THE NATIVE LAND QUESTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8483, 6 February 1891, Page 3

THE NATIVE LAND QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — is much to be hoped that your article _ respecting commissions on native land titles will lead to some more sensible course being pursued. Just consider the expense to the country of Mr. Commissioner Edwards' Court, when all the titles it can deal with could just as well Ik. set right, and many others besides, by a short Interpretation Act, making use of the ordit ' nary Native Land Court. It is the interpretation of the Acts which ' has caused a great deal of the trouble. For i instance section 16 of the Native Land Court Amendment Act, 1888, reads " Land oi shares in land owned by natives shall be deemed to have been transferable, and may hereafter be transferred by deed executed and attended with the ■ formalities for the time being prescribed by law as to deeds intended to affect the title of natives to land 5 but this provision shall not apply to any deed purporting to alienate land where such alienation was restricted or recommended to be restricted by order of the Court or where such alienation may hereafter be so restricted." This would be generally understood as validating, where by the original native title the land was saleable, the sale of shares in a block, provided the legal formalities lor the time being were complied with. But; nothing of the sort: the section is held not to validate the sale of shares, and consequently a title cannot be obtained. Again, the section 23 of the Native Land Court Act, 1886, reads: — Any native owner of land held otherwise than in severalty, or any person who may claim to have purchased or acquired an undivided share therein, maj apply to. the Court to make partition thereof and thereon the Court may proceed to par tition as hereinafter provided. • And section 16: "Person" includes a person whether, "native or otherwise." And one would, naturally infer that if a European purchased a share he could obtain a partition of it; but : it is held to mean nothing of the kind. Now, whether it is the law or the interpretation of it that is at fault, surely there could be no need of a commission to set it right; and for what other purpose was Commissioner Edwards' Court appointed, and an enormous amount of money wasted in unnecessary expenses 1 I am, &c., E.T.