THE MAORI CASE.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 143, 15 June 1909, Page 3

THE MAORI CASE.

HEMOATA MAIJRITIJ v WERAWEPvA TAP ATA.

Yesterday his Worship,. Mr T. Scott •Smith' SM., delivered judgment in :theabo?e previously heard case, as M^ThhTs an information laidl under the Destitute Persons Ac*. lfeOo, at -the instance of Hemoata Mauritu ioi -that one Werawera Tapata is the . father of an. illegitimate mate chud 1 bom on the 12th day of April 1909 of which the said Hemoata Mauiitu is the mother, and has tailed Jo provide -for the maintenance of &ucn child The parties in this case are Maoris, and 1 after the evidence had been taken and concluded on hoth sides, Mr Mills, counsel tor the defendant raised the question of want of jurisdiction, and in support of his argument referred me to section 22 ot "The Maoris' Council Act 1900, which reads as follows: 'The Council shall, in order that provision shall be made for the proper maintenance aud support of illegitimate children, or children known according to the Maori custom as poriro, on the discovery of the father of any such child, compel him to make such weekly payment or such other provision for the support of such child as it may deem fit, or to require security for the proper payment ot such maintenance. At any time when requested so to do by the Council, or when it is deemed expedient, the Governor may, as therein provided, declare that the . Destitute Persons Act, 1894, shall be brought into operation in any Maori district. Shortly after the passing ot the Destitute Persons Act, 1894, that Ac* was by proclamation in the Gazette of 1894 declared to be in force as to natives throughout the INorth, Middle and Stewart Islands. Under the Maori Council Act, 1900, districts were proclaimed Maori districts for the purposes of the Act, but no pro : clamation was made under the Maori Councils Act, 1900, proclaiming the Destitute Persons Act, 1894, to be in force as to Maoris, and that being the position, the jurisdiction of the Magistrate's Court was ousted. On the other hand, Mr McNab, counsel for the informant, argued that sec-j tion 3 of the Destitute Persons Act, | 1894 (Avhich enacts that that Act, shall come into operation in respect of persons of the aboriginal natice race at such time as the Governor shall appoint), having been omitted from the Destitute Persons Act, 1908, did not oust my jurisdiction to deal with Maoris under the Destitute Persons Act of 1908. 1 have very carefully searched the latter Act, and I find no reference to Maoris whatever except in the interpretation clause that Maori includes a half-caste. Both the Destitute Persons Act of 1894 and the Maori Councils Act, 1900, enact that the provisions of those Acts can be made applicable to Maoris by Gazette proclamation of the Governor. In the former Act it was done, while in the latter it was not done, and in the Destitute Persons Act, 1908, no reference is made to Maoris except as above mentioned. Neither of the Acts of 1894 or 1900 lias been repealed, yet they contain provisions that the Destitute Persons Act- of 1894 shall not be applicable to Maoris or native race, except by proclamation. Under the Maori Councils Act, 1900, no proclamation appears to have been made making the Destitute Persons Act of 1894 operative as regards Maoris. We liave therefore two unrepealed Acts which make provision for bringing the provision of the Destitute Persons Act of 1894 into force with regard to Maoris by proclamation, while under the Destitute Persons Act of 1908 there is no reference to or distinction made between Maori and European. Under the Maori Council Act of 1900 the Maori Council were empowered to make proper provision for the support and maintenance of Maori illegitimate children, and the Maori Council did, in exercise of these powers, inquire into the matter, but before arriving at any ■decision the matter Avas relegated to this Csurt. I think the Maori Council could have been compelled to adjudicate and make an order for maintenance under the Maori Councils Act of 1900, but as it did not do so £ do not think I ought to refuse jurisdiction. On the other hand, ii -the Maori Council had made an order for maintenance there is no procedure provided by the Act by which such order could be enforced, so that recourse would have to be made to the Destitute Persons Act of 1908 to enforce such an order. I am of opinion my jurisdiction has not been ousted, and that I have power under the provisions of the Destitute Persons A.ct of 1908 to adjudicate in this matter. Counsel for the defendant also pointed out that there was no cor-

roborative evidence that the alleged husband of the plaintiff, Poutu, was not at the Wairau Maori Pa Avhero the plaintiff was living between tho months of April and July, 1907, or about that time, but I think the onus was on the defendant to prove that Poutu was at the pa and was seen in company with the plaintiff. I do not think a proper legal marriage according to the Maori custom has been established. On the evidence which has been adduced before me I am ot j opinion the defendant is the putative i father of the plaintiff's illegitimate 1 child, and I adjudge accordingly, and order the defendant, to pay to the Clerk of the Court at Blenheim the sum of 5s per week Jrom the 12th day of April, 1909, until the child is fourteen years of age, and the costs of these proceedings."