THE KINROSS PERJURY CASE.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 381, 31 May 1879, Page 19

THE KINROSS PERJURY CASE.

Mr. Mansford held a special sitting of the Resident Magistrate's Court on Tuesday (tha ordinary business being dealt with by two just'ees at the Police Station) to hear the case of alleged perjury against Mr. Kinross, a Napier merchant, arising out of some native land transactions. The Court sat from 9 a.m. till 4 p.m. Mr. Rees and Mr. Nolan appeared as counsel for the prosecution, aud Mr. Travers and Mr. Chapman for the defendant. Accused was charged, on the information of Paramena One One, with laving, at Wellington, on or about Friday, the 20th day of October, 1871, falsely, wickedly, aud wilfully and corruptly committed wilful and corrupt perjury iu the testimony whirh he gave upon oath as a witness at the investigation into certain allegations made respecting transactions affecting native lands in the district of Hawke's Bay, and in regard to the working of the Native Lands Frauds Prevention Act, 1870, by a Committee of the Legislative Couucil of New Zealand. The perjury was assigned upon two statements, one being that he (defendant) had never sold spirituous liquors to natives, that he had never given them any such liquors except as a present ; and secondly, that he had never charged spirituous liquors in his accounts against the natives' land. Mr. Travers took a preliminary objection. The alleged perjury was said to have been committed by defendant in giving evidence before a Committee of the Legislative Council, and to form a basis on which to rest his evidence it would be necessary for complainant to prove that the oath was duly administered. The officers of the House or the committee alone could prove that, but this evidence could not be obtained without the consent of the Council. That consent had not been secured and therefore he apprehended the case could not proceed. Mr. Rees said his friend had no right to address the Court at that stage. He (Mr. Rees) would undertake to make out a prima facie case despite the obstacle referred to by Mr. Travers.

Mr. Mausford said he had received a letter from the Hon. Henry Russell, stating that the writer could not attend through illness. Mr. Rees, in opening the case for the prosecution, said that the defendant, John George Kinross, a merchant in Hawke's Bay, had, with his other business, been largely interested in dealings with native lands. The alleged perjury was committed by Mr. Kinross wheu giving evidence before a committee of the Legislative Council during the session of 1871. A committee being appointed by the Council to inquire into matters connected with the native lauds in the Napier district, Mr. Kinross had been summoned as a witness. By an Act passed in 1870 it was made illegal to supply the natives with spirituous liquors as a consideration or payment for lands. Previous to 1870 an Act had been in force prohibiting the selling to Maoris of a number of articles—spirits, arms, &c. —whether as payment for land or otherwise. Mr. Kinross, iu his evidence, a part of which he (Mr. Rees) read, absolutely denied on being asked that in buying, leasing, or taking mortgages of native lands, he had made any payment iu the forbidden articles. It was in this statement that perjury was assigned. After a speech of an hour's duration, Mr. Rees proceeded to call evidence. William Ward Yates deposed that he was for about ten years iu the service of Mr.^ Kinross as salesman. He left Mr. Kinross' employment about March, 1872. Amo.ig his duties wa.s that of supplying the natives with whom Mr. Kinross had transactions with goods. He served them with great quantities of spirits, that article bearing a large proportion in value to the other goods. He always before delivering spirits to the Maoris took care to be certain that it was with the full knowledge ami authority of his employer. The spirits were entered ia the books as so much money paid to the buyers, the other goods being entered under their proper names. In entering the spiris as money the amount charged was mors than the ordinary price of the article. There was no deviation from that

course. B. Mr. Travers : He knew there was a law prohibiting the selliug of to natives, aa-l

also that it was illegal to make spirits a consideration for the value of land. Frank Bee, a clerk, deposed that he was for several years prior to 1874 bookkeeper in the Her vice of Mr. Kinross. In that capacity he had kept accounts between Mr. Kinross and the natives. On the Maoris obtaining goods he debited them against the buyers. He had ~., s-v.ral occasions received money from the natives ns payment for spirits. At other times he had-been handed slips of paper, supposed to represent goods and cash obtained by the natives. He did not know in these cases whether cash had been paid or whether spirits had been given instead. He did not remember a single entry in which grog was debited to the natives. His impression was that all goods taken by the natives were taken in consideration for land. There had been cases in which money was handed him by Mr. Graham, Mr. Kinross' manager, to be given to the natives. Sometimes this money •ame back for the purchase of spirits. Had never known spirits to be served to the natives on credit, and had never known of spirits supplied to natives being entered as cash advanced. He had been in conversation with friends as to the probable result of this case. He had spoken to several people about the trial, but only as to its outcome. George Davey, storekeeper, deposed he had been in the employment of Mr. Kinross in fw storeinan; after leaving that situation !ih had kept a hotel at Pukahu. When an hotel keeper he bad supplied large quantities f li'iuor !•> several native landowners He bought all his*., i k from Mr. Kinross. Iu conjunction wit If Kinross he had been a party to Heveral v irt&rages by natives of their lauds. Mr. Ki r •■•■■> had asked him (Davey) to exert his inflti-•• ce with the natives to further Kinross' obj'-(•.:. to obtain mortgages of land. He had influence with the natives and used it. Mr. Kinross had cautioned him (witness) to be cartful when supplying liquor, or to enter it as cash. Among the natives with whom he and Mr. Kinross had dealings jointly and severally were Paramena One One, Ihaka Kapo. Hahepa te Itinganohu, and Hiriui Haramia (who were in Wellington to attend the trial) ; and the principal blocks of land in which they had been concerned were Rankawa (east and west). Mangaroa and Ngatarawa, No*. 4 and 5. He was aware that the supplying of spirits to natives in connection with land transactions was illegal. The witness deposed to a great number"of details, and identified a large number of documents in connection with a number of extremely complicated transactions between himself, Kinross, and the natives. During this part of his evidence, which occupied several hours in delivery, it was alleged that there was an arrangement between the witness and Kinross, by which the former supplied liquor to native land owners, taking as payment orders on the natives' shares of a number of blocks of land. Kinross honored these orders, atfd with them bought up the natives' land. In cross-examination by Mr. Chapman witness acknowledged having witnessed two deeds of purchase, knowing them to be deeds which practiced a deceit on the owners of the land. These persons did not know they were parting with the land, but thought the documents were merely orders on account of rent due to themselves. Paratua One One deposed that he was one of the grautees of the Kawhawa Block. Mr. Rees raised the point that the Dative evidence should be taken down in Maori as well as in English. That course was supported by a rule of t'.e Supreme Court. The case at this stage was adjourned until Saturday morning.