NATIVE LANDS COURT.

Waikato Argus, Volume IV, Issue 260, 17 March 1898, Page 4

NATIVE LANDS COURT.

JUDGMENT IN THE RANGITOTO BLOCK. Judgment was given in the Rangitoto Block case on Monday by Judge Gudgeon, of the Native Lands Court, now sitting at Otorohanga. The block comprises an area of over 125,000 acics, chimed by Mr J. 11. Edwards and bis hapus of Ngatimatakore by ancestry and by right of conquest over Ngatiwhakatere. The case has been before the Court for over a month, and the judgment is one of the most important ever delivered at Otorohanga. The following is the judgment in cxtenso : The parties to this suit arc as follows ; 1. Korongoi Tarakaiwaka, who claims a small piece of land between the Mangao rongu stream and Te Rercapoutu as a portion of that land in the Puketarata Block, which has already been awarded to him ly the Court. This land he claims as the property of the ancestor Pangea. This case was included by the Court for the reason that it was covered by the Ngatiwakatere claim, though not by that of the claimants, for this reason, allowed evidence of right to be given in order to settle the claim of Ngatiwakatere for or against that tribe. 2. The Ngatiwakateie, through their conductor Hare Teimana, claims all of Rang!toco Tuhua ea-t and north of Te Rereapoutu to the month of Kahuitiki on Mangaorongo, Tutukiranga, Te Kahuirangi, Tahunarimurimu, Te Rimu Kahika, Ngapuna-a-Hani and Pukemako on the east boundary of the block. This boundary crosses and re-crosaes that of the Ngatimatakore claimants, and includes a much larger area than that of the claim. But the evidence has been allowed to extend over the whole of this area in order to settle the claim of the Ngatiwakatere, who claim that the land within the above mention d boundaries is the ancestral land ot Wakatcic, and that the descendants cf that man have never lost their light thereto. 3. The claimants set up the following boundary, commencing on the northern end of the block at Mpuga-orongo to the month of Neahape, Ngatokatutahi, source of Mangamairc, Tutukiranga, Te Hue Kopuataumanu, Okahukura, Wharekiri, Te Arero. The Ngatimatakore claim for their ancestor Tukitana the Araikotore Block in the north-west corner of their claim. They further claim all the land southwest of a line commencing at Tutukiranga, Paewhenua, Kurirua Te Ranginui and Puke-o-kahu as the ancestral land of their ancestors, Matakore and Te Ikaatu. The remainder of the block they assert to be theirs by right of conquest over the Ngatiwakatere, whom, after a long series of battles, they drove from the block to Kapitiand other places, and whom they assert did not return to this district until about the year 1883 or ISS4, when they came on the invitation of Tawhiao. As to the evidence given by the Ngatiwakatere, we are of opinion that Hare Teimana exercised a wise discretion in refusing to call a third witness, since it could hardly be expected that the evidence already given could either alter or contradict the two witnesses, whose testimony hail already been given, had disclosed the case on which the Ngatiwakatere relied, and when read in conjunction with other evidence previously given by real or socalled Ngatiwekatcre. The true position ot affairs is not to bo mistaken. The evidence to which I refer is conclusive on the following points:—l That there was a conquest by the Ngati matakore, Ngatimaniapoto, and certain of the Waikato section that resulted in a migration of the true Ngatiwakatere and Ngatiraukawa. 2. That the moving spirits of this conquest were the Ngatimatakore under their chiefs Wahanui and Maungatautari, many of whom were related to Ngatiwakatere, and arc now claimed as true Ngatiwakatere. 3. That the Ngatimatakore, many of whom were, as I have said, ielated to those whom they bad either slain or driven away, occupied these lands immediately after the conquest, and have held possession down to the present elay. 4. That the true Ngatiwakatere migrated from Rangitoto probably before the year 1820, and "fter a more or les3 troubled residence at Pawaiti or Taupo, finally settled at Manawatu, and did not at any time return either by hapus or by tribes to this land. The points raised by Ngatiwakateie in order to exclude all rights under the conquest are :-l. That while admitting the conquest and the fact they migrated as a tribe to Manawatu and other places, yet they assert that the conquest was over the men of the tribe and not over the tribal land. 2. They hold that the land was held in their absence by members of the Ngatiwakatere for and on behalf of that tribe, 3. That certain members of the Ngatiwakatere, namely, Hinaki, Tc Motupurahirahi, Te Whorora, and others, returned from Pawaiti to Rangitoto immediately after the peace-making at the former place and occupied the land. 4 That peace was made ac Pawaiti, Taupo, and other places between the Ngatiwakatere, Ngatiraukawa, and their conquerors. 5. That it is not denied that the Ngatiwakatere were invited to return to their ancestral lands by Tariki, of Ngatirora, Potatau, Pateriki, Aperahatna Kiri, Te Rangianini, and Pcti Wahanui, and that in response to the last invitation certain ot the Ngatiwhakatere did about the year 1884 re turn and occupy the Rangitoto Block. 6. They assert that the Ngatimatakore proper did not take part in the conquest and never occupied the land of Rangitoto. 7. They deny that the Ngatimatakore ever had a right to auy land through the ancestor Matakore. Before testing the soundness of these contentions by reference to the evidence given by the two Ngatiwhakatere witnesses, it wi'l be well to remember that the rights of those who migrated, about the year 1820, from these lands to Kapiti have already been investigated and considered in a Maungatautari case by Chief Judge Fen ton, and that his decision was referred to by me in the Wharepuhunga judgment in terms of strong approval. After reading the judgment given by me on that occasion, I am still of opinion that the principles that guided the court on thac occa-ion are sound, and they will not be departed from on this occasion, at the same time any special circumstances distinguishing this case from that of Wharepuhunga will receive consideration from the Court. As to the first point raised by Ngatiwhikatere, it is a matter of very little moment whether the conquest was or was not undertaken in the first place for the purpose of acquiring land, provided that it can be shown that the result was a conquest of the land. We think that the long seriei of battles between the Ngatimatakore and Ngatiwhakatere were fought solely to avenge mutual injuries and that the bitter hostility between these two tribes, had reached such a point that the safety of the one demanded the extinction of the other. The battles commencing with Tangimania and ending with the seige of Hangahanga were undertaken, purely to avenge Ririhore and others, who feli wheu Te Haupelii Pa was captured and the battle of Kakamutn won. It is, however, clear that the Ngatiwhakatere know that there was a conquest of the land. For Te Paehiu says in his evidence ; " After the conquest, the mana of this laud fell into the hands of Tautari and Wahanui, but before that event many chiefs held maua over the lands of Whakatere," and he docs not deny that at that period Wahanui and Tautari had no mana amongst Ngatiwhakatere ; again lie tells the Court that Te Ringitanga of Ngatitertahu claimed Otamakehu by right of ancestry, and was opposed by l'eti Wahanui, who claimed it by right of conquest over Ngatiwhakatere, but that laud

was awarded to Pcti by the Maori tribunal. From the general tenor cf the evidence, it is clear that whatever the original intention might have been, the land was treated as conquered land and occupied in force by the Ngatimatakore, who arc still in possession It is moreover clear that had they not taken possesion, the Ngatihaua would have done so. As to the second and third points, not one word has been said in the evidence that would justify the Court iu believing that culier Tan tar i or Wahanui had ever lived witli the Ngatiwhakatere or had been recognised by that tribe as their chiefs Indeed, the evidence given precludes any such belief, it is therefore impossible to accept the statement that the Ngatiwhakatere when migrating left their lands in the keeping of Neatiwtiakatere. It is not denied that Wall anui and Tautari were of remote descent from Whakatere. Their mother Ngunu, was two-thirds Matakore by descent, and wholly so by domicile, since her male ancestors were from that tribe ; their father Irohanga and Te Riunui were Ngatihana and Ngatimatakore. Where then is this Ngatiwhakatere chieftainship, unless it be claimed through the fact that Tc Riunui and Irohanga were killed and probably eaten by Ngatiwhakatere ; Wahanui and Tautari were leading chiefs of Ngatimainapoto, Ngatimatakore and Waikato, but they were no* chiefs by virtue of any descent from Ngunu in the Whakatere line, her rank was from the Matakore side, viz. Toroapaihaunui. (To be continued.)