FURTHER PAPERS RELATIVE TO THE NATIVE INSURRECTION EVIDENCE OF THE VENERABLE ARCHDEACON HADFIELD AND MR COMMISSIONER McLEAN, AS TO THE CAUSES OF ITS ORIGIN, Taken before a Committee of the whole House.

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1860 Session I, E-04

E—Mo. 4

FURTHER PAPERS RELATIVE TO THE NATIVE INSURRECTION EVIDENCE OF THE VENERABLE ARCHDEACON HADFIELD AND MR COMMISSIONER McLEAN, AS TO THE CAUSES OF ITS ORIGIN, Taken before a Committee of the whole House.

(Laid on the Table by Mr. Speaker, 28th August, and ordered to be j)rinted.)

E—No. 4

EVIDENCE EELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN OF THE

NATIVE OSTJBBECTION. (The House in Committee.) Tuesday, the 14th day of August, 18G0. The Order of the Day,—" That the House do resolve itself into Committee, and that " the Venerable Archdeacon fladfield be requested to attend at the Bar of the House, to give evidence "as to the causes of the Taranaki War, and be subject to question as to the same : and that the Chief "Land Commissioner, Mr. M'Lean, shall also be summoned as a witness, and examined on the same " subject,"—being read The Venerable Archdeacon HadfieJd in attendance, — Ordered, That the Venerable Archdeacon be introduced within the Bar, and be permitted to seat himself. The Archdeacon was then introduced by the Serjeant-at-Arms. Ordered, That Mr. Chairman do request the Witness to state whether he would prefer to make a general statement as to the causes which led to the Taranaki War, or reply to specific questions proposed to him on that subject. Witness stated in reply that he had not come prepared to make an independent statement, not having understood from the summons he had received from Mr. Speaker that he would be expected to do so, but that in obedience to the Order of the House he was prepared to reply to any questions that should be submitted to him. 1. Mr. Fitzherbert.~\ How long have you known William King and under what circumstances? —I have known William King since December 1839 when I went to Cook's Straits and took up my abode at Waikanae. 2. What do you know of William King's personal character and of his public character in his relations to the British Government previously to the commencement of the present war?— During the four years I resided at Waikanae I formed a high opinion of his personal character. lam not aware of any act of violence of which he was guilty except on one occasion when during my absence he struck a man down for attempting to burn my house. With reference to his public character he gave most material assistance to the Government after the unfortunate massacre at Wairau. He rejected the proposal of Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata that he should join with them ir. an attack on Wellington; and exercised the whole of his influence to prevent any of his tribe from doing so. During my absence from Waikanae for a few days, an attempt was again made by Te Rauparaha and others to unite William King and his tribe with others in a hostile attack on Wellington, but heagain positively declined to take any part in such a proceeding. In the war with Te Rangihaeata he co-operated with the Government against that chief though he was a near relation of his. Sir George Grey, who was on board a vessel at Kapiti asked his assistance, he returned the same day to Waikanae, and proceeded with 140 men to Te Pari|>ari, when on the following day he captured eight prisoners who were in arms against the Government, and handed them over to the Authorities, They were tried by martial la a , and seven were transported, I believe they were sent to Hobart Town. Without going into further particulars I believe that liis conduct at that time gave universal satisfaction. He assisted the British Government on all occasions when his assistance was required. I could name other instances. 3. How long were William Kingard his party absent from the Waitara?—To the best of my belief about 20 years; (as far as I have been able to obtain dates prior to the year 1838,) the iirst migration from Waitara under William King's father, when he was accompanied by many of the leading chiefs, took place about the year 1827 or 1828; they returned in 1848. ■1. What happened at the Waitara during their absence?— After William King nnd nearly all the principal chiefs residing at Waitara had left to assist.Te Rauparaha in his war in Cook's Siraits, the VVaikatO easne down and attacked the remnant of that portion of the Ngatiawa who remained at Waitara in their pah Pukerangiora, they besieged and took the pah, also a number of prisoners, and dispersed the remnant of the tribe. The Waikatos subsequently proceeded to attack Ngamotu, they were resisted by Te Puni and other of their Chiefs, they were then repulsed at Moturoa. The \\':iikacos never held possession of Waitara and never acquired any right to it. A few members of the Ngatiawa remained on the land and cultivated. There was only one Waikato (Pekitahi) who ever cultivated, he had married into the Ngatiawa and cultivated by virtue of that marriage. 5. How were their individual rights or their tribal rights to the Waitara land affected by what took place during their absence? —I conceive that the leading members of the Ngatiawa having voluntarily migrated to Cook's Straits, and as the Waikato never held possession of Waitara, neither the right of the tribe nor of the individual meuibers of it were at all affected by their absence from Waitara.

1

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

6. Do you know the circumstances under which they returned from Waikanae to Waitara, and whether that return had been long contemplated by them?— They had contemplated such return from the time when they originally left. I first heard of their contemplated return on my arrival at AVaikanae in the year 1839. One reason was that a collision had taken place a few weeks before with Ngatiraukawa, supposed to be at the instigation of Te Rauparaha. Another reason for their return was that the limits of the land in their possession at Waikanae were very narrow, from my first acquaintance with them they always spoke of their return to Waitara as only a question of time. The immediate circumstances which led to their return in 1848 arose out of the disiurbancps at the Hutt. 7. Was any one occupying the land when they went back?— Not being at Waitara at the time I can only give secondary evidence on that point. I have never heard of any other occupation of Waitara prior to the arrival of the English colonists, and certainly not since, than that wiiicii I have previously alluded to. 8. To whom did the land belong at the time of their return?— From my reply to a previous question to the effect that Waikato never occupied the Waitara country, consequently it follows that in my opinion at the time of their return it belonged exclusively to the tribe under William King and that portion of the Ngatiawa who returned with him. 9. It has been stated that William King returned to Waitara in defiance of Sir George Grey, are you aware whether William King was in any way bound to remain at Waikanae, and whether Governor Grey had any right to dictate to him as to what part of his possessions he should reside in?—l have heard that William King returned to Waitara in defiance of Sir George Grey's expressed wish to the contrary. I never did hear from Sir George Grey himself that he had made any official communication to William King to that effect. I know as a fact that William King in opposition to the expressed wish of the Resident Magistrate at Waikanae took his guns, gun-powdur and ammunition with him. He did this as a necessity for he expected that he might be engaged in war with the Waikato. I have no reason to suppose Sir George Grey had the right to dictate to William King-as to whether he should reside at Waikanae or Waitara. I see in some papers which have been laid before this House a document signed by Major Richmond, then Superintendent of Wellington, in which he stated that he paid a visit to William King in July, 1817, and that he (William King) expressed himself as being anxious to do nothing which would be offensive to the Government, and lie would be sorry to do anything which would be displeasing to the Authorities. At the same time I have heard that Sir George Grey had expressed a wish that he should not return there. 10. Are you acquainted with the nature of native tenure of land?—l ought to express some diffidence in replying to that question, but I may observe (in reference to the tenure acknowledged by the natives of the souihern half of this Island with which I am acquainted,) that tiiere is little or no difficulty on the subject. 11. What opportunities have you had of becoming acquainted with the subject?— The opportunities I have had of becoming acquainted with the subject arose from the fact of my having resided for four years in a Maori Pah in which there were from five to six hundred men. My attention was particularly called to the subject at that time by the constant disputes about the purchases of land made by the New Zealand Company in Cook's Straits, I was frequently applied to by Mr. Commissioner Spain to assist him in elucidating Maori customs about land. I may further state that after the collision at Wairau I m:\de it part of my business to inquire into the subject, and after careful enquiry I came, in 1845, to a conclusion on the subject, which the experience of the last fifteen years has not tended in the slightest degree to alter. 12. State what you think to be the rights of the tribe in respect to land belonging to it?—l think that the right of each tribe to lands extends over the whole of the tribal territory and entirely precludes the right of any other tribes over it. Such absolute tribal right may be classed under two heads :— Ist. The territory which has been in the possession of the tribe for several generations, and to which no other claim had been previously known. 2nd. The territory acquired by conquest, occupation, or possession. 33. State what you understand to be the rights of individual members of the tribe in respect to land ?—I believe that the rights of the individual members of the tribes are limited to those portions of the lands of the tribe which they have either cultivated or occupied, or on which they have exercised some act of ownership which is acknowledged as such by the tribe. I must be understood to mean that their title to such lands was simply that of holding for their own use and benefit. Their right was a good holding title as against every other member of the tribe. They might exchange land among themselves, but no one could alienate without the consent of the tribe. In the year 184;") I drew up a paper on the tenure of native lands which I gave to Sir George Grey, who promised to return it. He told me he sent a copy of it to the Colonial Office. He did not return the original to me, I understand that it was burnt with other papers at Auckland. 11. What do you understand to be the rights of the chief of the tribe in respect to land belonging to the tribe ? —While looking over some papers a few weeks ago I accidentally discovered my original pencil notes, which formed the rough draft of the paper on this subject to which I have just alluded ; which I now produce, and with the permission of the Committee will read, as they must be conclusive as to what my opinion as to individual title was in the year 1845 : — • The chief of the tribe, since he has no absolute right over the territory of the various hapu, nor over the lands of individual freemen of his own hapu, cannot sell any lands but his own, or those belonging to the tribe which are undoubtedly waste lands ; nor can he do this in opposition to the opinion of the chiefs of the hapu of the tribe, if they consider the territory and thus the independence of the tribe impaired by so doing. Allowing this very questionable right of the chief to alienate any part of the territory of a tribe, it can scarcely be allowed to any chief of a hapu, even should he act

2

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

in accordance with the various individuals of the hapu. It must be remembered that a tribe, however subdivided into hapii is one, and cannot allow its integrity and strength to be impaired by the independent act of one hapu, which it is bound to identify with itself in all things, and to protect, if involved in any quarrels or difficulties. These remarks are more decidedly applicable in the case of ordinary freemen— tulua, who cannot alienate that land which is absolutely their own for all practical purposes, hut is not to be disposed of in a manner contrary to the supposed interests of the tribe. There can be no doubt on this subject." —The notes which I have now road to the Committee imply that the chiefs have power over some portions of the land. Fifteen years ago, I set it down as a questionable right or power ; I view it in the same light now. I limit such right of chiefs to deal with lands obtained by conquest only ; and do not consider that it extends to any land which has become vested in the tribe by long possession. I wish to guard myself in reference to what I am saying on this subject, by premising that I am speaking of tenure to land as it existed prior to the establishment of the British Government in the Colony, and not since that event. The chief of a tribe must be regarded as holding his position by a double title. His just title must arise from his undoubted descent through a long line of well known ancestors from the original head of the tribe. His second title depends on a more democratic principle, that is, he must be the acknowledged and the elected head of the tribe. The chief is the representative of the territorial right of the tribe, not because he is descended from numerous ancestors of noble blood, but because he has been acknowledged as such on account of his personal qualifications and influence, and has in fact been recognised as the guardian as well as the mouth-piece of the rights of the tribe. I have no doubt whatever on this subject. I understand that whatever rights to land existed previous to (he treaty of Waitangi among the natives are still rights with them, being guaranteed by that treaty. I investigated Maori titles to land irrespective of the influence which may have been exercised by the Government, and eight or ten years previous to the establishment of British sovereignty. 15. Who is the acknowledged chief of that portion of the Ngatiawa tribe resident at Waitara ?— I have no hesitation in stating positively that Win. King is the acknowledged chief of that portion of the Ngatiawa at Waitara. 16. Are there any other chiefs of that portion of the tribe who possess equal or nearly equal powers with Wm. King ? —The only other chief who, were Wm. King to die, and in whose power it would be to forbid such a sale of land is Te Patukakariki—a man older than W. King and head of the and Ngatituaho Hapu. 17. What rank does Te Teira hold in the tribe?— The only rank Te Teira holds is simply that of a freeman of the tribe, called by the natives tutua ; he could not by any stretch of language be called a chief ; I knew him and his father four or five years, and during that time I never heard him or his father attempt to speak at any Runanga or meeting of the natives. 18. To what hapu does he belong, and who is the principal chief in thatAoptt? —Te Teira belongs to Ngatihinga and Ngatituaho Iwpv, and Te Patukakariki is the chief. 19. Do yoa know the position of the block of land in dispute at Waitara?—The only difficulty I have in answering that question arises from my never having seen the official survey boundaries. It has been described as a block of land containing about COO acres situated on the south bank of the Waitara ; this land I have seen and been over ; but I do not know the precise boundary line of the Government. It is three years since I was on the land. 20. Can you state who were the owners of that block of land previous to the present dispute ?— I will state what I have heard on the subject. I have direct information from persons stating that they are claimants to that land, and I am only giving my opinion on that information. I have no hesitation in saying that the land belongs to that portion of the Ngatiawa tribe, of which William King is the chief. This portion of Ngatiawa is divided into four hapus, namely—Xgatikura, Ngatiuenuku, Ngatihinga, and Ngatituaho, who have principally resided at Waitara since 1848 under William King. With regard to the block of 000 acres (apart from the tribal right as represented by Wm. King,) I have been informed (speaking within the mark,) that there are a hundred claimants who assert rights to that land, it having been the land of their ancestors, and having been in ages past, in some parts at least, defined by stone marks. I know the names of a number of claimants. I could quote a great number. lam prepared to prove that there are a hundred persons now living at Waikanae, Port Nicholson, Queen Charlotte's Sound, and Massacre Bay, having valid claims. 21. Do you know any of them personally, and what is your opinion of their veracity ?—I have known the greater number of them personally. I have had no communication with them since this dispute has arisen, except with those ia my own immediate neighbourhood. The veracity of those natives I believe there is no room to question. 22. Have all the owners of that land with whom you are acquainted agreed to the sale of it ?— I was lately informed by two persons at Waikanae, whojiad just returned from Waitara, that many of those persons with whom they had held, conversation had not consented to the sale of the land ; I believe that there are, say ninety out of a hundred claimants who have noc consented to the sale of the land. 23. Can you say how many have agreed, and how many have not agreed, to the sale of the land in question ? —-According to the information which I have received, there are only ten or twelve persons who, having any valid claims, have consented to the sale of the laud. Tliero are eighty or ninety, perhaps a hundred others, who have never consented to it. 24. You have stated that certain owners of the disputed land ilid not agree to t!;e sale of it, do you know whether their consent has been asked ?—I have been positively told by tw-> or three claimants that their consent was never asked.

3

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

25. Do you know anything about any investigation of their claims ?—I hare been positively assured that no investigation whatever had been made at Waikanae. 20. Do you think that any of these claimants would now refuse to sell their interest in the block of land under dispute ?—I think that some would now refuse to sell their claims; my reason for thinking so is, that one of them, Hohepa Ngapaki, a nephew of ihe lnfe chief Te Hawe told me so. He further stated that when the Chief Commissioner was in Cook's Straits he appeared to express surprise at his having , a claim, and said that the Government would compensate him for it. He (Hohepa) replied that he was not prepared to ta'<e compensation —or be forcibly driven from the land, which he had inherited from his father. 27. Can you say what proportion of the disputed land belonged to those who have agreed to the sale of it ?—I understand the question to mean the proportion of the individual rights as distinct from the tribal rights. I believe that those individuals who sold the land owned about one-fifth of the block, and that four-fifths were the actual property of those who refused to sell, or whose claims wcro never investigated. 28. What do you conceive would be the effect on the native mind of commencing the survey of a block of disputed land ?—I have no difficulty in answering this question —such an attempt to survey the land in dispute was a taking possession of the land according to the native view, it being quite analagous to a custom of their own, when they want to take possession of disputed land they go and set up a post upon it; this is often done when they want to force on a collision between tribes. 29. Had the survey of the block of land at Waitara alleged to have been sold by Teira to tho Government, been delayed for six or twelve months, is it your opinion that these claimants might have been then more favourably disposed to part with their interests in the block?—My only reason for not giving a distinct answer in the affirmative to this question is my knowledge of the existence of the promise given by William King to his father that he would not alienate any portion of Waitara. With the exception of that, I have no reason to suppose that any other claimant, if proper time for investigation had been given, and the feelings of discontent which had been caused by the manner in which Taylor had persevered in his endeavour to dispose of the land had been allowed to subside, would have objected to the sale or that the consent of the whole tribe would have been withheld. When I was at New Plymouth, at the request of Mr. Parris I had a conversation with William King. He came into the town where he had not been for two years before, and spent the night at the inn with me. He then stated that he really had no objection to the Pakehas getting land; if they would only allow them (the natives) to settle their own differences and define their own boundaries, he would be prepared to negotiate with them for the sale of the land. I stated the result in the morning to Mr. Parris witli the understanding that it was William King's wish that this intention of sale should not be made publicly known, I have however no doubt that had six or twelve months been allowed to elapse without molestation a sale might have been fffected with general consent. '60. Here is a letter signed "Riwai Te Abu," do you know the handwriting?—l do know the handwriting. Otaki, Hune 23rd, 18G0. X te HtJPERITENETE, —■ Tena ra koe, tenei taku korero ki a rongo koe, he roa noa atu, tena pea koe c hoha kite korero. i tuhituhia ai c an ki a roa, he rongo tonu noku i te rere ke o nga korero mo taua whenua i Waitara, mo Wiremu Kingi. a, kei whakaaro iho koe, he whakatakariri noku ki a le Teira i kumea ai aku korero kia roa, a he tangata ke ranei a te Teira ki a au, ko Wiremu Kingi pea te mea i tata ki a au. Kao, he tvhakataki ano naku i tikanga o tera whenua, rue nga hapu, me nga tangata nona taua whenua ki a moliio ai koutou, no te mea kua nui haere te he. Ko te Teira te mea i tata ki a au, ko Wirenni Kingi ia c matara atu ana i au. Na, ki ta matou nei whakaaro, ekore c rere ke nga whakaaro o tenei Kawana i o era Kawana o Miua i a ia. He muremurenga tpra whenua na ratou, Katalii te whakaaro ka pohelie ake, E ! lie tikanga hou ano enema to tatou Kuini, otira, c whakaaro ana matou, na te Teira pea ratou ko ona hoa, me ana kai hoko whenua o Taranaki ate Kawana i tinihanga, na reira, ka hohoro tana unga atu i »na lioia ki Waitara liei whakawehiwehi i nga tangata kaioa me nga wahine i pana atu ra i ana kai ruri i runga i o ratou whenua tupu me o matou. kia tangohia noatia atu. Ino hoki tetalii o nga kupu a C. W, Richmond, Taranaki, Maehe 1, 1860, kua rangpna nei c te katoa, "Kua ata kimihia mariretia to te Teira take ekenga ki taua waki, be tika tonu, kahore kau te tangata hei whakahe i tona take." Ac, c tika ana, ki ana niara ano tono ekenga i roto i taua wlienua, E rua taupa, c toru, he penei tahi ano hoki te tika o matou ko era kua pana atu ra i runga i taua wlienua, c rua taupa, kolahi, c torn c wha, a lena t.uiga'a. a tena tangata i roto i taua whenua, He penei ano hoki la Wiremu Kingi kupu i kawea ketia ra c te kai hoko whenua o Taranaki ' ; I whak ac ano a Wiremu Kin;i no te Teira anake taua whenua" na tona ngakau tohe kite tango maori ite whenua, me tona kuare ki le red maori, i kawe ke ai ite kupu a Wiremu Kin«;i. Xi ta matou nei whakaaro ki tenei ktipu a ie C. W. Richmond, ko te taha anake ki a tc Teira ma i kimihia, i whakarangona lioki nga korcio c «ua kai hoko whenuao Taranaki, a whiti atu ki Arapawa c kimi ana. Ko te taha ki a Witemu Kingi ma, kahore i kimihra, kahore hoki i whakarangona atu a ratou korero. Ina hoki te kupu ote reta a Wirerrfu Kingi eki nei "Ko tetehi kupu hoki ana, kahore ratou nga pakeha c whakarongo mai ki aku kupu" na te kai hoko whenua o Taranaki taua kupu ki a ia, (tenei ano taua reta te takoto nei), Otira, kihai au i whakapono ki ana kupu katoa i tulii mai ai i tera tau, I mahara hoki au, ekore c pena rawa tc mahi a te Kawanatanga. Kahore hoki i tae mai le kimi kia matou, mci kimihia tahitia, mci whakarangona atu a ratou korero, a tae noa mai ki a matou c kimi ana, na, kua kitea te he o tale Teira ma, E ! c takoto

4

E—No. 4

OP THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

l»opurepure ana o ratou wahi whenua i waenga nui i nga wahi whenua a nga tangata katoa kahore ai i whaka&e, i o matou hoki c nolio nei, tenei te kupu o te reta a Wiremu Kingi " Xi te he hoki o nga pakeha k;iiao, o Parete, o te VV'aitere, o te Kawana, c ki ana ratou, no te Teira anake tona pihi wbenua, kaore no matou kaloa, no te tamaiti pani, no te wahine pouaru taua piihi whenua" (Tenei ano tana reta te takoto nei). Penei, ekore c tito ki ate Kawana ana kai lioko whenua o Turanaki, kua kitnihia c ratou tika tonu, no te Teira anake taua whenua. Kua rongo matou, eona rawa nga ran eke o te whenua o te Teira ratou ko ana hoa. Ka whakaaro matou, ehara (era 1 taua wheuua i Waitara, engari, he whenua kite hou tera na te Teira ratou ko ona hoa, ma hoki te nui rawa. Ko te take i kaha ai te pelii a Wiremu Kingi ma ite limatangao ta te Teira korerotanga i reira ki a hokona alu ki a te Kawana, he wehi no ratou kei huia katoatia atu a ratou, me o matou, no te Teira anake, na, rite tonu ta ratou i uelie ai. Kua rongo matou ki ta Wiremu Kingi kupu i tuhi mai ai, na te kai hoko whenua o Taranaki te kupu, ko ia tenei, " Ko ta ratou i naiauei, ahakoa tangata kotahi maana c lio atu a whenua ka pai tonu mai nga pakeha" (Tenei ano tana reta te takoto nei). Na, ekore matou c whakatika iho ki enei kupu kua rangona nei. No te Teira te whenua, no ona hapu ano tera whenua, no Ngatihinga raua ko Ngatituaho, na ratou nei hoki c whakaae te nohoanga o Wiremu Kingi ki t.iua pihi i tona haerenga mai c Waikanae, katahi ia ka nolio ki reira, *' lie peke pokanoa ta Wiremu Kingi, tena c liata i a ia taua whenua, a he poka noa tana kupu." Whakarongo mai, ma nga pakeha anake, me nga tangata maori o nga hapu ke o tenei motu c whakatika iho enei kupu. Tena, ma matou o Ngatiawa c noho nei i Waikanae, tae atu ki Poneke, wliiti atu ki etahi o Arapawa, tae noa atu kite Taitapu. Kore rawa c whakatika iho, ekore ano hokie whakahe iho ki a Wiremu Kingi, lie peke pokanoa. Heo'i anake nga tangata o Ngatiftwa c whakatika ki a te Teira, c whakahe ki a Wiremu Kingi, ko nga tangata c nukarau ana ki a te Kawaua, me nga pakeha, E hua ana pea nga kai hoko whenua o Taranaki, ko te Teira anake ratou ko ona nga tang.ita o Ngatibinga raua ko Ngitituabo, a c hara pea enei tangata i aua hapu, a Wiremu Te Patukakariki (te rangatira o aua hapu) a Nopera Te Kaoma, me etahi atu o ratou, kshore ra i whakaae atu. i whakariingona mai hoki a ratou kupu c aua kai hoko whenua o T .raiiaki ? Whakarongo mai, na te waliine o Wiremu Te Patukakariki, me a raua tamahine ake tokorua, me etahi wahine ano o aua hapu, na ratou i pana atu nga kai ruri a te Kawana i runga i o ratou whenua ake. Na, kahore i wehea iho i namata taua whenua kia motuhake mo Ngatihinga anake raua ko Ngatituaho, a kia moiu ke mo etahi hapu mo Ngatikura, mo Ngatiuenuku, mo uai hapu, mo wai hapu, i roto i taua whenua, kua riro ra ia te Kawana. Kaore, i wlmkauruuru noa iho, na nga pou paenga ano a nga tupuna i wehewehe nga mara, ehara hoki enei hapu i te wehenga ketanga i a ratou, no te iwi kotahi tonu. He ingoa katoa o aua inara, na nga tupuna ano i tapa iho. Te in«oa ota Wiremu Kingi mare, ko te Parepare. Ko mja roara ana ta.nariki ake, na o raua matua wahiue ake, kei te pa kua tahuna ra c nga hoia kite ahi, kei te Hurirapa, kei Orapa tetahi, i te tonga o ratou p > tawhito, kei roto katoa enei mara i te whenua c kiia ra, no te Teira anake, kua riro katoa alu enei i a te Kawaoa, Ko a matou mara katoa ko era kahore ra i whakaae, ara, o Ngatikura, o Ngatiusnuku, me etahi o Ngatihinga, o Ngatituaho, o tena hapu, o tena hapu, kua lmia katoatia atu enei mara etc kai hoko whenua o Taranaki, no te Teira anake. Ka pewhea ai te tikanga o tenei kupu? "na ratou nei hoki i whakaae te nohoanga Wiremu Kingi ki tauu pihi i tona haerenga mai i Waikanae." Ha! na write ki, hua atu, he mohio ano na ratou ki nga mara a tonatupum, a tona tupuna, na ratou ranei i whakaae a te Pureparc lie; mara ma Wiremn Kingi i tona haereaga atu i Waikanae ! Na ratou ranei i whakaae nga mara ana tamariki ake i te Hurirapa i te haerenga atu i Waikanae, kua riro atu na te tango c nga hoia? Na ratou ranei i whakaae nga mara katoa a o matou tupuna kua oti ake nei te tuhituhi c au, i to ratou haereaga atu i Waikanae, kua riro atu rate tango c nga lioia kite mata ote hoari. Xi taku whaknaro, c rite ana tenei kupu kite rongoa wbakamate. Xi ta te kai hoko whenua o Taranaki, he tika rawa ta te Teira hjatutanga i tain whenua, a lie he rawa a Wiremu Kingi, kia matou he nui rawa atu te he o te Teira, kahore he mea hei hu ianga mo tona he kia ngaro ai. Ko taku kupu whakamutunga tenei, kahore c kitea c au he kupu whakamarie maku ki toku iwi c pouri mai ra ki to matou wliniua, kia mutu ai, c nui rawa ana to ratou maniac kite tangohanga noatanga i te whenua o matou tupuna, kite mea ka riro tonu atu taua whenua akuanei ka matt tonu tenei kupu, i tangohia muoritia atu taua whenua c te Kawana o te Kuini o Ingarani, a mau tonu iiio ki nga whakatupuranga. Tenei hoki etahi kupu whakahe a nga Pakeha mo Wiremu Kingi kua rongo au. E kiia ana, he tangata kino, he tangata haurangi, he tangata kohuru. Tenei taku kupu: Katahi na pea ia ka inu ram aki Waitara. I a matou c noho ana i Waikanae, kahore rawa an i kite iaia c hoko kaho rama, c haurangi ana ranei, kore rawa ; kahore ano hoki au i rongo, he tangata kohuru ia i mua atu o taku whanautanga a kaumatua noa atu, kahore rawa au i kite i tetahi tangata c koburutia ana c ia. liaere noa atu ia ki Waitara. Mehc tangata kohuru a Wiremu Kingi, kua riri ia ki aTe Parete, kai hoko whenua o Taranaki, mo tana kupu kia " puhia ia kite pu, ka lanu noa iho ki waho ki a ratou mahinga, kaua c kawea ki nga urupa tanu ai." (Na he kupu kino rawa tenei ki a niaua kite tangata Maori mo nga rangatira, ka heke rawa te ope. Tenei ano tana reta te takoto nei.) Na i kanga tona matua a Reretawhangawhanga c Ngatimaru i Whareroa (1837). Na, heke ana te ope nui a Ngatiawa, haere atu ana i Waikanae ki Whareroa, c wha nga rau, na te pai o nga whakaaro o taua kaumatua. Ka kore c patua nga tangata o Whareroa, i hutihutia kautia nga taewa, i haere tahi ano au i taua ope. Na te haurangi ranei, me te kohuru o Wiremu Kingi, te take i mohiotia ai c nga kai lioko whenua o Taranaki, no Te Teira anake ratou ko ona hoa taua whenua i Waitara, na reira ranei i tangohia ai ? Na, tena ano tetahi tangata kohuru kei te aroaro o aua kai hoko whenua o Taranaki,

5

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

na kahore taua tangata i te karangatia c ratou, ko te tangata kohuru, engari c karangatia ana o team, Eto matou hoa, ahe aha ra hoki te tango tahi ai i ona whenua ? Kahore a Wiremu Kingi ma i pai kite whawhai i te rironga mai o nga moni utu o Waitara i a Te Teira, na reira i tuhituhi mai ai tetahi o ratou ki a au, me he raea ekore c pai kia kohikohia c ratou he moni hei whakahoki mo nga moni ate Kawana i riro mai ra ia Te Teira. Kei riro noa atu o matou whenua mo aua moni, ka rere atu ratou kite pupuru mai, aka waiho hei take riringa mo te Kawana ki a ratou. (Tenei ano tana reta c takoto nei.) I rongo tonu au i mua ki nga kupu pakeke o Reretawhangawhanga, matua o Wiremu Kingi, i to matou pa i Waikanae, (1840) mo Waitara kia kaua c hokona kite Pakeha, na mau tonu tana kupu a mate noa ki Waikanae (1844), waiho iho tana kupu ki a Wiremu Kingi hei pupuru i muri, i a ia. Ite rongonga o Rere me nga kaumatua i Waikanae, kua tae mai aTe Niutone Te Pakaru raDgatira o Ngatimaniapoto, kite tua waerenga i tera taha o Waitara, (ko Wharenui te ingoa o te mara), ka puta te kupu aua kaumatua kia hoki atu ia ki tona kainga, kia waiho marire Waitara kia takoto ana mo matou ano, (i rongo ano au ki enei kupu ite 1842-43.) Kahore he tangata o Waikato, me Ngatimaniapoto, i noho i reira i mua atu o te taenga o nga Pakeha ki Ngamotu, katahi ano ki a Nuitone Te Pakaru. Na reira i haere atu ai tetahi o aua kaumatua, a Ngaraurekau, i Waikanae, hei tiaki kei hoki mai ano a Ngatimaniapoto ki Waitara, na, mahue tonu iho i a Ngatimaniapoio a Waitara, a tae noa atu te heke a Wiremu Kingi ki reira, (liaunga a Peketahi, n» tana wahine i taki mai ki reira.) Tetahi he tangata aroha a Wiremu Kingi ki nga Pakeha o Poneke. Tihema 1843 i haere atu rnatou i Waikanae (me te Ahirikona o Kapiti) ka kite matou i a Haerewaho c whakawakia ana c Te Haruera i roto i te whare whakawa i Poneke, ka kitea te tika o lona he, kawea ana kite whare herehere, na, ka oho nga tangata Maori katoa o Poneke kia patua nga Pakeha o te taone, na, ka rere a Wiremu Kingi kite pehi, na kua mutu. Te tuarua (1846) i puta mai te kupu a te Kawana Kerei ki a Wiremu Kingi kia haere atu ki a ia ki Kapiti ki runga ite manuao, ko te Kata te ingoa. Haere atu ana matou, ka puaki mai te kupu a te Kawana Kerei ki a Wiremii Kingi kia haere atu kite Paripari hei whakawehiwehi atu i tona hoa ngangare i a Te Rangihaeate, na whakaae tonu atu a Wiremu Kingi (kahore ia i whakaaro ki a J'e Rangihaeata). Ao ake, ka whiti mai matou ki Waikanae, whakakau tonu atu a Wiremu Kingi ki ona hapu kia haere atu ratou kite Paripari, moe noa atu i Whareioa, ao ake, ka tae kite Paripari, ko au ano tetahi i haere, hoko whitu topu tana ope (hoki mai ana au ki Waikanae). Ka hopuhopukia c ratou ko tana ope nga tangata o Whanganui i uru tahi ki a Te Rangihaeata, tokowaru aua langata. (No te hopukanga o aua tangata ka karanga ake ratou, c noho ko wai ka liua, ekore hoki koutou c peneilia a ona rangi, Kei te maharatia tenei kupu c Wiremu Kiugi) Muri ka arakina mai ki Waikanae, utaina ana ki runga kite tima ote Kawana Kerei. Kua ki c pea eiahi o nga Pakeha i enei tangata i hopuhopukia nei c Wiremu Kingi. Kei whea hoki ra la te Kawana kolia ki a Wiremu Kingi i enei rangi? Na, he tangata hapai tonu a Wiremu Kingi i nga tikanga ote Kavvanatanga, kahore rawa i pai kite Kingi Maori, a tae noa kite whawhaitauga mo Waitara. Heoti ano aku korero. Na tou hoa aroha, Nα Riwai Te Ahu. 31. Who is the writer, and how long have you known him?—Riwai Te Ahu is the writer; I have been acquainted with him since 1839. 32. What do you know about him?—l have known him quite intimately for twenty years; I appointed him to act as Native teacher; I have formed the highest possible opinion of him; his great influence and veracity was such that he htld unquestionably a higher character than any other Nativo in Cook's Straits. I recommended him to the Bishop of New Zealand for Ordination in the year 1848, and I believe he was ordained four or five years ago, after having lived for a considerable time at Archdeacon's Kissling's house. He is a man of the most scrupulous veracity. 33. Will you be good enough to compare this translation of that letter with the original, and say whether it is in your opinion a correct translation, and if not in what part or particular is it incorrect?— I have already seen this letter, and have compared it with the original. 1 believe it to be a fair translation, perhaps not a literal one in the strict sense of the word. I have seen letters eloquently written by natives translated into bad English, with what object I know not, unless it were to produce au impression on the public mind that the natives were incapable of expressing their opinions in proper language, which is the reverse of the fact. I believe that to be a fair translation. [Trayislation.] WIWAI TE ABU. Otaki, June 23, 1860. Mr. Superintendent, — Greeting. This is what I have to say. I have much to say; perhaps you will be tired reading; but I write fully because I hear such erroneous statements about the land at Waitara and about William King. Do not think that it is out of any ill feeling to Teira that I write so fully, or that Teira is a more distant relation of mine than William King. No, it is because I wish to explain to you that you may understand all particulars concerning the land, and the tribes and the people to whom the land belonged, because the trouble has increased. Teira is a near relation of mine, and William King only a distant otic. We never imagined that this Governor would adopt a course different from that of other Governors. They, failing in their endeavours to obtain that land, desisted. Now, we are altogether perplexed

6

E—No. 4.

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

(and exclaim), Alas! this is a new proceeding on the part of our Queen. But we think that the Governor must have been deceived by Teira and those acting with him, and the Land Commissioner of Taranaki, and that is why he was so hasty in sending his soldiers to Waitara to frighten the men and women who turned his surveyors off their own pieces of land, and land belonging to us, in order that he might seize those lands. For instance, Mr. C. W. Richmond writes, Taranaki, March, 1860, (which lias been heard by everybody), " Teira's title has been fully investigated, and is perfectly good; there is no one to deny his title." Yes, his title is good to his own pieces within the boundaries of that land—two or three pieces. Our title is equally good to our own pieces—some have one, or two, or three, or four within that block. William King stated this; but what he said has been misinterpreted by the Land Commissioner of Taranaki, who asserts that William King said the whole of the land was Teira's. It was his determination to take the land by force, and his ignorance of the Maori language which made him pervert what William King said. From this statement put but not proved by Mr. C. W. Richmond, we conclude that the Land Commissioner only inquired of those who were on Teira's side of the question—even when they inquired at Queeu Charlotte's Sound, they did not seek for information from any who were on William King's side ; nor would they even listen to what they had to say, for William King writes —" He (Mr. Parris) says the Pakehas willjnot hear what I have to say ;" but I did not believe what he wrote last year, for I did not think it possible the Government could act iv this way. Information was not sought from us. If inquiries had been made on both sides of the question, if what they (W. X.'s party) had to say had been heard, and their inquiries had likewise extended to us (at Waikanae, &c.) it would have been evident that Teira and his party were in the wrong (had such inquiries been made, they must have exclaimed) Well ! their pieces are dotted about amongst those belonging to persons who refuse to sell, and amongst ours who dwell here. William King writes again— " This is what I blame the Pakehas for—Mr. Parris, Mr. Whiteley, and the Governor, they say the land all belongs to Teira. No, that land belongs to us all—to orphans and to widows." His letter is here. If they had sought for information, the Governor's Land Commissioners would not have falsely represented to him that after full investigation they found the land belonged to Teira. When we first heard that there was so much as 600 acres in the land claimed by Teira and his party, we thought it could not be the land at Waitara, but some new land that Teira and his party had discovered. The reason why William King and his party objected so strongly when Teira first offered the land for sale to the Governor, was because they found that their lands and ours would all be included in the one block ; and what they found, has come true. William King wrote and told us that—"The Land Commissioner of Taranaki said that though only one man wished to sell the land, the pakehas would at once assent to purchase." Now we deny the following statements which have been put forth—That the land is Teira's, that it belongs to his tribes, to Ngatihinga—and that they allowed William King to live on that land after his return from Waikanae—that his occupation of it was unjustifiable, and that he had never before occupied it. Do they mean to say that the land did not belong to William King, and that he had no right to object to the sale ? Listen. This statement would only be believed by pakehas, and tribes who are strangers to the facts of the case ; but we of Ngatiawa, who live at Waikanae and Wellington, Queen Charlotte's Sound and Massacre Bay, we will never allow Teira's title, or say that William King has put forward an unfounded claim. Only tliose members of Ngatiawa who are deceiving the Government and the pakehas, will deny William King's claim or uphold Teira's. The Land Commissioner of Taranaki seemed to imagine that Teira and his party are the only members of the Ngatihinga and Ngutituaho ; they did not seem to know that Wireinu Te Patukakariki is the chief of that hapu. Besides Nopera Te Kaoma and others who are of those hapu, who did not consent and whose objections were not listened to by the Land Commissioner at Taranaki. Listen. It was Wireinu Te Patukakariki's wife and their two daughters with some other women of that hapu who turned the Government surveyors off their own pieces of land. Now this land was not divided into different portions for the different hapu for Ngatihinga and Ngatituaho, and for Ngatikura and Ngatiuenuku and other hapu, holding within the block which has been purchased by the Governor. No, they were all intermingled ; the boundaries of each individual's land having been marked by stone-posts by our ancestors ; besides these hapu are not of two different tribes ; they are all of one tribe. All of these different portions of land have names given them by our ancestors : the name of William King's is Te Porepore. One portion of land belonging to his son and daughter, which was the property of their mother, is that on which Te Hurirapa's pa stood, which was burnt by the soldiers. Another portion of land is at Orapa, to the south of where their old pa stood. All fliese portions are contained in the block asserted to be Teira's ; and have all been taken by the Governor. All the portions of land belonging to us and those who opposed the sale —Ngatikura and Ngateucuuku and sonu , of Ngatihinga and Ngatituaho, besides portions which belong to the hapu, have all been included in the block of land which the Land Commissioner of Taranaki asserts to belong to Teira alone. What can be the meaning of this expression—" William King was permitted to live on that land by their consent, when he returned from Waikanae ?" Who can venture to make such an assertion ? It was no such thing ; each man knew the portion of laud inherited from his ancestors. \Vas it by their assent that Te Porepore became the property of William King when he returned from Waikanae ? Was it by their own permission that Te Hurirapa became the property of his children when they returned from Waikanae—which has been taken away by the soldiers ? Was it by their permission that our lands inherited from our ancestors, became our property —which lands have all been taken from us at the point of the sword ? In my opinion, such an assertion is like deadly poison. According to the opinion of the Land Commissioner of Taranaki, Teira was quite justified in assorting

7

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

Ills right to sell the whole of that block, and William King was utterly wrong (in denying it.) In our opinion, Teira's act was a great crime, and nothing can be said in his behalf which can hide his unjust act. In conclusion, I must say that I am unable to suggest anything to my people to pacify them in their sorrow about our lands ; they are very much grieved about the seizure of the lands of our ancestors. If that land should be permanently wrested from them, then this saying will be handed down through all future generations—that land was forcibly and unlawfully taken away by a Governor appointed by the Queen of England. If William King had been a murderer, he would have shown it to Mr. Parris, Land Commissioner of Taranaki for saying that— " He (W. X.) would be shot and iiis body would be put under ground in their cultivations, and not taken to a burial ground." Now, to us Maories this is a very bad language (a curse) to use about a chief. It would immediately occasion war (his title is here.) In 1837, Reretawhangawhanga was cursed by Ngatimaru. A large hostile party of Ngatiawa, consisting of four hundred men, went from Waikanae to Whareroa ; but owing to that chiefs moderation none of the Whareroa people were killed—their potatoe crops only were injured. I formed one of that party. Was it because William King was (asserted to be) a drunkard and a murderer that the Land Commissioner or Taranaki thought that land belonged only to Teira and his party ? Is that the reason why it was taken from him ? There is a murderer living with the Land Commissioner and his party at Taranaki; but they do not call him a murderer, he is called " our friend " —why did they not take away his lands ? William King and his party wished to avoid war when the first instalment of money was paid to Teira for Waitara. One of them wrote to ask me whether I thought it would be well to collect money among themselves and return the Governor the money, £100, which he had paid to Teira, but when our lands should be taken on account of that money having been paid, they should resist, and their resistance should be made a pretext for the Governor to make war with them (his letter is here). I myself formerly heard the private language of Reretawhangawhanga, William King's father, in the pa Waikanae, in 1840, in reference to Waitara, not to sell it to the pakeha. And he continued to express the same determination until his death, in 1844. And he left a strict injunction to William King to carry out his wishes after his death. When Te Reretawhangawhanga and the other chiefs at Waikanae heard thatNuitone Tβ Pakaru chief of Ngatimaniapoto had come to clear a place for cultivation on the south bank of the Waitara, (Wharonui was the name of tlit piece of land) they said that he must return to his own place, and leave Waitara for us. I heard them say this (in 3 842-ii). Nobody belonging to Waikato or Ngatimanipoto lived at Waitara before the pakehas went to settle at Ngamotu. Nuitone Te Pakaru was the first who attempted to live there, and this induced one of those chiefs—Ngaraurekau to go there from Wai ■ kanae, to hold possession, and prevent any Ngatimaniapoto men from returning to Waitara. Ngatimaniapoto now returning to Waitara during the interval between that and William King's return there. I make no mention of Peketahi, he was allowed to remain there because of his wile (who was a. Ngatiawa). William King acted like a friend to the white people of Wellington, in 1843. We went from Waikanae (with Archdeacon Hadfield). We saw Haerewaho tried by Mr. Halswell in the Court House at Wellington. He was found guilty and taken to prison. There all the natives of Wellington rose and wished to kill the pakehas in the town. William King at once exerted himself to put down the movement; and it ended. The second time was in 1846. Governor Grey sent for William King to go to him on board H.M.S. Castor, which was anchored at Kapiti. He went. Governor Grey then asked him whether he would go to Te Paripari, to assist against his foe Te Rangihaeata. William King immediately assented (he did not raise any objection on the ground that Te Rangibaeata was his relation). In the morning we returned to Waikanae. William King-at once summoned his various hapu, and told them that they are to go to Te Paripari. We slept that night on tlu road to Wareroa. In the morning we reached Te Paripari. Ile took one hundred and forty men with him. I accompanied them, and then returned to Waikanae. They made prisoners of eight men, belonging to Wanganui, who had joined Te Rangihaeata. (When these men were taken, they said to those who captured them —wait, who knows whether you will not be served hereafter in the same way. I dare say William King now remembers this saying.) They were brought to Waikanae, and then on board Governor Grey's steamer. I have no doubt there are pakehas who saw these men whom William King captured. What return does the Governor now make to William King for these acts ? William King always upheld the authority of the Government ; he always refused to have any connection with the Maori King up to the very time when hostilities took place at Waitara. I end here. From your friend, (Signed) Riwai Te Ahu. 34. Here is a document signed by several natives, do you know their handwriting ?—There are seven of them whose handwriting I know. I see that the others have put their marks which accounts for my not recoguising their signatures. The letter is in ibe hand writing of Riwai Te Ahu. Waikanae, Hune 29, 1860. Etc lllteeitenete, Tena koe. Ko a matou kupu enci kia rongo koc, hei whakapuaki nui atu mau kite aroaro c te Kawana.

8

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

He wahi whenua ano o matou kei Waitara, kei roto i te whenua i hokona hetia atu ra c te Teira kia te Kawana ; o matou tahi ko era kua pana atu ra i runga i taua whenua, no matou tupuna katoa. Kaliore matou i rongo ake ki nga kaumatua kua ngaro ake nei, no Ngatituaho anake raua ko Ngatihinga taua whenua, no nga tupuna ranei o te Teira iatou ko ona ho* i whakapapa nei, no tona matou ianei, a tukua mai ana c tatou ki o malou tupuna, me o matou matua hei hunga mahi kai atu ma nga tupuna o te Teira ratou ko ona hoa, ma tona matua ranei, ratou ko nga matua ona hoa E hara hoki a reira i te whenua kite hou na te Teira, na tona matua, na ona hoa ranei, c polielie ai a matou korero; c tau ai te whakauaua rawa i te korero mo taua whenua, kia tika ai te whakakorenga i a matou ko era kua oti rate pana maori atu, kao, he whenua tawhito tera no nga tupuna. Na, kua rongo matou i (c kupu whakatikatika mo te main he a te Parete ki o matou wahi whenua i reira, E ki nei " Na, ka tukua ki a roa noa te wa c pahemo, kaliore he kupu mo te whenua ki a puta, na ka rapu marire ate Parete. Kai whakarite whenua o Taranaki kia tino kitea ai nga tangata nona taua whenua i tukua mai ra, kimi ana, ka mutu, na ha tino kitea c te Parete." Hei kupu whakamiharo enei ma nga tangata katoa, ki a kiia ai he pono tana kimihanga. Whakarongo mai, I Waikanae ano matou c noho ana, i Otaki tetahi, na, kaliore a te Parete i haere mai kite kimikimi ki a matou mo matou whenua i reira, mo te korenga ranei, (kahore hoki ona hoa mahi pera i haere mai kite palai) kahore ana reta patai i tuhia mai, kahore i taia kite Nupepa ana korero kimi i nga tangata nona taua whenua i roto i taua tau, korekore rawa. Whaia ketia ana te kimi ki etahi o Arapawa c tetahi o nga kai hoko whenua; kapea iho te ai mai ki a matou. Rongo rawa ake matou, ko te wa i riro ai nga moni i a te Teira, (Heoti, kihai matou i manawapa ki o matou whenua kei riro, no te mea c rongo tonu ana matou kite kaha o te kupu a Wiremu Kingi kite pupuru mai i o matou whenua, ko ia hoki to matou rangatira, hei maru mo matou whenua i reira). Te tuarua, ko te haerenga o nga kai ruri. Te tuatoru, kote tukunga atu i nga hoia hei tango. Me pewhea c whai kupu ai ? No te nuinga o te he, katahi kata kau a te Parele i tana kimihanga kite Nupepa. Tenei ta matou kupu patai. Me pewhea ra matou nga tangata c ata noho ana kahore nei c taru ana kite whawhai, me katangohia hetia atu o matou whenua c te Kawana, me kimi ra c matou ki whea tetahi huarahi hei whakahokinsja mai kia matou i o matou whenua ? Kia te Kuini ranei, ki a wai ranei, Hua noa matou, ma te Ture c whakatika nga he, kei te rapurapu noa iho o matou c noho nei. Me mutu i konei. Na matou na etahi o Ngatiawa nona taua whenua i Waitara. Na Hohepa Ngapaki Na Paora Matuawaka, KiripataPake, Hutana Awatea, Patihana Tikara, Wiperahama Putiki, Epiha Paikau Tupoki, x Teretiu Tamiaka, Pinarepe Te Neke, x Riwai Te Aim. Henere Te Marau, x Tera ano etahi, kaliore i konei, a Herwini ma, meikonei kua tuhituhi. 35. Who are the writers, and how long have you known them ?—I have known them all from my first acquaintance with the tribe—there is not one of them under 40 years of age. 36. What do you know ahout them ?—Two of those spoken of, I esteem as being honest and straightforward men, incapable of any want of veracity. But I have no reason to doubt the ye.- ty of any of them. 37. Will you be good enough to compare this translation of that letter with the original, and say whether it is in your opinion a correct translation, and if not, in what part and particular it is incorrect ?—I believe it to be a fair and honest translation of the letter. Letter read. [ Translation,'] HOHEPA NGAPAKI AND OTHERS. Waikanae, June 29, 1860. Mr. Superintendent,— Greeting—Listen —We wish you to declare these words in the presence of the Governor. We have portions of land at Waitara within the boundaries of the land which Teira wrongfully sold to the Governor ; this land belongs to us, and to those who have been driven off that land ; and belonged to the ancestors of us all. We never heard from the elder men, who are now dead, that the land belonged to Ngatituaho and Ngatihinga only, or to the ancestors of Teira and those, whose pedigree lie has published with his own, or to his father ; and that they gave it to our ancestors and our fathers to cultivate food upon for the ancestors of Teira and his party, or his father, and the fathers of his party. This is not land newly discovered by Teira, or his party, or his father, that there should be any doubt about our Statements (in reference to it) or that they should pretend to such an undoubted claim to that land or should justify the denial of our claims, and that of those who have been forcibly driven from it. It is not so. The land is an ancient possession transmitted from ancestors. We have heard the justification (put forth in defence) of Mr. Parris's wrong act in reference to our portions of land. It is as follows —" A long time was allowed to elapse; no objections were made to (the sale) of the land. Mr. Parris, Land Commissioner at Taranaki carefully inquired in order to

9

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

ascertain who were the owners of the land offered to him. I\fr. Parris made inquiry and was satisfied as to the right." We presume this statement is put forth that all men may wonder at the carefulness of his proceedings; that people may be led to believe that he did really make inquiries! Listen. Wa are living at Waikanae—one at Otaki. Mr. Parris never came to make inquiries of us as to whether we had lands there or not (nor did any of his fellow Land Commissioners come to make inquiries). He did not even write to inquire. He did not during the whole of that year advertise in the newspaper his wish to ascertain what claimants there were to that land. He did nothing , of the kind. One of the Land Commissioners inquired of some persons in Queen Charlotte's Sound; but he passed us by and made no inquiries of us. The first we heard, was the payment of money to Teira. But we had no doubt or anxiety about our lands—we had no fear that we should lose them, because we were distincly informed of William King's determination to keep possession of our lands—he being the chief to protect * our lands there. The next we heard, was the survey, and the arrival of troops to take possession. What opportunity had we of speaking? When there was actual war, then Mr. Parris published a statement, sayin"that he had made full inquiries. What we wish to ask is this—What are we to do, who are persons living quietly, and take no part in war, —when the Governor wrong-fully takes away our lands? Should we look to the Queen? or to whom? We had always thought that the Law afforded protection from wrong. We are at the present time wholly at a loss as to what course to adopt. We conclude here. This is from some members of Ngatiawa to whom the land above referred to belongs. (Signed) Na Hohepa Ngapaki Na Patihana Tikara, Epiha Paikau Tupoki x, Pinarape Te Neke x, Henere Te Marau x, Paora Matuawalca, Hutana Arawatia, Wiperahama Putiki, Teretui Tamaka, lliwai Te Ahu. Kiripata Pake, [Here Mr. Fitzherbert with the leave of the Committee put in the following translation of a Maori letter, the original document being missing.] ( Translation.) K. N. ■\VniTIKAU. Waikanae, July 9, 18G0, This is a letter in explanation of one which Kopoama wrote to Mr. McLean and to which he clandestinely attached our names to make it appear that a large number of people assented to the sale of Waitara. These men whose names were written in that letter did not consent to have their names written down, nor did they see the letter written which contained their names, Ropoama Te Once wrote it quite clandestinely in order to have a number of names affixed to his letter to Mr. M'Leau. I, Ropata Nutana Whitikau, did not see that letter written or my name written, I was here at Waikanae, when I returned to Queen Charlotte's Sound I asked Kopoama about this letter and he gave me no answer, I was very sad. When Inia and others at Queen Charlotte's Sound heard that Ropoama had written their names ■without their consent in his letter to Mr. M'Lean. Tuia Tuwhata also wrote a letter to Mr. M'Lean to have their names erased from Ropoama's letter to him. The Rev. Mr. Butt took their letter and gave it to Mr. M'Lean and he received this (that is Tuia's) before he received Ropoama's. The names of fifty people were written by Ropoama without their consent in his letter to Mr M'Lean, even the names of people living at Waikanae were written by Ropoama in his letter. This is ours, (Signed) Ropata Nutana Wiiitikait, Wieemtj Te Mono. Witnessed. Ritvai Te Ahtj. HOIIBPA NgAPAKI. Anauu Maweto. 38. Who is the writer and how long have you known him?—R. N. Whitikau. I have known him a long time. He is a leading chief at Queen Charlotte's Sound. I have not had such personal acquaintance with him as with some of the others whose names have been just mentioned. He is a man of considerable note among his tribe. I have no doubt but he was the author of that letter, judging from the names of the witnesses attached. 39. Where does he now reside ? —He was lately at Waikanae, when I left Cook's Straits. He usually resides in Queen Charlotte's Sound, where, with the exception of an occasional visit for a few weeks to Waikanae, he has been residing for twenty years. 40. In what sense, so far as you know, did the Natives understand the Maori proclamation of Martial Law ?—There could be but one opinion as to the effect upon the Native mind of the proclamation of Martial Law, as published in the Native language. The interpretation so put upon it by all Natives who have come under my notice wa3 the same. They were all iv a great state of excitement. They looked upon it as a declaration of war, on the part of the Government, against all the Natives of

• Literally that which affords •' shade ,, in protection si the Rita uei to the undeiwjod beneath it.

10

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

Taranaki. The Proclamation conve)'ed even more than that, for the impression it left on the Natives was that it was lawful to take up arms. That was the impression in my part of the country. The mail came up on the Tuesday, and with it a newspaper (the Independent), of the previous Saturday, containing the proclamation of Martial Law. At about half-past nine o'clock, several of the Natives very unceremoniously came into my room, with a paper in their hands. They may have knocked, but I did not hear them. They asked me, pointing to the Proclamation, " What really does this mean ?" I looked at it, and read the Maori version before I saw the English, I was astonished ; but looking above I caught sight of the English, and then, being aware of its import, I said to them that the Proclamation was all right in the English, but that the translation was very bad. I said that it was the result of its having been put into the hands of some blockhead who did not know the Maori language. There are one or two English persons in the district who know the Native language as well as myself. The Natives went to them also, and got from them the same explanations. This Proclamation had a similar effect in exciting the Native minds over the whole district of Wellington. One of the Europeans was a Mr. Wm. Dodds , the others Mr. Eagar's sons, but of them I am not quite positive. 41. What, in your opinion, is the effect on the Native mind of the present Land Purchase System ?—1 believe that the effect of the present Land Purchase System is the means of creating the principal part of the disaffection throughout the Southern half of this Island. I have no hesitation in saying that its proceedings have created the gnater part of the disaffection which exists. Ido not know whether I should be justified in stating to the Committee that when Mr. Richmond (the present Native Minister) was at Wellington, about two and a half years ago, I requested an interview with him for the purpose of discussing the question. (I beg to be informed by the Committee whether lam out of order in alluding to this interview.) (Hear, hear.) I then expressed feelings of great alarm, and stated that there was a considerable uneasiness and disquietude manimaniiested by the Natives in my district. I then pointed out the cause which, in my mind had created it ; that it arose from the manner in which the Native title was attempted to be extinguished by the Chief Commissioner ; that the Natives never felt themselves secure ; that he was guided by no fixed principles in acquiring the land ; that somptimes he dealt with the conquerors, when they were inclined to sell, at other times with the conquered, sometimes with the leading chief, at others with an inferior one ; that I had heard of instances in which an inferior member of the tribe had been treated with. Under these circumstances, I pointed out to him the absolute evil there was in continuing the same course. This was in the conclusion of the year 1857. The evil has since been aggravated. The want of a distinct principle laid down to guide the Commissioners in the acquisition of land had been severely felt by the Natives. They did not know what was law and what was not. During the last eighteen years, I have never lost an opportunity of communicating my opinion to the Government on that subject, and I have pointed out the absolute necessity of defining what constituted a Native title to land, and not leaving this point to the knowledge or mere caprice of the Chief Commissioner. I pointed out, in several instances, that the blocks of land in which the Native title had been extinguished in my district, and which had become the subject of dispute, would never have occasioned such dispute under a proper scheme of land purchase. 42. Are you acquainted with the circumstances of Rawiri Waiaua's violent death ; and what do you conceive led to that event ? —That was the first murder which took place at Taranaki, in connection with the land. It took place in 1844 or 1845. The circumstances which led to it are these :— I was informed that after the proceedings of the purchase of the Bell Block at Taranaki had been completed, a communication was made to the Natives that, in future, all proceedings in reference to disputed lands should be carried on openly, and that Mr. Bell, the Commissioner had promised that no purchase should be effected without a full and careful investigation of the claims, and that the claimants should be informed that such purchase was contemplated, and that he left a memorandum in the Land Office to that effect. Rawiri Waiaua had been for a few years in possession of a field, claimed by one of Katatore's people —Topia. This man destroyed Rawiri's wheat on that field. Rawiri, in order to avenge himself on Katatore, immediately offered to sell to Mr. Cooper, the District Land Commissioner, a piece of land, including some belonging to Katatore, which was, by his own express wish, excluded from a previous sale, because it was claimed by Katatore. Katatore strongly objected to this sale, and frequently warned Mr. Cooper and Kawiri not to proceed with it. But, Rawiri having undertaken to cut the boundary line himself, Mr. Cooper assented. Katatore having heard that Rawiri had undertaken to cut the line, on the following day sent to him to say that he should certainly interrupt the survey, and that he had better come armed, and, that he might do so, sent him some muskets and ammunition. Rawiri, heedless of this warning, went out and began cutting the line. A collision took place. Rawiri and several others were killed. There can be no doubt that this collision, resulting in the deaths of several natives, was brought about through the ignorance of the Land Commissioner more immediately concerned in reference to Maori tenure of land, but by the entire absence of any ascertained or well defined principles in connection with this question. I learnt the particulars of this important affair from several natives ; but I likewise received Information concerning it, while actually on the spot where the collision took place, from Mr. Parris himself. 43. Do you know whether William King took any part in the death of Rawiri?—l believe that the attack on Rawiri was made without the sanction of William King ; that lie, previously, knew nothing about it; and that he had nothing whatever to do with the transaction. Indeed I never heard the contrary asserted by any one. 44. State what you know about the origin of the King movement?— There are some facts connected with it which I have heard dwelt upon in other quarters which I might as well pass over, that I may give my own view of the matter, I may state that the pre-disposing cause of the dissatisfaction which exists in the minds of the natives of the Southern half of this island arose from a feeling of

11

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE OEIGIN

insecurity, derived from a want of protection and a want oflaw. Three years agowhenl first had my attention particularly drawn to it, it struck me that the origin of it, was the absence of law among the natives and the necessity of some law to govern them. The natives say, " that as far as we nre able to judge the law of the pakeha existed only for the protection of the pakeha, and for those immediately around their districts, but we have been living under British Government and find that authority will not prevent the outrages of other tribes. The authority of the chiefs who formerly decided these disputes being gone, the absolute necessity of organizing Runangas forced itself upon us to protect ourselves— from a feeling of insecurity under British law." Then came the question of land; their dislike to alienate land arises in consequence of the system which has been pursued in acquiring it. This was another cause of accelerating the King movement. I was absent from the colony about twelve months, and on my return I found that the movement had made rapid strides in the south. On my return I met a personage (whom perhaps I ought not to mention here) at Otaki: the first question I asked was, " what was the state of the King movement"? The reply was, that it was fast dying out, that the Waikato who first originated it had given it up. I replied that I was surprised at this, as I found it growing at Otaki. Mr. M'Lean, who was also present, then said, that the natives in the south had picked it up as a child did a toy that had been thrown away. The progress of the King movement is to be attributed, in my opinion, to the action of the Land Purchase Department in the southern part of this Island. 45. What do you conceive has been the effect on the natives of their being permitted to wage wars without the interference of the Government? and also of the principal laid down by the Governor that he would only repress native outrages inter se, if committed within the boundaries of lands belonging to Europeans?—l slightly alluded to this in answering a previous question, 1 may state my opinion positively and distinctly, that nothing could be more calculated to alienate the feelings of the Natives, than the practical denial of Government protection, and the entire duty of protection being cast back upon the chiefs. Nothing could have tendered more thoroughly to alienate their feelings than that. When murders have been committed and the parties have applied to the Government for protection, they have been plainly and distinctly told that they must protect themselves. This has compelled them to establish an organization for Uie purpose of punishing criminals. The greatest step towards alieniating the feelings of the Natives from the Government was taken when they were denied the protection and the justice to which they clearly had a right. When Natives are told that they may carry on a war with one another, in order to protect themselves, I am not surprised that they should go up and down with arms in their hands, and that they should lose that respect for the Government which they otherwise would have had. 46. Do you know in what light the Natives of the South regard the Taranaki war, that is, whether they regard it as undertaken in vindication of the Queen's authority, or if not, in what other light?— All of those with whom I have conversed, and wko are acquainted with the facts of the case, being in some instances near relations of the persons concerned, having themselves resided on the land at Waitara, are of opinion that the war was not undertaken with the view of vindicating the authority of the Queen, but they state positively and distinctly that it was a sheer act of spoliation. 47. Mr. Richmond.] Have you made yourselves acquainted with the different ancestral stock* (or takes) of the Ngatiawa?—l don't profess to know anything about them, lam not prepared to answer that, though I may know something about them. 48. Have you ever conversed on the subject of ancestry with any of the Ngatituaho of pure blood, such as Raru or Kaupongo? —I have had conversations with them on these subjects when I was in a pah with four or five hundred of the Ngatiawa tribe, and have since conversed with others on the subject, lamat a loss to give a more definite answer to that question. I have often conversed with the head of the Hapu—Te Patukakariki. 49. Does your la<t answer apply to the descent, and the Land Claims at Waitara, of the Ngatituaho?—Certainly not, I have not seen or spoken to Patukakariki for the last sixteen years. 50. You say that there are four Hapus under King —have they equal right to the South Bank ot Waitara?—l think they have. 51. What are the grounds of your opinion?—l ground it on the evidence of living witnesses. 52. Is your opinion derived from conversations subsequent to the present dispute?—l have it on the authority of those persons with whom I have conversed on the subject, and who have objected to the sale of land at Waitara. 53. Prior to the present dispute have you ever had conversations relative to the respective rights of the four Hapus to the South Bank?—l have previously stated that I believe in the fact of the tribal right of Win. King —having stated as much distinctly —it is a question in which I take no interest, as I think it irrelevant. I have had conversation on the subject and Ido not believe that any separate rights exist between Ngatihinga and Ngatituaho on the one side and Ngatikura and Ngatitenuku on the other: the various hapus through former intermarriages are so mixed up with one another that it would be impossible to distinguish among them. It is impossible to give either an affirmative or a negative to a question which you can neither believe nor disbelieve. The question is perfectly unintelligible and irrelevant. 54. Has King or any of the Ngatikura ever cultivated on the disputed Block?—I am not aware that they have cultivated any part of that land since their return—but his tribe have in former times cultivated there. When I was at Waitara his cultivations were almost exclusively on the North Bank. 55. Can you say if any of those cultivations were within the disputed Block?—I do not know from personal knowledge. 56. Where was Reretawhangawhanga'a Pa before the migration?—l do not know—he principally lived at Mauukorilii—l am not certain that his Fa was there.

12

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

57. Was there aPa on the disputed Block before the migration? —-I do not know. 58. Have you ever heard that King asked permission of Ram to build a Pa on the South Bank, »nd do you believe that he did so?—I have heard so. I believe I know the reason why he asked permission. On their return from Waikanae they were all rather anxious that they might be on the safe side of the river as they dreaded that the Waikato would return. This fear was more particularly expressed by Tamati Ram who thought that Wm. King might as well occupy their side of the river. The reason of his making it a request was not on account of his having land there—for there was within a few chains the land of his brother-in-law—but he desired to build the Pa a few chains nearer the river than it would have been on that land. 59. Who is the head of the Ngatituaho?—Undoubtedly Te Patukakariki. 60. Do you know Ropoama te Onee?—Yes, I have known him for the last 20 years. 61. What is his rank in the Tribe?—He might possibly rank as a Chicf —but most certainly under Te Patukakariki. 62. Are you aware whether Ropoama has consented to the sale?—lam not personally aware whether he assented to it or not. I have heard so many contradictory statements. Ropoama had a personal quarrel with Wm. King's brother and would have gladly co-operated in anything likely to annoy W. King. I have heard reports that some payment had been made to Kopoama which he now wanted to return ; also that the Chief Commissioner bad offered him £100 for his claim to the disputed land at Waitara. I never heard that he approved of the sale, but on the contrary that he positively refused to be a party to the sale. I have this on very good authority. 63. Are you acquainted with the details of negotiations for land in the New Plymouth district since the disallowance of Spain's Award?—l have read the documents laid on the table of the House, and have heard a good deal, but living 200 miles from the spot —I could not say that I was acquainted with '.he details. 64. Of whom was the Bell Block bought ?—Principally, I believe, from returned slaves from Waikato, so 1 have been informed. 65. Of whom was the Hua Block bought ?—I do not know. GO. Of whom was the Tarurutangi bought ?—I do not know. C 7. To what hapus of the Ngatiawa do Riwai Te Ahu, Hohepa, and the Waikanae claimants belong ?—Riwai belongs to Ngatikura and Ngatihinga : the other claimants to the same hapu. GB. Did William King receive any payment for Mangati or Bell Block ?—I don't know whether he did or not. 69. You say King is the head of four hapus,—where is the Territorial boundary of these four hapus ?—I am not acquainted with the boundaries of the land owned by those four hapus, of which William King is the hend. I have only been for a few dnys at Taranaki of late. I have never professed to be acquainted with the boundaries. 70. Did King receive a payment from Colonel Wakefield in 1839, and for what ? —I believe that William King receivedno payment in the year 1839. I presume the question hae reference to a deed ■which is published and to which his signature is attached. I was rather surprised to see that document relied upon —but lam aware that King received no payment, or anything for Waitara. lie may have picked up a few figs of tobacco on board the " Tory." In reference to the a»rard of Mr. Spain,—he distinctly informed me that when he looked at the deed he treated it as waste paper, and told me that there had been no award made under that deed. 1 was requested by Governor Hobson to attend a meeting, at which were present the late Chief Justice, the late Attorney-General, Mr. George Clarke, Colonel Wakefield and others, who were about to examine this deed On that occasion, I suggested that, as the deed was drawn up before this was a British colony, and in the English language, that it was probable the Natives did not understand it. The person who interpreted it to the Natives was sent for. This person was Mr. Brooks, who afterwards lost his life at the Wairau. He was sent for, and asked to interpret it. After stammering for some minutes, it was found that he was utterly unable to translate a line of it. It was consequently considered as of no importance. Colonel Wakefield told me that lie never had any intention of taking possession of any land under that deed, and it was only intended " to throw dust in the eyes of the Sydney land sharks," that he might keep them away, or that if they came he could assert a primary claim to the land, which would invalidate any other claim. William King received no payment or any compensation, except what he may have picked up on the deck of the " Tory." 71. Mr. C. 11. Broion.~\ Are you aware of any cause of personal enmity betwen Teira and William King, prior to Teira having offered the land in dispute for sale?—l am. I have been informed that Tβ Teira bore enmity to William King, on account of a girl who was affianced to his brother, having been married to William King's son. 72. Do men of high rank sometimes descend in rank—" Ne/ce te tupu ?"—A man of good descent, even of the best blood of the tribe, may lose all rank in the tribe, and be treated simply as a tutua. Th law of primogeniture does not exist among them, in reference to Chieftainship. 74. Would he lose his claims to land by that'descent ?—A man would not lose his claim to land by becoming a lulua. His title would not be affected by it. What he would lose would be his rank and position in the tribe. 74. What was King's conduct, with regard to the King movement, up to the time of the dispute about the land at Waitara ?—He always decidedly objected to have anything to do with the King movement. When I saw him, three years ago, he repudiated all connection with it. And up to last January, ho decidedly refused to have any thiiigto do with it.

13

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

75. Can you state positively whether or not Wiremu Kingi belonged to any land-league extending beyond the Ngatiawa tribe, previous to the dispute about the land?—l m"st guard myself in answering , this question against being misunderstood, and must first know what is meant by the " land-league"— whether it is to be taken in its extended or limited sense—if in an extended sense I should have to give one answer—if in a limited sense, another. If it is meant by a land-league that he exercised influence over tribes other than his own I must deny that he did so, —as I am fully convinced that Win. King never did endeavour to exercise any influence over foreign tribes, and that he has used no influence beyond his own tribe. In this limited sense, that is in reference to his own trine, only he may be called a land-leaguer. But I can see no connection between this question and the subject of the Taranaki War. 76. Mr. Do you know whether Wm. King had any opportunity offered him of stating his claim to the Government Officers, or to the Governor himself before the Military force was brought into action?—-I presume he had innumerable opportunities, he might have written by every Post. He had an opportunity of meeting the Governor after the publication of Martial Law. (After further conversation between Mr. Sewell and the witness, witness said) I must then confess myself unable to understand the question. 77. Mr. Gillies.~\ Have you any influence with the Natives in your neighbourhood in guiding thu formation of their opinions on secular not on religious ;natters?—l am not aware that I have any influence whatever on the subject. 78. Have you assisted in guiding , the native opinion to the result stated by you " that the present war was not to assert the Queeen's Supremacy but a war of spoliation"?—l certainly did not. la fact my opinions on those subjects have been formed since theirs. 78. Mr. Richmond.] On what authority do you state that there are 90 claimants on the Block at Waitara and only 10 or 11 claimants consenting?— What I have now stated on this subject rests on the assertions of others lam here as an unwilling witness in the case before the House, unprovided with direct proof. lam but a secondary witness, I have founded my convictions upon statements made to me by the Natives themselves—but I do not know what is considered conclusive to the Committee lam unable to state to the Committee all the grounds on which 1 have formed opinions. Ido not know whether I fully understood the question. 80. Is William King one of the ninety ?—I have before stated that the right of the tribe extends over the whole of that block, therefore he is one of the claimants. 81. Has William King ever made a proprietary claim ?—I hear that he made a proprietary claim to a portion of the block. It would be impossible for me to say what it is, as I understand that the boundaries of the block are undefined. I have heard that about sixty acres, on the south bank, had been left out as belonging to William King. It is utterly impossible for me to state, without the boundaries being defined, what portion of his claim is within the block and what without it. His son has a claim within the block. 82. What proof have you that Hamere Ngaia has a claim on the block ?—-I before stated that I am unable to produce all the evidence which I have had, but I may state to the Committee that an old man, who resided at Waitara forty years, pointed out to me, when I was at Waikanae, portions of the land whicji belonged to William King. Several other Natives confirmed that statement. 83. Are you aware whether any act of ownership was ever exercised by the Waikato upon the block ?—Certainly none that I acknowledge to be an act of ownership. 84. Do you know of any Waikato Native, except Peketahi, who lived at Waitara ?—I do not know that any other lived there, in such a sense as to establish a title. 85. Aie you aware whether William King asked permission of Potatau to return to Waitara ?— I remember Potatau visiting him at Waikanae. Ido not believe that King asked permission to return to Waitara. They had nothing but a friendly conversation. Ido not believe that he did ask, for if he had, it would not have escaped me. I never heard that he did. He may have applied by letter to Potatau, asking his leave to return. 80. Were you at Kapiti or Otaki when the " Tory" was first there?—l was neither at one nor the other. 87. That was the time when the Queen Charlotte's Sound Deed was executed, and when any payment to W. King would have been made?— When the Deed was executed the payment would be made, no payment beyond a few presents was ever made. 88. On what authority do you state that there was no investigation of the Absentee Claims? —I am quite certain that none was made at Waikanae. It muse be generally understood that my evidence in reference to this dispute is derived chiefly from the chief Hohepa Ngapaki and Riwai Tβ Aim; I have had information from others, but I limit myself to these two. 80. Mr. Fit:herbert.~\ Do you believe that i? you were permitted to summon Native witnesses from the South, you could substantiate by direct evidence the statements you have made before the Committee where requiring direct confirmation?— Yes, I think I could substantiate every one of the statements I have made relating to the Natives at Waitara. lam quite sure I could substantiate all of them. Ordered that the Witness be now discharged from further present attendance on the Committee. The Venerable Archdeacon accordingly withdrew. Mr. Commissioner Donald McLean in attendance. Ordered, that Mr. McLean be introduced within the Bar, and be permitted to seat himself.

14

E—No. 4.

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

Mr. McLean was then iutroduced by the Serjeant-at-Arms. The Witness proceeded to make the following , general statement.

STATEMENT. With reference to the question I have been called here to explain—the purchase of the block of land at Waitara—l have to state that, several years previous to the purchase, I travelled over the district in company with some Natives, King's own brother being one of the party, and they pointed out to me the respective claims of the different /inpus or subdivisions of the Waitara tribes. This was in the year 1847, when the Natives were willing to dispose of their interest in the land at Waitara. The Government did not at that time go on with the purchase; Win. King was expected to come back from Kapiti. His own claims and those of his immediate followers were represented by tlie best possible evidence (that of his own brother) to be almost exclusively on the north bank of the Waitara 1 liver. It was stated to me by old men well acquainted with the circumstances (that speaking as Natives do of these matters, when referring to the Several generations of owners), that King's own ancestors were but comparatively recent occupants even there. In 1818 Wm. King and his party returned to Waitara. It was their intention to occupy the north bank of the W T aitara. But in consequence of some difference which one of his brothers bad with a Native chief at the louth— Eopoama—he designed to possess himself of a portion of the land at Waitara belonging to liopoaina. About three years before Teira's block was offered to the Government, Wm. King, who was permitted to reside on part of it, had been extending his encroachments so far that one of the actual or rightful owners of the soil becoming alarmed, determined to dispose of his land altogether by sale to the Government. He was not able to cany out his resolution at that time, being laid up with illness. He made up his mind, however, that he would at the first favourable opportunity dispose of his right to the Government. He afterwards attended a meeting at which about 80 persons were present — amongst them Wm. King, who was well aware of his intention, and he there statod distinctly that he had determined to sell his land. Wrn. King objected, and counter meetings were held. The resolution of this Native was not to be changed. Conscious of his right he attended every public meeting which was called to discuss the question. He went to one which wa» held 15 miles north of Waitara, and there insisted on his right to dispose of his own property. As far as I can learn from the reports I have received of this meeting-, no one stood forward to oppose this man's claim with the exception of King himself. Many endeavoured to persuade him not to alienate his land, but no one disputed his right to do so. Teira is the name of the Native to whom 1 have been referring. Several of his friends and relatives in remote parts of the country had been in constant correspondence with him on the subject previously to the offer of the land to the Government. The majority agreed to the sale— 6ome few opposed it. He made the offer of his land to the Governor in this most public and open manner, having first given full notice to all the opponents of the sale of his intention to dispose of the land. At the meeting held on that occasion Teira asserted his right to the land, and no one seemed able to deny it. He afterwards offered it to the Governor, giving the usual warning:—" My friends, all of you know that lam about to part with this land. There is a great portion of the territory which we own conjointly which I shall not interfere with. That I have excluded." He then, in the presence of the whole assembly, proceeded to name the boundaries of the offered block, and continued —This, which is the property of these two tribes, the Ngatituaho and the Ngatihinga, I here make over to the Governor. The Waikato title to Taranaki was universally admitted by the natives at the time ef the conquest, many acts of ownership over the soil had been exercised by them. The land was divided among the conquering chiefs, the usual custom of putting up flags, and posts to mark the boundaries of the portions claimed by each chief had been gone through. Any occupation of the land by the Ngatiawa at that period was entirely out of the question, but those natives who were released from slavery from time to time were permitted by Waikato to occupy, but those who had fled to the Soutli were not allowed to return, and they were distinctly warned that if a return were attempted it would be the cause for fresh war against Ngatiawa. The Waikato right was thus established us a right of conquest, ard was fully admitted by the Ngatiawa themselves. Who, on each occasion when they sold a portion of land at Taranaki sent a part of the payment to Waikato as an acknowledgment of conquest or of the right of Mima possessed by the Waikato chiefs as their conquerors. In this view of the question it is quite evident that the Ngatiawa title had been superseded by the right of the conquerors. And though, in course of time, the parties who fled to the shores of Kapiti, and those who were taken captive were gradually permitted by Waikato to return, it was generally on the understanding that they were to recognize the superior rights of the Waikatoes over the territory. The natives who first returned were from the Ngatimaniapoto country. Tl ey were permitted to return and did so. with this injunction from the Waikato chiefs, who released them, to go and occupy the land but to take care and send them some of the fruits of it, which w;is accordingly done. In several cases, returned slaves were afterwards invested with a right to the soil. About this period the New Zealand Company was making its purchases of land for carrying out its scheme of colonization. The Taranaki question thus became mixed up with the various claims adduced by the natives who had been drwen off it. The agents of the Company who c.me out to establish settlements in New Zealand first attempted to purchase from the fugitives, who fled to the South and who were glad of an opportunity to dispose of land to which their title was at best but precarious, and accordingly they readily took such compensation as was agreed upon between themselves and the New Zealand Company's Agents for the surrender of all their rights. I think it necessary to state here that although for the most part these purchases were not fully comprehended by the Nalives at the time, yet that William King, whose name is now so frequently

15

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

referred to, and who was more intelligent than many of the other natives who at that time claimed the ownership of the soil, took a very active part in the transactioni and the disposal of the rights of the tribe. He visited and advised with several of the subdivisions of the Ngatiawa in Queen Charlotte's Sound about a gale of Waitara and other portions of the Taranaki district. He afterwards gave every possible assistance to the surveyors who shortly after the purchase proceeded to Taranaki to subdivide the land. He was well aware of the object of their visit and gave them letters of introduction to the few natives of the Ngatiawa tribe who were then residing a , Ngamotu. A second sale of the whole country was originated by the Natives of the South, ami they despatched some of their chiefs to Taranaki to aid in completing the negociations. This was effected in the course of a few months and afterwards the New Plymouth settlement was established ; payment having in the meantime been made to the Waikaio chiefs for theii rights The difficulties in which New Plymouth was placed at the time when th-se arrangements were made to which I have lieen referring, were of a very peculiar kind. Natives from all parts of the island North and South, who had originally lived in the district, were preferring claims to the land. In order to settle ihose claims on a satisfactory basis. I was instructed by one of the Governors of the colony in the following terms :— Memorandum of an arrangement proposed to be entered into with the Native Land Claimants in the Taranaki District. It is proposed that tlie whole of the Natives having claims ta land lying between Ngamotn and the Waitara (with the exception of the Puketapu Natives now resident within this block) should, if possible, be induced to abaiidon their claims without furtherenquiry, and to locate themselves on the North bank of the Waitara. These Natives may be divided into two classes— These now resident on the north bank of the Waitara. Those who are shortly expected 10 arrive here from the Southward. It is proposed that the first of the above classes should be induced to agree to abandon their present cultivations within a period of three years, and then to remove to the north bank of the Waitara, if they remain within this district. The second class should be induced to proceed at once to the North bank of the Waitara, there to locate themselves on such sites as they may select—relinquishing all pretensions to any lands to the south tf that river. This arrangement is regarded as one in every respect so likely to promote the future peace and prosperity of the country, that the Government, in oider to induce the Natives to accede to it, will offer the following advantages to them. It will, without further enquiry, admit the claims of the parties acceding to this arrangement, to the lands lyinn immediately to the north of the Waitara. Upon all pretensions at once relinquished to all lands to the south of the Waitara, the Government will, without further enquiry into such pretensions to these lands, admit that from the prompt settlement they are making of this question, they are entitled to such compensation as may be agreed on between themselves and the Officers of the Government. The Government will then also recognise and permit them immediately to diapose of their claims at Waikaaae and Totaranui for such compensation as may be agreed on. The compensation in both cases to be paid in annual instalments, spread over a period of not less than three years. The Government will survey regular village sites on the north bank of the Waitara for Native villages, at such points as they may select, and will endeavour to see that the amount of compensation paid to the Natives shall be so expended as to secure their petmanent advancement in civilisation and prosperity. This is the general outline of the instructions I leceived from Sir George Grey, in 1847. They can be referred to in the Blue Books or as recorded in the Government offices. This was the view then taken of the Taranaki question. In accordance with those instructions, arrangements were made from time to time with the Natives resident on the spot for the satisfaction of their claims. Absentee proprietors had to be treated with separately, and on a different scale from those who were actually resident on the spot; and the Government of that day went so far as to say that wheie the parties concerned did not agree to a reasonable arrangement for the cession of lights which they had almost entirely forfeited, their claims of ownership to the soil should not be recognised. With reference to the particular block under consideration, the claims of the actual owners were carefully enquired into. Notice was given publicly at the time of the purchase to such absentee claimants as were known to have a right to the soil. It was not considered necessary to go about the count!y to rnke up claims, or to induce Natives to prefer them. It was well known that when any block of land was offered for sale, there was no hesitation on the part of claimants to come feward to receive that portion of 'the proceeds to which the extent of their claims might entitle them. The sale of any land in the country soon becomes known throughout it, from one end to the other, and it is often fou:ui I hat a hundred ficticious claims are adduced when the actual owners altogether do not exceed thirty or fjrty persons. There has been a great deal said about unsatisfied claims in different parts of the country, hut my own conviction is that many of those claims have been manufactured. At all events, 1 found that in the course of a few months after the time of the first offer of the Kind aud my notification of it to the tribes at the South, several parties were adducing claims who had never previously done so. It is notorious that if any native thinks he has any chance of obtaining money for land, it is an easy matter for him to assert a claim. There are various motives which impel him to do so —one is the love of

16

E—Nβ. 4.

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

being considered a landed proprietor, another is his love of gain. The principal difficulties which have to be contended with in acquiring land (rum the natives arise out of the necessity of insisting oa proof of such merely asserted claims, and of excluding those who fail to substantiate them from participation in (he money paid for the land. I know of instances in wliich the most frivolous pretences have been used to justify such demands. I have found natives, after attempting to substantiate an asserted claim to land, and failing to do so for want of a good title, evince great disappointment at their defeat. On one occasion a native actually came to me and wilh the greatest EiMnes;, asked whether (since he had failed in his first attempt) he rould not bring forward a claim lo an island in the south seas from which his ancestors had come 600 years ago. The idea wai absurd. I aske I him whether he really meant what lie said. He replied that he did. I told him he niiiiht as well have preferred a claim to a portion of the Moon. His reply was that he was descended from Hawea ote Marama. Finding, however, that it was useless to prefer a fictitious claim, he gave the question up. I allude to this circumstance to show that too much attention to merely asserted claims may entail considerable inconvenience, danger, and expense to the country. I do not wish to throw doubts upon any just claims of theiis, and am fully aware that every acre of land in this island, not acquired by the Crown, is their property. In the case of this purchase, the river oa wliich the land is situated is a place to which the natives have been much attached, and which many of thi-m were latterly indisposed to alienate. But 1 quite deny the assertion which has been made here ihis day that ihere are 80 persons at Waiters who have claims to this block of land. If there were 80 claimants there besides those at Waikanae, Port Nicholson, and Queen Charlotte's Sound, they never made their claims known, and the ancestors of many of them were never knowa to have claims there. Had there been 80 claimants, I believe the invitation given to the chiefs soon after the Governor's visit to Taranaki, to put in such claims, would have been sufficient to bring them forward. That invitation was dated March 18th, 1859, and was to the following effect: — Nga JMotu, Maehe 18, 185$. E HOA MA, E NGA TANQATA O WaiTARA, TENA KOUTOU, — He kupu atu tenei ki a koutou. Kia wakamaramatia c koutou o koutou pihi, whenua c takoto i roto i te walii kua oii nei i a te Teira te tuku mai ki a te Kawana. Kua mohin ano koutou ma tena tangata ano te tikanga mo tana pihi waihoki kia Te Teira te tikarga mo tana pihi; ekore c ahei kia rere noa te tangata ki runga ki ona walii arai ai i tona tikanga. no te nriea, kei a ia ano te whakaaro mo tona ake ano, he kupu atu tenei ki a koutou, kei rere kau koutou ki runga ki to Te Teira raua ko te Retimana walii, no te tnea kua wakaaetia a raua wabi kia hokona i te aroaro o te iwi, i te tino awatea, a meake ka whakaolia nga ritenga ki a ia mo tona, ekore l.oki matou c tohe ki to elahi atu tangata, no te mea kei a ia ano tona wakaaro mo tnna pihi. Ko tenei kei pouri kau koutou ki a ia, no te mea he tikanga wakamarama hoki tona. (Signed) Nα Te Wakauini. Kia Wiremu Kingi Witi, ki a Wiremu Nga Waka, Pdtukakariki, ki nga tangata katoa o Waitara. Nga Motu, March ISth, 1859. Friends—Chiefs of Waitara, — Salutations. This is a word of mine to you. That you siiould make clear your portions of lan lying within the block which has been ceded by Te Teira to the Governor, ' You know that every man has a right (of doing as he pleasts) with his portion, and no man may interfere to prevent his exercise of this tight as respect* his portions, for the thought respecting his own is wilh himself. This is a word of mine to you lest you should, without ground, interfere wilh Te Teira and Te Reiimana's portion, as they have consented to sell their portions in the presence of the people and in open daylight; and the arrangements with him respecting his (land) will shortly be ci mpletecl. We do not pres3 for what belongs to others, because the thought respecting his own piece is wilh each. Now do not you be displeased with him without a cause, for his arrangement will tend to make matters clear. (Signed) Donald McLean. To Wiremu Kingi Whiti, Wiremu Ngra Waka, Patukakariki, and to all the men of Waitara. This invitation was given to the natives to bring forward any claims which they might possess; but none was ever asserte I, except thu general claim of an anii-Kuid-selling-league, wliich grasped at the mana of the whole of the extensive territory between Waitaha and Mokuu, although this same land had been ceded to the Government. The rights of Retimnna and others were fully recognised. It was admitted that the land was theirs, and that their title rould not be disputed. Indeed it must have been evident to any impartial person who witnessed the proceedings, that the parties selling the land were confident in the justice of heir cause and were determined to carry out the sale —notwithstanding the anti-land-selling-leagu and the King movement. The whole of the purchase previously made at Taranaki had been effected on the same principle as the present one, namely : that of acquiring the land from the different clans and subdivisions of those clans which came in from time to time to offer it. I never, dur.ng my residence there, heard of any of the pretended claims that have eincs sprung in'o existence in ii*e imagination (not of the naives- themselves, who are most interested and whose imaginations are ily worked on,) but of persoDs who hare a false sympathy instead of a true one with the natives,

17

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

in matters affecting their real welfare. There was no urgency displayed in this matter, no desire to hasten it, but ample time was given to all parties to put forward their claims; and not only was there ample time given but claims were solicited and hunted up in every direction in Taranaki iiself. Yet, with the exception of the two trihes who sold the land on the banks of the Waitara, and another tribe on the banks of the Waiongana, who were joint claimants to a part of the block, no substantial claims were put in. If I were to say that no other claims were adduced I should be wrong, but I mean no substantial claims, no claims that could be recognized by the Government, or which would be regarded by the natives as valid. Certainly one man told me that his grandfather had once lived a jhort time on the land, and that he therefore expected compensation. Another told me that in one of their fights he was wounded and suffered greac inconvenience there, and therefore thought it was right that he should have some consideration now that the land was sold. Now, this is the class of claims of which I have just been speaking, which it is clearly the duly of the Gcvernn ent to resist, as otherwise it would be an utter impossibility to carry out any purchase of land wnhoul defrauding the real owners. By compensaiii g this cl.'ss of claimants, the re.'i owners would be deprived of what they are fairly entitled to, and merely because the Government chose to recognize ficiiiious claims of this character. What I maimain on the present occasion is, that ihe actual owners of the soil, the men known and recognized us such, have been conferred with, and their consent to the sale obtained. With respect to the nflvr of this land to the Governor at Taranaki, 1 may t.tate that great pains were taken both previously to and after the offer, to inquire who the real claimants were, and to settle with them. And here, I should not orn-t one imporiaut fact that, in settling with them, a section of the Puketapu tribe which is located in the vicinity of the Waitara, was associated with Te Ti ira, Retimana, and others in effecting this sale. These men were exceedingly jealous of the offer when it wasfirsi made and were on the eve of protesting altogether against thesaleol Uie land. I heir claims were at once admitted by the selling , paity, but it was rather difficult toeff ct a satisfactory arrangement at once between the parlies. It happened that they were too distinct and it was this which caused the difficulty. During the investigation which took place, and while the difficulty was being atljustrd, I felt convinced that the cla ms thin preferred by these conflicting parties wen- substantially good, and that in fact the sale must be proceeded with, or otherwise the natives who had oftlrt-d iht- land would be treated with great injustice. The officer whom I instructed to conduct die negotiation (Mr. District Commissioner Parris), was requested to persevere in his inquiries inio the matli-r from time to time; not in any way to hasten the arrangement, hut to give full opportunity to opposing claimants to come forward and state iheir case. He not only did this, but he also look a great dal of trouble in visiting, as far as lay in his power, every part ot his district, to make sure that there should be no substantial claim overlooked. I have already stated that there was a public notification Irom myself inviting all persons who had claims to bring ihem forward in order that they might be carefully investigated. No fresh claims were recorded however; no rights were shewn by the Bativec who opposed the sale, except the right which the land-league conferred upon them, that of claiming land everywhere, and of opposing the sale of land everywhere. In the officer wiio conducted the negotiaiion I place the most implicit reliance. He was on very friendly terms with William King and was universally liked by the natives of the district. He was instrumental lam almost certain, on one occasion, in s ving the life ol William King when a trap had been laid for him, by Ihaia, and a party of Wauganui Natives. It was with great regret that 1 heard this officer's character assailed—a man who has taken such an interest in the welfare of the Natives of his district since he has been there, and who has used all his influence to prevent the disgraceful feuds continually being carried on in the district, frequently with the greatest success; and who has, in carrying out these duties, more than once run the risk of losing his own life. 1 regret exceedingly to find a public officer, who devotes his time to the interests of the community in which he resides, stigmatised in the manner in which Mr. Parris has been. I should have much preferred that any reflection in connection with this purchase should have been at once .directed to myself, by whose instructions it was carried out; I should have preferred this, to hearing an officer thus stigmatised who is certainly worthy of a better reward. I passed over from Taranaki, where the transaction had been so far initiated, and went almost directly to the Natives in Queen Charlotte's Sound, who were claimants to this block. I had a meeting of them at Waikawa, having first intimated to them by letter that I was coming, and the whole of the Natives there, alter a careful enquiry into the extent, position, description of boundaries, and the rival claims of the Natives, agreed to sell their own interest in the land, besides a considerable extent of territory lying beyond the boundaries of the offered block. I devoted as much time as I was able to this investigation. I knew that these were the real claimants, and I found a great deal of unanimity among them about the sale of the laud. (In reply to Mr. Fox) —The date of my letter to them is the 9th of April, and the interview took place on the 12th of April, 1859. The Chief Ropoatna, who offerred to dispose of his claim, was recognised as the head of the hapus or sub-divisions of the Ngatiawa tribe, who owned the land and sold it. He holds x high position among his people, and is much respected by the Europeans. On several occasions it was contemplated by the Natives of Waitara to invite him there, and to live among them as their Chief, to keep peace and order in the tribe. In this arrangement Wra. King (about whose Lhieftaiiiship we have heard so much, and who undoubtedly was a Chief of the section of the Ngatiawa at W aikanae) acquiesced. No actual payment or promise of payment was made to the Natives at Queen Charlotte's Sound at that time. When they informed me that they had agreed to sell the land, my reply to them was, that they had better wait until matters had been finally arranged at Waitaia, as i should not feel myself justified in concluding the purchase with them till tfi i. Having arranged with them that they should be paid after matters were settled at Taranaki, I left Ropoama's place for Wellington, where I notified to the Natives what had taken place with reference

18

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

to Waitara. I had previously ascertained the names of the Wellington claimants to the land. I consulted them about it, and made similar arrangements with them to those which I had made with Kopoama, that they should be paid when the block was settled for at Taranaki. I believe that one or two of Ropoama's people were at Waikanaeat that time, and he promised to see them on their return, and to endeavour to arrange matters with them witli respect to their claims. It has been recently stated that, in addition to these persons who are known and recognised as the actual owners, claimants are to be met with at the South as numerous as a swarm of bees; but I think that those who say so, would find very great difficulty in establishing anything beyond mere assertion of right to the land comprised in the Government purchase. Knowing how scattered the claimants were, and the difficulty of getting them all together in any one place, at any one time, I was a long time pursuing investigations before 1 myself came to the conclusion that the purchase was quite satisfactory; but the more I enquired into the case, and came into contact with impartial natives residing at a distance, and having no particular interest in the locality, the mere I became satisfied that the purchase was a good one. There may be one native at Waitara, not a party to the transaction, who I admit may yet have a claim to a small portion of the block, but he has never asserted it . I cannot tell the exact quantity, it could not be large; indeed, lam not sure that he has not lelinquislied his claim in the block, if any existed, in exchange for some lands in the vicinity of the purchased block which Teira gave up to him, as the latter owns a considerable quantity of land there. There may have been some such accommodation between them—at any rat* Patukakariki has never asserted any proprietary right. Resides ample time having been given, a notice was inserted in the receipt for the first payment to the following effect:— E mea ana te Kawana, mehemea ka tika te kupu o tetahi tangata c ki ana ia, he pihi whenua tana ki roto i nga rohe kua tuhituhi nei ki tenei pukapuka, kahore ia c pai kia hokona ton* pihi, ara, tona taupa, me rohe marire me waiho tana pihi ki a ia. [Translation'] The Governor says that if any man brings forward a just claim to any poriion of the land included within the boundaries written in the Deed, and is no! willing that his portion or division should be sold, such portion will be marked off", and he will be allowed to retain it. By this it will be seen that it has always been left open for parties lo come forward and substantiate jus' claims, but very few who have availed themselves of the opportunity given them, have established any reasonable claim, such as one founded on having occupied the land within the last 50 years. I believe that most of the difficulties md opposition which has been met with in pursuing this purchase have originated entirely with the anti-land-selling-leaguo. This league I first heard of as having commenced at Otaki. Tie Natives of that place assured me that they had very good advice on the subject, and that they had resolved not to dispose of any more land to the Government. This league kept gaining ground for some years, until a general meeting look place in the Ngatiruanui country, where the Natives pledged themselves not only to sell no more land, but to take the life of any one who should attempt to do so. This meeting took place aboui 7 years ago. It was also resolved at this meeting of the Natives that they should entirely repossess themselves of lands already alienated by them, and drive the European settlers into the sea. The subsequent murders, involving the deaths of Rawiri, Kaiatore and oihers that have taken place at T».ranaki, have been the result of that league and the confederacy at Manawapou, and there is very little doubt that the setilement of New Plymouth, since the formation of this land league, has been in a very perilous position. It has been stated that this has arisen in some measure from the defective system of acquiring land which has been in operaiion, but I feel satisfied that such is not really the ease. 1 can refer to very many circumstances connected with purchases of laud in different parts of the country where Native life has been saved and wars and quarrels averted, which might have involved the Europeans. This has been done by purchasing from the conflicting parlies the land which was the bone of contention, on terms which they themselves perfectly understood and appreciated. I know it is wished by some to create an impression—and the Venerable gentleman who was examined previously to myself has tried to make it appear that the land purchases at the South have produced dissatisfaction. The purchases to which he probably refers, viz., those at Rangittkei and in the Middle Island, were carefully conducted. I can refer to the whole of the purchases between Otaki and Wanganui as having been acquired from the true and rightful owners. It was perhaps the misfortune of some of the proprietors that they did not belong to the same denomination as the Venerable Archdeacon —and this in a great measure, at least to me it appeared so, formed in his estimation a bar to their claims. Reference has been made to land being at one time bought from the conquerors, and at another from the conquered. These two grave offences in the instances alluded to, happened to be purchases made from Natives of the Weslevan denomination. 1 will defy (beyond probably a trifling dispute about boundaries) any perso:i, however high an. authority he nay be in Native matters, to challenge the validity of these purchases, or the mode in which they were brought to a termination. I believe I have now stated generally to the Committee what I have to say with reference to the purchase at Waitaia.

19

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

1. \_The Hon. Mr. Richmond.] Had the Ngatituaho and Ngatihinga a right to the di«puced block, independent of the hapusoi the Ngatiawa?—Yes; decidedly. 2. Do the sellers, including llopoama and his people at Queen Charlotte's Sound, properly represent these two hnpus ? —They do. 3. After the inquiry you have made, do you know of any outstanding claim?—l have referred to one man who may have a claim, that is Putukakariki, though I do not know that he has. 4. Do you believe that any considerable claim can be outstanding?—l do not. 5. As to Te Patukakariki, did he oppos? Teira's offer?—No, he never did. 6. Has lie ever made a claim? —He never, to my knowledge, made a claim to that particular block. 7. Do you think he possibly has a claim to any extent ? —I think lie may possibly have a claim to a small extent. 8. Do you consider that Riwai Te Ahu has a valid claim to any part of the Block ?—I do not consider that he has, 9. Has King ever made a elaitn of proprietary right ?—William King has never made such a claim to my knowledge. 10. Under the peculiar circumstances of the Taranaki case, had King, in your opinion, any right to interfere with the sale by another hapu of their lands ?—-Decidedly he had not. 11. Has any similar interference by the chief been recognized in Taranaki, either in favour of King, or of any other ?—Never in connection with any of the purchases made there. 12. Having regard to previous transactions, do you consider that the Government ought to recognize any but proprietary claims in Taranaki ? —I do not th-nk the Government should recognize any but proprietary claims. 13. \ Mr. J. C. Richmond."] Will you inform the House of the relations which subsisted between Mr. Parris, Land Purchase Commissioner at Taranaki, and the Puketapu chief Katatore (or Waitere) at the time of the murder of the latter ?—The relations which subsisted between them were of a most friendly and even intimate character. And I know that Mr. Parris much regretted Katatore's death. 14. Does anything in those relations justify the statement that Mr. Parris was glad of the death of Katatore? — No, quite the reverse. 15. Are you aware whether on any occasion, and when, it happened that Mr. Parris defeated an ambush prepared for the destruction of W Kins and his part} , ? — I am aware that he did defeat such an ambush in 1848, when Ihaia and others were seeking William King's life. 16. Would it be possible for Mr. Piirris to refer to that event in conversation with W. King without insult to thai chief according to Maori ideas?— Quite possible. 17. Do you think the words naku hoe i oraai, alleged to have been used by Mr. Parris, could properly and inoffensively, recording to Maori ideas, be used in reference thereto?— Certainly. 18. \_Mr. Williamson.] I wish to call your attention to the instructions to District Land Purchase Commissioners, which appears as No. ] of E No. 3 of the " Papers relative to the Native Insurrection," and to ask if you are aware whether or not Sections 1, 2, & 4 of those instructions have been attended t~>, with reference to the land offered by Te Teira ?—They were fully attended to. Sections referred to: — 1. In order to facilitate your negotiations, it will be necessary for you to study with great care the history and genealogy of the Taranaki tribes, from their early location at Ngapuketurua, on the banks of the Waiongona River, up to the date of their dispersion and conquest by the Waikato ; also to make yourself acquainted with the subsequent migrations, inter-marriages with foreign tribes, and other changes affecting title, that have occurred amongst the Ngatitama, Ngalimutunga, Ngatiawa, Ngamohi, Taranaki, ISgatiruanui, Ngarauru tribes, from that period up to the present date. 2. Having well fortified yourself with this general knowledge, which will greatly facilitate your future operations, you should devote your attention to a careful and minute investigation of the rival claims of the seveial sub-divisions of those tribes in such localities as they a)e most anxious to cede to the Government, bearing in mind that the object of your investigations should not be confined to acquiring a knowledge only of the Natives actually residing on the land, but should Le extended to those also who are inter-married among neighbouring tribes, as well as to those who are living in distant districts of the Colony. 4. At the same time I am desired to state that it is His Excellency's wish to have a separate investigation of the claims of absentees instituted at the places where they reside ; when tht-y will be settled with, in proportion to the relative merits of their claims, on a basis which will fully preseive the distinction which should be made between resident and non-resident proprietors. 6. A record of all claims submitted by the Natives should be noted by you in a book kept expressly for that purpose, more especially in those cases where conflicting interests have to be dealt with; and great care should be taken not to give too much prominence to that class of claimants who are frequently the first to offVr their lands for sale, from the fact of their title being in many instances very defective. The actu-1 uwuer, in contra-distiiiction to the class to which I have just referred, seldom makes a noisy or boosting demonstration of what his claims really are ; it may therefore be inferred from his silent and uncompromising demeanour, that his rights are not to be trifled with, and that without his acquiescence, it will be impossible to make a valid purchase, This class of claimants it will be your duty to search out, as they will be the least likely, from feeling secure in the justice of their cause, to press themselves upon your notice. 19. The former part of the 6th Section directs that a record of all claims submitted by Natives ehould be noted in a book. Do you know whether this has been observed in the instance to which the present inquiry relates ? —I believe that a record of the claims, and of the various meetings has been

20

E—N#. 4,

OP THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

kept by the District Commissioner at Taranaki. I know he kept a Journal of events —I cannot say positively -whether he keeps it in a book or on loose papers which are filed. Copies of the papers containing- the names of the Claimants have not been forwarded to the Office here—but the investigations made by Mr. Parris were submitted to me when I was at Taranaki. 20. Were the negotiations in connexion with the purchase conducted solely by the District Commissioner or did you take part in them ? —I took part in the commencement of the investigation, when the purchase was initiated at Taranaki and instructed the District Commissioner how to proceed; I also took part myself in investigations having reference to Absentee Claimants. 21. [Mr. Fox.'] You have referred to the alteration of Native tenures owing to disputes. By whose consent and in what manner have the ancient tenures been altered ?—The original occupants have in many cases been swept off the country. The tenure has been changed in Taranaki by the Waikato conquest. 22. What evidence have you of such alteration ?—The evidence of living witnesses who took part in the conquest. 23. When you say the tenures were altered, do you mean not that the laws by which the lands were held were changed, but that the ownership changed hands?—l mean that there was an entire change. The right of the original proprietors became vested in the conquerors. 24. If the tenure were changed in this sense, why did you buy of Te Teira, and not of the Waikato only?— The reason for buying from Te Teira, was that the Waikato title had been extinguished by the Government who purchased from them, and because the claims of the Ngatiawa had been subsequently readmitted by the Government. 25. You have spoken of the title of the Waikatos to the Waitara obtained by conquest, and referred to it as recognised by the Ngatiawas after their return frorr. Waikato. Are you acquainted with the following statement of Mr. Protector Clarke on the subject contained in his Report dated Auckland; 17th October, 1843:— " to Taranaki preferred by the Waikato Natives is good, so far as they have taken possession ; but they did not wholly succeed in driving the Natives out of that district, who maintained their independence by resorting to different pahs along the coast. 1 should therefore consider the principal right to land in the Taranahi district still vested in the original inhabitants. Again the titles of tribes about Port Nicholson to land in the Taranaki district, cannot be wholly extinct, if they have kept up a friendly intercourse with the residents. * * * A tribe never ceases to maintain their title to tlie lands of their fathers, nor could a purchase be considered complete and valid without the consent of the original proprietors. * * * Possession of land even for a number of years does not give a right to alienate such property to Europeans, without consent of the original donors of the land ; but it may be continued in the possession of the descendants of the grantee to the latest generation." —Do you consider this opinion of Mr. Clarke as being in conformity with those expressed by you in reference to the importance of therights by conquest of the Waikato Tribe ?—Mr. Clarke's views are not materially different from mine. He irr the first instance recognized the Waikato right of conquest. 26. You have spoken of " new arrangements" being necessary in reference to the purchase of land at Taranaki, and referred to instructions given you by Sir George Grey on the subject. Were these " new arrangements" made with the consent of the Natives, and were they ever carried out ?— The arrangements indicated in the instructions were carried out so far as they could be acted upon ia the Taranaki district. 27. Do you mean that the Natives South of the Waitara were induced to remain North and to sell all their lands on the South?—No; the arrangements concluded at Taranaki did not then extend so far as Waitara. The instructions were part of a general scheme not confined exclusively to Waitara. 28. You huve spoken of a notification of the sale having been given by you to the Southern Natives. Have you a copy of such notification ?—I hate a copy, I cannot produce it now, but shall be able to do so. 29. How, when, and wheie was such notification published?—l communicated by letter. It -vras not in the shape of a published notification. I addressed letters to those persons whom I believed to be claimants uf the land in question. 30. Then if there are any claimants of whom you have not heard, such notification may probably not reach them?—l believe it to be an utter impossibility for them not to have known of the sale. 31. You are aware that King and five hundred of the Ngatiawas resided at Otald and AVaikanae for 21 years, and when they left many of the tribe remained there. Did you ever send your notification to, or visit those places to notify the intended sale of Waitara then, and did you ever investigate any claimsor enquire whether there were'any there?—At "-Yaikanae ; I did not personally investigate claims. I sent a copy of the Governor's speech at Taranaki to Otaki in the first instance. lam not so sure ot having sent to Waikanae. I sent several copies to Otaki. 32. That was not a notification of Te Teira's sale 7 —lt was not a notification of Te Teira's sale, but of the Governor's speech at Taranaki. 33. You have stated that Riwai Te Ahu had no claim. How can you be sure of this if you have never investigated claims at Otaki where he lived, nor notified the sale to him?—l am sure of it from this fact, that he once preferred a claim to land there which I investigated. I was under the impression that it wasof considerable exttnt, but I found on inquiry from the parties through whom he ulaimed and whose names he gave, that hi» claims were really insignificant, and were situated near the

21

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

river Waiongane. Even those small claims the Natives disputed, as the land was occupied by a sifter of his. The extent of the land as represented to me is not much larger than the floor of this House. I communicated the result of my inquiries to Riwai who was disappointed at it. 34. In investigating Riwai Te Ahu's claim, was he present, and had hfi the opportunity of examining the witnesses on whose evidence his claim was negatived by you ?—I believe I have an•wered that question already He was not present, and indeed it would been of little use if he had— as he knew almost nothing about his claim, which he referred wholly to me. 35. Believing that Patukakanki has possibly a claim to the disputed block, why have you not endeavoured to ascertain it, and to treat «vith him?—He has had frequent opportunities of preferring his claim. I have already read a letter dated 18th March, 1859, inviting him and others to come forward and prove their claims. 36. How was that letter published and circulated?—lt was not published at all. It was written by me to the Chiefs of the district, without being otherwise notified than by being put into their hands. 37. Was a copy delivered to Patukakariki ?—The letter was addressed to Wm. King, Patukakariki, and all the people at Waitara. 38. Is not Patukakariki the head of the liapu to which Te Teira belongs ? If he is not, who is?—l have never recognised him as such. I know the contrary. I admit, however, that he is a chief of some importance. The principal chief of these hapus died some years ago. llopoama, at Queen Chailotte's Sound represents them. 39. Suppose that Patukakariki's claim is a good one, is he bound to prefer it? and if he does not, what law will bar its future assertion I —l really do not think that I am called upon to state what his claim is. I had to hear his title adduced, which universal custom recognizes as the manner in which he should prefer his claims.* 40. You have instructed Mr. Parris to give more credence to the claims of modest and retiring claimants than to such as are more urgent. Are not those of Patukakariki and the Otaki claimants of the former class, and Te Teira rather of the latter , ?—No, I think not. 41. If a claim such as Patukariki's m;iy be, is an undivided claim in joint tenancy, how can the claimant be compelled to sever it? and can compensation be forced on him if he refused to sever and to sell?—I believe that there is no local enactment that would force him to do so. 42. Hare you or Mr. Parris kept any official record of the various interviews and investigations with Natives with reference to Te Teira's sale, and of the evidence of the title taken thereat ?—Not certainly of every interview. 43. Has any record of evidence been kept by either of you ?—Evidence of that description has been preserved by Mr. Parris. 44. Can you produce it ?—I can. 45. Will you ?—I will. 46. You have heard of the 11 claims mentioned by the claimants as existing , at Otaki; have you investigated them ?—I have not investigated those claims, with the exception of the one to which I have referred in answering a previous question. 47. You will remember being examined in writing by a Commission issued by His Excellency in 1856, one question put to you was " Has a Native a strictly individual right to any particular portion of land, independant of the Tribal right over it." I find among the answers in the negative " McLean," Is that you, and was that your report on the question ?—(Appendix 1856, B. No. 3.) I am the Mr. McLean, and that is the reply which I made. 48. Did you ever hear of a Meeting at which Te Teira offered to give up to the parties opposing the sale, some lands belonging to him outside the block in exchange for the lands he was offering to the Government ?—I did not hear of a meeting at which any proposal of that nature was made in reference to the land he was offering to the Government. lam aware that there was a meeting at which there was some discussion about the accommodation of their claims. This was a considerable time prior to the purchase. 49. What do you mean by Tribal right ?—I suppose it means the right of a Tribe. 50. Will you describe the meaning of Tribal right in regard to the transfer of land ?—lt varies so much in different parts of the country, I should wish to know what particular part of the country you refer to—as the custom which prevails in one place does not in another. 51. What is the general rule? —There are very wide exceptions. 52. Is the rule or exception wider? —The exception is the wider. 53. When a hapu alienates, who represents it, and is the consent of all its members necessary ? —In some tribes the different hapus must be consulted, in others the chiefs; much depends upon the personal character of the latter. I did not say that hapus or subdivisions of tribes had not a right of transfer of property. The various hapus or families which compose a tribe most frequently have the right of disposal, but not always : the custom varies. 54. How do you discover what the rights of the parties are?— You must discover them by inquiry of the people in the district where the land is situated and elsewhere. 55. If Patukakariki is the head of the Ngatihinga, could an individual sell without his consent? —A certain number of claimants could sell, but not invariably without his consent.

* The abore are the words given by the reporter, admitted to he not quite correct; Mr. McLean's impression of the answer is as follows :—" 1 really do not clunk that lam called upon to answer that question ;he never adduced any claim. lam not aware of any lncal law that would be a bar to his claim, but it is customary that such claims should b« preferred. Mr. Fox's recollection of the amwer is as follows:—"He would not b» barred by any local law ; bat tber« it »!i ttnirerial sustom.

22

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

56. What proportion, a bare majority ?—I cannot say. It would depend on the locality, the people, and the boundaries. f>7. Then the sum of your evidence is this: That there are no settled rules or principle* guiding alienation of land, mid that in such matters the exception is wider thai the rule? —The Natives have no fixed rule. The custom varies in different districts. 58. What are the rules of alienation in tbe Ngatiawa tribe ?—-In the Ngatiawa a family of three or four people has been regarded as empowered to dispose of its common property. -59. Have they long enjoyed tin's right ?—lt has been so for the last eighteen years. CO. Did either yourself or Mr. Parris make any official report on the validity of Te Teira's title, previous to the Taranaki war ?—Mr. Parris did make several reports during the progress of the purchase. I did not make any. He reported on the validity of Te Teira's title. 61. Will you produce that report?—l will. 62. Did you ever receive a letter from Witikau informing you that the signatures to a certain letter written by Ropoama Tc Once were surreptiously obtained, or written without the owner's knowledge I —l wish to know the date of the letter. [Mr. Fox: About the time of your visit to Queen Charlotte's Sound.] I have received a letter from Inia objecting to certain signature* which were put to a letter by Eopoama. Aperira 10, 1859. E koro, c te Makarini, tena ra korua ko Kavvana Parsone, he kupu taku kia rongo koe, kahore a. matou katoa tikanga ehaia i a matou ena ritenga i te iwi katoa ena kupu i te pukapukaa Ropoama, he mea tito noa atu nana matou ki roto i tana pukapuka, engari nana anake tona kupu; ta matou i pai ai, kia hu katoa mai: i nga tangata katoa c noho ana i Waitara te tikanga: na Te Teira anake tena tikanga ratou koona mama, kahore a Wiremu Kingi ritenga, no te rriea kei a ia te ritenga ko Waitaha to rumja, ko Mokau to raro: ekore hoki matou c pai kia mahi atu i muri i a ratou, no te mea kua lie hoki era ritenga i mua ra; ko Rawiri Horoatua: i kainga atu hoki i Poneke nga moni oPuketapu; kei pera hoki tenei. E i\la, kua mohio koe kei kiia na matou i wakahe ratou, ka mutu ano to ratou m<dn l<a waiho hoki ratou kia vvakaea i te mauiui i o ratou pakihiwi i te amolianga i a ratou pu; he aha te pai kia wakatupuria tonutia te he? engari, kia rite katoa, ka pai. Heoi ano. E mea ana au kia homai te mapi o Waikawa ki a maua ko Hopa kia mohio ai maua; o te Ruakaka hoki, kua lac mai hoki te pukapuka a Wiremu Kingi ki a maua ko Hone Tuhata mo Waitara kia purutia. Heoi ano, E iVla. Na tou tamaiti, Na Inia Tuhata. Tuhia mai te tahi reta ki au kia rongo hoki au i tau kupu me ka tae atu kia koe. No Waikawa. Translation. April 10, 1859. Friend McLean, — Salutations to you and Governor Browne. I have a word which you must hear. We, all of us, have nothing to do with the words of Ropoama's letter, they are not those of all the people, but they are his own invention. Our names are in his letter, hut the words are his own only. What we desire is that all the people who live at Waitara should assemble. That arrangement is Te Teira's only with his relations ; William King has nothing to do with it, for with him the arrangement i* that Waitaka is the (boundary) on the south and Mokau on the north. We are not going to follow up their work, for in time past similar proceedings have been wrong" (as in the case of) Rawiri Horoatua. The money of Puketapu was consumed at Port Nicholson, and (we fear) le*t the case be similar now. Mr. McLean, you understand the matter; let it not be said that it is we who condemn them. When they have finished their work, they will be left to rest their shoulders, tired with cairying their guns. What is the good of perpetually causing evil to grow ; rather let us all agree; then it will be well. This is all. I wish the map of Waikawa to be given to me and Hopa for our information, also that'of the Euakaka, for a letter from William King has come to me and Hone Tuhata about Waitara, that it i» to be held. This is all, McLean. From your Son, (Signed) Inia Tuhata. If this reaches you, write me a letter that I may hear your word. Waikawa. I might be allowed to remark that the only letter I received from Ropoama was in reply to one I sent to him from Cloudy Bay. I afterwards liad a meeting with him at his own place, when the Waitara question was openly discussed, and at which he stated that some of the claimants were absent at Waikanae and elsewhere, but that he should confer with them about the sale of the land after their return. The father of Inia (the writer of the letter just read by me) is one of the moet prominent land sellers to the Government. 6J. Will you read the letter from Uopoama ?—I have not got Ropoama's letter : it was sent as a record to the District Commissioner at Taranaki. I can obtain it. 64. Did not Patukakariki protest repeatedly three or four times at public meetings against the sale of the disputed block ?■—Never against the sale of the block in question ; but he has protested against the sale of other land. 65. Has he claims within the block ?—I stated that he may have claims, he has never prorerf my title.

23

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO ORIGIN OF NATIVE. INSURRECTION.

66. Do you believe he has claims?—lt is altogether conjectural, it is probable he may have a claim within the Block. 67. [Mr. Bell.} You have spoken of the Waitaha: is not that the northern boundary of the Bell Block, some miles from Waitara river?—lt is. 68. Was the Bell Block within the country of the Puketapu tribe, and chiefly owned by them ?—lt was within the country of the Puketapu tribe, and was owned by them. 69. Did William King assert any claim to the Bell Block, and if so was it allowed, and did h» receive any of the payment for that land ?—•Hβ asserted a claim, but it did not entitle him to receive any part of the payment given for the land. 70. Is there any country belonging to the Puketapu tribe north of the Bel Block, towards the Waitara?—The country north of the LJell Block belongs to the Puketapu tribe, tlieir boundary goes to within about two miles of the Waitara river. 71. Has William King ever set up a claim over the whole country between Waitara and the Bell Block ?—He has constantly done so. The only claim he does set up is that general claim over the whole country between Mokau and Waitaha. 72. Would such a claim be admitted by the Puketapu tribe, so far as their land is concerned ?— Not at all, except as members of the anti-land-selling league; not otherwise. 73. Has W. King expressed his determination that so far as his influence could prevent it, no sale of land should take place north of the Bell Block? —He has repeatedly expressed such determination. 74. Was this determination the result of a combination among certain sections of the Natives to prohibit the further sale of land, which combination is known by the name of the land-league ? — It was. 75. In the evidence of Archdeacon Hadfield, he says that Te Teira is not a Chief at all, but a " tutua" ; is that your opinion as to his position in the tribe ? Certainly not. 7G. [_Mr. Domett.] How many millions of acres have you purchased, during the last twenty years, at otlier places than Taranaki ?—The various purchases in these islands with ■which I have been connected amount to about 20,000,000, or 25,000,000 of acres. 77. Has the validity of any of these purchases ever been disputed?—ln very few cases indeed. There has been no serious dispute in any. The validity of the purchase has never been disputed in any important particular. 78. Have you neglected in the Taranaki case any investigation, inquiry, or precaution which you adopted in those undisputed cases?— Every precaution was used. A great deal of trouble was taken to obtain a knowledge of the different claimants. 79. Did you advise the Governor that the title of the sellers of Te Teira's block was good, before the purchase of the block was made?—l advised the Governor to accept the offer, and proceed with the purchase of the block, because it appeared to me that Te Teira had an unquestionable title. 80. [Mr. Fox] When did you give that advice to his Excellency ?—ln March, 1859. I was ■with him when the land was offered. 81. Had the title at that time been fully investigated I—The offer was made publicly, which was the first and best evidence you could get of title, and a more minute investigation into the titles of the various claimants was afterwards instituted. 82. [The Hon. Mr. Richmond.'] Have I rightly understood you that notwithstanding the Waikato conquests, the British Government has respected the separate proprietary rights hi Taranaki of the several sections of the Ngatiawa ?—You have rightly understood me. 83. Has the Government allowed the exercise, or has the exercise hitherto been attempted, within the Block comprised in Spain's award of any general tribal right, or right of chieftainship; so as to interfere with the rights of the oeveral hapus or families to dispose of their lands to the British Government ?—No; no general rights of that kind have been exercised, but the rights of the subdivisions, or different hapus of each tribe have been recognised. 84. Was a contemporaneous or nearly contemporaneous notice of the Meeting of March 1859, at which To Teira's Block was offered, published in the Maori Messenger ?—A notice of that meeting was published in the Maori Messenger. 85. Archdeacon Iladfield has stated that Itopoama refused t> come up to the meeting at Kohimarama because he disapproved of the transactions at Waitara, falsely alleging illness as an excusewas this the case ?—lt was certainly not so, he was scarcely able to stand. I sent a boat for him. He expressed ldmself willing to come, but he was really so unwell that he might have died at sea. In fact I could not think of bringing him. In the short interview which I had with him on board the steamer he again expressed his intention of selling his claims to the Government. 86. Was any otlier person than yourself a witness of Ropoama's state at the time when the " White Swan " called for him at Queen Charlotte's Sound ?—I believe Sir Charles Clifford, Mr. Carletoa 13aynes, and Mr. Crawford, witnessed the state of his health Ordered, That the Witness be now discharged from further present attendanc ~ Mr. Commissioner McLean accordingly withdrew.

24

E—No. 4

APPENDIX TO MR. McLEAN'S EVIDENCE.

No. 1. MR. PAKRIS' REPORTS. 3rd November, 1860. Sik, — I herewith transmit Mr. Parris' General Report, referred to by me in reply to Questions Nos. 42, 43, 44, and 45 (p. 25); together with a subsequent Report of Mr. Parris', dated 13th September last: copies of Mr. Parris' daily entries of interviews respecting title have not yet been received, in consequence of his time being fully occupied with other duties. Ropoama's Letter, referred to in Question G3 (p. 23), has been supplied to the Clerk of Committees. Donald McLean. 'Die Honorable E. W. Stafford. Enclosure 1 in No. 1. MR. PARRIS TO THE HON. C. W. RICHMOND. New Plymouth, September 21st, 1859. Deai: Sih, — Since 1 wrote to you on the 9th instant, I have been investigating Teira's question, in order to be able to give an opinion as to the opposition likely to be offered to it, and am sorry to say that I find William Kinjj full of his dogged obstinacy, assuming the right to dictate authority over land offered by the rightful owners to the Government. He takes this ground, not being able to refute the claims of Teira and his supporters, who, from all I can gather from disinterested natives, are the rightful owners. William King's son told me a few days since, that if they consented for Teira to sell his land, otheis would do the same (quite true); they were, therefore, determined not to allow any one to sell, admitting at the same time that they believed the Governor would not buy, so long as there was any opposition. Teira is emboldened by the justice of his claims. I consequently find it necessary to restrain him in many of his propositions, lest anger should arise, and violence ensue. He offers to cut the line, but at present I decline to give my consent, knowing the opposition he is sure to meet with. A short time since some natives erected some fencing on his land, whilst he was in town to see me, on my return from Waikato. On his return to Waitara he cut down the fencing, upon which they threatened to burn a canoe of his. lie told them he should not attempt to prevent the burning of his canoe, but if they did it, he should at once proceed with a fire stick, and fire the three pas (at the mouth of the river) which they knew were on his land. Teira's father (Tamati Raru) told William King last week, that it was only stubbornness on his part, to oppose Teira in the sale of the land on the south bank of the river; that his (William King's) land was on the north side; in answer to which William King threatened violent opposition. The prevailing opinion among the natives is, that Teira's offer will settle the question of the sale of land for a long time; if purchased, more will immediately follow; if not purchased, those who want to sell will be afraid to move in the matter. The most favourable prospect of the whole is, Teira has induced a party of the Ngatiruanuis to take a favourable view of the land question. He came to me on the 14th instant, with a native of rank of the Pakakohe tribe, who informed me that he had come with a message from his brother and one hundred supporters, to inform me that they were going to propose the sale of a large block of land (of from fifteen to twenty miles beach frontage,) from a place called Ohangae to the Patea river, The acquisition of such a block of land would bo the making of the Province. The land is good, with good sheep runs, and the Patea river much superior to the Waitara. The Ngatiruanui tribe is composed of several petty tribes of which the Pakakohe is one. They occupy the part alluded to, and have also claims between Patea and Waitotara, in conjunction with the Whanganui tribes. I was hoping Mr. McLean would have returned by this time, for the state of Teira's question is such now. that it is desirable that it should be settled one way or the other before long, for the natives in the district are being kept in constant excitement by it. I have, &c, Robert Parris. Enclosure £ in No 1. MR. PARRIS TO CHIEF LAND PURCHASE COMMISSIONER. New Plymouth, July 16th, 1860. Sir, — I have the honor to transmit the following report of occurrences connected with the negotiation for the block of land at Waitara from the time it was first offered to the Government, to the time of attempting the survey of the same.

25

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

2. This land was first offered to the Government on the Bth March, 1859, before a large meeting of Natives, assembled to meet His Excellency the Governor in the Town of New Plymouth ; present, His Excellency the Governor, the Native Minister, the Native Secretary and Chief Commissioner, His Honor the Superintendent, Lieut.-Colonel Murray, Rev. Mr. Whiteley, and a number of Settlers. Among the natives present were all the leading men of the Waitara, Puketapu, Ngamotu, and some of the Taranaki Tribes. After the usual salutations had been exchanged, and two or three short addresses to His Excellency the Governor, Teira rose and said, "Listen all present, both Europeans and Maories, lam going to offer the Governor my land." He then commenced to name the boundary, during which their was r.ot the slightest interruption. Having finished, he put the question to His Excellency the Governor, Whether he would consent to buy his land. There was a pause while His Excellency was consulting with the Native Minister and the Chief Commissioner, before answering the question. In the interim, a Native called Piripi got up to propose that a block of land inland of Teira's, in which he (Piripi) has some claims, should be added to Teira's and sold as one block. This proposal was instantly opposed by Patukakaiiki and several others, when another man (Hemi Kuka) got up to offer his land at Onaero, which caused some confusion ; aud seeing it was likely to interrupt Teira's question, I requested Hemi Kuku to sit down, which he did ; Piripi was still standing, and Wm. King rose to put him down, when Teira said to him, " E Wi noho koe kite whenua, maku c whakoti te tikanga a Piripi," (Win. King, you sit down, I will stop Piripi.) Wm. King sat down, and Teira, addressing himself to Piripi, said, " I shall not consent for the land I am offering to be entangled with any other ; when mine is sold, you can do as you like with yours. Quietness having been restored, Teira again put the following question to his Excellency the Governor," "Will you consent to buy my land?" His Excellency replied through the Chief Commissioner, " If the land is yours, I consent to buy it;" upon which Teira walked up to his His Excellency with a Kaitaka mat, and laid it down at his feet, as a token that the land had departed from him. Seeing there was no interruption, some Natives present said, " Kua riro a Waitara" (Waitara is gone), when Wm. King rose, and in a very disrespectful and sullen tone, said, " Governor, there is no land for you," and left most abruptly and unceremoniously, with kis followers, without offering the slightest explanation. 3. Previously to his Excellency's departure from the settlement, I was instructed to investigate Teira's claim carefully and cautiously, and not to do any thing, or encourage any move on the part of the sellers, which would in any way be calculated to bring into hostile collision the two parties, and from time to time to report the result of my investigation. 4-. After this offer of the land for sale, Teira associated with W. King and his people the same as before, but never let the subject rest. He frequently called them together, and in a quiet and kind manner, entreated them to withdraw their foolish opposition, assuring them that he never would give the question up ; that the small piece of land he had offered to sell was hut a very small portion of his and his supporters' claims, that if they continued to oppose him in the offer made to the Governor, he should also offer more, but if they behaved consistently he would stop with the offer made. Nothing but the justice of his claims could have encouraged him to meet them in the way he always has, fearless of the existing combination to annihilate all land-sellers. It is due to the opposition to state, that they never had recourse te harsh measures, for many months after the public offer of the land to His Excellency the Governor, but on the contrary, tried to work upon Teira by aGts of kindness ; they built him and Retimana a very nice house each, and showed them other attentions, which if appreciated, had not the desired effect, for he continued to write to His Excellency the Governor urging him to conclude the purchase. 5. For an interval of two months the negotiation for this land was suspended on account of peace negotiations, between the late contending parties, at the Ikamoana aud Karaka, which I considered I should not be justified in interrupting, by forcing upon them negotiations for land. At the same time, although the public complained of the delay in the matter, I was absent for a month at Waikato negotiating for a line of road through the interior. On my return Teira came to Town and stopped a week with me, he informed me that during my absence William King's Natives had been threatening to cultivate some of the land, that he therefore wished me to resume the negotiation, On his return to Waitara he found that some fencing had been put upon the land, which he immediately cut down, for which they threatened to burn a large W T ar Canoe (Manawatu) the only one at the River, owned by his father. In reply he told them, that if they injured the canoe, he would witli his own hands, put a fire stick to every house in the Pas, which they knew were standing on his land. The canoe was not touched, and nothing further occurred. 6. In September last, the peace negotiations having been concluded, I went to Waitara, to have an interview with William King and his people on the subject of resuming the negotiation for Teira's land. I spent this day and many others with them endeavouring to induce them to meet Teira's party, and discuss quietly and deliberately, the claims to the block of land, but they never would consent to do it, I therefore was obliged to get information from other Natives (and strange to say some who are now opposing the Government, fiapurona and others,) to compare with the representations of the selling party, and the information which I obtained, fully corroborated the statements of the selling party. Hapurona on one occasion had a disagreement with W. King, and declared that he never would support the opposition. The land was occupied by Tamati Raru's and Rawiri Raupongo's people, before the Ngatiawa migration to the South, and their Pa was at Pukekohatu on the land, whilst William King and his people were living on the North side of the river, and had their Pa at Manukorihi, and on returning from the South, in 1848, they asked permission of Teira and his father to be allowed to build their Pa on the South side, which question had been submitted to a Committee, who had decided

26

E—No. 4

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

that the South side was preferable to the North, in case of an invasion" from Waikato. Since their return from the South, none of the land sold by Teira and party, has ever been cultivated by William King's people. 7. Having been authori«ed to pay an instalment for the land, I appointed the 29th November for that purpose, and gave William King a week's notice of my intention to do so. On the 28th he came to Town with about thirty followers, all armed. On hearing they were in the Kauwau pa, I went to them, and prevailed on William King to remain until the following day, and supplied them with food for that purpose, and on the 29th they met Teira's party, before His Honor the Superintendent, Lieut.-Colonel Murray, Rev. Mr. Whiteley, and other authorities of the place, when he distinctly admitted, in answer to a question put to him by myself, that the land was Teira's and his supporters, but that he would not allow them to sell it. An instalment of one hundred pounds was paid that day, from which time Teira remained in town, his life having been threatened, having at the request of the others conducted the negotiation. Teira, whatever others may think or insinuate with regard to him, as a man of rank, has a character unsullied, and can prove his line of ancestors to be of no mean origin. 8. Rawiri Raupongo, an extensive claimant in the Waitara district, was frequently forcing the sale of this land upon me privately, being, as he always assured me, afraid to move publicly in the matter, lest he should be served the same as Ravviri Waiaua was ; and the opposing party for a time had an impression that he was not a consenting party, for one of William King's principal men, Komene Patumoe, made a statement to Archdeacon Govett, which that gentleman has furnished me with, a copy of which I here insert:— New Plymouth, July 10, 1860. Dear Sir, — I have no objection to give you a written statement of what was said by Komene Patumoe to me, regarding the sale of the Block of land at Waitara. His expression was, that if Rawiri Raupongo had been a consenting party to the sale, they could not have had anything to say against it (Kahore a matou kupu). By this I understood him to mean, that the Natives generally at the Waitara could not have reasonably opposed it. I remain, &c, Henry Govett. Robert Parris, Esq. 9. In December last a Native called Waitere, from Hangatiki, an active agent in the King movement, called at Waitara on his way to the South, and left secretly a King's flag with a Native called Erueti, the miscreant that proposed the plot to murder me, who has done a great deal of mischief in this district. As soon as William King found out that this flag had been left there, he accused those who sanctioned it of acting treacherously by him, and finding some of his own people favourable to it, he threatened to leave the district. This matter caused a division among the party ; William King left liis Pa at Waitara, and went and lived with Teito, near the Waiongona, while; the other party still carried on the flag question, and commenced to prepare a flagstaff". The two old men, Tamati Raru and Rawiri Raupongo, declared they would lose their lives rather than allow of its being erected on their land. Whilst this was going on a large (Kupenga) fishing-net was also being made by the same party. William King went to Tamati Raru and Rawiri Raupongo, and recommended them to obstruct the use of the net (which right by Native custom is vested in the owners of the land) by falling on it with a knife and cutting it in pieces. Teira, who was stopping in town, came to me i n trouble for the two old Chiefs, lest they should consent to William King's recommendation and get hurt ; I therefore went with him the following day to Waitara, and advised them not to interfere. 10. In January last a report was current that I was going to cut the bouudary line of the block of land, and in consequence thereof an armed party was out every day, waiting for me. On hearing of this, I rode down to them and gave them a reprimand tor assembling in that way with arms, and told them that they need not be lying in wait for me, that they should have notice, whenever it was decided to survey the land. I had a long discussion with them, during which Edward (William King's son) said that they had determined the land should not be sold, for if they allowed Teira to sell, others would be wanting to sell also. 11. On payment of the instalment of the 29th November last, I read over the boundary of the block ot land, in the presence of William King and his party, to which was appended the following, as instructions from His Excellency the Governor:— "If any other person can prove that he owns any part of the land within the boundaries above described, his claim will be respected, and he will be allowed to retain or sell the same, as he may think proper." No definite claim was ever preferred, at this or any other time, and the only position they have ever taken is ihe arbitrary one of assuming the right to oppose the sale of any land, even by the rightful owners. 12. Having been instructed to proceed with the survey of the land, I appointed the 20th February for the commencement, and informed William King accordingly. This having been generally understood by the settlers, a number of them were intending to accompany us, on hearing of which, I went to His Honor the Superintendent, and requested that a notice be published cautioning them against doing so, as it was highly objectionable. On arriving on the ground with a surveyor, two chain men, and one Native, Hemi Pataka, one of the sellers, we were met by a party of seventy to eighty, waiting for us. On placing the suiveyor' s

27

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

instruments on the ground, they were seized, and a struggle ensued, when Hemi Pataka struck one to the ground. I exerted myself to prevent any further collision, and requested the surveyor to retire : shortly afterwards we returned to town. 13. If the question with regard to this land had been confined to the Waitara Natives, it would have been settled amicably, but the interference of the Waikatos, and the support guaranteed from that quarter, rendered the opposition impracticable and ungovernable ; the question of claims was entirely repudiated, and the authority and supremacy of the Maori King declared. 14. On the arrival of His Excellency the Governor from Auckland, he sent a request by the Rev. Mr. Whiteley, Mr. Rogan, and myself, to William King, to come to town, and have a conversation with him, and sent him a written pledge that he should not be molested. THE GOVERNOR'S PLEDGE. Ist March, 1860. I hereby pledge my word that W. King and any reasonable number of his followers who may choose to come to New Plymouth unarmed, and converse with me, shall be allowed to return unharmed and in freedom, to the place from whence they came. This promise shall be good from this day, until the night of the third of March, 1860. I\ Gore Browne. William King refused to comply with His Excellency the Governor's request, and from that time remained away in the bush, where he had previously prepared himself a place, having decided upon hostilities against the Government. I have, &c, Robert Parris, District Commissioner. The Chief Commissioner, &c., &c, &c. Auckland. MEMORANDUM BY HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR. Government House, 20th July, 1860. In order to complete the documents about to be printed for both Houses of Assembly, the Governor requests the Chief Land Purchase Commissioner to answer the following questions :— First, —Had Tamati Raru, Rawiri Raupongo, and their people, such a title to the block of land recently purchased at the Waitara, as justified them in selling it to the Queen ? Second, —Had William King any right to interfere to prevent the sale of the above block of land at the Waitara to the Queen ? CHIEF LAND PURCHASE COMMISSIONER TO THE GOVERNOR. Auckland, 23rd July, 1860. Sir,— In reply to your Excellency's Memorandum of the 20th inst., I have the honor to state with reference to the first mentioned question, as to whether Tamati Raru, Rawiri Raupongo, and their people, had such a title to the block of land recently purchased at the Waitara as justified them in selling it to the Queen. I believe that the above Chiefs, conjointly with others at the South associated with them in the sale, had an undoubted right of disposal to the land in question. With reference to the second enquiry, " Had William King any right to interfere to prevent the sale of the above block of land at the Waitara to the Queen ?" The question of Title has been carefully investigated. All the evidence that has come before me, including Wm. King's own testimony that the land belonged to the above parties, goes to prove that he had no ri«ht to interfere; the interference assumed by him has been obviously based upon opposition to land sales in the Taranaki Province generally, as a prominent member of an anti-land-selling league. I have, Sec , Donald McLean. Chief Land Purchase Commissioner* His Excellency Colonel Gore Browne, C. 8., &c, &c, &c. Enclosure 3 in No. 1. New Plymouth, September. 13th, 1860. Sis,— I have the honor to forward for your information, the following further particulars, relative to

28

E—No. 4.

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

meetings and interviews with the Waitara natives, for the purpose of discussing and investigating the title to the block of land sold by Teira and party to the Government. 2. The first meeting was convened by Teira, to declare publicly his intention in the matter, on the 28th N ivember, I8f)7, at the Kuhikubi pa, Waitara, which meeting I attended. On that occasion RawirißaupODga appeared undecided, although both he and Patukakariki had intimated to me, th< ir desire to sell the land on the South batik of the Waitara. Patukakariki has some substantial claims in the piece excluded from the block sold by Teira and part-/ ; William King has also two vi ry small allotments there : for this reason, I refused to allow that part to be included in the bl.tck, although the party selling are tlie largest claimants ther?. Previously to this, Ilorima Kumukumu had been t<> inform me, that bis father had decided to sell the land in question on account of disputes they had had with some of William King's people about the occupation of it, and very shortly after this he died ; had he survived, I have no doubt but that his father and he would have supported the sale, and that iliev would have sold also the piece of land to which they have substantial claims, but which is now excluded from the purchase. 3. At the beforementioned meeting, Teira, Retimana, and Hemi Pataka spoke and declared their intention to sell their land. They warned Eauponga and Patukakariki not to betiay them, intimating that they had encouraged them privately to be strong in the matter but now were afraid to speak out. William King was tlie only man who spoke for the opposition, he said nothing about claims to the land, but threatened war if any land was sold, as he did also in his letter to Ihaia aad Nikorimt respecting the sale of the Taiuiutangi block. 4. Shortly alter this Katatore was murdered, and land purchase operations were su°pendcd for nine months in consequence of the disturbances among the Maories. The negotiation for the Tarurutangi Llock was resumed at the request of the natives themselves, and reopened Teira's offer as a, collateral question. Teira, on every favorable opportunity, agitated the sale, and states that his title was never disputed. At. several meetings he promised his opponents that if they would withdraw their opposition ( considered to be very wrong.) he would show his love for the tribe by declining to sell any more land, bin as his word had gone to the Governor offering this piece of land, he could not, and would not give the matter up, and if the Governor refused, he should urge the next to buy the land (nothing but the justice of his case could have supported him in this conduct.) 5. In the i.i t week in 1859, I sent William King word that I was going to Waitara to meet him and his tribe respecting Teira's offer, and requested that they would all meet me. On my arrival 1 found most of them present but not William King. I opened the question by aHvi-ing them to sell their individual claims to the land, so that the dispute respecting occupation which ha i arisen subsequent to their arrival from Waikanae might be ended During the discussion Ihakara became violent and threatened the life of Teira should he s< II the land. Some of them said the land belonged to them all. I requested them to show me their different parcels, but they refused. Patukakariki did not on this or on any other occasion oppose the sale, but always remained silent. During the twelve months which the purchase was pending, I visited William King and his people very frequently, and was on the most friendly terms with them, until the attempted survey of the block. This was so'apparent to Teira and his party, who were staying in town, that they became displeased with me, and enquired if I was waiting for the assent of William King and his people to the sale of land which did not belong to them, stating that they would not consent, that they should receive payment for that which .lid not belong to them. C. Failing to get an explanation of any claims from the opposition, T had recourse to others for information. Hnpurona told me the land belonged to the selling p;irty and that he should have nothing to do with the opposition if Teira confined the block to its present boundaries. William Tamihana, a particular friend of Wiremu Kingi's, came to me with an impression, that the inland boundary at the Devon line went straight to the Waitara river, and included a place called Kakaika. O;: explaining to him that the proposed boundary excluded that place and others, he at once admitted that the land belonged to the party who were anxious to sell it, and by letter (which I ded to i ou), declared he would have nothing to do with the question to whatever extent William King might curry it. 7. On the loth of February last, I met William King and all his people the last, time ; I entreated them in the kindest possible manner to meet His Kxcellency the Governor in a proper spirit in the matti i him that he was most liberally disposed towards them if they would only assist him in putting an end to the dreadful state of things which was disgracing them as a tiibe. A young man called Hemi Te Horo (son of the chief Tamati Ngorewa,) addressed the meeting in favorable terms, which, bo noon as William King discovered, he rose and said, "I will not consent for the land to be separate.!, because it was my ftuher's dying instructions." 8. Nopera Kaorua not only consented to the cale Jbut urged me to proceed with the purchase, requesting me at the snn-e time not to use his name until the matter was to be settled, as he was afraid of the people, but subsequently when I summoned V\ illiam King and his peoj le to witness the payment of the first instalment, he (Nopera,) stood up to oppose the sale, upon which he was lectured by Teira for his deceitfulness, and w:;s told by Raniera Ngaere (a disinterested man,) that he ought to be fined for his bad conduct, and to neither of them was he able to reply. I bave, &c, Eobriit Parris, District Commissioner. The Chief Commissioner Auckland.

29

EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE ORIGIN

No. 2. ROpoama's letters. Waikawa, Aperira 10, 1859. E hoa, c Makarini, — Tena koe. Tenei taku kupu, kia rongo mai koe ; he kupu milii naku. E koro ma, c kui ma, c ! whakarongo ake ra! E tama, tna c, whakarongo ake ra ! naku i aha ? E hine ma c, whakarongo ake ra ! naku i aha? Ko nga iwi o o tatou tupuna, ko Waitara, ka pau i a maua ko toku hoa aroha ko Makarini. Heoi ano era kupu. He kupu ano enei. E tama ma c! whakarongo mai ra ! E hine ma c ! whakarongo mai ra! E aku tuakana c! whakarongo mai ra ! Naku hoki i aha ? Ko nga iwi o o tatou tupuna, ko Waitara, ka pau i a maua ko toku hoa aroha ko Makarini. E Ma, ko te utu tenei i tono mama k'oe ki aau kia whakaaturia atu c au ki a koe; c waru miriona: kite pai mai koe ki enei utu me homai c koe ki konei: c kore au c pai ki Poneke: kahore au i te pai ki a Herangi; engari ano, kaua c purutia atu to matou inoni; me homai c koe aianei, i to tatangamai ki a matou ; kaua koe c haere ki Poneke. Haere mai; whakaotia ta taua korero. Naku, na to hoa aroha. Na Ropoama, Ihaka, Te Ketu, Witikau, Wi Te Honi, Te Matina, Ropata Ngapaki, Hamiora Hotu, Rihari, Te Hereiwni, Naru, Oropere, Haimona, Rupuha, Te Hita, Hamiora, Hamuera, Hare Puwera, More, Karanama, Hoani, Tamati, Hohepa Nga, Te Hara, Wi Te Puke, Meha, Te Rei, Wikeiri, Wikotiroa, Utiku, Te Kepa, Te Hapimana, Neta, Inia, Pirihira. Wi Toea, Rakera, Takana, Ripeka, Hone Kewetone, Tiripa, Hakaraia, Ema, Hona, Tarete, Te Retimana, Ngawaka Pirihira, Eruera Tuiti, Heni, Te Nihana, Heni Kereopa, Henare Te Moana, Neta, Kereopa, Oriana, Wiwi, Ora, Taiii, Meri Paina, Ropoama, Miriama, Timoti, Pirihira, Kβ ta matou kupu tenei oto matou runanga;—Homai to matou moni. Na te runanga tenei mihi ki a koe. .Heoi ano ; ka mutu. Na to hoa aroha, Na Ropoama. [translation.] Waikawa, 10th April, 1859. Fhiend McLean, Salutations to you. This is my word. Hearken, a word of affection from me ! O friends, •"oale and female, hearken! O sons! hearken ! what have I done ? O daughters! hearken ! what have I done ? The bones of our ancestors, that is, Waitara, are consumed by my loving friend McLean and me. Enough of those words. Here are also some words. 0 sons ! hearken! O daughters ! hearken ! Omy elder brothers ! hearken ! what have I done ? The bones of our ancestors, Waitara, are (or will be) consumed by my loving friend McLean and me. McLean, You requested me to name to you the price which I want :it is eight millions. If you approve of this price (or payment) do you give it here. Ido not approve of (its beins; given at) Wellington; nor do I approve of Mr. Searancke ; I approve of you only. Do not withhold our money. Dα you give it now, while you are near us. Do not you go to Wellington. Come here and finish your and my talk. From your loving friend, Ropoama Ihaka Wi Te Honi Witikau Ropata Ngapaki Te Ketu

30

E.—No. I.

OF THE NATIVE INSURRECTION.

Te Matina Rihari Hamiora Hotu Naru Te Herewini Haimona Oropere Te Hita Rupuha Hamuera Hamiora More Hare Puwera Hoani Karanama Hohepa Nga Tamati Wi Te Puke Te Hara Te Rei Meha Wi Kotiroa Wikeiri Te Kepa Utiku Neta Te Hapimana Pirihira Inia • Rakera Wi Toea Ripeka Takana Tiripa Hone Kewetone Ema Hakaraia Tarete Hona Ngawaka Pirihira Te Retimana Heni Eruera Tuiti Heni Kereopa Te Nihana Neta Henare Te Moana Oriana Kereopa Ora Wiwi Meri Paina Tahi Miriama Ropoama Pirihira Timoti This is our word (the word) of our Runanga. Give us our money. This is the affectionate Message of the runanga to you. It is enough. From your loving friend, Ropoama. Waikawa, 10 Aperira, 1859. E hoa, c Te Makarini:— E vi atu ana au ki a koe kia whakaaturia mai c koe kia a au kite kitea c koe tan whakaaro pai ki roto ki a koe, koia tena. Homai nga utu mo te rohe i Waitaha haere mai ki Puketapu, Waiongana, wakawiti ki rawahi, kei te Hoe te rohe ka tuku ki uta ki Matatacorea, ki Poinanga, ki Pukekura: otira, kua kite koe i taku korero kua tae atu ki a koe mo nga utu o toku whenua kia homai c koe nga mano etoru me nga rave waru ki aau aiauei. Kahore au ite pai kia roa; engari kia tata. Ileoti ano, ka mutu. Na tou hoa aroha, Na Hare Puru, Te Hbrevtcni Ngamutunga, Rakera. Tenei ano taku kupu atu ki a koe mo tetahi pukapuka maku kia homai c korua ko te karauna o Te Kuini. ano. Na Ropoama enei kupu. Xi a Te Makarini, Kei Akarana. [translation.] Waikawa, ICth April, 1859. Friend McLean :— lam asking you to shew me, if you find a good thought within you, that is it. Give the payment for the boundaries from Waitaha thence to Puketapu and Waiongnna crossing to the other side; the boundary is at Te Hoe, thence inland to Matataeorea. to Poinanga and to Pukekura. You however have seen what I had to say, that which was sent to you about the payment for my land (asking you) to give me three thousand and eight hundred at this present time. Ido not like tliat there «hould be any delay, it had better be done soon. Enough. It is ended. From your loving friend, Hake Puru, Te Heeewini Ngamutunga, and Rakera. This is another word of mine about a paper for me, to be given to me by you with the Crown of •the Queen. Enough. These words are from, Ropoama. To D. McLean, Esq., Auckland.

31