence or the fact that she was head of the cult, to show that she coerced him to execute a will in her child's favour. The Court's finding was that the will was the will of a person of sound ; •memory and understanding to dispose i of his estate; that he realised its contents? and that «he •mil expressed his deliberate intentions. Judgment of the Lower Court was annulled, and ,-probate granted to the executors.