[ko te tohutoro i roto i te reo Māori]

Important Decision of the Supreme Court.

On Saturday. 14th inst., Judge Gillies heard an appral by the Hon. H. R. Russell from the decision of Mr Beetham, late R. M. and Frauds Commissioner at Napier, in the matter of two leases by Hori Kiokio husband of Te Orora, of his wife's share in pekapeka No. 2, and of his share in Kaokaoroa Block

The circumstances of these cases are shortly as follows. Some years ago Te Orora signed leases of these blocks without her husband's signature, and Mr. Sutton af erwards got the most of the grantees to sign mortgages and sales to him of the two blocks, the effect of which was to transfer all real interest in the land from the grantees and their hapus to himself. Fortunately for the Natives, most of these deeds by which they were quietly, and for trifling consideration of which money formed a very infinitesimal part, deprived of their lands, were not executed according to the requirements of the Native Land Act. Hence there was then a chance of their recovery by legal proceedings, founded on the Iaw as laid down in the Mangateretere case, and steps have heen taken with that object.

It is perfectly clear that no wife can alienate her property without her hushand's consent, and so Te Orora's deeds not having her husband's signature also, are null and void. He accordingly made a deed of lease to Mr. Russell of his wife's shares in the two blocks When brought before Beetham the the Frauds Commissioner, the leases were objected to by Mr. Hugh Camphell, and Mr. W. Donglas who claimed to he lawful tenauts of the blocks. They were supported by an army of counsel, and among other objections, and one upon which the greatest stress was laid, was the denial of Hori Kiokio's marriage. Unfortunately the register of Native births, deaths, and marriages was burnt when in the custody of the Rev. Samuel Williams at Te Aute, and it was considered by Messrs Douglas and Hill and their lawyers that it would be impossible to prove the marriage, Mr. Beetham, the Commissioner, although Mr. Rees for Mr. Russell and for the Natives, argued that it was not the intention of the Act to confer on the Commissioner power to go beyond the immediate deed before him, namely the lease between Hori Kiokio and Mr. Russell, decided that he was entitled to take into consideration not only those leases, but also any former leases by Te Orora, the wife, and further to require proof that Hori Kiokio and Te Orora were married. Several influentiai Native chiefs, among them Renata Kawepo and Te Harawira Tatere, gave evidence that they were present at the marriage at Awapuni, when the Rev. Mr. Colenso officiated. That rev gentlem, however declared that he had no recollection of the marriage, and went out of his way to say that neither Hori Kiokio nor Harawire were persons worthy of credit, "as they owed him money for goods, and had refused to pay it."

Mr Beetham, the Commissioner, after an interval of some days, refused the certificate on the ground that it was contrary to equity and good conscience.

An appeal was made by Mr. Russell to the Supreme Court, and the case was fully argued by Mr. Rees for Mr. Russell, and Mr. M'Donald, supported by Mr. Cotterell, for Mr. Douglas, and Mr. Carlile for Mr. Campbell.

Judge Gillies decidcd that the Frauds Commissioner had no right to take into consideration any third parties, or what interests might be affected by the leases, and if no objection was made that there was an illegal consideration, such as the supply of grog, ammunition, or spirits, and that the Native had no other lands to live on, or that the rent and other terms of the leasc were unfair to the Natives, the Commissioner had no alternative but to grant the certificate. Such certificate neither made the deed better nor worse; it simply enabled it to be registeretd, and to fight its way in the Supreme Court against all other previous deeds. The Frands Commissioner, who was generally a mere laymau, had no power to refuse a certificate on any other grounds than those just stated. Were it otherwise it simply came to this, that he exercised a power which even the Supreme Court itself did not possess, and prevented the parties to the deed from asserting their rights before the Supreme Court. Unless the deed was registered it could not be produced in a Court of Law, and was of no value whatever, and no deed could be registered without the Fraud Commissioner's certificate.

Judge Gillies declared that the decisions of former Commissioners were against the clear instructions of the Act, and remarked that the asserted decision of Judge Johnston in Arihi's case in 1872 was a mere dictum, and altogether wrong, and that in fact the case of Arihi had nevcr been brought properly before Judge Johnston, who therefore could not decide the law point.

We consider this a great triumph for Mr. Russell and the Natives generally, gained after years of struggling for justice againat the influence of interested parties in high positions in the late Government and their obsequious nominees, but as our space is limited, we shall postpone till next issue further remarks on this important victory over the King, by whom, in an evil moment for themselves, Messrs Campbell and Douglas allowed themselves to be seduced into co-operation, instead of separately endeavoring to come to an amicable settlement of their titie with the so called Repudiation Office.