Maori Land Claims Heard

Northern Advocate, 1 March 1947, Page 4

Maori Land Claims Heard

(Special.) AUCKLAND. This Day. Sitting for the fourth day at Auckland, the Royal Commission on surplus Crown lands heard submissions by both counsel for the Maoris and the Crown yesterday. The commission comprises Sir Myers, as chairman, and Mr Hanara Reedy and Mr A. Mj Samuel. Mr V. R. Meredith is chief counsel for the Crown and Mr H. O. Cooney is chief counsel for the Maori interests, j There were few other surplus land I claims in the North Island, other than those in Northland which were being inquired into, and none in the South Island, Mr Meredith stated, in reply to questions from Sir Michael. Continuing his reading of tne report of the land claims commissioner (Mr F. Dillon Eell), Mr Meredith said it was not possible to assess the total j amount paid to Maoris for the 10,000.000 , acres claimed, but for the 474,146 acres | for which claims were seriously considered the Maoris received £95,215. CASE FOR CROWN The fate of the balance of the 10,000,000 acres was discussed, Mr Cooney stating that although the Crown had made payments in some cases, these were for balances of titles only and | resulted in further hidden surpluses, j Mr Meredith, after quoting by vari- i ous courts and commissions on claims ! for surplus lands, submitted that the | Maoris lived in a state of anarchy and de-population through wars and diseases before the arrival of Captain Hobson. Under the Treaty of Waitangi, they willingly ceded authority to the Crown, which protected them from crime and violence. Their tendency to decrease numerically ceased and they received the benefits and amenities of civilisation. * Under the Treaty they'were left in possession of practically the whole of the country. Since that time the country had developed and the native titles to the areas, which had since increased in value, were secured. ' / By taking payment, the natives had legally parted with the areas. Only by accident did surplus lands exist. Mr Meredith submitted that the native could not, on the grounds of equity and good conscience, receive anything as in the creation of surplus lands, losses were not suffered by them. On the other hand they received benefits by cession to the British Crown. RETURN OR COMPENSATE Mr Cooney submitted that the effect of the treaty was not to vest the land in the Crown as a prerogative, but to vest in the Crown a bare legal estate subject to the rights of the natives. No provision was made in the ordinance of 1841 for a transaction lyhich was found to be inequitable. If the area purchased was reduced because of the inadequacy of the bonsideration, then the native vendor* should be repaid either by having surplus land returned or fair compensation. The Crown had no right to take benefit which accrued from a native .title which was extinguished by pri- , vate purchase before sovereignity was established, unless the purchase was entirely free from fraud, was properly understood' by the native vendors, was fair and equitable in all respects, and was obtained for a reasonably adequate consideration. The question was if the transactions which resulted in surplus lands could measure up to those standards. Mr Cooney submitted that the Crown must implement its obligations to protect the Maoris by compensating them "for the lands which the Crown acquired without cost to itself. The inquiry was adjourned until June 10 at Kaikohe provided the date was suitable to both counsel.