29

G.—7

arrive at any satisfactory conclusion as to the adequacy or otherwise of the purchase price. Apparently the Maoris at the time were satisfied. Seeing that it was bush and scrub land, in a very warlike district, with no access, it was probably not worth more than what was paid for it. The petitioners have not made out, we think, any case for relief. Arawa District. Petition No. 21. 91. The petitioners in this case are members of the Ngatitu hapu, and their case is this : In the year 1886 the Tarawera eruption destroyed their pas at Kaiteriria, Motutawa, and Tikitapu, and covered their land with pumice. Of the 7,000 acres which they held originally, 6,000 acres were sold to the Government after the eruption for 2s. 6d. per acre, and the 1,000 acres they have left is alleged to be valueless and unfit for occupation. They claimed to be members of the Tuhourangi Tribe, and applied under section 27 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1921, to be added to the list of beneficial owners of the block granted in trust for that tribe. This application, was opposed by the principals of the Tuhourangi Tribe, and the Native Appellate Court refused to add the names of the petitioners to the list. The members of the Ngatitu hapu, according to the evidence, are scattered about the North Island, but they have two meeting-houses in which they meet occasionally, and they endeavour to maintain their existence as a separate hapu. They pray that a grant may be made to them of a piece of land on which they could live together. 92. The lands of certain Natives of the Tuhourangi Tribe were rendered uninhabitable by the; Tarawera eruption, and a promise was made by the Government to set apart certain lands in the Aroha Survey District for the use and occupation of these Natives. Under section 7 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1918, the Native Land Court inquired as to the existence of the promise, and ascertained the persons to whom the land should be granted. This case is a precedent for making a similar grant in the present case. The case as presented by the petitioners appeared to be a deserving one, but the Crown was not able to say anything about the position of the petitioners. We recommend that inquiries should be made as to their position, with the view of assisting them, if possible. Tauranga District. Petition No. 22. 93. The petitioners in this case, being members of the Ngati-Maka Tribe, allege that they are the descendants of loyal Natives whose land was included in the Tauranga confiscation, and that they are now landless. They pray that relief may be afforded by granting them a block of Crown land in the Parish of Apata, County of Tauranga, containing 1,050 acres. The petitioners did not offer any evidence in support of the allegation that they are now landless. This petition really raises a general question of policy —namely, whether or not the Government should undertake to provide land for Natives who are landless. That is a question outside the scope of our inquiry, and we do not make any recommendation on the subject. Petition No. 23. 94. The petitioners in this case are members of the Ngaitemarawaho Tribe, a subtribe of the Ngaiteranginui Tribe. They allege that the land of their, ancestors was included in the Tauranga confiscation, and that an area of about 100 acres only was returned to them. They further allege that owing to the increase in the number of their tribe many of the members are landless or have insufficient land to support them. They pray for a grant of land. The observations made on petition No. 22 apply to this petition also. In this case a search-paper was produced giving the land owned by the members of this hapu. This shows {inter alia) that Lot 536, Parish of Te Papa, containing 600 acres, is owned by 111 persons, and that in some cases a successor under a succession order has got one-seventieth of a share. The search-paper shows also that Section 80, Block 10, Tauranga