3

a—2a

Hone Pini, Parakipano te Koliu, Wiremu Parakipano, Te Muera te Naku, Peia Poriki, Pohutu Turiwhati, Hohepina Parakipaue, Rititia te Kipihana, Amiria te Hiakai, Petera te Au, Ruiha te Naera, Te Uawhaki, Tata Pini, Mihipeka Pehara, Tuangahuni, Tepora Ngaroha, Rata Roha, Anahira, Turanga, Raita Manewha, Wiremu te Manewhaj Wikicoria Turaaga, Ihaia Turanga, Hemara Turanga, Pohe Turanga, Araraa Karaka te Umutiritiri, Meihana Henare, Poihipi, Reihana te Piki, Rota te Hiakai, Mauahi te Hiakai, Mata Karaka te Umatiritiri, Aratna Karaka Tatnaiti, Hiaeikakea, Piripi te Au, Wireinu Rikihana, Bnereta Rikihana, Pairoroku Rikihana, YV^arihi Mokowhiti, Rikiliana te Wairoa, Mata Ranginui, Tioriori Rikihana, Raita Rikihana, Hiaeikakea te Hiakai, Karepa, Mohi te Tawharu, Waiatate Wharu, Hapeta te Rangikatukua, Manahi Paora, Revveti te Kohu, Henare te Hatete, Watene te Panga, Tamatatai Haru.ru, Hona Taupo. All Ngatiwehiwehi, per Maaahi Paora.

No. 2. Mr. F M. P Brookfield to the Hon. the Native Minister. Sir, — Auckland, 16th March, 1881. I have the honor to forward you herewith the Commission issued by His Excellency the Governor to Mr. H. T. Kemp and myself relative to claims made by certain Natives to lands adjudicated upon in the Native Land Court held at Cambridge in the month of November, 1868, together with the minutes of evidence taken by us, and our report thereon, and to request that you will lay the same before His Excellency I have, &c, The Hon. the Minister for Native Affairs, Wellington. Fred. M. P Brookfield.

Enclosure 1 in No. 2. Report of the Commissioners. To His Excellency the Honorable Arthur Hamilton Gordon, Knight Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, Her Majesty's High Commissioner for the Western Pacific, Governor and Commander-in-Chief and over Her Majesty's Colony of New Zealand and its Dependencies, and Vice-Admiral of the same. Sir, — The Commission with which your Excellency has honored us was placed in our hands on the 10th day of January last. The notification in the Maori language that we should sit at Cambridge, in the District of Waikato, on the following Ist day of February to make the inquiries intrusted to us, was printed on the 12th day of January, and copies were immediately despatched to the petitioners through their recognized agent, Mr. A. McDonald. Before entering upon our formal report we beg to call the attention of your Excellency to the fact that Mr. McDonald, who has conducted the correspondence with the Government on account of the petitioners, has led not only the petitioners, but also the Natives who were declared by the Court sitting in 1868 to be owners of the several blocks an interest in which is claimed by the petitioners, to believe that, should our report be favourable, all Crown grants which have been issued respecting these blocks, and all subsequent dealings with the land, will thereby become void, and that the land will revert to them as joint owners. Finding that this statement had such influence with those who supported their claims in the Court of 1868, and who then ignored the claims of the petitioners, as to lead them now to admit the claims of the petitioners, we took an early opportunity of disabusing their minds on that point, and of informing them that in no possible way could the Crown grants be upset, and that all that the petitioners could obtain (if anything) would be compensation in either money or land from the Government. Mr. McDonald then handed in a written protest against that statement, with a request that it might be attached to the minutes of evidence; and that accordingly has been done. Having made this preliminary statement, we have the honor to report,-—■ 1. That in the Native Land Court held at Cambridge in November, 1868, only four blocks of land outside the confiscated boundary-line were adjudicated upon —namely, Pukekura, Puahoe, Ngamako No. 2, and Maungatautari Nos. 1 and 2. 2. That the petitionersaredescribed as belongingtothe NgatiraukawaTribe,whilstthosewhoappeared before us as claimants describe themselves as being of the Ngatikauwhata, and ignore any connection with the former tribe, alleging that they themselves are a distinct tribe, and have been so from ancient days, when they numbered from 800 to 1,000 warriors. This, however, is strongly denied by members of other tribes, who assert that until a very few years ago they never heard of such a tribe as Ngatikauwhata, and that the claimants are, in fact, only a hapu of Ngatiraukawa. The object of this statement on the part of the petitioners will appear when we consider the question as to whether they were or were not represented in the Court of November, 1868. 3. The claims of the petitioners divided themselves into three classes : — (a.) A tribal claim to Pukekura, Puahoe, and Ngamako No. 2, by 142 individuals, viz. : Tapa te Whata, Hoeta Kahuhui, Rena ote Wharepakaru, Karehana Tauranga, Henare Poaki Mereti, Takana te Kawa, Kereama Paoe, Tamihana Whareakaka, Kauwhata Tapa, Himiona te Oha, Matapere te Whata, Kooro Renao, Ra'uira Kahuhui, Nere Otu, Mokena Manako, Heni Peti Rangiotu, Merehira Tauranga, Ruiha Kinomoerua, Hanatia Heipora Manako, Kehara Kauwhata, Maka Renao, Emiri Manako, Pere Kinomoerua, Tino Tangata, Harata te Oha, Brana te Rangitiora, Hori te Mataku, Ani Patene Hori, Ihaka Renao, Pere Himiona, Heni Himiona, Maraea Himiona, Haimona Renao, Hori to Hoeta, Kaumatua Hoetu, Hanita Renao, Epiha, te Moanakino, Wetini Tangata, Earnari Kahuhui, Hepi Moihi, Metapere Hareini, Marara Hoeta, Ngatai-aka Hoeta, Tura Hoeta, Waeroa Hoeta, Rangitou Hoeta, Ani Hareini, Areta Hemokanga, Weti Pekamu, Pape te Rama Apakura, Miriama te Rama Apakura, Makereti Weti, Wiremu Pekamu, Ratima Pekamu, Turuhira Pekamu, Whati Pekamu, Ema te Awe-