Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 73

"Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui."

"Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui."

That petition, Sir, was not reported on by the Native Affairs Committee, because it was pointed out, after a large amount of evidence had been taken, that there was a case pending in the Supreme Court, and that the Committee ought to hold its hand; but the Native Affairs Committee of the Legislative Council, before whom a similar petition was heard, proposed further remedial legislation. All this time the action in the Supreme Court was proceeding. Mr. Edwards had been retained by the Muaupoko Tribe before I came out from England, and, as a matter of professional courtesy, I allowed him to conduct the case. I simply instructed him. The case was heard in Wanganui in 1894, and, after a protracted hearing, the Chief Justice declared that there was an undefined trust, and that Horowhenua No. XI. was not the property of Major Kemp and Warena Hunia. I shall not trouble you, Sir, or honourable members, with the text of the judgment, but I will state shortly that this judgment was appealed against, and the whole matter was argued again before the full Court in Wellington. With your permission, Sir, I will read the final judgment of the Court of Appeal. But I may state here, parenthetically, to explain my position, that this No. XI. was the only part of Horowhenua in which I had any concern whatever. I was pledged to the tribe, and I came out from England expressly to look after their interests. I was pledged to see them through this business, being convinced that they were being unjustly deprived of their tribal rights. I had no concern with the other parts of Horowhenua. I understand that some portions have been sold, others leased, others mortgaged; but I do not know the name of a single purchaser, lessee, or mortgagee. I know nothing whatever of the arrangements, and have had no concern whatever in any of these transactions. Therefore I absolutely contradict the statement made by the Minister of Lands, evidently on wrong information, that I had been concerned in the selling of lands to raise money to enable the Natives to fight the case amongst themselves. When the case came on in the Supreme Court at Wanganui it was, of course, necessary to have funds. Mr. Edwards had received a hundred guineas on his retainer before I came from England, but he could not go on further unless Kemp was in a position to find money. Kemp promised to deposit £500, and there was every hope that he would be able to raise the money in Wanganui. He was unable to do so, however, and he appealed to me. I wrote a cheque for £500 and handed it to Kemp, who passed it on to Mr. Edwards. The whole of that money has been applied in the payment of costs, not a shilling coming back into my pocket. At the suggestion of Mr. Edwards, I took a mortgage over Kemp's own Block, No. XIV., the title to which is undisputed. I took a mortgage of that to secure my advance of £500, and the mortgage was submitted to the Trust Commissioner sitting at that time in Wanganui. Evidence was taken in Court, and the Trust Commissioner some days after attached his certificate. That is the only one of these land-transactions I had a personal interest in, and the whole of the money came out of my own pocket. I paid that money through Major Kemp to Mr. Edwards. I afterwards paid fifty guineas to Mr. Skerrett as junior counsel in the Court of Appeal; and I believe I am responsible to Mr. Edwards for about £500 more. That is the only other portion of the Horowhenua Block with which I have had any dealings whatever; I mean Subdivision No. XIV., in respect of which there has never been a suspicion or suggestion of a trust or any allegation of fraud. This land was awarded to Major Kemp ten years ago, and he obtained a certificate of title under the Land Transfer Act. He held undisputed possession for six years or more before I negotiated for the lease of it: that is to say, Subdivision No. XIV. is the block of which I then took a lease, subsequently purchasing two small portions of eight and four acres respectively, and the block on which I afterwards took a mortgage, as I have just mentioned. The portion of the disputed land in which I have been professionally concerned—the only portion I have had any concern with at all—is No. XI., the subject of the action in the Supreme Court. On appeal their Honours gave the following judgment:—

"In the Supreme Court of New Zealand, Wellington District.—No. 5608.

"Between Meiha Keepa te Rangihiwinui, Ihaia Taueki, Noa Te Whatamahoe, Rawinia Taueki, Te Rangimairehau, Raniera Te Whata, Makere Te Rou, Kerehi Mitiwaha and Ngariki Te Raorao, suing on behalf of themselves and all other persons in the same interest, plaintiffs; and Warena Te Hekeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, defendant; and Rangipo Mete Paetahi, Rawea Utiku, Reupena Mete Kingi, Rakera Hunia, and Hera Te Upokoiri, third parties, added by order of this honourable Court on the 4th day of July, 1894.

"This action coming on for trial at Wanganui on the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, and 15th days of October, 1894, before his Honour the Chief Justice, and being then ordered to stand for argument of the points of law involved therein at Wellington, and again coming on before his Honour the Chief Justice at Wellington on the 16th and 17th days of November, 1894, in the presence of counsel for the plaintiffs and for the defendant, and for Rangipo Mete Paetahi, Rawea Utiku, Reupena Mete Kingi, Rakera Hunia, and Hera Te Upokoiri, third parties, added by order of this honourable Court on the 4th day of July, 1894: Upon reading the pleadings and upon hearing the evidence of John Alexander Wilson, Edward Buckle, the plaintiffs Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, Te Rangi Mairehau, Raniora Te Whata, George Latter Scott, Kerehi Tomo, Makere Te Rou, Noa Tomo, Winara Raorao, Walter Lawry Buller, Alexander McDonald, Wirihana Hunia, Himiona Te Kowhai, the page 8 defendant Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, and Donald Fraser, and what was alleged by counsel for the plaintiffs and the defendants, and for the said third parties: this Court doth declare that the lands called Horowhenua No. XI., comprising all the lands included in the certificate of title volume 29A, folio 130, of the books of the District Land Registrar for the Land Registration District of Wellington, are held by the plaintiff Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui and the defendant Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, as trustees for the plaintiff Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui and for the persons whose names were registered in the Native Land Court under the provisions of the 17th section of 'The Native Lands Act, 1867,' as owners of the block of land at Horowhenua, in the District of Manawatu, in the Provincial District of Wellington, originally called 'Horo-whenua,' and for the successors of such of the same persons whose names were so registered aforesaid as are dead (such successors respectively taking the same shares as their respective ancestors would have been entitled to if living) for the same estates and interests (save that the same are now held for an estate of fee-simple of inheritance) and in the same proportions as the plaintiff Meiha Keepa To Rangihiwinui and such persons whoso names are so registered as aforesaid would have been entitled to in the same lands if the partition order relating to the said parcel of land called Horowhenua No. XI., made by the Native Laud Court on the 1st day of December, 1886, in favour of the plaintiff, Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, and the defendant, Warena Hunia Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, had never been made, and as though the aforesaid certificate of title under 'The Land Transfer Act, 1885,' volume 29A, folio 130, had never been issued, and as though the partition order made by the Native Land Court on the 14th day of January, 1890, whereby the Native Land Court purported to partition the said parcel of land called Horowhenua No. XI., into two blocks, called respectively Horowhenua No. XI.A and Horowhenua No. XI.B, and to award the said block of land so called Horowhenua No. XI.A to the plaintiff Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, and the said block of land called Horowhenua No. XI.B to the defendant Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, had never been made: And this Court doth adjudge and declare that the said last-mentioned partition orders made by the Native Land Court on the 14th day of January, 1890, are wholly void and of none effect: Let an inquiry be made who are the persons interested in the said parcel of land called Horowhenua No. XI., pursuant to the declaration hereinbefore contained, and who are entitled to be declared to be the representatives or successors of such of them as are dead; and let there also be an inquiry as to the respective interests of the persons so found to be interested in the said block of land called Horowhenua No. XI., and as to the respective interests therein of the representatives or successors of such of them as are dead; and for the purposes of the said inquiries let a case or cases be stated and referred to the Native Land Court for its opinio thereon, as may be found necessary: And this Court doth order and adjudge that the plaintiff, Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, and the defendant, Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, respectively, do forthwith deliver to the Registrar of this honourable Court at Wanganui, upon oath, all certificates of title, partition orders, and other documents of title in the possession or power of the plaintiff, Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui, and the defendant, Warena Hunia, otherwise called Warena Te Hakeke, respectively, relating to the said block of land called Horowhenua No. XI., or to either of the subdivisions thereof, called respectively Horowhenua No. XI.A and Horowhenua No. XI.B, and that all such certificates of title, partition orders, and other documents of title shali remain in the custody of the Registrar of this honourable Court at Wanganui aforesaid, there to abide the further order of this honourable Court: And this Court doth further order and adjudge that the caveat No. 612 in the books of the District Land Registrar aforesaid, lodged by the plaintiff, Meiha Keepa Te Rangihiwinui and the caveat No. 812, in the books of the District Land Registrar aforesaid, lodged by the plaintiff Ihaia Taueki and others, do remain and continue until the further order of this honourable Court, and that the same caveats shall not be withdrawn without the order of this honourable Court: And this Court doth order and direct that a caveat, with a copy of this decree annexed thereto, be lodged by the plaintiffs with the District Land Registrar aforesaid forbidding further dealings with the said block of land called Horowhenua No. XI., and that the caveat so lodged shall remain and continue until the further order of this honourable Court: Let the following accounts be taken—namely, an account of all moneys received by, or come to the hands of, the defendant, Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, from the sale of any portions of the said parcel of land called Horowhenua No. XI. And in taking such accounts the defendant, Warena Te Hakeke, is to be charged with interest at the rate of £8 per centum per annum on all sums received by him, or come to his hands as aforesaid: And in taking such accounts, let all just allowances be made, and let the defendant, Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise Warena Hunia, within such period as may hereafter be ordered by this honourable Court, pay into the office of this honourable Court at Wanganui aforesaid the amounts, if any, which shall be certified to be due from him on the taking of the said accounts: And let the defendant, Warena Te Hakeke, otherwise called Warena Hunia, pay to the plaintiffs their costs of this action upon the highest scale as upon a sum of £5,000, with an extra allowance of £15 15s. for each of six extra days occupied by the trial, with all proper allowances for fees of Court, witnesses' expenses, and other necessary disbursements, to be taxed by the Registrar of this honourable Court at Wanganui: And let page 9 the further consideration of this action be adjourned; and any of the parties are to be at liberty to apply to this Court in Chambers as they may be advised."

The effect, Sir, of that judgment of the Court of Appeal, from which there was no dissent, was to place the whole of the 143 owners back on their ancestral lands, it being a direction to the Native Land Court to proceed, according to its own methods, to determine the individual interests of the whole of the parties. I think I may say that I was instrumental in bringing about that result; and, ever since I took a retainer, whatever I have done in connection with this Horowhenua business has been with the object of assisting the tribe in their efforts to obtain justice. I have not been mixed up in any of the numerous other transactions with the Horowhenua Block, and I know nothing whatever about them. I did on one occasion assist Mr. Peter Bartholomew to make an arrangement with Major Kemp as to cutting timber on Block No. VI., which was virtually a trust block, and drew up a short memorandum of agreement between them, leaving Mr. Edwards to prepare the timber lease. Major Kemp, who was entirely guided by my advice, came to an agreement that the royalties for the timber should be paid into a trust account at the bank, in the joint names of himself as trustee, Mr. Edwards as representing Mr. Peter Bartholomew, and Messrs. Marshall and Fitzherbert as representing the Native claimants, pending the ascertainment of title. I am correct, I think, in saying that, with this sole exception, I had no transactions of any sort in connection with the other parts of the Horowhenua Block. The only other business, indeed, that I can remember affecting the entire block was something relating to a different matter altogether. It was the getting of a deed of release executed by the whole of the Muaupoko people, with the exception of Warena Hunia and his party, which I shall now ask permission to put in. [Exhibit No. 2.] It arose out of an action which had been brought against Major Kemp in the Supreme Court, calling upon him to account for the rents and profits received by him during a period of some twenty years. It was utterly impossible for a Maori chief who kept no books, and had never done anything of the sort in his life, to produce accounts extending over a long period of time. Without any actual request from Major Kemp, I went to the district and called the tribe together, and, having explained the position to them, they: at once agreed to execute a deed of release and discharge. That deed is signed by some sixty members of the Muaupoko Tribe, and all the signatures are attested by a Magistrate, with the aid of a licensed interpreter. This had the effect of releasing Major Kemp from all responsibility in respect of these moneys. That deed was put in before the Supremo Court at Wanganui, and again before the Court of Appeal. The Court held that it was quite unreasonable that Maori chiefs should be expected to bring in accounts to show what they had received and disbursed in the name of the tribe; and the deed of discharge was held by the full Court to be sufficient. The clause in Sir James Prendergast's judgment requiring Major Kemp to render an account was accordingly struck out when the Court of Appeal made the final decree in this matter. I think, Sir, this explanation covers the whole of the ground. It has enabled me to reply to all the charges brought against me by the Minister of Lands in relation to the Horowhenua Block. These charges, I feel certain, have been founded upon a total misconception of the facts and upon utterly wrong information. I think I have given a sufficient history of the transactions referred to, and I am now in the hands of the House. I do hope that honourable members will not fail to ply me with questions, for it may be said that upon the result of this hearing largely rests my professional reputation and my fair name in the colony. My honour is at stake, and I think it is therefore due to me that I should be put through a crucial examination. I am really on my trial before the country, and, as I have no chance afforded me of meeting the charges in the ordinary way, it is due to me that honourable members should now put me through the most searching cross-examination. As I have already said, I have been at a groat disadvantage in regard to the fresh charges which have been brought against me this morning, inasmuch as I did not hear the speech of the Minister of Lands, and have not seen a report of it. But I am told by a member who was present that three blocks in which I have been concerned were referred to—namely, the Rangitikei-Manawatu Block, the Owhaoko Block, and the Rangatira Block. With your permission, Sir, I will say a few words in regard to each of those blocks. My connection with the Rangitikei-Manawatu purchase was as Assistant Land Purchase Commissioner, from 1865 to 1871, and long before I was in practice. I was at that time Resident Magistrate at Wanganui, but I was detached for special service upon the Land Purchase Commission, and I acted throughout under the direction of my late lamented friend, Dr. Featherston. I am not going to trouble the House with all the particulars. It is enough for me to say that, at the conclusion of that business, during which I myself took and witnessed no less than 1,700 Maori signatures and paid over £25,000 to the Natives, I received the warm thanks of the Superintendent of the province, officially recorded in his speech to the Council; and the acknowledgments of the Chief Land Purchase Commissioner. I also received a handsome letter of thanks from the Premier and Government of the colony for my services on that occasion, and that letter is on record in the Journals of this House. I am prepared to answer any questions of any sort or kind in regard to this Rangitikei-Manawatu purchase. Now, some members of the House may wish to know something from me about the Owhaoko lease. I was never professionally concerned in the obtaining of that lease, but I did act for Mr. Studholme in connection with a different page 10 matter—namely, in getting an application for a rehearing of the Owhaoko Block withdrawn by the Natives. I was absent in England, as the Minister of Lands has said, when Sir Robert Stout issued the memorandum containing reflections upon me. On seeing that memorandum, I immediately wrote a letter in explanation, and I must say that Sir Robert Stout gave the same publicity to my statement as he had given to his own. It was laid on the table of the House and printed in the Appendices to the Journals. That gentleman afterwards sent me an expression of regret for what he had written, and he declared openly that he was perfectly satisfied with my explanation. The principal charge was that I had acted professionally at one and the same time for three different parties, and that I was receiving pay in three directions. Amongst the comments of the Press on that occasion there appeared, I remember, the following: "Thrice happy Dr. Buller, trebly retained and three times paid." There was no ground whatever for that accusation, and my friend Sir Robert Stout, who was then Premier, was the first to acknowledge that my answer was complete, and to publish it to the world. With regard to the Rangatira Block, I cannot imagine what can possibly be alleged against me there. I certainly did fight the case for the Natives through the Native Land Court with great energy and for a continuous period of nearly two months. If I remember aright, my final address to the Court occupied nearly three days. The result was that I achieved a complete victory for the Ngatiapa Tribe. As against outside claimants, if I remember aright, they won every acre of this large block in the Upper Rangitikei District, and my own clients got a large share of it. I acted for Messrs. Donald Fraser and James Bull and the Hon. Charles Johnston in the acquisition of the block by purchase. I was paid liberally by those gentlemen for my services, and they also guaranteed my costs in the Land Court. I cannot conceive what can be alleged against me in connection with that block; but I shall be happy to answer any questions by the Minister of Lands or any other member, either in connection with that or any other block. I do not think, Sir, that I should trespass upon the indulgence of the House any further, seeing that the session is approaching its close, and that I might lose my opportunity of a full cross-examination if I continued speaking any longer. I would conclude by saying that, although I have been actively engaged in Native affairs, officially and professionally, for a period of some thirty years or more, and have probably put through more Native titles than any other solicitor in New Zealand, I defy any man to put his finger down upon one single transaction of a questionable kind in which I have ever been concerned. My conscience is absolutely clear of ever having done anything in connection with Native affairs that this House could not agree with, and which I should not be able to justify. Although I have acquired hundreds of thousands of acres of land from the Natives for clients, I may say that, with the exception of one block of a thousand acres—the Iwiros Block, which I purchased through Mr. Donald Fraser—I have never acquired Native land for myself. For my services on behalf of my clients I have received their thanks in abundance, and have always been liberally paid. I am not aware that there was anything alleged against my honour or probity in any of these transactions, but if there is a suspicion of the kind I shall be only too glad to answer any questions that may be put to me, and I promise to do so fully and without reserve.

Mr. Speaker.—I do not feel myself called upon to put any questions to Sir Walter Buller. In this House it has been the practice in cases of this kind that questions should be pat through the Speaker, and in accordance with that rule certain questions have been banded to me by the Minister of Lands, and I shall now proceed to put them to Sir Walter Buller

Sir W. Buller.—If you please, Sir.