A PARAWERA DISPUTE

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1607, 14 February 1925, Page 5

A PARAWERA DISPUTE

AX UNFORTUNATE MAORI WOMAN

BUYS STACK OF HAY ALREADY SOLD.

The atmosphere of a Maori pa pervaded the local Courthouse on Thursday last, when a party of natives from Parawera with their womenfolk completely filled the limited accommodation provided for the public inside the Court; whilst outside the lawns were liberally sprinkled with squatting groups of natives. The activity as far as the natives were concerned was chiefly connected with a civil case brought by one Umu McLean (Mr Downes) against Rangitaea Poria (Mr Preston) for £ll 6s, being the value of certain hay, and cost of harvesting, which it was alleged had been wrongfully taken possession of by the defendant. Mr F. W. Platts, S.M., was on the Bench, and Mr VV. J. Herlihy acted as interpreter. In opening, Mr Downes on behalf of the plaintiff stated that on 22nd September. 1923, at Parawera, a native named Hare Toatoa died. At the subsequent tangi, a collection was taken up to defray the expense of a cpffin, the amount thus collected being short of the required sum. A meeting of the Native Council was then held at which there were present the three members of the Council —Henare Mangere, Poihakene, and Hare Mutu—together with the widow Tarewai Toatai and deceased’s step-sister, Mama Hoeta. At this meeting. Mama Hoeta gave the Council power and authority to dispose of certain hay over which she had a proprietary right, the proceeds of such sale to be used for the purpose of making up the required amount to pay for the coffin. The Council subsequently arranged a sale of the hay to Umu McLean and assisted him to harvest, stack and fence the crop, Umu paying the’ undertakers’ account in return for the hay. After Umu had stacked the hay, he left the district, for awhile. On his return some time afterwards he was prevented from using the hay by Rangitaea Poria, who told him that Mama Hoeta had sold her the hay. Umu McLean tendered formal evidence in support of the claim. To Mr Preston, witness stated that he had carted oniy one load from the stack. He had not paid for the hay at the time he commenced harvesting. Re-examined by Mr Downes: He bought the hay about 14 days before he paid for it. Henare Mangere, Poihakene and Hare Mutu gave evidence as to the negotiations between the Maori Council and Mama Hoeta concerning the hay.

Hare Mutu in cross-examination said that Tarewai Toatoa, the widow, also gave authority to the committee to sell the hay.

For the defence, Mama Hoeta said that she sold the hay to Rangitaea Poria for £3 10s and received the money. She did not authorise anyone else to sell the hay. To Mr Downes: She did not attend any ineeting of the Maori Council and denied having approached the Council to purchase a coffin.

Rangitaea Poria stated that, as she knew that Mama Hoeta practically owned the land on which the hay was she went to Mama in order to purchase the crop, making an offer of £3 10s. Mama was agreeable to the sale, and the bargain was completed. Some time afterwards she discovered from a conversation she had with Henry Mangere, her brother, that the hay belonged to Umu McLean. She contradicted this statement, however, as she had bought the hay herself and paid for it. As there seemed to be some uncertainty with regard to Mama Hoeta’s rights in the matter, she went to Takanini and interviewed Mama, who refuted the accusation that she had sold the hay twice, and denied having ever approached the Council. Witness returned to Parawera and interviewed the members of the Council, informing them of the result of her enquiries at Takanini. The Council's reply was, “We fear no man nor any law. We have sold the hay to Umu and that is the end of the matter.” They further stated that no matter who the hay belonged to, if the Council sold it, then “it did not matter.” She then went to Auckland and interviewed a native named Moumou, a cousin to Mama Hoeta. Moumou really owned the land and he said to witness, “What Mama says I will abide by.” Witness then returned to Parawera, and informed the Council of the result of her interview in Auckland, and then took possession of the hay. To Mr Downes: The money for the hay was paid to Mama Hoeta in notes. Witness had not removed hay at night time.

Tarewai Toatoa, the widow (called by Mr Downes at the suggestion of the Magistrate) stated she and Mama Hoeta attended a meeting of the Maori Council and Mama said at the meeting “Sell the hay.” Witness also concurred. To Mr Preston: Witness was sure that it was Mama who told the Council to sell the hay. The Magistrate, in giving judgment, said that the evidence of the Council members, confirmed by the widow, proved that Mama Hoeta first arranged with them to sell the hay, and the Council therefore sold the hay to Umu. Mama Hoeta was then tempted, as Maori women often are, to sell the hay again to Rangitaea Poria for £3 10s. Mama was the liar in the case, and the cause of all the trouble. He proposed to make the natives stick tc the arrangements originally made by them. The only way to do this and to bring Mama Hoeta to realise her fault was to give judgment for plaintiff against defendant, Rangitaea Poria, leaving defendant to bring an action against Mama Hoeta for recovery. Defendant was an unfortunate woman who found herself in the position of a person who innocently purchases a chattel already sold'to somebody else. Judgment was therefore entered for plaintiff for £8 16s, and costs £9 12s.