MOKAU DEALINGS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1299, 30 November 1911, Page 2

MOKAU DEALINGS.

STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER. IN lilil'lA' 'IV ill!. uKl.;y. Sir .loscpli Ward ;,-avc a Uuminio reporter )ji-( ■•vi'iiiii" a .-lal'-ininl in ri-pl In i-nrl:iiii ion> I'oncc-i Mini; tli Mokai! <-r-l ;i (\lllicll \W'IC nittili' Ijy I|| nki.v, Kolorni i-;nir|i<iii(c Jul- 'Cariinak ami rcporlrd in Dominion*. The I'l-inif Mini-ler'., li-ini-iil whs a lollmvs:—".Mr. I tknv s 1 lint, in mti* faction fur (Ik? co.*t i»|' :nr\c\> cM:cule by llm (.'rov.n, liens were (,'ranteil ovc llin land iimoiiniinß lo .1:1102, logelhe willi interest of Sr-tMions aggregal in;; .1021 litres were si-l a>ide in salislai lion of Iliiv-" liens iiml marked us Crow tp-iirln on Ihe official plans, .Mr. Okey' csjiimtle of ihr; viijun of Ihese lands i .Ci.-iltl. .Mr. IJkev Ihiil. oil A lli llii'.v wore Mild .for .lillfj!), and on Noi ember 20 (lie lions on th>: title were caii colled and I li<- In became the properl, of Mr. M'Nah's conipiiny, to whom I)ii> lvC i!r''. ; "°' ! ! l»'ivately without compelitior "The fjitln aro very simple, and a llioy lnivc iilitihlv been published in ofli t'l.'il documents (here is no e.Tcuno lor Mi Okey misrepresenting the circumstance jl "it case. As u member of the lal House, lie must have seen the report o (he Parliamentary Committee on 111 Mokau-Mohak-afino case, awl consequent ly was perfectly well aware that hi version of the matter is, lo put. it mild I y> incorrect. 'J'he following c.vplanalioj will servo to show (he public Ilia tru circuuislnnces:— "The question was jnrpiircd into by lb Parliamentary Committee on Wednesdav Sep!ember 20, 1911, and Mr. Win. C JveiiMiigfon, 1.5.0. ('Under-Secretary o Lands), in his evidence, s |a(cd that ii salisfuction of the Crown survey liens, (In Crown was awarded by the -Native Lam Cmirl about 51,'i1l acres in dilVerenl. sub divisions of the block. Thai award win made on (he supposition lhat Ihu l'c< simple of tlio block was held b.v tin Maoris, and that the Court could appor. lion an area for Crown liens. As a mattei of fact, there existed at that time Mr, Jones's leases and other sub-leases, and heavy mortgages over the block. The consequence was that (he .Department could not out out llies'e areas lhat had been awarded to the Grown. ,11 was therefor; seen that (he order of the Court had been made under a. misapprehension, therefore, when the syndicate acquired (ho block, (he Under-Secretary pointed out to their solicitors (hat the Crown must have .-e----enrity for its survey costs, and Messl.-. Findlay, Dalziell anil Co. deposited tile full amount of tho survey costs (.filtli'.l) on August 1G last, and that amount was paid to tho deposit account of Iho lio-ceiver-Clenent), pending final determination in tlio matter. It will, therefore, be seen "(1) That no land had been sold by the Crown as alleged. "What hail happened was that the survey costs had been repaid by the Native owners lo tlio Crown, as has frequently been done ill other auos where the Natives wish to sell their Innd which is encumbered with tho Crowa survey liens. "(2) The order of the Native Land Cour.t .was novel- carried out as it was deemed ultra vires under tho circumstances navrated. Such an order can only have effect when the land over which it'isito be registered is unencumbered. In this ease the la.nd was subject to leases and subleases, the majority of wliicli had priority over the. Crown's liens. "(3) The Native Land Court reconsidered tho liiattej- at To Kuiti on October 19, l!)lt, when Judge Holland cancollcd the order in question under Section. 121 of tlio Native Land Act, I'JGO. Tlio decision was recorded in Olorohanga Uinuto Book, No. 103, p. ,'ilO. "(J) The effcct of this eancrllatiou of tho order was that the area jf land in one block to L>o awarded in satisfaction of the survey liens was theiouoon freed from tho Crown's encumbrance," and re-' veiled In the Native owners, who could then deal with it as (hey had nowcr. Tho Crjwn never paa-csscd any fitlo lo the land in question, sa eojfd not sell it. Ail tho Crown had was t chargo over tho area, in respect. ol" unsatisfied survey liens n hen _ these liens were jiaid oft, the Crown's claims disappeared. Tho alleged of tho -1 and by the Crown without competition is therefore imaginary. Tho Nativo owners owed tho Crown * monev for its survey of tlio block, anil when they discharged this debt, the Grown had no further claim on tile land or against the Natives, so that Mr. Okey's statement is absolutely contrary to fact."