G.—3.

next incident is the death of Te Whakaete, a great chief of Waikato, killed by Ngatimaru, at Haowhenua. Ngatihaua tried to avenge his death, but were defeated at Kariaruhe. Then Waikato went, with no better result, as they sustained a repulse at Putoetoe. There were several battles fought between Marutuahu and Ngatihaua, but as they do not affect the history of the case, we. will omit all reference to them. The next incident was the great battle of Taumatawiwi, which has already been very ably described. There Marutuahu sustained heavy loss, though dealing heavy blows in return; they were forced to sue for peace, being almost completely out of ammunition. Te Waharoa allowed them to return to their own land, to breed men, to get payment for those they had lost. Ngatikoroki now took possession of and occupied the north-east part of Maungatautari, also Ngatikahukura, and Ngatiwerewere, and Ngatihourua, Ngatihura, &c. Te Waharoa and Ngatihaua returned to Matamata and remained there, as it was rumoured that Ngatimaru and Ngapuhi were coming to attack Matamata. Ngatimaru and Ngapuhi came in two detachments, one of which invested Matamata and the other Kawehitiki; the attacking force retired from Kawehitiki, and joined the other before Matamata. News then reached them that Waikato in strong force was coming to the relief of Matamata, and the siege is raised. Simultaneously with the occupation of the north-east portion of Maungatautiri by Ngatikoroki and other hapus we are told was the occupation of the south-west part by Ngatikoura, who, though they do not appear to have taken any part in the battle of Taumatautiri, were eager to get what benefit was likely to arise therefrom. The occupation of Maungatautiri by Ngatikoroki and the other hapus was never questioned by Ngatiapakura or Ngatiraukawa, or by any other hapus whatever. In consequence of Poara te Uata, a Ngatiraukawa chief, having spared the lives of Tetenui and Pitorua, two young chiefs of Ngitahaua, captured by him at Matamata, and to mark his sense of the generous treatment accorded to them by Poara te Uata, Te Waharoa invited them to return and occupy the tribal possession of Ngatiraukawa on the right bank of the Waikato River. He laid down a boundary which has since been respected, and but slightly varied in later times. After Ngatiraukawa had lived some years at Otaki and other places near Kapiti, they were visited by Potatou and afterwards by Haunui and Porokoru, and formally invited to return to the land, but few appear to have availed themselves of these invitations. Now, the questions we have to determine are: (1.) Were the battles between Waikato and Ngatiraukawa and Kauwhata, which began during the time of Taowhakairo and Koroki and ended with Hangahanga and Aurukoata, of any effect as to the ownership of the land the subject of this adjudication ? (2.) Did Marutuahu acquire the mana over Maungatauri. (3.) Did Ngatihaua and the other hapus get the mana over this land at Taumatawiwi ? Now, having in view the fact that at the previous hearings of the claims to parts of Maungatautari, many persons of the Native race held aloof from having anything to do with the Native Land Court, and by so doing shut themselves out of Court, but who now are present to prosecute their claims in person, we decided to afford them the fullest opportunity of supplying such evidence as they could bring. (1.) Now, as to the first question. After giving full weight to all the evidence we find that the battles between the Waikato and Raukawa did not in any way affect the title of Raukawa to the land before the Court or their other lands. (2.) As to the Second question. Having referred to the evidence of Ngatiraukawa witnesses in a great many cases brought by themselves and others before the Court, as well as the evidence adduced in the present case, we unhesitatingly answer, Yes, Marutuahu did acquire the mana over Maungatauri; for although they came here as refugees they by force of arms caused such of Ngatiraukawa as continued in occupation to vacate the land before the Court, and by that and their occupation acquired the mana. (3.) Now, as to the third question. We find that Ngatihaua, Ngatikoroki, and Ngatihourua, and their hapus, having driven Marutuahu away from Maungatautari, dispossessed them and acquired the mana over the land, which they have retained ever since. The evidence in this and former cases is very clear as to the boundary struck by Te Waharoa, and is to our minds conclusive ; for if Te Waharoa had not had the mana over the land why should he have been able to give part of the land back to Ngatiraukawa. Having disposed of the claims by ancestry which we find were extinguished by the take ran patu, we will now dispose of the cases in the order most convenient to us. (a.) As to claimant, we uphold the former decisions by this Court as to Ngatiraukawa having forfeited their rights by leaving the land. (b.) As to the persons represented by Hori W Tirihana, they are in precisely the same position as Ngtiraukawa. Hori himself has a good claim as a Ngatikahukura. (c.) As to the Koroki, Haua, and Hourua cases, they are in reality one, and should have have been so treated from the first, and expense saved. As we have already decided that Ngatihaua, &c, by the Taumatawiwi victory, acquired the mana over this land, no further remark is now necessary. (d.) As to the case brought by Te Puke, we find that, although Ngatikoura did not fight at Taumatawiwi, yet they were permitted by those who had got the mana to occupy portions of Maungatautari, and this has continued almost uninterruptedly for fifty years. Ngatikoura will therefore be admitted. We can make no distinction between the Ngatikoura represented by Te

6