NATIVE MATTERS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 422, 13 March 1880, Page 17

NATIVE MATTERS.

(FROM OUlt OWN CORRESPONDENT.) Hawera, March 6,

The Royal Commission to enquire into promises made by Ministers, and their accredited servants, in connection with the confiscated lands on the West Coast, are at present in New Plymouth or the neighborhood, but are daily expected back in Hawera. Previous to leaving the latter place a large amount of real business appears to have been transacted. The Parihaka natives, it is true, held aloof, and however much this is to be regretted as curtailing the amount of evidence expected to be produced, it is nevertheless a fact that many causes of complaint were examined into, and the Commission placed in possession of many facts which will greatly aid any efforts made for the satisfactory settlement of the native difficulty in this Not being executive, the Commission can merely recommend, and it is to the carrying out of their suggestion that we have to look for a solution of the question „ During the sittings in this neighborhood evidence was produced of a promise made by a former Government to Wiremu Kingi, Matakatea, and Arama Karaka for the return, in consideration of loyal services, of that portion of the confiscated lands of the Taranaki tribe lying between Matoti and Taunga-atara, and supposed to contain 56,0' i) acres. The natives mentioned were chiefly instrumental in saving the lives and protecting the property of the passengers and crew of the Lord Worsley steamer, which was Avrecked on the coast line of their tribal lands many years ago, and a promise was made that their land should be excepted from confiscation in consequence of their good behavior in the matter. The case received the favorable consideration of the Commission. Many cases were enquired into which, although not, strictly speaking, within the list of promises made, were yefc of sufficient importance to demand attention as being among the causes of dissatisfaction which gave rise to this bloodless rebellion. The allotment of reserves is one of these, and various reserves in the vicinity were the subject of investigation. Among these is a reserve of seven hundred acres on the Patea River, which was granted to Hone Pihama and his tribe. Being situate on the mountain road to New Plymouth, and bounded by the railway to that place ;: also, the Government wished to acquire it for the purpose of cutting it up into what is now part of the township of Stratford. Major Brown, who had the matter placed in his hands for negotiation, gave the natives seven hundred acres further down the river, and handed the original reserve of five hundred acres to the Waste Land Board for use a 3 proposed, and the natives now complain—firsts, that they did not consent to the removal of the location; and secondly, that if any of their number had done so, the terms of the agreement have not been carried out. The Royal Commission appeared satisfied that an injustice had been done, and recommended accordingly.

Another reserve which was brought before the notice of the Commission is one of 10,000 acres, for the hapus of Isgatirnanui, named Aravikuku, Ngatitupaea, and Tongahoe. This reserve was made by Major Brown, instructed by the Government. Major Brown affirms that he instructed Mr. Dalton, the surveyor appointed to do the work, to cut the boundary lines of a reserve of 10,000 acres, and that he gave the latter gentleman certain natives to assist him in finding the tribal boundaries, with the special stipulation that the quantity mentioned above was not exceeded. The natives state that no quantity was mentioned in Major Brown's negotiations with tliem in the matter, but that lands within certain stated boundaries were to be given them.

Mr. Dalton backs the natives up in this, and says that his instructions were to follow the footsteps of the native guides in his survey, and that he should have done so had they gone to the top of Egmont. The consequence of the mistake in the matter is that, on completion of the survey, it was found that the reserve contained 16,000 acres instead of 10,000. Subsequently the size was reduced by the cutting up into sections for sale of a portion lying between the Mountain road and Waingongoro river, hence the complaint of the natives. It came out in evidence that 10,000 acres was the quantity mentioned by Major Brown at his meeting with natives at Ngarongo, and it is believed that no injustice has been done to the natives in this case. A third reserve is one which was made by order of Sir Donald McLean, forToi and others, on the banks of the Waingongoro, and which was subsequently included in the large reserve above mentioned, which was made for a different tribe. Major Brown did not know of any such reserve in consequence of its having been made previous to his term of office, and no record of its appointment having been submitted to him. Satisfactory documentary evidence was produced before the Commission by Young Fox, clerk to Dr. Buller, and the reserve was recommended to be confirmed to the persons for whom it was made.

Whilst at Geo application was made by Hone Pihama for a very large piece of land which he had partly fenced in on the south side of the Oeo stream. It was pointed out that a reserve had already been made for this chief on the north bank of the stream, containing 1000 acres, and another reserve had been made for his tribe in the same locality 3500 acres in extent. Hone Pihama pleaded that land of his had been confiscated in the Tongahoe district, south of Waingongoro, and he wished the land at Oeo to be given him as compensation, pointing out his improvements and the length of his occupation as evidence in proof of his claims. It would perhaps be a difficult matter for Hone Pihama to prove his hereditary right to the land, which your correspondent believes is claimed by the Ngatitama-aaroa hapu, and the result of Hone's application is not known.

Sufficient has been said to show the mature of the claims brought before the Commission, and one more of a different character may be mentioned as explanatory of the working of the Act of Confiscation under a different aspect. This was the claim put forward by Patu Kopa, an elderly man of the Mangaporua hapu, of the Ngatiruanui tribe, inhabiting the Waimate Plains. The man left this country in his youth, and joining an English man of war visited most parts of the globe in the service of the Queen. He took part in the Chinese and East Indian wars, and visited England, where he is said to have been honored by an interview with the Queen. The old chief says that he was told by the Queen that if a Maori served six years in the British service his land should not be alienated, and the promise seems to have been firmly believed in by the man. Since leaving the navy, Patu Kopa has lived in Sydney, ■where he has property, been digging for gold on the Shotover, in Otago, farming noar Port Chalmers, and publican at Ngahauranga, near Wellington. He married an European woman, and has two half - caste children grown up, and on his return to the scenes of his childhood on the Waimate Plains he found his land threatened with confiscation by the nation for whom he had been fighting. Being an hereditary chief of high standing, he fenced in portions of his land, with the consent of his tribe, and, on the appointment of the Commission, appeared before them, stated his case, and was listened to with attention. It will be seen that the abovementioned causes of dissatisfaction are all necessary to be enquired into, and if by settling them satisfactorily we can ■detach some of the following of Te Whiti, then the Royal Commission will have done good service to the country. But the fact is that these cases were all brought forward by natives who claim to be loyal, and consequently by those who -disown having anything to do with creating the disturbances which have lately arisen. The real question which is being agitated by Te Whiti and his followers cannot be touched upon by the Commission, and it remains to be proved whether generosity on the part of the Government ■will wean away the followers of the prophet. The question is best explained by stating the answer of Manaia to the Commission, when asked why he did not bring his people to the meeting. He replied by asking if it was possible for one horse to draw four tons, thereby intimating that he had no influence over his tribe In the matter. Manaia is undoubted hereditary chief of the Mangaporua hapu, and is acknowledged as such by all; he has been of some service to the Government, and is supposed to be loyal, but in this case, he is a chief without a following. If all the chiefs on this part of the coast were honest, they would acknowledge the same. Honi Pihama i 3 in the same posi-

tion as Manaia, as a large portion of his tribe are regular attendants at Parihaka. It appears to your correspondent that we are not getting a quidpro quo when_we make large reserves for particular chiefs who can command us men for our side should we want them. If we particularly want a few individual Maori friends we might just as well get a few tutuas ; they would claim less laud, be less expensive, and of equal service with chieftains, who cannot influence their tribes. If all the chiefs who have appeared before the Commission were to proclaim for the Government and antagonistic to Te Whiti, call together their followers, and declare that those who were not for them were against them, they would find themselves at the head of a very poor lot indeed. And this is not all; there is very good reason to believe that the sympathies of even these chiefs are with Te Whiti. However this may be, we ought to learn a lesson in our dealings with the natives, and not for the future treat with the chiefs alone for lands which are the property of a people who are particularly communistic. There is no chief in New Zealand who is despotic with his tribe.