THE TARANAKI QUESTION..

11

E—No. 2

venae to clear land for cultivation on the other side of Waitara, (the name of the cultivation was Wharenui,) the old chief said that he should return to his own place, and that Waitara should be let alone for our own use. d myself heard these words in 1842-43.) None of the Waikato and Ngntimaniapoto had settled there before the Pakehas to New Plymouth. Nu-itone Te Pakaru was the first. Therefore one of those old chiefs, Ngaraurekan, went from Waikanae to keep possession of Waitara, lest Nqniimaniapoto shoild come back, and Ngatimaniapoto altogether gave up Waiiara, even up to the time of Wiremu Kingi's migration thither. (I except Peketahi, who went there on the, ground of his wife's title.) Further, Wiremu Kingi was a friend to tlie Pakehas of Wellington. In December, 1843, we went from Waikanae, (having Archdeacon Hadfield with us,) and found Haeiewaho being tried by Mr Halswell in the Court House at Wellington. He was found guilty, and was taken to prison. Then ail lie Maories of Wellington rose up in arms against ihe Pakehas of the town, but Wiremu Kingi. hastened to quiet them, and there was an end ot it. in 1846, there came a message from Governor Grey to Wiremu Kirrgi, to po to him to Kapiti on board the man-of-wa- called the " Castor " We went, and then Governor Grey asked Wiremu Kingi to go to Te Paripari to deter his eneniv liangihaeata. Wiremu Kingi iu-iuediately consented. His regard for Rangihaeaia did not prevent him. The next (lav, we came across to Waikanae, and Wiremu Kingi inimeiiiatelv urged his people to go to Te Paripari. They slept at Wbareroa, and the nexi day reached Te Paiipari. I also went with him. His party numbered 140. From thence I leturned to Waikanae. He and hi 3 party canght. eight men from Whanganui who had joined Kaogihaeata. When these men were caught, they cried out, "Stop a bit; who knows that, you will not be treated in this Wi»v in time to come?' , Wiremu Kingi bears this saving in mind. After this they were taken to Waikanae, and put on board Governor Grey's steamer. Some of the Pakehas have probably seen these men who were caught by Witernu Kingi. And where is the help now with which the Governor requites Wiremu Kingi? Wiremu Kingi was always one who upheld the Government. He never in any way recognised the Maori King, up to the time of the fighting about Waiiara. This is all I have to say. From your loving friend, KnvAi Te Ahu (43). In these documents the grounds of the opposition to the Government are clearly disclosed (44). The right of the whole Tribe and the rights of individual owners are both maintained. It is averred that the whole Tribe did not consent :—an averment which is not even contradicted by the Government, for the Government lias contented itself with ignoring the tribal right. If anything be plain in the case it is this, that the whole Tribe never have consented to part with the Waitara land (45). Up-in this Fact William King-stands; and but for this fact, we should in all probability, never have encountered any opposition. In the case of the Bell Block, where everyone interested in the Block agreed to the sale, V\ iliiam King's opposition was withdrawn (46). In that case he ceased to oppose, when his people assented. In this, he opposes steadfastly, because his people steadfastly dissent. 8. These adverse claims reach us also through other channels. Dr. Featherston, the Superintendent of'the Province of Wellington, after the outbreak of the troubles at the Waitara, visited some chiefs of the Ngatiawa who still live in the valley of the Hutt. What took piaee on that occasion, was thus stated by Dr. Featherston, in his place in the Hovfse of Representatives, on the 7th of August last :— " ' What,' (said Dr. Featherston,) ' did yoe not mean to admit that William King had no title to the land, no right to forbid the sale ? 'Ihe words were scarcely out of my mouth before Wi I ako, Te Puni, and other chiefs present, cried out. ' Kahorr, kahore. The Governor is in the wrong. Wi Kingi has land in the block, his wife has land, his son also: Te Puni and others /mentionin" , a graat number of names) all own portions of the lam; sold by Teira,' Wi Tako and Te Putii then explained that the land was divided into small allotments ; that those allotments were marked out by stones ; that many of them (the allotments) had names, and said if we would accompany them to Waitara they would point out the allotments of each individual. Wi Tako added, * Teira had no more mht to sell the GOO acres, than a man owning one acre in. Wellington would have a right to sell the whole town.' " Mr. "Fitzherbert, Member for the Hutt district, also stated in the House, —"These (Te Puni and others) are all loyal men ; and these statements have been made not only to me, but to others. They have drawn the plan of Waitara on the sand and on paper, and they have pointed out the owners of the several allotments, and they say that William King was right, and that Teira had no title to sell the land." 9. The foregoing documents and statements are not set forth here as if the averments therein were necessarily true. They are only set forth as shewing what is in effect averred by the adverse claimants. That some of these averments are honestly made, I cannot doubt. I have known Kiwai Te Ahu for years. Atone time I was in the habit of talking with him daily, for months together, lie is a very intelligent, and, I believe, a thoroughly honest man. We are not at liberty to assert these claims to be true, without investigation ; neither are we at liberty to assert them to be false, without investigation. They raise plain issues, on which depends the justice or injustice of the course taken by the Government (47). To ascertain whether they were true or untrue, was the very business and duty of the Government. How did the Government discharge its duty? IV.— The Investigation.. 1. The Governor had accepted the offer of Teira, subject to an investigation of the title. If the seller could make a good title, the Governor would buy 'he land. We have seen that the matters in dispute involved numerous and weighty points, both of law and of fact. Among others, the following questions arose:—" What is the Community, and what the Chief, whose consent is needed? or, if their consent is to be dispensed with, can the Governor lawfully dispense with it? What was the effect of Potatau's cession? Who are the other claimants, besides Teira and his party? Do they consent ? What are their claims? Are those claims valid?"