THE NGAITAHU CLAIM.

Southland Times, Issue 19502, 17 March 1925, Page 4

THE NGAITAHU CLAIM.

To the Editor. Sir, —I beg to be allowed to answer Mr Skerrett’s letter which appears in your issue of March 14. Mr Skerrett has cooled down to such an extent to admit the appointment. To give to those who had applied and not attended the hearing at Tuahiwi on January 15, 1925, a meeting of the assembled natives was called for • the repott of the Advisory Board and balance-sheet from 1920. The Board was not able to produce a balance-sheet until January 16. The Committee at that date became a nonentity and the secretary must follow suit until re-nominated accordingly. The Court accepted the appointed Committee to facilitate the work of the Court (see Ngaitahu Claim Minute Book, January 20, 1925). Mr Skerrett says these points are foreign and wild, but I advise those holding Court receipts with my signature as such, not to be afraid as to their legality. I see. Mr Skerrett has accepted the Editor as a deciding factor as stated by me. I hold that the challenge turns on the points at issue, being the controversy which appeared continuously in the columns. These points are:— (1) Report that it was easy for those descendants of those chiefs who signed the Deed to be admitted without question (paper report March 5). (2) That Mr Skerrett is a participator both on his father’s and mother’s side (March 5). (3) Mrs Skerrett’s claim was admitted without question. (4) Whaikai Pokene appears on the Deed, not Te Whaikai Pokenu. Now, I suggest for the benefit of the Editor that the question be deferred to June, as we are both going to the island and the Land Court will be sitting to hold a session and the Court records will assist the Editor in all points. Mr Skerrett is to stick to his compendium, without declaring misprints. In conclusion, I fully appreciate the kindness of the Editor of the Southland Times in allowing me space in connection with this discussion. 1 am, etc., ARTHUR E. WIXON.