13

L—3a

66. Were you aware that your grandson had engaged Mr. Morison to apear for you?— Yes, I knew; but my daughter and I were not called upon to be present at the arrangement. 67. Then it was without your consent that Mr. Morison appeared for you? —I have said that he was there at the instigation of my grandson. 68. Without your consent?— Yes; I found fault with him. 69. Did you object to Mr. Morison in the Court? —No; but Kewanui was our mouthpiece, and she stood up to protest, but was made to sit down. 70. Were you in Court?--I was there, but I did not know the effect of it until I saw the award, and then I saw that we. had been injured. 71. Were you aware that the agreement was signed in the Court, in the presence of the Judge, by the different conductors? —All that I knew was that it was read out. 72. You heard it read out?—l heard the reading-out of a document, sometimes in Maori and sometimes in English, in an all-together-and-one-after-the-other style, but 1 did not understand it. 73. Did you ask the Maoris anything about it afterwards?— That I do not know. I am an old woman. That is all. Hare Rakena examined. (No. 6.) 74. The Chairman.] Are you the Hare Rakena who presented the petiton in reference to the Kaihinu Block?— Yes. 75. You signed this petition, did you?—lt is my petition. 76. Can j t ou give the Committee any further information in connection with the petition? You have heard the evidence of the previous witnesses?— Yes. I am sending in a petition in regard to this land in the Kaihinu Block No. 2, under the right which I have from the ancestor to whom the land was awarded in 1871, and 1 am asking for an inquiry to be held into this matter under the rights established in that year. The old people being all dead, my sister and myself alone surviving them, I want to obtain a further inquiry under the rights which were established in 1871. Well, I applied for a Court, and got it, and it sat at Woodville, and I stood up there and addressed the Court. In reply to this question of the Court, " Who has the right to this land?" I said, " Tawhakahiku and Mangere." Those were the ancestors under whom the award was given in 1871. However, my claim was not upheld by the Court. Mr. Morison then asked me a question, "Don't you know that Tarake has the right to this land?" I became angry in that Court, and I said this: "Is it asserted that Tarake has a right to this land when it was my father, Te Aweawe, who has the right, and my elder brother, Te Peeti." Mr. Morison having asked me that question, asked another: "Did you not hear of a division made between Tarake and Te Aweawe with regard to the land?" and I replied, "1 did not know." Now, I say to you, Mr. Chairman, then I appealed, because I saw that no notice was taken of what 1 said. Both these two appeals are one. We sat at Hastings. When the Court sat at Hastings my conductor stood up and asked that the claims which I made be heard. This was not done. Both the appeals were dismissed, and the award of the Court at Woodville was confirmed under the agreement between Kewanui and party. I then decided that when this Parliament sat, which is now sitting, I would draw up this petition. That is why I did so, and sent it in to Wi Pere, and this is t"he question you are now dealing with. It will be to my trouble if lam wrong, and if lam not wrong award it to me as I ask. That is what I have to ask before the Chairman and the Committee. 77. Mr. Hone Heke.] Who was your conductor in the first Court at Woodville?—John Chase. 78. What claims were put forward by your conductor in that Court? —One was that I should be included as successor to Te Peeti, and 1 claim £100. 79. Then,- your conductor, John Chase, did not put forward any other claim—your ancestral claim to the land? —I did. My conductor was not competent, because he had been drinking too much, and I had to do the business myself in Court. 80. What did the Court say in its judgment in regard to the case at Woodville under the ancestral claim?— They would not take any notice of ancestral claims. All that they did was in connection with the division of the money. The Chairman: That is all that we should be dealing with now. Mr. Wi Pere : When the Act was framed I myself specially requested that the question of the rights as to who the owners of the land were should be ascertained, but, of course, everybody knew more than I did, and they smothered me, and said it shduld be put in this way and be decided as to who was entitled to the money, giving as a reason that if it was not put in that way the lawyers would get all the money. 81. Mr. Hone Heke (to witness).] Do you remember that before the Court at Woodville there was produced the book of Court records containing this statement: that your father's interests were to be on the Palmerston side and your mother's interests on the Wnirarapa side of the range?—l do not know anything about that. My ancestors had large rights there. If there is any Court record such as that it should be here. 82. Did you not see it at the Woodville Court? —I did not. 83. Did you not hear it read out to you?— Mr. Morison asked me if I did not know of any division of land between Tarake and Te Aweawe as to Tarake's land, and I said I did not know. I required at that time the production of the proof showing thai Wiremu Kingi had made such a statement about the division of these lands, and I want to know where it is to be found. 84. Did you not hear the Judge reading out from any document in the Woodville Court—any decision? —-All that I heard him read out was his award, saying my case was dismissed. Any division such as you refer to I can say nothing about. 85. Did he tell you why the case was dismissed? —I do not know that. 86. What grounds did you put forward in your appeal?—l was appealing for the rights to be investigated. I wanted to know how the people got in who have been put in. This land passed through the Court in 1871 under my ancestors.