Untitled

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume II, Issue 300, 18 May 1889, Page 2

The Native Land Court has this week got through the first stage of a settlement of what has been hitherto a bate noir to all the Native Land Judges. We refer to the Potutu ease. We are pleased to sea a judge who is not afraid to taokle a ease, however complicated, and speaks his mind with no uncertain sound whan any matter comes before him which will not bear strict investigation. We understand that Mr W. Cooper’s deeds of purchase in the the B Block have successfully passed His Honor’s scrutiny. The Court was engaged j on Thursday in investigating Wi Paraouo's purchases. These were not so satisfactory, » good deal of contradiction taking plate, between witnesses on both sides.

Ths Napier Telegraph has a strong article in reference to the execution of Haira te Feri. It says:—" After Haira te Pere was brought down to Napier he made another statement to the minister of religion attending him, and this was to the effect that it was his brother who was the real guilty party. Subsequently he made a written statement in the presence of two licensed interpreters, and which occupied several sheets of foolscap. This statement, we understand, not only gave the details of the robbery and murder, but made the most astonishing disclosures concerning the mode of defence that was to be set up at the trial, and which, indeed, was carried out. The substance of the document was to the effect that, not knowing the object of the journey, Haira accompanied his brother to Book’s store; that they went into the store, and the brother knocked Pook on the head with the back of an axe; Book fell on Haira, which accounted for the blood on his shoulders; that Mrs Pook, hearing the ' disturbance, came in from another room, and was treated in the same way. The murder was then completed with the sharp edge of the axe, and the till was robbed. Book’s child was suspected of witnessing the proceedings, and the brother, in spite of Haira’s remonstrances, knocked the little boy on the head with an axe. Then, according to Haira’s statement, the two brothers separated, the elder one going to his home, and, together with his father and mother, held a council. It was resolved amongst themselves that Haira, being innocent, should allow himself to be arrested and that the brother, with the proceeds of the robbery, should engage the services of a lawyer, who would be sure to get Haira off provided that Haira did not say a word in Court. Haira then goes on to say that all this was done, but when he found that he was brought in guilty he made a statement to his lawyer which in substance was very much the same as we have already given above. The article then condemns the secrecy that has been observed over the confessions, and says that if the confessions had been made known without being put through the routine of officialdom the public would have demanded the delay of the execution to see that full justice was done. The obvious course, it says, would have been to have arrested Haira’s brother, and his father and mother, to have kept them strictly apart, and to have confronted them with the prisoner. Our contemporary is mistaken in saying that a confession was made to Mr Kenny, and we believe that gentleman was paid for his services by the Government; and further, we believe that full enquiries have been made and steps taken to ascertain whether there is any credit to be placed in Haira’s statements.