dk-8

12

APPENDIX lI.—MEMORANDUM ON THE QUESTION OF MEEGEE OF COMPENSATION AWAEDS IN TEIBAL GEANTS.

No. 1. The Hon. Sir W. Fox to the Hon. the Native Minister. Sir, — West Coast Commission Office, New Plymouth, sth June, 1883. I have the honour to forward a memorandum on the merger of compensation awards in the reserves recommended by me in the West Coast confiscated territory, and to request that you will lay the same before His Excellency the Governor. I have, &c, William Fox, The Hon. the Native Minister. West Coast Commissioner.

Enclosure. Memorandum on the Merger of Compensation Awards in the Reserves recommended by the West Coast Commissioner. The question how far the unallocated awards issued by the Compensation Court would merge in the abandonment of confiscation of some blocks, and the granting of tribal reserves on others, occupied much of the attention of the Commissioners of 1880, and was frequently discussed by them. In their Second Eeport, page xxxvii., they stated briefly the reasons for and against such a course, but did not express any categorical opinion upon it. Two points, however, they were clear upon— Ist. That no loyal Native should be compensated twice over; and 2nd. That in the settlement of the question it would be unavoidable to give discretionary power to those who were to settle it. Since the date of these remarks the more intimate acquaintance which the present Commissioner has made with the details of the West Coast complications has confirmed him in the adoption of the above suggestions, and satisfied him that, whether there be any technical considerations to be met or not, the principle of merger is quite consistent with the equitable settlement of the Native difficulties, to secure which was the object of the legislation of 1879 and 1880, under which his Commission was issued, and in accordance with which he has felt it his duty hitherto to guide his recommendations to His Excellency. After the announcement made by the Government in March and "September, 1866, relative to the abandonment of confiscation at Stony River and Opunake (see references in margin, Second Eeport, 1880, page xxxix., and Evidence, Q. 717, et seq.), it was quite understood, both by the Natives and the Government, that the confiscation would not be maintained in those districts. Notwithstanding this, the Compensation Court is found dealing with these blocks in October, 1866, on the 26th of which month, and under the provisions of the Act of 1865, agreements were entered into with the loyal Natives by the Crown Agent for the commutation of their claims from Hangatahua to Kaupokonui, a very large part of which related to the Stony River and Opunake Blocks. As far as these blocks were concerned this ought not to have been done, as the Government had already, and quite recently, declared its intention of abandoning the confiscation, over them. The matter, however, was further complicated by the Compensation Court, three years afterwards (in March, 1869), issuing " compensation awards " to the persons and for the quantities apparently designated in the " agreements," and the parties to which had, as in all such cases, requested the Court " not to proceed any further in them " —that is, not to make any such awards. The result was that a large number of loyal Natives received awards and obtained scrip to be selected in blocks of land which had never been, in fact, taken from them, or over which the confiscation had been practically abandoned. What ought to have been done in these cases was not to have given compensation either in the shape of agreements or awards, but to have issued a Proclamation under the Act of 1867, which was passed for the very purpose of giving legal validity to the abandonment, but repealed in 1878 without it being done. (Second Report, 1880, page xxxix.) The cases of Parihaka and Waimate Plains differ from those above mentioned. In them the confiscation was always maintained, and the proper course was to make specific awards to the loyal Natives, either by decision of the Court or by agreements under the Act of 1865. Unnecessarily both courses were pursued : agreements were entered into in 1866, and awards^made in 1869 ; but neither fixed the locality of the awards further than the general limits of the tribal districts within which the specific quantity of each awardee was to be taken; while any actual allocation on the ground has, till lately, been prevented by the opposition of the Natives themselves, their denial of the validity of the confiscation, and their physical obstruction of the necessary surveys. Then, after several years, comes the'^adjustment recommended by the Commissioners of 1880, followed by the grant of very liberal reserves to the tribes resident in the districts, including the holders of the awards, every one of whom has his name inserted in one grant or another. It becomes my duty to decide how far the compensation awards made under the circumstances above related are now to be recognized.