G.—2

42

when Kemp suggested this, and many of us walked out of the Court. We did not go back to the Court, but returned to the barn. Next morning we went to the Court again, and found that No. 11 had been awarded to Kemp and Warena Hunia. If we had known that this was to be done we would have withdrawn the case, as we objected to it. Then the hill block was brought on, and I rose and told the Court that I intended to withdraw it until the tribe had agreed what was to be done with it. The Court consented, and adjourned till the next day. I have now told all that I heard at the meetings outside the Court, as well as what took place inside the Court. As to the block at Ohau, we were asked by the Court if we objected to Kemp having it. We replied that we had no objection ; it was his share, and that he had not been given an interest in any of the other divisions. I heard of Kemp selling the timber on No. 14, and did not object. I also heard that part of it was mortgaged to raise funds to pay the lawyer who acted for us in connection with our troubles over Horowhenua. I wish the Court to understand that the 1,200 acres at Ohau was given to Kemp for himself. It was done publicly, not secretly. It was also done under the law. After the hill block was adjourned Eangimairehau wanted it awarded to him. Hoani Puihi wished his name put in also. Then Himiona wanted to be one of the grantees. This was not consented to, and it was ultimately decided to have the land awarded to Ihaia Taueki as trustee. This was done on the application of Kemp, made in our presence. We told the Court we approved. The Ohau Block was dealt with on the last day. The Court asked us if we had any objection to make to Kemp's application for an order in his favour. We said we had no objection ; the land was for him, for his share. Kemp had previously applied for an order for the same block, but it was not made. This was the day before the order was finally made. The descendants of Whatanui wanted the 1,200 acres bounded by the Hokio Stream, but Kemp insisted that the boundary should not go within 2 chains of the Hokio Stream. It was settled that the boundary should run from a certain point to the top of Ohenga Hill, and was to exclude our burial-grounds. This was afterwards carried out by survey. I was present at the Court of 1890. I remember the Horowhenua Commission sitting here. I did not hear it stated before the Commission that Kemp held the Ohau land in trust, and not for himself. I heard Kemp say that the land was for himself and those in his mind. That was in this Court. He said he held it for Eaniera, Tamatea, Arihia, and Ngahuia. I did not ask him for any interest in the land. To Court: I did not hear Kemp say this until the Commission sat.

The Court announced that the draft copy of the Horowhenua Commission report had been received, and it could be seen from it that the date 1895, referring to the telegrams sent by Judge Wilson to the Under-Secretary, was a misprint for 1890. A memorandum would be sent to Judge Wilson pointing this out, and asking him if he had any remarks to make upon it.

Eaniera te Whata's examination continued. Witness (to Sir W. Buller) : I remember giving evidence before the Commission. [Horowhenua Commission, page 100, questions 69 to 81, and replies, read out.] I remember giving that evidence before the Eoyal Commission. It is true. [Horowhenua Commission, page 33, questions 240 to 242, with replies, read out.] I heard Kemp give that evidence. I have nothing to say about it. I assent to it. It is correct. [Horowhenua Commission, page 100, questions 82 to 84, read out.] I reaffirm those replies now. They are true. I never said before the Commission that Kemp was a caretaker for No. 14. I don't remember saying it. He was not a caretaker for No. 14. It was his own share. [Horowhenua Commission, page 191, questions 234 to 236, read out.] I heard Kemp give that evidence. I have no objection to those statements of his. They are correct. No one ever told me that I ought to share in No. 14. Who could tell me so? I had given it to Kemp. What other land was there for him ? [Horowhenua Commission, page 131, questions 123 to 130, read out.] I remember giving that evidence. It is true. I know where Pipiriki is. It is on the other side of the lake at our kaingas. Eemember meetings of Muaupoko there. Eu Eeweti explained the object of the meeting to us. It was to discuss the proposal that Warena should have 3,000 acres. Nothing came of it, and Kemp left. Waata Muruahi was at the meeting. [Horowhenua Commission, pages 275 and 276, questions 290 to 296, read out.] I did not hear anything of that at the Pipiriki meeting. [Horowhenua Commission, page 276, questions 297 to 299, read out.] That is false. I did not hear anything of the kind. I did not hear Hori te Pa, or Charles Broughton, or Ngatahi, or Makere say anything about No. 14. I was present at Pipiriki all the time, and heard all that was said. If anything had been said about No. 14 I should have heard it. I have never heard any of the Muaupoko make any objection to the sale of the timber on No. 14 by Kemp to Bartholomew, or to the mortgage and sale by Kemp to you of parts of the same block. Cross-examined by Mr. McDonald. Witness : I have told the Court that I went to Wanganui to get food. Did not return to Horowhenua before I went to Palmerston. I did not live permanently at Wanganui I came backwards and forwards to Horowhenua, where my home'is. I have told the Court what I believe to be the truth with reference to what we did in connection with Horowhenua in 1886. I saw Lewis at Mangakahia's Court in Palmerston. He gave evidence before that Court. He said that the land for descendants of Whatanui was to be near Horowhenua. [Vol. 7, page 185, Lewis's evidence, read to witness.] I did not say anything about the area. I heard Lewis say that the agreement was in Wellington, and that the boundary was to be near the Horowhenua Lake. The story I have told is my recollection of what took place. It was what we all agreed to in the barn