C.—6

9

slightest claim to the land, either for himself or on behalf of any one else, although the Judge several times asked whether any one objected to the unanimous desire of all present that Kamariera te Wharepapa (who is called Mare by Mr. Tole) should have his name alone inserted in the memorial of ownership. It was at this stage of the proceedings that Te Haurangi came forward and stated that he had no objection, but that a portion of his land was included in the survey, and he was quite willing that Te Wharepapa's name alone be in the memorial, provided that he (Te Wharepapa) pay him his share of the money when the land should be paid for. So far the statement is correct, and Te Wharepapa agreed to do so ; but Heta te Haara took no part whatever in these proceedings, although present all the time, which he has since admitted to me, in the presence of Mr. Kemp, on my reminding him of the fact. It is also true that the Judge told Te Haurangi to mark off the piece he claimed, and that a pencil line was drawn across the plan of tho land by the Interpreter of the Court at the direction of Te Haurangi, and not objected to by Te Wharepapa, who was looking on at the time. Ido not myself, however, consider that such a line could give any correct idea of the actual portion which To Haurangi really claimed, for it was not a line describing any natural features such as usually form boundary lines of Maori claims, nor was it even a straight line from any point known or described by name to any other point similarly defined, but an arbitrary straight line crossing the plan, which itself showed no distinctive features, neither Te Haurangi or Te Wharepapa, being Maoris, having any idea on what scale the plan was drawn, or what proportion the one portion had to the other. At the same time whatever interest Te Haurangi may have been entitled to, Te Wharepapa did admit that he had an interest, and he, without any persuasion on the part of Te Wharepapa (as is incorrectly stated in Mr. Tole's letter), but after consulting with others of the Natives, voluntarily informed the Court that he was willing to leave the matter in Te Wharepapa's hands on condition that he got paid for his portion. It is true that the portion so marked out on the plan by a pencil line does contain 8,775 acres, as shown afterwards by the separate areas having been calculated, but there was no mention of area at the time, and I do not believe for one moment that either Te Wharepapa or Te Haurangi himself had the most remote idea that such an extent was included, nor do I myself rely on such a description as giving a correct view of the boundary line between the two parties in the case of Maori claims. Mr. Tole remarks on the fact of such a length of time having elapsed between this settlement and the actual purchase of the land so as to preclude the claim being reheard. This was, no doubt, unfortunate, and weakened my hands in effecting a settlement between Te Wharepapa and Haurangi; but the reason was that the then Agent was not in possesion of funds at that time to enable him to com plete the purchase, and before he obtained the necessary funds the Natives had dispersed. He (Mr. Brissenden, who was the Agent at the time) went to meet the Natives at Kaihu as soon as he was in possession of funds, but did not settle with them on that occasion because they were not all present, Te Haurangi being one who was absent. The first opportunity there was after that of meeting them was at the Kaihu Court in January last, when the matter was closed by me, as related in my report above referred to. Early in January, namely, on the 6th, I met Te Haurangi at Ohaeawai. I then informed him that I had appointed to meet Te Wharepapa and the Mangakahia Natives at Kaihu on the occasion of the sitting of the Native Lands Court, advertised to be held on the 27th January, and warned him to be present, as I intended to settle for the Opouteke Block. Heta te Haara was with him at the time, and said he would try and be there too, if he was well enough. This was the first I knew of Heta in the matter, aud he did not then prefer a claim. On my arrival at Kaihu on the 27th January, I met Haurangi, who handed me a letter from Heta te Haara and Ihaka te Tai, of which the following is a translation:— " Feiend, — " Ohaeawai, 24th January, 1876. " Greeting. —This is a request from us to you about the money belonging to Peita te Haurangi Do not pay it there, but give him ten pounds ; take the greater portion to Auckland. "Ihaka te Tai, and " To Mr. Preece, Kaihu Wairoa." " Heta te Haaea. On reading this letter I asked Te Haurangi whether this was his desire; he repbed, " Yes." I told him it entirely rested with him, as I did not know Heta in the matter. He said Heta had written the letter with his knowledge and consent. On proceeding to settle the purchase of the block, I told Te Wharepapa that I should require to retain for Te Haurangi the amount of money in proportion to the area marked off on the plan. Te Wharepapa said he intended to deal fairly, but that the amount claimed by Te Haurangi was out of all proportion to his interest, and that it was a matter which he alone was responsible for, and that I had no right to interfere ; that the money would all be taken to Mangakahia, and there be dealt with by tho whole of the persons interested. I endeavoured in every way in my power to effect a settlement of the matter between them, aud assembled them and others together to discuss the question. In this discussion, I must say that Te Haurangi made out a very poor case for himself as to the extent of his claim to the land; yet, notwithstanding that, I did my best to get Te Wharepapa and the other Mangakahia Natives to settle with him there and then, but they insisted that it was a matter entirely between them and Te Haurangi, and Te Wharepapa refused to si<m the deed unless I paid him the amount of the purchase money. Mr. Tole refers to the matter as an " arrangement which was come to by the parties and recognized by the Court." Such it was "by the parties " and between them, namely, Te Wharepapa and Te Haurangi, and that arrangement relating not to the land itself, but to a portion of the proceeds of the sale of the same ; the nature of which arrangement will be found in the records of the Court; and on the evidence of that record, I presume, Te Haurangi has a legal claim against Te Wharepapa, independent of any sum I have paid him, provided he has not already settled it, as I am informed he had done before he ever saw Mr. Tole. When I found I could not get the matter settled between Te Wharepapa and Tc Haurangi, and as it wa3 a matter of dispute as to money between them, Te Haurangi having no legal right to the laud, but having, as I considered, a good remedy at law as 2—C. 6.