Untitled

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XXXVII, Issue 12411, 22 March 1911, Page 9

What would appear to be an omission on the part of Parliament was "pointed out by their Honors the Chief justice (Sir Robert Stout) and Mr 'justice Uwper m giving judgment m an important Native case at the Supreme Court. Their Honors said they thought it was their duty to mention that although section 37 of the Maori Land Claims AidSi£ n t nt and Am endment Act of 1907 has not yet been repealed, that which makes the section undesirable, namely, the schedule, has been repealed. Could they then ask the Chief Judge or the Native Appellate Court te proceed as if section 37 did not exist? The words of section 37 were: "Ihe Appellate Court' shall have jurisdiction on the application of any Maori claiming to be interested m the land referred to m the second schedule hereto, to inquire and ascertain the boundaries, etc." Now there are no schedules. They are repealed. The practical question their Honors had to decide m thi9 particular case Avas whether there could be a rehearing under the 1907 Act, the second schedule being now non-existent.