MAORI BANKING.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLII, Issue 7399, 27 February 1902, Page 4

MAORI BANKING.

THE BANK AND ITS OBJECTS. GROG AND CARDS. In the S.M. Court, on Wednesday, before Mr H. Eyre Kenny, S.M., the case Te Okeroa v. Te- Toi was heard. It was a claim for £1 ss. Mr Halliwell appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Barton for the defendant. The claim was for JGI, grant in aid, the balance being for interest. Mr Halliwell, in opening the case, explained that some time ago the defendant's husband, Te Kahi, made a proposition to the other members of the Meremere tribe to form a bank amongst themselves, and at a meeting held for the purpose a sum of about d£4 was promised as a nucleus and afterwards paid. The amount of this claim was part of this sum. Eventually it was suggested that the money should be expended in grog, to be retailed at a profit. As soon as the plaintiff made a demand for the return of his deposit, information was laid against several of the natives for sly-grog selling, which certainly looked as if it had been done in revenge. Te Okeroa gave evidence that Te Kahi suggested the formation of a bank, and proceeded to collect subscriptions. The funds were to bo used for paying for food for large meetings for both Maoris and Europeans, and also for using for loans for those who required them, including natives of other pahs. If a man borrowed £1, and repaid it within one month, he was charged 2s for interest, 3s 6d for two months, or 5s for three months. The interest went to the bank, which belonged to the tribe, which was a sub-tribe known as the Meremere tribe. Te Kabi took account of the money as it was collected. There were also three clerks — himself and two others. When a loan was required, application was made to the treasurer or one-of th» clerks, who then consulted together, and, if they agreed, the advance was made on suitable security. Te Eahi made an application for an advance on behalf of Te Toi, wbieh was granted on the security of a chestnut horse on 26th Oct. last. On 24th Jan., saw To Toi, and reminded her that the date of repayment was nearly due. Also saw her the following day, when Te Kahi said he would not repay the amount. Te Toi said Bhe was " very sorry for you people," as she would have repaid the amount if Te Kahi allowed her to. Te Kahi was applied to for payment when he was appointed a member of the Maori Council, but replied that he was afraid of breaking the law if he did so. To Mr Barton: At the gatherings the food was supplied free to Maoris and Europeans alike. Part of the money had been expended in the purchase of beer by Te Kahi without the consent of the clerks. Te Kahi received the proceeds. Te Kahi had been elected a member of the Maori Council for about a month. The other natives were not jealous of him. At the same time some of them " felt a darkness in their hearts" towards him, and advised him not to join the Maori Council, but he persisted in doing so, and then the others demanded a return of the bank funds from Te Kahi. The bank was formed in September, 1900. The beer was obtained in August, 1901, and there had been some whisky bought on a previous occasion. The book produced contained records of money lent, and also of card-playing, part of the proceeds of which went to the bank. None of the clerks had objected to the bank's money being expended in buying cards or" liquor. They also played occasionally another game called nap, for which the bank was also paid. To Mr Halliwell : It was Te. Kahi who first suggested obtaining the grog. Witness has only heard one old man object to it. Te Kahi was also the first who introduced the cards. An information had been laid against some of the natives for sly grog-selling. Whalcahihi, another member of the tribe, said he had heard Kangi Tutulti, a chief of the tribe, state in the presence of Te Kahfthat he would not have grog brought to the pah. Te Kahi replied that he had full power to bring grog there if he wanted to. Mr Halliwell, in addressing the Court, said there had only been proofs of sly grog-selling having been carried on oc two occasions. He did not think from the evidence adduced that His Worship could come to the conclusion that the Bank had been formed for the purpose of sly grog-selling and gambling, and that the other part of the business was merely a cloak. Mr Barton submitted that his two points of defence were the illegality of the objects of the Association and the fact of it being an association of moro than ten persons formed for the purpose of gain, and not being registered under the Companies Act, which made it an illegal association. His Worship gave judgment for defendant, on the grounds that the association on whose behalf the plaintiff was suing was an " association consisting of more than ten persons formed after the commencement of the Companies' Act, 1882, for the purpose of carrying on a business that had for its object acquisition of gain by the association or by tbe individual members thereof," and that it was not registered as a company. TLe association having been formed, and a fund raised to lend, not merely to any subscriber, but to outside natives, at 100 per cent, per annum was certainly an association to " acquire gain," and the fact that this practice bad gone on for a leng time, and was so intended, established that it was a " business." As the case was one of public interest, he would allow a counsel's fee of £2 2s, court costs 2s. Leave was given to appeal.