The Daily Telegraph. WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1890.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5878, 9 July 1890, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1890.

Wk have often drawn the attention of our readers to the important question affecting the acquisition of native lands and tho means by which that end can be attained, but wo fear that the many cases which rise from the threshold of tho legal platform may cause a gloom to be cast upon the real stability and genuineness of tlio Acts now iv force. Of course, every case has to be guided by and decided upon the circumstances that affect it. A sort of mask seems to have pervaded the mind of the public with reference to t lie caso of Poaka v. Ward, a caso which was tried—or, rather, what is called in law tin " extraordinary proceeding " was taken for tho purpose of prohibiting one James Smith from obtaining a title to a portion of a block of land supposed to bo acquired by him in tho district of Wangauui. Of course, the judgment given in this caso by Mr Justice Richmond iv effect, to our mind, is that Smith relied upou the validity of the documents which the natives signed and upon which he professed to acquire his titlo, instead of asking tho Native Lands Court to alienate upon the bona jides of the transaction entered into between himself and tho natives. The Native Lauds Court Act, 188(3, Amendment Act, 1858, seems to have taken it that bySection 11> of that Act the purchases of the interest by Smith wero validated. The Section reads as follows :—" Land or shares in land owned by natives shall bo deemed to havo been transferable, and may hereafter be transferred by deed executed and attended with tho formalities for the time being prescribed by law us to deeds intended to affect the title of natives to land. But this provision shall not apply to any deed purporting to alienate land where such alienation was restricted or recommended to bo restricted by order of tho Court, or where such alienation may heroafter be so restricted." Upon this view of the case that Section 10 validated tho transaction Mr Justice Richmond gave his decision, and looking to the language of the Statute, aud followed by tho meaning and intention to be gathered therefrom, we cannot conceive that His Honor's judgment must bo sound. At anyrate wo find that the Court of Appeal havo chosen to disturb this verdict, and havo given an impetus that has caused the litignut in whose favor judgment was given by Mr Justice Richmond to relogate his cause to the Privy Council. Now we wish to point out that if Mr Smith had in tho first instance taken his vendors before tho Native Land Court Judge, and hud he shown to the Court that his transaction was in keeping with I equity, and that ho ciuno into that Court with clean hands, and wished equity to be dealt out, that the natives understood the alienation, and the Court satisfied itself of the propriety of tho transaction, thero would not havo been any cause for this protracted and expensivo litigation It is a pity that tho Acts required to bo used should be so completely hashed up as they are. It can only stand to reason that from tho benefits conferred, meagre as they may seem to be, that tho Native Land Court is the only custodian of alienation, but these only upou being satisfied from tho natives themselves, not these inchoate documents purporting to alienate. We would advise all who are interested in land which is held by natives, tho title to whioh they desire to acquire, is to go direct to the Native Land Court and obtain a direct and unimpeachable title; not fo burk enquiry, but satisfy all parties of the absolute bona Jides of the sale, or lease, as the case may be, and thereby alleviate the necessity of the patchwork matliod ot endeavoring to grasp title and laud themselves in interminable litigation.