THE NATIVE PURPOSES ACT, 1941 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION No. 56 OF 1939, OF DICK STIRLING, PRAYING FOR RELIEF IN RESPECT OF THE OTAIMINA BLOCK

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1945 Session I, G-06

1

1945 NEW ZEALAND

THE NATIVE PURPOSES ACT, 1941 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION No. 56 OF 1939, OF DICK STIRLING, PRAYING FOR RELIEF IN RESPECT OF THE OTAIMINA BLOCK

Presented to Parliament in pursuance of the provisions of section 18 of the Native Purposes Act, 1941

Native Department (Chief Judge's Office), Wellington C. 1; 23rd October, 1945. Memorandum for the Hon. the Native Minister. Otaimina Block Pursuant to section 18 of the Native Purposes Act, 1941, I transmit to you the report of the Court on the claims and allegations contained in Petition No. 56 of 1939, of Dick Stirling, concerning the investigation of the title to this block. I have considered the Court's report, and have to recommend that no further action be taken. D. Ct. B. Morison, Chief Judge.

Op. M.B. 31/15. In the Native Land Court of New Zealand, Waiariki District.—ln the matter of section 18 of the Native Purposes Act, 1941, and in the matter of Petition No. 56 of 1939, by Dick Stirling, praying for relief in respect of the Otaimina Block. At a sitting of the Court at Opotiki on the 27th day of July, 1944, before John Harvey, Esquire, Judge. Upon reference by His Honour the Chief Judge of the claims and allegations contained in the said petition for inquiry the following report is submitted:— 1. The title to the Otaimina Block is an order on investigation of title dated the 26th October, 1909, in favour of 79 owners with 2,685| shares. A share equals an acre in this block. 2. The title to the Otaimina and Kapongaro Blocks were investigated together. In the latter block, Mihi Kotukutuku, the mother of the petitioner, was given 80 shares out of 85 shares, and in the Otaimina Block was awarded 59 shares. Mihi Kotukutuku was represented at the hearing by her husband, Duncan Stirling. The orders were arranged outside the Court, and it is obvious that the petitioner's mother was well treated in the Kapongaro Block. With regard to the Otaimina award, Mihi Kotukutuku stated at this hearing: "My husband told me when he returned from the Court that I had not been treated well in Otaimina. About five years ago I gave all my papers to Whakatane (Dick Stirling, the petitioner) and he put the present petition in." Later on she said: " The reason I have not done anything in Otaimina before is that I did not know what had been done until 1 got my son to look into matters." 3. The evidence of the petitioner and his mother, Mihi Kotukutuku, before this Court showed that they had no great knowledge of the Otaimina Block, and their case consisted of generalities poorly presented. The husband is still alive, but was not called. 4. It is the opinion of this Court that the claims of the petitioner are entirely without merit. Not a single reason was shown for the setting-aside of an arrangement agreed upon by the parties (including the petitioner's father, who appeared for his mother) in 1909, and undisturbed until now. For the Court, [l.s.] Jno. Harvey, Judge.

Approximate Cost of Paper.—Preparation, not given; printing (480 copies), £1 10s.

By Authority: E. V. Paul, Government Printer, "Wellington.—l94s. Price 3d.]