X* , Oα

5

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

Wednesday, 28th September, 1898. PETITION OP HAMIORA MANGAKAHIA AND OTHERS. Te Heuheu, representing the tribes of Tuwharetoa, Wanganui, Te Aroha, Ngatiraukawa, and Ngatimaniopoto (objectors to the Bill), examined. The Chairman : I wish the Natives present to understand that I desire to hear separately their views in reference to this Native Bill, and I would ask that each of the spokesmen representing their different districts be as concise and short as possible in giving their views either for or against the Bill. Te Heuheu: Greeting to the Chairman and members of this Committee. The first matter which I wish to bring before the notice of this Committee is to request them to give effect to the petition which has been signed by the seven persons commencing with the name of Hamiora Mangakahia (No. 195). When I have gone on further to explain matters which I do not think are thoroughly expressed in that petition I will then deal with the Bill. While dealing with the petition and elaborating it I shall have to refer to certain sections of the Bill. Ido not know whether each member of the Committee has a copy of the petition to which I refer. The first part of the petition to which I will refer will be the second paragraph, which says, "2. That the prominent supporters of the Bill, who are aboriginal natives, are principally those who will not be affected by it, being either persons for whose benefit special legislation has been introduced into Parliament, or whose lands are mortgaged to the Public Trustee, or who have no lands at all." I would like to point out to the Committee that there is no reason why that clause of the petition should be worded in that way, because the position is really this : None of us are agreeable to the Bill, but there are certain of us who are in support of the amendments that were agreed upon by the Native people at Papawai. I wish now to speak with reference to clause 3a in that petition. 1. Hon. Mr. Carroll.'] I wish you to make yourself clear to the Committee as to paragraph 2 of the petition. Do you withdraw it, modify it, or what ?—The reason I say we can no longer say anything about that section of the petition is this : We were under the impression that when this Bill was brought down it would contain the resolutions and amendments of the original Bill (the Premier's Bill) that were carried by the kotahitanga hui at Papawai. However, when we got the translation of the Premier's Bill we found that, shortly speaking, none of the Papawai amendments were contained in that Bill. Therefore we need not say anything about that section. 2. There is still the allegation that this Bill will not affect the Natives. I just want you to clear that up as you go along ? —-Well, I will explain what that section means by so saying that persons in support of this Bill are persons not affected by it. I shall deal with Mr. Wi Pere first. We know that there was special legislation by Parliament some time ago with reference to Mangatu, Wi Pere's lands. Bight Hon. B. J. Seddon : I immediately raise the question that we cannot hear any motives imputed to members as to their looking after their own position in reference to legislation. No evidence of that kind, I think, should be presented. The way he is putting it, in plain English, is that it is all right for Wi Pere to support this Bill, when he has taken very good care beforehand that he is protected, because he has told us he has got the Mangatu Act passed. Captain Bussell: Mangatu represents a great deal more than Wi Pere. There are five thousand Natives affected. The Chairman: I merely look upon it as an illustration of what he is saying. Hon. Mr. Carroll: He explained first of all that their position was changed. Paragraph 2 made it distinct. He modifies that, owing to having seen the Bill since, and he would qualify that paragraph. Why they put it there was because they looked upon Wi Pere's position as being affected by legislation. Bight Hon. B. J. Seddon : Well, so long as he does not impute personal motives to members of the Committee it is all right, Te Heuheu: In the Native Land Court Act Amendment Act of 1897, as we look upon it, there the Committee was influenced by a petition presented by Wi Pere and five others last year, the result of which was that the legislation was passed so as to relieve Wi Pere and his five fellow petitioners of the disadvantage under which they laboured. 3. Wi Pere.] And because I am relieved will you be angry ? —Tamahau is another person. We have heard that he is in the same position—that his lands have been brought under the control of the Public Trustee. And Tomoana is another case in point. We know that all Tomoana's interests are under lease. And there was a special Act passed in reference to the Karamu Beserve. Now, I would point out to the Committee that these are the principal men who pressed upon the kotahitanga hui at Papawai the provisions of this Bill, and who submitted this list of resolutions and amendments there passed. With reference to the people who have no land, well, lam not in a position to speak about them. That is all I have to say about that clause of the petition. Hon. Mr. Carroll: He is not aware that that part of the petition has any foundation—that most of the petitioners are landless. He is not aware that it is true that any of the petitioners are landless. Te Heuheu : What I say is this : that there are other speakers who will follow that are in a better position to speak as-to that than I am. If it came from my district, the West Coast, I might be in a position to speak for them. Captain Bussell : Where does he speak for?