HISTORIC GREENSTONE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 15824, 22 January 1915, Page 7

HISTORIC GREENSTONE.

ECHO OF BATTLESHIP VISIT.

CONFIRMATION OF GIFT,

DISPUTED OWNERSHIP

MAGISTRATES DECISION

"Oxk would have thought it more in accord with the traditions of the Maori ' race that a Maori of high rank would' acquiesce in the presentation, even if a mis!.ike had been made, rather than allow ' a reflection to be cast upon the whole native race." This sentiment was expressed by Mr. K. C. Outten, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, giving reserved judgment in a case which was the sequel of a presentation made by Mere Paora to 11.M.5. New Zealand of "a block of greenstone weighing about 1701b, and greatly prized, not only for its intrinsic value, but also for its historical associations. Henaro Kaihau (Mr. F. G. Massey) claimed possession of the block of greenstone called Xgarangipukohu from Mere Paora (Mr. E. C. Blomfield), and also £25 damages for alleged wrongful detention of the disputed heirloom. The magistrate said that the greenstone had been in the possession of Mere Paora and her father for a great many years, and he thought that it might be talker that no Maori of the rank of defendant would have risked the reflection upon the good name of the Maori race that would he involved in making a presentation of this kind, when .she knew the article, presented did not belong to Her. At most, the presentation was made under a misapprehension, and it would have accorded well with Maori sentiment that the greenstone in question, by whatever chief or tribe it was presented, should be with the battleship New Zealand while she was doing her duty in tin present war. Plaintiff's Burden Undischarged. "In my opinion," said the magistrate, '" the plaintiff has not by any means discharged tiie burden necessary to entitle bun to a judgment." A great ; many years ago a block of groer.stone weighing about oYwt was brought from the South Island by a EuroI pean, and plaintiff's grandfather, Paora te Iwi. purchased it, and took it to the kiauga at Waiuku. Hail the stone was i cut into meres by William Oliver, an Auckland lapidist, and the other hall" of the, block was the subject of the action. On l'aora te Iwi's death the plaintiff claimed that the stone became the property of his sister and himself under their grandfather's will. Some time after this the plaintiff said he arranged with Paora Tuhauere. the defendant Mere's father, that lie should take the stone to Orakei, and there bury it for safekeeping. "An Offering to the Dead." i It was not until 1894, at the tangi in j connection with tne death of the late "king" Tawhaio at Taupiri that plaintiff again saw the greenstone. He surmised that Mere had *aken it there, and prese iU-d it as an 'ff.u-ing to the dead. It was the custom to present many of these offerings to the visiting tribes at the tangi. Kaihau said that at the time he protested against Mere's right to present it, and declared that it should not be given away |t" the visitors. He. did not. however, claim its possession, hut left it with j Mahutu, the Maori " king." On Mahuta's | death the greenstone was given ha. k to i | Mere by Parata, the present "king." | This, Kaihau claimed, was wrong, as the stone, belonged to him. The Defendant's Story. The history of the stone given by defendant agreed with that of the plaintiff so far as concerned the,ownership of it by Paora te Iwi, plaintiff's grandfather. But defendant contended that it was a gift to her father by Te Hira, and that it had come into the possession of that chief in the following manner:—Te Hira, a chief' of the Oiakei Maoris, married a relative of i Henare Kaihau, and went to live with her j people at Waiuku. ' About the year 1872. I Te Hira's wife died, and he then returned j to Auckland. Prior to his leaving Waiuku, in accordance with the Maori custom of making a presentation to a departing Jangatira. a gift was made to him of the stone in question "to clothe him" on his return to his own people. It was part of Mere's story that when she was quite a young woman her father, not very long before his death, pointed to ihe place \> here the stone was buried and said, " Your precious article is buried there." Mere not unnaturally contended that her father, who was an influential man, holding r ■ important position under the (Government, and a man highly honoured by the Maoris and respected bv the Europeans, would not have put her in the false position of leaving her to believe that she was the owner of the stone if he had held it merely as a trustee for Henare Kaihau. Defendant's Version Accepted. The magistrate considered that Mere's account of what took place from the time her father gave the stone to her might be accepted without question, as it was supported in all except the conversation with her father by other reliable evidence. He pointed out that there was the evidence, also, of two independent and reliable witnesses that Te Hira brought the stone, to Auckland, when he came from Waiuku, and that he subsequently presented it to Paora Tuhauere. . This carried the history of the stone back to 1372 or 1873. and it showed that tne stone had been in the possession of the defendant and prior holders for over 40 years, without notice of any other poison having an interest in it. Going further back still, although there was no primary evidence of the presentation of the stone to Te Hira on his leaving Waiuku. it was not denied that, Te Hira inairied a relative of Henare Kaihau, or that he went to live at. Waiuku and retinue to Auckland after the death of ' his wife.

It was dear, end Mr. Cutten, that the plaintiff's story was unsatisfactory. He had left ta» stone in the hands of other people forT!s years without making any tlaim for its possession. .Although he said lie left it in Psora's possession merely fur safe keeping, he did not claim it oil l'anra's death. Further, it was to be noted that, if the plaintiff's story was true, P.iora Tuhauero was guilty of extremely dishonourable conduct, in that a stone which he held in trust for Henare K;iihau he gave to his young daughter. " Whatever faults the native character may have," summed up the magistrate, "it is extremely difficult to believe that Maoris of trie rank of these men would act in a way that would be dishonourable in the eyes of their own people." Judgment lor Defendant. "I am satisfied." concluded the magis trate. " that the history of the stone given by the defendant is the true on", and that at the time of the. presentation to Captain Halsey the stone was the defendant's property." Judgment, with costs, was thereib'-e entered for the defendant.

The stone, which, to save unpleasantness, was left in the possession of the Mayor, will now be forwarded to Captain Halsey.