NATIVE AGENT SUED.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20230, 15 April 1929, Page 12

NATIVE AGENT SUED.

PROMISSORY NOTE CASE.

LEGAL DEFINITION OF MAORI

AN IMPORTANT DECISION. [BV TELEGiRAPH. —rRESS ASSOCIATION*.] HEW PLYMOUTH, Saturday. An important judgment was delivered this, morning by Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., on tho question of whether Niho Papakura, a. native agent and interpreter, was a Maori' within the meaning of the Hills of Exclbange Act, which requires that a bill to which a Maori is a party should bo written in Maori, or have a translation inscribed, and if ho waived or could waive tho requirement of a translation.

The caso was', one in which C. T. Trundle sued on a promissory noto for a sum of £IOO and interest, the note being signed jointly and severally by defendant and F« V. Gully. Tho money advanced was far tho benefit of tho latter, who had flailed to meet his obligations.

In his judgment, tho magistrate said tho defendant was seven-eighths Maori and one-eighth jvbitc. His father's grandmother was - white, and all his other ancestors wea'e Maori. Tho summons was not translated, but that had been waived. A Maori could not bo held liablo on a bill of exchange which was not written in 'tho Maori language. The promissory note had not been written in tho Maori laoguago. Wcro the formalities complied with?, 'lho late Judge Edwards had held that a halfcaste was not a . Maori. . 'iho various statutory definitions of a Maori were arbitrary only for tho purposes of the particular Acts. Tho word " Maori had to bo' construed in its ordinary meaning, and its ordinary meaning did not include a half-caste.

Tho defendant possessed a preponderance of Maori blood, his environment was that of tho Maori race, his property was subject to tho disabilities of tho race, and his voting power was that of the Maori. Ho therefore came within the definition of a Maori in tho ordinary senso of the word. Ho was not therefore liablo on tho note, which did not satisfy tho requirements of section 97 of the Bills of Exchange Act. Judgment was therefore given for defendant.

Mr. L. Hughes, who appeared for the plaintiff, asked that, in view of tho importance of tho judgment, lcavo be granted to appeal. The magistrate said ho would be glad to facilitate that, _as he thought the matter needed clarifying.