TE PUKAPUKA.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8360, 13 September 1890, Page 1 (Supplement)

TE PUKAPUKA.

THE TITLE TO A BLOCK OF LAND

AT REMUERA.

AN INTERESTING PAGE OF HISTORY.

This io a proceeding to determine what

persons should have their names put into a Crown grant for the Pukapuka Block. The inquiry is held by virtue of a certain Order-in-Council referred to later on. The Court decided that the inquiry should proceed as though no Crown grant had existed in respect of this parcel of land. The Courk was asked to rule as to the period of time from which tho proceedings were to commence, and it decided they should commence from the] giving of the land by the Governor to Te Wherowhero; the Court also assumed that the title of the Crown to this land was good and valid. Mr. F. Earl appeared for Ihapera Kati, Mr. Hay for Tiahuia, Mr. K. lare Kaihau for Tawhiao, and Mr. S. Heskdth for Paora Tuhaere. Mr. Dufaur appeared in support of a deed from Tamati Ngapora to Te Rata Tutawhiao ; from him to Mr. Osmond, and from him to Mr. Dufaur ; but was ruled out of Court. The Native Office file of records in respect of Te Pukapuka was tendered in evidence. Before going into the case the Court thinks it would be well to give a short history of the surrounding circumstance*, showing how the claims of some of the parties hereto originated. Some time after the capture of Matakitaki pa, near Alexandra, by the Ngapuhi under Hongi, in 1823, peace was made between Hougi and To Wherowhero; and bo confirm that peace Matire Toha, a Ngapuhi chieftainess, was given*, in marriage to Te Kati, Te Wherowhero's younger brother. This, we are informed, took place in the early part of 1824. Te Kati and Matire lived for some time at Mangere. When Te Taou, who acquired by conquest the country around Auckland, but had fled bo Waikato for protection from Ngapuhi, were brought back and reinstated in their former possessions by Te Wherowhero. As a return for military services and protection they (Te Taou) gave land at Onehunga to Te Wherowhero, another piece ac Remuera, to Te Wetere te

Kauwae, and this piece, To Pukapuka, to To Kati. The land at Onehunga and Remuera appear to have been given in the year 1836, or thereabouts, but the date of tho gift of Te Pukapuka is uncertain. In the judgment on the Orakei case, Mr. Chief Judge Fenton, with respect to To Pukapuka, says :—(See "Important Judg-

* " Because if so great a result as this should not be manifested, if only delight in these studies should be sought, yet, as I think, you would judge this mental relaxation to be most refilled and noble. For other studies do not belong to all seasons, or all ages, or all places; but these studies nourish youth, delight old age, adorn prosperity, give a refuge and a solace in adversity ; they pass the nights with us, they accompany us abroad, they stay with us in the country."

ments," page 80), 1841. " Final settlement of the gift of a piece of land called "Te Pukapuka to Te Wherowhero and Te Kati. Te Kati and his Ngapuhi wife Matire take up their abode there." From the word final.used by Mr. Fenton, it might bo, inerred there was! some act of giving prior which had not finality. And again, on page 23, " There is no doubt thatNgabite Ata, with the other Waikato tribes who returned with Potatau, had rendered considerable services to Apihai and his people. These services were requited by the gift of a piece of i land near Onehunga to Potatau, of TePuka!puka to Te Kati, his brother, and of Remuera to Wetere te Kauae." Te Kati and Matire appear, to hare lived several years at To Pukapuka; some of their children died and were buried there ; ' they sometimes lived at Mangere. With reference to this gift of Pukapuka to Te Kati, Paora Tuhaere, one of the claimants before;fche Court, says ib was not an absolute gift'for all time ; it was intended the land: should revert to the people who gave it; ib: was merely given as a place where food, might be planted for the entertainment of such of the Ngapuhi people as from time to time came to visit Matire.

There is also considerable uncertainty as to the identity of the donor. Paul says ib was his uncle Apihai, other witnesses say ib was Uruamo, bub the Court may reasonably take it for granted that whoever the donor may hare been, he was simply acting as the mouthpiece of Te Taou, to whom the land all around Auckland belonged, as already stated, by right of conquest. After Te Kati's death the land appears to have been occupied by his (Te Kati's) slaves till 1854, when it was sold by Te Hira te Kawau, son of Apihai, to the Crown. On the sale to the Crown becoming known, Te Wherowhero, since known as Potatau, came with an armed force, and, to avert threatened hostilities between Waikato and Te Taou, and because of the dead buried there, Colonel Wynyard, then Acting-Governor, and Major Nugent, the Native Secretary, handed the J and over verbally to Te Wherowhero—without any deed of cession or promise of a Crown grant. Now, as to the claims of the several parties. The claim of Ihapera Kati, daughter of Te Kati and Matire Toha, is, so far as these proceedings are concerned, based on this gift by the Governor, Potatau having been her uncle. The claim of Tawhiao is also based on the same gift or promise. At to Tamati Ngapora, or in point of fact Tiahuia, his granddaughter, who claims as his representative— this claim is based (as a letter of Tamati recorded in the Native Office shows) on an alleged gift to him by Potatau (extract from letter dated June 13, 1861). " Potatau's word at Ngaruawahia was that that land should be

mine." Mr. H. Monro, now one of the Judges of the Native Land Court, in 1862 was asked by the Government to report on the nature of Tamati's claim to Te Pukapuka. In his report dated April 3, 1862, he says : "Tamati stated the land was verbally promised to him by Governor Wynyard, Major Nugent, and Mr. McLean, and the boundaries marked in his presence." On this letter there is a minute by Mr. Regan, that " the land was given back to Potatau, but no promise of a Crown grant was made." The Rev. Dr. Purchas also in his evidence said he had always heard from the Maoris that Te Pukapuka was Tamati's land.

The war in Waikato commenced in 186

On the 16th January, 1864, this parcel c land was taken possession of on behalf o the Government, though not then confiscated. On the 17th December, 1864, a proclamation issued confiscating all lands of rebel natives within certain limits including (according to the text) " a'l lands northward of the above boundaries belonging to rebel natives or tribes up to, and as'far as the waters of the Manukau and the Waitemata."_ There can be very little doubt this would include the land under investigation. A time was fixed within which the claims of loyal natives to the lands affected by this proclamation would be received, and claims were received for the Mangere lands, which wore dealt with by the Compensation Court. No proceedings were taken in the Compensation Court with respect to this land, presumably for the reason that the title to the land was still vested in the Crown, as no legal transfer had followed the promise or gift of the land to Potatau. In 1868, the Government, with a desire to conciliate the Maori King party, directed the preparation of a Crown grant in favour of Matutaera te Tapuke(Tawhiao) and TamatiNgapora, and askeil Mr. Chief «hi. Fenton what other

name!., >;.,r,nr- in l.; adgmenb should bo added. F: -• - -^ ai ,eu Matire Toha. A grant was prepared accordingly, and signed on the 28fch June, 1869, in' favour of the persons above named, without the title being restricted. As to the claim of Paora Tuhaere. lb was stated by Paora in his evidence that after the sale by Te Hira to the Crown, lie asked the Chief Land Purchase Commissioner to give back Te Pukapuka to him, but Mr. McLean refused, adding, "it has been sold by Te Hira to the Government." He (Paul) then thought no more of the matter— that he first after this heard of the Crown grant to Tamati Ngapora and others when ho was a Government native agent in the Civil Commissioner's Office, Auckland, probably in 1872. In March, 1872, Paora and a large number of Ngatiwhatua chiefs visited the Maori King people at To Kuiti, and in the presence of all the people Tamati Ngapora publicly returned Te Pukapuka to Paora, Keweti Tamahiki, and Te Hira Te Kawau. (This is disputed by some of the witnesses called by Mr. Hay.) Certain copies of letters confirming this giving, in terms more or less va?ue, were received in evidence by j Court. There was also an autograp.. letter of Tamati Ngapora's, the tenor of which was as nearly as possible conclusive that his desire and intention was that the land should be returned to Paora.

Some time after his interview with Tamati Ngapora, Paora saw Matire Toha. He told her what Manuwhiri (Tamati Ngapora) had done with respect to Te Pukapuka, and she expressed her willingness to do the same. She then went with Paora tj Mr. Dufaur's office, and a deed was prepared conveying her interest in Te Pukapuka to Paora, which was signed at Mangere on the 2nd day of October, 1875. This deed was handed into Court as evidence of a gift by Matire to Paora of her interest in this land. Certain doubts were sought to be cast on the surroundings of this deed, but the evidence of Mr. Barstow as to what took place between himself and Matire, while waiting for this deed to be presented to him for the usual inquiries under the Native Lands Frauds Prevention Act, shows that he was thoroughly satisfied as to the bona fides of the transaction. With respect, however, to the representations made by Paora, himself, as to what induced Matire to concur with what seems to have been the intention of Tamati Nga- I pora, there is nothing to show save his (Paora's) unsupported testimony. ! To proceed with the history of the case, on ;he 9th July, 1889, the grant for this land was cancelled, and on the 21st May last, an Order in-Council issued, giving the Native Land Court jurisdiction to hear and determine the matter.

The Court has fully considered all the evidence, both that of the various witnesses before it, and the official documer received in evidence, and it appears w the Court that the question it has to decide is, Whether any of t'-e alleged gifts, promises, or contracts entered into by Tamaci Ngapora and Matiro with Paora Tuhaere or any other persons, have any force or effect. To this question there appears to the Court to be but one answer, and that in the negative. The land is nob held by natives under their customs or usages, and native custom cannot in this case be admitted as a factor. The decision of the Court therefore is adverse to the claim of Paora Tuhaere.

The Court orders that a Crown grant issue to Matutaera to Tapuke, Ihapera Kati, and Tiahui, in equal shares. The title to be restricted in such manner as shall best secure the interests of the persons named therein.