17

G;~2

The money owing by Kemp should, if recovered from him, be divided as to the sum of £500 received for timber on Subdivision No. 3 in equal shares amongst the original owners of that subdivision, and the balance, £1,500, in equal shares amongst the persons mentioned in the fourth schedule hereto attached. Warena Hunia also received from the Crown the sum of £'2,000, but this should be treated as part of the purchase-money for the share of Kawana Hunia in the tribal land. Certain of the Natives interested gave a deed of release to Kemp in October, 1892. This deed forms one of the exhibits to the evidence. It was prepared by Sir Walter Buller on Kemp's behalf. The Natives had no independent advice, and were not parties to the preparation of the deed. They were asked to meet, and a considerable number did so, when Sir Walter Buller explained the deed to them, and a number signed it. Other Natives subsequently signed it, but we are satisfied that, whilst the deed was truly read to them, they were not aware what were their legal rights, and what were Kemp's liabilities to them. Broughton, an educated and intelligent half-cast, tells us that he was sent for, and came from his work thinking he was about to sign a petition to Parliament. He came to where the Natives were, and heard Sir Walter Buller reading the deed, and signed it when requested to do so. He did not know its contents. After we adjourned a number of Natives came to us to repudiate their alleged signatures to the deed, and we feel confident that no Court would recognise this deed as a bar to an action for accounts by the Natives against Kemp. (4.) What moneys (if any) are (4.) The Crown has no claim against legally or equitably due or owing by, or either R QY Rnni^ or should be refunded by, the nominal r owners, or either of them, to Her Majesty on account of any dealing or transaction with Her Majesty in relation to the said block, or any portion thereof ? (5.) What moneys (if any) are (5.) Whirihana Hunia and Warena Hunia legally or equitably due or owing by are en titled to receive from Kemp, in common of the tribe, thenor other matter aforesaid? share ot the amount Kemp owes the tribe. (6.) Who are the persons for (6.) The names of these persons are set out whose benefit it was arranged between j n tne scne dule attached hereto. the said Keepa te Eangibiwinui and the late Sir Donald McLean, in the year one thousand eight hundred and seventyfpur, that one thousand two hundred acres of the said block now represented by division number nine should be set apart ? (7.) On the division by the Native (7.) Yes. Land Court as aforesaid, was division number fourteen of the said block in the first instance vested in the said Keepa te Eangihiwinui for the purpose of carrying out the said arrangement between himself and the late Sir Donald McLean, and, if so, should the said Keepa te Eangihiwinui have returned it to the registered owners when, at the request of the persons claiming to be interested under the said arrangement, division number nine was set apart in lieu of division number fourteen ? (8.) Whether at the time of any (g.) Qn the 26th June, 1878, by Procladealings with any portion of the said mation published in the New Zealand Gazette, Government of the colony acting on Her Land Purchase Act, 1877, it was notified that behalf, the land so dealt with was sub- mO ney had been paid by or on behalf of the ject to any duly published and then n uee n for the purchase or acquisition of, inter :f^he n L^nme U nf^v c cL P a°ndPr alia, the Horowhenua Block, and further that chases Act, 1877," or any other Act re- negotiations in respect ol such purchase had lating to the acquisition of land from been entered into by or on behalf of Her MaNatives by the Crown? jesty. No notice of this Proclamation or 3—G. 2.