THE WAIMATA SECTION

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2116, 26 June 1907, Page 2

THE WAIMATA SECTION

WITHDRAWN FROM BALLOT.

The flat lias gone forth. The Waimutu section, so eagerly sought utter in the land gamble, has been n'lthdrawn from Thursday’s ballot. The anounccment will come as a groat disappointment to the humorous applicants, estimated to total 1000 by ballot day, who were “trying tlioir luck,” and they will naturally be somewhat resentful, and demand the reason. “Somo more Government bungling” will be the verdict of the majority, and to some extent it must bo admitted that their finding is justifiable. The complication dates back some four or five voars, when the section was first opened for selection. The names wore in, and in the ordinary course a ballot would have taken place, but a hitch occurred in the title, and to the chagrin of applicants the block was withdrawn from selection. In 1904 a Royal Commission was appointed to go into the matter, and reported to Parliament in 1906 as follows: —“This block came before the Native Land Court in 1881, when a memorial of ownership was ordered in the names of fifty-four persons, the two persons whose claim is represented by this petition not boing amongst them. It is claimed for these two persons, Rangikohera te Kani and Toira loapa to Hau, that as descendants of To Whakahiliipa (tlio person referred to in the petition as the ‘.Whangai’), and by virtue of a gift to that person, they were entitled to a specific portion of the block at present unascertained by survoy, but which was pointed out in a general way Or* the plan before the Commission. The minutes _of the proceedings before the Court ill 1881 show that this claim was mentioned at that time, and a request made that the gift land should bo separated from the rest of tile block; but the matter appears to have been lost sight of in the ultimate decision. Wi Pere says he handed in the names of these two persons for inclusion in the list of owners. He may have done so, but no trace of it is now discoverable. The Crown having acquired tile rights of certain of the owners, the Court sat in 1896 to defino the interests of the sellers, and a portion of the block was awarded to the Crown in satisfaction of the shares purchased. The aivard ivas made on the basis of equal shares, which the petitioners complain of as an injustice to the non-sellers, as they allege that the majority of the sellers were persons having little or no interest. This, however, is outside the scope of the petition. We understand from tlio petitioners that they have been in communication with the Land Purchase Department with a view to the repurchase of the land; but until the question as to the rights of these two persons is disposed of it is useless to consider any other aspect of the matter. We recommend that the Native Land Court be directed to inquire and ascertain whether the two persons above named are entitled to any —and if so, to what —portion of the ICopaatuaki block, and if found so entitled to amend the title accordingly.” . The “law’s delays” are proverbial, and the case was only set down for hearing at the Native Land Court yesterday. In the ordinary course it cannot be heard for some days, and even then there is the right of appeal. Judge Jones, presiding over the Court, made reference to the matter. It was rather strange, he said, that the Lands Department should take on itself to anticipate the Court’s decision, which, whichever way it went, was subject to appeal.. Por some time it has been rumored that the title was liable to be a bar to selection, but the action of the Department in dealing with the land was taken to be reassuring. But the Department was at fault, and an omission to put matters right has caused hundreds of applicants great inconvenience and annoyance. The local officers, interviewed, simply stated that the block had been put up under instructions, and that in the absence of any word to the contrary the ballot would go on. The ultimatum of Wi Pere in the Native Court added to the perplexities of the situation. He said he had received a promise that the land would not be dealt with until the dispute was settled. His threat that he “would have the thing stopped when he got to Wellington” was full of possibilities.

In the end the harassed local officers had the telegraph wires going at top. finally receiving instructions to withdraw the block, from ballot —a case of history repeating itself. . Anathemas will bo hurled upon the • Department with great liberality and unanimity. For cla'-s the local Lands Office has been thronged with people “This way to make your fortune” might well have been written up over the door .to account for the optimism of the crowd surging in hour after hour in quest of the “lucky dip.” For some inscrutable reason this particular section seemed to have aroused the gambling instinct among a -large section of the community. Up to yesterday there were 800 applicants, embracing, it would seem, all classes, ages, and sizes. The sturdy settler, with years of experience manifest in his rugged countenance, and the pink-cheeked jackeroo hustled their way to the counter, cheek by jowl, with the horny-handed laborer trying to make a “rise.” the neatly-dressed tradesman who hoped to improve his position. and the immaculately-attired clerk and salesman, gritty withal, whose hands had never yet been soiled with anything but quill-driving or parcelling up goods for .dainty femininity. The casual colonial, the more stolid Scot, the volatile Irishman, and the prudent Englishman. . all were hopeful that the blanks would not come their way. “You can never tell—anyway, it’s better than Tattersall’s,” was a remark often heard. Enterprise was never more marked. “The race is to the swift” thought the enterprising, and off they careered to “finance” the deal should they be the lucky ones. It’s a mixed crowd the land ballot draws like a magnet. To think of all this wasted effort! v