G.—s

38

This title is in exactly the same position as Section 47, a succession order, dated 17th October, 1885, appointing the following to succeed To Muru: Rakera Taunoa, one-quarter; Rupene Te Muru. one-quarter; Hohepa Henaie, one-quarter; Paratene be Uki, one-eighth; Rupapera te Uki. oneeighth. The same question arises as to whether Rakera Taunoa's will should be validated, and, for same reasons as in Section 47, I do not think it should be. Section 52. Grant under the Crown Grants Act, 1862 (No. 2). Area : 12 acres 2 roods 17 perches. Restrictions prevent disposition by will. Grantee : Matana Piki. The grantee died on 25th October. 1885, leaving a will, but as succession order for this particular section was made on 7th January, 1887, in favour of the children, the widow, Reita Takuru, does not make any claim herein under the will. Section 54. Grant under the Crown Grants Act, 1862 (No. 2). Area : 14 acres and 8 perches. Restrictions prevent disposition by will. Grantee : Eiwai Kairakau. On 13th September. 1883, succession order was made appointing Heremaia Taunoa to succeed to the grantee. On 2nd October, 1893, olio wing were appointed successors to Heremaia Taunoa : Hamuera Rupene Kuri, Riria Peehi Rupene , Kuri (equally). Minutes in Book 8. pap , 42LV clearly show thai order was made in pursuance of deceased's will. An appeal was made in September. 1905, by Hoani Maaka Hape against the order appointing Heremaia Taunoa successor to Riwai Kairakau. and the Native Appellate Court dismissed this on the 2nd November, 1908. Before the Commission Mr. Bishop objected to the succession order made in pursuance of Here maia Taunoa's will. Mr. Wright, for those claiming under thai order, point that Commission was not authorized to inquire into case* such as this— where <i succession order had been made in pursuance of a will and the time for appeal had lapsed ; that Court, by making succession order, had practically validated the will ; that fact that title of successors was derived through a succession order was a strong point, especially seeing that order was made so far back as 1893. Mr. Bishop contended that the Court of Appeal's decision had shown will to lie invalid, and that section 3 of the Kaiapoi Reserve Act, 1910, gave Commission power to inquire and report thereon. I do not think order should be interfered with after this lapse of time. Section 55. Grant under the Crown Grants Act, 1862 (No. 2). Area : 13 acres 3 roods 17 perches. Restrictions prevent disposition by will. Grantee : Apera Pukenui. On the 19th October, 1885, the Native Land Court made a succession order appointing the following successors to the above grantee ;Wi Naihira Teihoka, Hana Horomona, Rakera Purua. Minute-book 2. page 29, shows shares equal. The previous minutes show that a copy of a will was produced, but that there was considerable discussion as to whether it was a correct copy. Order apparently does not follow the will, but is in favour of next-of-kin and widow of grantee. - I think order should be allowed to stand. It is protected by section 432, Native Land Act. 1909. Wi Naihira Teihoka also left a will, full particulars whereof are set out under section 40. As probate specially excepted this section, I do not think the will should now be validated so as to pass it. Succession order has been made (12th September, 1905) for Wi Naihira Teihoka's interest in favour of Hineawhea Teihoka and Hohepa Teihoka. Hineawhea died sth April, 1909, leaving a will. probate whereof was granted on 10th November, 1910, but at this time it was understood restrictions prevented will operating, and, by consent, order w£s made in favour of deceased's child. This will should not be validated. Rakera Purua, one of the successors to the original grantee, also left a will, particulars whereof are mentioned in report on Section 47. A succession order was made for her interest on 12th September. 1902, but was never signed, and is indorsed, " Cancelled.—H. W. Bishop, Commissioner, 18/8/04." As in case of Section 47, I do not think will should be validated, but Court left to decide question of persons entitled to succeed. The devisee under will is not the next-of-kin. but in Section 47 he claimed as an adopted child. Section 56. Grant under the Crown Grants Act, 1862 (No. 2). Area : 14 acres. Restrictions prevent disposition by will. Grantee : Tuini Pihawai. There are no succession orders on the file, but from Probate File 13 it appears that the grantee died 31st August. 1888. and that application for probate of his will was made by Taituha Hape. The