528
THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE.
[No. 27

eighteen Natives, in addition to the restrictions imposed by
"The Native Land Act, 1875."
28. The said Chief Judge has caused to be indorsed in the
certificate of title signed by him on the 25th day of June
last a certificate and declaration in favour of the defendant
company, in pursuance of sections 59, 60, and 61 of the Act of
1875, and has announced his intention of signing the same,
and of making a recommendation to the Governor to cause a
certificate of title under the Land Transfer Act to issue
to the defendant company, which if he is permitted to do
without further inquiry, then the plaintiffs and all the
other Native owners of the said block will be deprived of
their land.
29. Neither the defendant Chief Judge nor the Court has
made the inquiry, nor obtained the assent of all the owners
to such sale, as provided in section 59 of "The Native Land
Act, 1873," and neither the said Chief Judge nor the Court
has explained to them, the plaintiffs and the other owners,
the effect of such sale, as provided by section 60 of the
said Act.
30. The plaintiff Arapeta Kurekure is one of the said
eighteen Natives to whom the certificate was issued, and he
says the provisions of sections 59 and 60 of the Act of 1873
have not been complied with, and that he was not present
at any such inquiry, and never assented in Court or else-
where to the alleged sale to the defendant company.
31. The plaintiff Arapeta Kurekure is one of the Native
owners who signed the document dated the 15th day of
March, 1882, before the said block was subdivided. He
never received any consideration therefor, and had no know-
ledge until lately that the Court awarded his interest in the
said block to the other eighteen Natives.
32. The certificate of a Trust Commissioner under "The
Native Lands Frauds Prevention Act, 1881," has not been
indorsed on nor obtained for the deed of the 15th day of
March, 1882, signed by him, the said Arapeta Kurekure, and
the other owners signing the same.
33. The plaintiffs and the other Native owners have not
sufficient lands left for the maintenance and support of them-
selves and their families.
34. That the defendant company has, by an order of this
honourable Court, been ordered to be wound up, and the
defendants John Blair Whyte and George Schultz Kissling
are the liquidators of the said company.
Wherefore the plaintiffs pray this honourable Court to
order and decree,--

1. That the alleged deed of the 15th day of March, 1882,
   made by the plaintiffs and other Native owners
   when the title of the said block was held under
   "The Native Land Act, 1867," to the defendant
   company was and is absolutely void, and that the
   interests of the plaintiffs and other Native owners
   in the said block did not pass thereunder.
2. That the order of the Native Land Court, dated the
   5th day of April, 1882, awarding the undivided
   interests and shares of the plaintiffs and the other
   eighty Native owners whose names are mentioned
   in the said order is absolutely void and of no
   effect, and that the said order was made contrary
   to law, and is of no effect whatsoever; or, in the
   alternative, that this honourable Court do order
   and decree that the names of the plaintiffs and of
   the other Native owners who signed the deed of
   the 15th day of March, 1882, be inserted in such
   order, and also in any and every certificate of

title issued by the Native Land Court in pur-
suance of such order.
3. That the certificate of title awarding the 8,475 acres
to the eighteen Natives named therein, signed by
the Chief Judge on or about the 25th day of June,
1890, and antedated to the 5th day of April, 1882,
be declared void and of no effect, and an order be
made to have such certificate cancelled.
Or, in the alternative,--
That this honourable Court do order a decree that the
names of the plaintiffs and of all the other Na-
tives signing the deed of the 15th day of March,
1882, be inserted in the said certificate of title
issued in favour of the said eighteen Natives
named therein.
4. That this honourable Court do declare that the said
Court, in ordering a certificate of freehold tenure
to be indorsed on the said certificate of title, did
not comply with the provisions of sections 59 and
60 of "The Native Land Act, 1873," before order-
ing such indorsement to be made, and that such
order is of no effect.
5. That this honourable Court, after hearing all the evi-
dence on behalf of the plaintiffs, do declare that
the certificate of title ordered to be issued on the
5th day of April, 1882, awarding 7,974 acres of
the Paremata Block, was issued by the said Court
to the said eighteen Natives named therein on
false evidence of existing fact produced to the
Court by the defendant company, through the
fraud of the said defendant company, and through
deceit practised on the said Court by the de-
fendant company.
And the plaintiffs further pray,--
(a.) That this honourable Court may be pleased, by its
order, to compel the defendant Chief Judge and
the Native Land Court of New Zealand to per-
form the duties imposed on the said Court by sec-
tions 59 and 60 of "The Native Land Act, 1873,"
before indorsing on the certificate of title an
order of freehold tenure, and before recommend-
ing to the Governor the issue of a certificate of
title under the Land Transfer Act in favour of
the defendant company.
(b.) Also to compel the said Chief Judge to insert, or
cause to be inserted, the names of the plaintiffs
and all the alleged vendors before subdivision of
the said block in the said certificate of title, in
addition to the names of the eighteen Natives
named in such certificate of title.
Or, in the alternative,--
(c.) That this honourable Court do compel the said
Chief Judge to cancel and declare to be void the
subdivision orders made by the said Court on the
5th day of April, 1882, and to hear any applica-
tion made or to be made by Natives interested in
the said block for a subdivision of the said block.
That the defendants, except the defendant Chief
Judge, be ordered to pay the costs of and inci-
dental to this action. That the plaintiffs and the
other Native owners of the said block of land
may have such other judgment or relief as this
honourable Court, after hearing the evidence,
may consider them entitled to.

Ironbark Timber Supplies, 1894.

Railway Department (Head Office), Wellington, 4th April, 1894.

THE following list of successful and unsuccessful tenders for the supply of ironbark timber for the New Zealand
Government railways is published for general information.

By order of the Commissioners.
E. G. PILCHER, Secretary.