NATIVE LAND COURTS.

Timaru Herald, Volume L, Issue 4861, 5 June 1890, Page 4

NATIVE LAND COURTS.

The Napier Telegraph has the following sensible remarks on a wasteful principle adopted by the Native Land Courts : — ; Ab night followß tho day so notico of rehearing is always given immediately after judgment baa been delivered by a Judge of a Native Land <'ourt. It has" become, apparently, as much a part of tbe proceedings as the taking of evidence and tho delivery of judgment. It is no objection to such notice of application that no reason haß been given, no cause shown why the whole of the proceedings BhouH be. gone over de novo. It is sufficient at the time to give notice, and then three months are ajlowed m which to invent reaeonß for a new trial. An immense amount of time is thus gained by the objecting parties, who lave, probably, no other cause for objection to tho first judgment than that their greed has not been satisfied, though, perhaps, their claim is of the most shadowy character. Wo remember m; one case a re-hearing was granted on tbe application of a claimant who had objeoted to the firat decision of the Court because he and his party had only been awarded 3000 acres m a block of some 35,000 acres. He thought he bad a superior right over the lot to tho exclusion or partial exclusion of the natives who had been occupying the land for generations. At the second hearing it was found that the objector had no substantial claim to the country whatever, and was consequently awarded nothing. Not- to be done out of the satisfaction of hia greed, this objector appealed to Parliament, and a Royal Commission was appointed to enquire into his claims, when the judgment of the second hearing waa confirmed. It is the grasping greediness of impudent pretenders to tho proprietorship of the whole country, founding their claims for tbe most part on a mana that might nover hare existed, and on a genealogy that apparently can be altered from time to time to suit the particular claim set up, which i causes the endless delay m the settlement of Maori titles. Unless the very strongest reasonß can be urged m favor of a re-heariug, a new trial should never be granted.