COMPENSATION COURT.

New Zealander, Volume XXII, Issue 2431, 17 May 1865, Page 2

COMPENSATION COURT.

*TuESDAT, Mi* 16.' S ''' (Btfore F. D. Fentou, Esq., and ?. Ifaekay, '• ;■ 'TOAItAa»UOOK. r ,'-' A Thb y C6urt : gave judgment in this east; "Mfi ; Fenton said that the Court-had deliberated ea these claims,'arid found that *h*' caw Mm a/ v much more i trieaie bae'thaw the kit. Then were points in had argued, by the learned oounsel, not so mack for this case itself* as for-a guidance to the Court in its future -proceedings. -Of these the most remarkable was the tribal right, of-which they had-beard so much, and which sow appeared—in order to be dealt with -in » much morn substantial manner-than - had hitherto been the case. Unfortunately, the Court was bound to.deal with them, «nd therefor* it had • done so. The Court found that tb -re wan M several persons whose claims were solely on this tribal right—such as Wiremu Tukorehu,, Harieta, Eurj, and, to a certain extent, Tiramate, although she set up a claim- of a different persons claimed as being-i"i connected?!^ 1 relationship, by descent, rrom the < principal ilhiefo of the Ngatiprt, : «n principles. which were well khown to the Maoris, bat difficult t* -be -understood by - Europeans. -Onaccount if the* &*&, they said that, as ibis land baa been taken away from them, they were emitted; to;:eompensation j but the said tbAywere* not, Jrt the first place, if a tribal right fraf.mn u easement,; 1 ; <* <?°nld fce recognised in a court of law, it could only bs recognised in the person of one principal cnist, Of this class there was bat one-Karaka Tome, and si it was very clearly, proved he was ■ ' rebellion, the Court were of opinion thstns compensation could be given, to him or hav representatives. For seignorial rights t**? ' could be none in this .case. The Court eons* dered that the 'true- owners of this Tnakanblock was the small tribe of the Ngatunanokuv The evidence was very clear on that pouVMMj it was also clear that the whole "**>*#.*• exception of one person, were in. majfiieiij' It-Hras stated by one witness,' who* evidence was of great assistanee_l» the Court, that the- tribe numbered fertyv five,/which would give, forty-four I* rebellion an I one legal. Of the owners* : the soil—the peraonswhoyrtttder.ordlnary M*" customs, would claim by thill right—ttarMJ* only two men who had remained loyal—-Tea* hutai, and Wetene Pcrohuka, thel alter ofwheel claimed under a limited portion of the Noek., Besides these chims, there were others »*• nature of ordinary circumitances, would have no p»«ar : of selling or the land lVany w«j> but might' exercise* sort of veto, and .little more-'who would receive a eharaof «l* P«V chase money from the sellers themselves, on» not from the phrch tears. This had beenatatsfl very clearly by Mr. Marshall. Of tfusdjli Buka Teira—men wh * i sf» connected by blood, and. according. to fafJtty rights; absolute Owners of the landVWM toe certain extent weakened their interest W residing with another trUe, which w "**£! last twenty jeara had been in a state of sens* ~ hostility with the Ngatipo, resulting, in ■■, year 1846, in the death of certain P"""* : Under these cirerimstances,. the euninrnfa" descendants of Korokepe and others,wlw-weia represented now by Tehkrra Buka were greatly, weakened, and could under the fln«jtlsm. As for those s*** persons entitled % sell, the Court w*ss ~;.■' the* in theHgh«f were entitled tS-compensation. The ■ claimants, such'a» Wiremu BttkarehPj; «£*"• already dealt with ; in the mind **?*>** SMi interest* wa*Af a eharaeter whiebdMj" come within the>brds of the could only exist and be embodied in pai chirf. who, it was proved, was UJ '•""E ThFclaiiM tribe were a p«»w fiction. That of the Akitai, u TeEeene,Te HapTraana, Biria. «~ °£2 appeared to be derived from a sort of traaawtfolTwbieh passed, betwwn W*rihf. AtSeVdVof that «?«^? I J I Z a Ppt irtd to have been objeeted to «r*»»2£ manoki tribe, and the evidence \'^ m \ the claim had aoeolatel/ claim of very recent dat*, *a*: 4 **jL persons bad been allowed to qwtly nf» that land, was wery doubtful tf '**££ woild have granted «he elmni; M** l " o circumstances of that claim being OOjeoaf»<«» the(}oart«mldmnowayrecognia9it. uw "g

ton late to set np a claim for Te Warihi, who «s in open rebellion. The result then of the reference by the Government of these claims to the Coort was that a certain number of them Xappeared.' Of, that class, was Wirema Tukorehu, Arleta Kuri, and some others. Tbe nsult of what the Court had stated as its 3>inion on this question was as follows. To or i Tauroa, Aihipene Kaihau, and those of the Ngatitiata tribe,, the. Court certified for nothing- To Te Keene and the rest o r the Akted nothing; to Tiramate, nothing?: to Wiremu Tukorehu and Herieta Kuri, nothing; to Hon Tuhemata,. nothing ; to Werene Per - fuika, £3O; to Te Tara Poroare, £4O; to Kuka Tauma and bis party, including Hunui Ngahiwi aod Ngawhara, £6O, and toTe Kehutai, £IOO. PA.TKKAHOE.

The claims to compensation on account of Hakopa Te Waharoa was sworn, and dewMfrl that he.-betonsjed to the N-.:atiha*a, and that he dented his-claim-to this land from an ancestress, hajned: KirwJJoiwai, who belonged to tbe Ngatipakira. She bad a son named Rati Painea, whose son witness was. Kirimoiwai lired on this land. His claun was on the west aide of the block from tbe bill of Falemahoe. The other owners were his wife (ttani), and Kakina, and these resided on the land. Rorotini bail a claim, but he was a non-resident. TiooM, of the Ngatipakira and. Ng»»tiawai tribes, also had a,claim He w*s a.Ngatihawa bv his father's side. In former years the land belonged to Ugarikt. from, which tribe sprung the two other sabjiyisions. His wife descended from the Ngatitirawai. Raso itahada aon nejnedfeiheki, who be«at Fiko, wlio begat ■Te VVhau, who waafbe/ather of his wife Heui. Kiri >as a Ngatipakira, and Honi tahi was the basband of Kiri, Mohawai, -nd he was a tfgatihaua. Rakuia was brother to witness'wife. He (witness) was living on the ground broke out,, also bis Haratipwe, Kapan«, aid tteuii. tlwse were, all that *ere living on tbe west side., On Uje east side we v re residing pokarama's grants-children . and their,mother Boruhi, Perereka, jMeipna Titoko, Mita, Materia, Paaro te Ngatijios of the Ngatimanoki, Tamakaui, Hone' Kotoku, Konruof the Ngatiruanuis, who were Waikato slaves of Ihaka and' Poharapaa' of the Uribtepa' trjbe. Hemi was a half-brother of witness", having the 'same mother, his father's name being , Banana, who was a' Ngatihinawai. Rapaha had "a claim upon the land. , His father's name was Piho, whose father,. witness thought, was | Bona., Paratene had aqlaim on the east side. Titoko had a claim through his father Amoana„ iJelonging: to the Ngatihauia and Ngatihatunia; tribes; he derived hia claim t'Pm thf latter. TJ»e land, bad beep .cultivated up to the war time, when, the Government, sent out to take rteir winswd be ,g%Yf upibjs. The claims of the, wesiaide , ds,,npt ,exjtend...oyer,,the .east. Bakaua's r mvi was. dejiverecl ap • at, the same. time wifjb bif!,! ; A bijl.in;tbe!centreot,theblock divided the east, from the west. He could not abpw.it on the map,, butjbe could if he was on tbe land. Witness, also claimed at Purumate and at Tawarut on the.other side of Waikato. Cross l exariiined .by Mr. Crawford: The tillers"qf |,his blpck.,were,/Bi>baraina>, Paratene, WirWUi-VVajata,'Paojtp, Te. Iwi,. Ihaka Takenini, the' Ng ititamaboho. the Uriotapa. and the Ngatipari. He* did pot know .how much money was paid. He received none himself, nor. did be know bow mrf hj Poharama gOt. He was at the South whea.o it; was sold. The rtse'rve was marked off by Ihaka Te Bopia . and Kahasama. He did not atfl) it done, as it was marked off before his .return- He got no Share of the price, because tbey looked dOwd upon bim as a person of inferior r«nk. He. was not. quite sure, but he thought that,,be.had resided thereabout, four Jeers, i It was i a good -sized piece of land, but e did not know/ bow many acres were in it. Ihaka had! a claim! over the whole piece, bat.it. wasonly when witness came on the ground that it was,divided, when Iheha's claim wasdimited He did'not knewshatsume ■of the land had been set apart for ihaka, but Mine of his slaves resided there with the rest of the slaves. ■• He had never known of tbe Ngatitiata'residing there. He hail no other witnesses, *«. all the- Europeans know that he had continued t<> reside upon the land. -£■ . John' White; K.M., «swora, deposed, that he was engaged as interpreter at the purchase of this block, that be arraiged it, and his purchase went all.round the 700 acres. He was present at the' staking' off of the reserve which was made for the natives out of the large Waiuku fclock. The money for the larger block was divided among the;j natives, and the old chief Poharama look the Paemakoe reserve, which was to be his private property. This was not a-a ted in; the Government account but it was intended by thesettlers that Poharama should >have the Patemaboe reserve. He also •rectived a small portion ot the purchase money for the large block Ihaka, Pohene, Petie, Wetere, Aihepeni Kaihan, Paoro Tewi, Waste Xukutai, We Arama, Karaki, and others gave him this, title at the time. At the time witness laid the reserve be heard. Poharama say that the land after his death should belong to his two grandchildren, the sons of Horei Ropea. A crown grant was not promised at that time when lands were purchased. The £1,500 for the whole block distinguished the settlers of the Patemaboe block, Iso that i none of the settlers but the descendants of Poharama bad a title to this block.

i The Chief Judge said that this was an opinion of law and not fact, and conld not therefore be received) and at the same time he mast say ♦hat it was strange that the Government had not given the Court an opportunity of seeing the deeds which they had in their possession. Mr. Crawford said that these had been written for, but had not yet arrived. Examination continued: lhaka had no claim whatever on this block, nor had Paoro, Te Iwi, or any of the Ngatitiat* tribe. He did not know Hakona, Te Wabaroa, nor Raknia, nor did either of them, as far as he could remember, take any part in the sale. Hakopa Te Waharoa being permitted by the Court to ask Mr. White any questions, said that what that witness had said was correct. To Paoro Te Ngahoeho ; There were many present al the time of the sale. The time he went there with Paoro was subsequent to laying out the reserve. To the Court: He could not say that those he had mentioned as having no claim never had any, but this block was given np by them 40 Poharama. - He knew that they meant Poharama alone, because there was a dispute •bout die money, and Poharama said he would <only take a small portion. for himself besides this block. On the occasion of its being desired to make a road through this block, Pohejrama objected, and the road was never made. In paving for land, the general principle is for the Government to giro the money to tho chief. and let him apportion it. The only exception that he knew pi was the great Wanganui block, where Government apportioned the money. He aa 3 Mr. Commissioner IDmp paid for the Wai•kopoko block, in one payment. The money was laid on a large table; when it was counted by the natives and fount correct,and the deed was signed, lhaka was about to apportion it, •and he first handled it, hut there was a dispute, and other chiefs afterwards distributed it. Poharama was present, but witness could not say how much he .got, or who gave it to him. Witness afterwards heard that Poharama -'bad got a small portion, but he did not know taia of his personal knowledge. By the verbal agreement it was arranged that Poharama should have a square mile of land, and witness was" sent to mark it off. The reserve was part Of the contract price. Qn account of Poharaoia's receiving this reserve, he only got a •mail portion ,of the purchase money. When the .Laud Purchase. Commissioners purchased

this ]*nd.and made the reserve, they, intended <ae other native* besides Pohanun* to reside fipon their other lend. The treatment of tbe„ •!*».«» from Taranakl was not thought of by th Government at the time. Ousting the origin*] ot the land fiom their righto was not •contemplated, because, to the best of witness's knowledge, they all received a portion of the Sirchase invue/. There were natives cuhivatg Patemakoe at the. time, and- he had no doubt they too received a portion of the money. There was another small reserve made for Poharama called. Puitai, bat there were two or three others connected with him In this. There was another reserve for Waota Kukntai, and another large reserve for the Ngatitiwai principally, besi'ies other reserves. Paoro Te Iwi, of the Ngatitamahoko, deposed ♦bet he claimed on this land from the NgatiJhaamia, who wen th* owners of the land.

I Kaumia begat Pohatu, who begat Korougohe, who begat Te Rarigiarua and Te i»oro. Te ltoro begat Bfatai, who ni witness's rather. Pobamma was » grandson of Te Rengirarua, who Uika Peroa, Who bejiat Waitawhia, who begat Poharama and Poaki Te An. Patema hoe wag an old residence of witness's. He remembered Mr. White's purchasing it. Mr. White and he pointed out the bound vies to Poharama, and aftetwards it was surveyed. Poharama was residing on it at the time of the sale. After the survey Poharama and the others still resided there. Witness did not reside on or cultivate it after the surrey, and he could not do so until after Poharama's death. Poharama is now dead, and buried at Pehiakura. Para'tne aad his grandchildren, anl some others, resided on the land after Poharama's death. Ihaka's slaves occupied the land, and cultivated it, because Ihaka was Poharama's relative, and they did not leave till the war began. They cultivated it for Ihaka. The reserve was made for Poharama and his relative Te Parateoe. After the death of Poharama, Aihipene, Kaihan and himself would come in, or have a claim to this reserve. Hukopa Te Waharoa squatted on the land before the war, by permission of Poharama; but that gave him no claim to the land. Witness had not occupied the land since Poharama's death,. on account of the war. Hakopa was residing with witness at Peikura before he went to Patamahoe, where fee went of his own accord.

Cross-examined by Mr. Crawford: The reserve was simply made, that Poharama and his children might reside there; bat if lhaka's children wished to go and lire there also, they might do so, and they could dispute the right of Poharama'B children to turn them off Witness could not go on the land without the invitation of Poharama. His elder brother Waata went to the king and died there. He left children, of whom one son and one daughter were with the king, and two daughters were living with witness.

To the Court: Aihicene had a claim, because he was a Ngatitarnaboho, and he and Poharama were descended from a common ancestor. They did i.ot understand that the reserve was made for Poharama alone, bat for the whole tribe. ~.,■,....,... ~., | ~-... Aihipene Kaihau, sworn, deposed 'that this piece of land bad been Poharnma's, and after his death it became ' lhaka's, and after lhaka's death it became the property of his children. He put in a claim to the land 'on behalf of lhaka's.children. The arrangement about the reserve Was not the same as a pakeha arrangement when the Crown grant is given.. The reserve was made for Roharama, but for the re tof the tribe as well Kaihau and. Tuoku had lived there. He did not know anything abou't, Hakopa, but his wife was one of them. '

Cross-examined by Mr. Crawfprd: It was his hand who distributed the £1,500 for the Waittku block. The Ngafifipa received £750, aud Poharama received He himself was vexed, and| therefore his name did not appear in the deed of settlement.. , The principal owners of the land were Paoro. Te Iwi, Waata, who died with the rebels, Ih.ika, Poharama > Moti, Pao.o Te.Haeri, and himself. He could not lay any claim to this piece of land during Pohararaa's liie, nor could he claim it during the lifetime of lhaka, Te Ropia, or their children. I'aoro Te Iwi,' Poharama, and lhaka wore as one in their right, to.the land. ■-.,' . tii ->.

The Court then adjourned to next day at 10 a.m. •,: ■ ••• ■"•' -v " -"■".•"

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—Tufcsblir.

(Before Dr. Home, J.P.,,8. Kempthorne, Esq. J.P., and W. Collet Esq, J.P.) ' . ADJOURNED LICENSES. Tbtbv following' application 7 which were adjourned at the Annual Licensing Meeting, held on the 18th ultimo, came on for hearing : Richard Henry Cox, Exchange' Hotel, Queenstreet, granted ; He'nry'Hardington, Auckland, Arcade, Short land-street, adjourned ; Kobert florneV'Star Family"Hotel; Albert-street ad journed ; Daniel Lorigan, ! Harp'of Erin. Hotel, Newton, granted ;' Mary Ann . Martin,' Free-, mau'a Bay, adjourned; James, Mould, Airedale rtotel, nb (appearance,; Nay lor and Casey, Alexandra Hotel, Pai-pell, granted ; James. Rosie, Rob Roy Hotel, Free-, man's Bay, granted ; William Parker, Horso and Groom, Nelson and Drake-streets, gfante 1. Bush Licenses: Thomas Smith, K]ataraki, granted ; William Stavers, .Kaukapakapa, granted ; Henry Howard, WaHcomiti, granted. Mr. Weston .applied to have the license granted to David Watson'on the last licensing day transferred to another house. Mr. Beveridge opposed the application, which was refns d. The meeting adjourned until the 27th prox.

POLICE COURT.— Tuesday. (Before Dr. Home, J.P., and 8. Kempthorne, Esq., J.P.) A JvTKxruß tN the Dock.—Patrick Gdonan, a lad about fourteen years of age, »i brought up in custody, charged with having stolen a sum of money amounting to £4 Us:, and one pin value Is., the property of Matthew Cullen, shoemaker, West Queen-street. The prisoner, who was the prosecutor's apprentice, pleaded guilty, and was sent to gaol for one month. . Motinton Board the 'Dauntless.'—Six seamen of ihe above -snip, named respectively James Walker, John . Pri chard'. Charles Butcher, George Wickham, Thomas C. Jones, and Michael Ahem, were brought before the Court, and remanded till next morning on the application of Mr. Beveridge, who appeared on the part of the prosecution.