OWNERSHIP OF CHURCH

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19394, 31 July 1926, Page 8

OWNERSHIP OF CHURCH

DISPUTE BETWEEN NATIVES. FOLLOWERS OF RATANA. POSSESSION CLAIM FAILS. ORIGINAL USE TO CONTINUE. [BY TELEGRAPH. —OWN CORRESPONDENT. ] THAMES. Friday. The Native Land Court has been occupied for the past two days in hearing evidence in connection with a dispute between a number of converts to the Ratana movement and certain Church of England natives regarding the ownership of a church at Manaia, near Thames. An application was brought under section 5 of the Native Land Claims Act, 1921, to decide whether the church should be handed over to the Church of England. The applicants claimed that the church was built 70 years ago by voluntary subscription on behalf of the native members of the Church of England. In 1905 the building was blown down and rebuilt by voluntary contribution. The opening service was performed by Bishop Neligau, who, in the presence of a large congregation, dedicated it to the service of the Church of England. Two years ago a large proportion of the congregation seceded to the Ratana movement. Relations became somewhat strained between the two denominations and culminated in a recent attempt by the Ratana section to prevent a Church of England service being held, for which the leaders of the movement were prosecuted and fined. An order was now asked for giving control of the building to the Church of England. The claim was before Mr. C. E. MacCormick, Judge of the Native Land Court. Archdeacon Hawkins appeared on behalf of the Church of England and Mr. E. J. Clendon for the followers of Ratana. History of the Building. The first witness, Wakere Paraone, asserted that the Ngatimaru tribe had put up the building in 1878 for the Church of England on land given by one of the elders of the tribe. It was re-erected in 1905 and duly consecrated and named the Holy Trinity Church by Bishop Ncligan. It had always been used for Anglican services, but was now wanted by the Ratana people. Witness and the people he represented objected to Ratana. Archdeacon Hawkins, superintendent of Maori missions in the Auckland diocese, said he was present at the dedication of the church. Some time later he was asked by an influential native what steps -were being taken to hand over the building to the Church of England, in terms of Bishop Neligan's consecration and dedication. He suggested that application be made to the Native Land Court. Corroborative evidence given by several natives elicited the fact that the burial near the church of a lay reader had converted the ground into a "tapu." The Ratana followers subscribed about £5 out of over £IOO required to build the edifice. Ownership of the Land. Mr. Clendon addressed the Court at length on behalf of the objectors. He said the application was unique and was apparently made on the authority of section 5 of the Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1921. The facts, he said, were not seriously in dispute. There was no doubt that although the church building was erected by the members of the church and had ever since been used as an Anglican church, it was upon land owned by the objectors. The church was last rebuilt in 1905. In 1911 the land was awarded to the objectors and had been, and still was, a burial ground. Legally the building was part of the land and belonged to the objectors. In its equitable jurisdiction the Court had power to decide as to the possession of the church. There was no doubt that Manaia was essentially a- native village. There were about 150 inhabitants, three-fourths of whom had become followers of Ratana. They were quite sincere in following his teachings. He did not consider a dual control of the church was practicable, but he would suggest that the church building be retained by the owners of the land subject to fixing compensation. Archdeacon Hawkins contended that as the church admittedly belonged to the Church of England the order should be made declaring that the church was the property of the Church of England, and that the natives who had left it and joined Ratana should build a church of their own. Reviewing the evidence the Judge said he was of opinion that the church should remain for the purpose for which it was built, and for which it had always been used. He therefore had decided to vest possession of the church in trustees for the purpose of permitting services only of the Church of England therein, with a right-of-way from the roa4 to the church door. The trustees and width of the right-of-way could be settled by the Court later. It was ultimately agreed that the right-of-way be Bft. wide, the trustees to he appointed at some future time.