C—6.

20

of the Court; and Mr. Nelson, my assistant in the land-purchase matters, and fully explained the nature of the same to them. Tiopira then signed them in the presence of the gentlemen I have named, and they were attested by Mr. Kemp. There could have been no possibility of there being any misunderstanding as to the £2,000 being the price of Tiopira's interest, for I remember distinctly, when Mr. Clendon, the interpreter, was reading over and explaining the deeds, he at first explained to them that the two blocks were being sold for £4,000; lat once corrected him and told him that the arrangement was that Tiopira was selling the whole of his interest for £2,000, which was then his explanation to them. It is true that there was no total amount of consideration absolutely written in the deeds at the time, and I myself called the attention of the Judge to the fact, and told him that, as I did not yet know -what I should have to pay Parore, I could not tell what the full amount was, and at the same time I asked him to note what I was now paying, and if Parore came to terms he would see what he was to get, which together with the amount now and formerly paid would be the price of the two blocks. I also told him that I would not ask him to attest the signatures of Tiopira until I should have come to terms with Parore and he should have signed; or, should I fail to come to terms with him, I would ask him to attest the signatures of Tiopira, and then insert the £2,000 as the consideration of his interest. The Judge did not attest the signature of Tiopira then, nor was the attestation clause written in or attested to until after the actual amounts of consideration of money for both blocks had been written in, in both deeds, and after Parore had signed them and the whole of the money had been paid. Judge Symonds and Mr. Kemp then attested the deeds and examined them, thereby seeing that the amounts named were true, and in accordance with the payments made. The apportionment of the moneys in the deeds, at £2,200 for the one block and £2,300 for the other, was simply a matter of detail, in order to apportion the payments as nearly as I could according to area in round numbers, for the agreements with both Tiopira and Parore, although quite separate, were in each case not for the two blocks separately, but for each of their undivided interest in the whole area contained in the two blocks ; and such division was a matter of no moment to the sellers, as both blocks were owned by the same parties, and the money was paid in each case in a lump sum. There was no concealment of anything by me; the whole matter was done in an open and straightforward manner before a Judge of the Court, a Eesident Magistrate, and two licensed interpreters, besides being publicly talked about. After Parore came to terms, and I had consented to pay him £2,500,1 was asked by some of Tiopira's own people what he had got, and I told them. I saw Paul afterwards, as well as several of Tiopira's people, who mast have known it, but they made no complaint, nor did I hear of any till I saw Mr. Tole's letter. With regard to the question as to whether in the whole arrangements Tiopira has not obtained fully as much and more than Parore I shall presently show. It must be remembered that the Maunganui and Waipoua Blocks alone (and not the reserve, "Waipoua No. 2) were the subject of investigation before the Court up to the time of its giving its judgment, which judgment the Court informed the Natives could only be rendered valid by their mutual agreement, or by the Court accepting any voluntary arrangement come to between the parties. The Court did, however, give its judgment, in order, I apprehend, to acquaint the Natives how far their opinion went, and in this judgment they expressed an opinion that Parore had a superior right to Tiopira, and consequently, out of the 72,892 acres before the Court, they awarded to Parore 37,592 (Maunganui) and to Tiopira 35,300 (Waipoua), thus making the award to Parore 2,292 acres in excess of that to Tiopira. This judgment could not be upheld in consequence of the strange conduct of the Assessor who sat with the Judges, who, having fully concurred with the Judges while they were conferring together, afterwards on the bench gave expression to quite a contrary opinion. It must be remembered that the Waipoua reserve, containing 12,220 acres, was not under investigation at the time; had it been I have no doubt but that the Court would have awarded to Parore at least an equal interest with Tiopira, if not more, for the Waipoua settlement was his birth-place and continual home until only a few years ago, and in it was planted, and now stands, a fig tree, a present made by His Majesty George IV. to Hongi Hika, the uncle of Parore, who brought it out from England and planted it there. So Tiopira was not entitled by the judgment of the Court to be in the memorial of ownership of Maunganui at all, but in Waipoua, the lesser of the two by 2,292 acres, and the reserve of 12,220 acres was not before the Court. It was only by an agreement come to between the parties after considerable discussion, and numerous proposals and counter proposals having passed between them, that it was arranged that Parore and Tiopira were each to have their names inserted in the memorial of ownership for both Waipoua and Maunganui, and that Tiopira should be paid by Parore the sum of £IUO out of the proceeds of the sale of timber on a block of land named Waimata, which by the judgment of a former Court Tiopira had been found to have had no interest in, and that the Waipoua reserve should be in the name of Tiopira alone, which reserve was through the whole of that negotiation stated to have been G,OOO acres or thereabouts, whereas it afterwards became known to us that it was and is 12,220 acres. Mr. Kemp and myself had very great difficulty in inducing Parore to agree to these terms, and had we known, as we afterwards did when too late, that the reserve was over 12,000 acres, instead as we understood about 6,000 acres, I am sure that I for one would not have asked him to agree to such terms ; and it was that as much as anything which induced me ultimately to agree to pay him £500 more for his interest than Tiopira had sold for: at all events I had to do it, for it was the lowest amount that it was possible to get him to agree to take. In order to show clearly the proportionate value that Parore and Tiopira have each had out of the whole estate in which they were jointly interested, I have put in the following form—