TEE MOKAU LANDS. Decision of the Native Lands Court. [BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1555, 22 June 1882, Page 2

TEE MOKA U LANDS. Decision of the Native Lands Court. [BY TELEGRAPH. — PRESS ASSOCIATION.]

Nmv Plymouth, Tuesday. A Native Lands Court has been sitting afc Waitara during the past fortnight. The examination of witnesses has been long and tedious, but beyond those engaged no interest is taken in the proceedings by anyone. The case re the Ngatimaniapoto and Ngatimata tribes, has been the only one hcai d. Judge Fenton, in giving his opinion of the ease, spoke chiefly of the numerous conquests and slaughter that were carried on in olden times before the British settled in New Zealand, where, in two battles, the Ngatimaniapotos drove the Ngatimataa from Potama (Mokau), and fought them at New Plymouth, Moturoa, and other places, and the Ngatimatds going South to VVaikanae, Kapete, Wellington, and Chatham Islands, the Ngatimatas saying that they were going to procure guns to try and regain their lost battles with the Ngatimaniapotos. With but few exceptions the Ngatimatas never returned to dispute the ownership of Potama since 1840, until the last couple of years. Whatever the feuds may have been between the two tribes before the colony was settled, the opinion of the Judge was, that it had nothing whatever to do with the present time. The Ngatimaniapotos bad won the land by conquest, and had held the land since undisputed. The final decision was reserved till the chief Rewi had given his evidence, which I was taken on Friday last, and the Judges then gave their decision, which has not yet been published. The Judges, while giving their opinions in the case, were listened to with great attention by the two tribes; not a word being spoken by either side. The decision, however, goes very fully into the case, the most important portion of it being the following :—: — " The principle of Maori law on which this Court has ruled in cases of this sort is very simple, very intelligible, and in truth, could, not be otherwise. A conquest, attended by the expulsion of the defeated party from their land, conferred no title on the conquerors unless followed by occupation. A conquest, resulting in the complete expulsion of the defeated tribe, or the abandonment of their territory under the stress of force, and followed by the permanent occupation of the conquerors, conferred a perfect title which endured until they, in their turn, were evicted. When the Court's authority was intro- , duced into New Zealand, of course a new state of things came with it, end private warfare,. being illegal, no right could be acquired by force. It > therefore' follows that any conquering tribe found at 'the' 'epoch in the perfect occupation (by which, Lmean occupation undisturbed and not, ■ diminished in its „ character by hostile 'force) of land from '-whiclf .other owners ■Kacl been previously expelled, or ,which '.they, had abandqpied*from;fear, f would re- 1 jtairi'all its "rights oyer^that 'territory^ un/4 Jess iiadmittSd^the'returilApf Hfie expert fledypeople^y'qp^se^ 1 expres^'or- tacit,' ?; wwld it j»e^e^,^y { to eject the, -fe. *Vr * - " ,j ---, *" * >>' •• v- ' i f ,' ■

traders. If discontent is signified, that is sufficient. The squattings of the Ngatimatas on this block, which appears to have been attempted before 1860 were trivial, and most certainly not made with the consent of the Ngatimaniapotos ; and, failing that consent, would not avail to disturb the title as it existed in, 1830. At that time it was perfect, and in my opinion was perfect in 1868. How far that title is affected by an agreement made by the chief of the Ngatimaniapotos and the Ngatimatas.in that year (the. price of their allegiance to Tawhiao as King) remains to be determined." The Court then adjourned.