NATIVE LANDS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXIII, Issue 15920, 4 May 1912, Page 17

NATIVE LANDS.

INTERPRETERS' RIGHTS. [Per Press Association.] / AUCKLAND, May 3. An offence of a most unusual nature was tho subject of a Police Court action before Mr Cutten, S.M., this morning against a Maori interpreter named George R. Hamilton. The accused is a native interpreter of the second grade, and he was charged with acting as a native interpreter of the first grade. Under tho Native Land Act only an interpreter of the first grade can interpret and witness leases to land under the Act. Recently a lease was presented to the Waikato Native Land Board,' and it was found to he signed and witnessed by the accused, whoso signature was accompanied by the words " No. 1 " and something else not easily decipherable. It was known that Hamilton"was only a second grade interpreter, and therefore not competent to witness and interpret a lease, and an investigation brought to light several other cases of leases signed by second grade interpreters. The result was that those who wero parties to the leases had to have the documents prepared again and go to tho considerable expense of engaging a first grade interpreter to obtain tho signatures of native'owners and interpret the ag] cements.

In consequence, Hamilton was prosecuted, and Mr Selwyn Mays, in stating the case, said that in making a written explanation accused said that the "No. "l" on tho document was intended for "Not 1," and that the following hieroglyphics meant " Second class interpreter." That explanation he thought made the matter worse. Hamilton pleaded "Guilty," and Mr Denniston stated on his behalf that his work was almost wholly that of interpreting in the Maori Land Court, and he very rarely did private conveyancing, so that he was not aware of tho offence he was committing in interpreting and witnessing the deed. His Worship said that if ho made the penalty commensurate with the possible serious results that might flow from the defendant's act, he would have to impose a very heavy penalty. Ho did not want to do that, because this was the first time any such case had come before him; but it had to be made ouite clear to the defendant and to cvervone else that an act of the kind might have serious .results The defendant would be convicted and fined £lO and costs.