THE NATIVE PURPOSES ACT, 1933. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION No. 122, OF 1931, OF TUPITO MARUERA AND ANOTHER, PRAYING FOR RELIEF RESPECTING CERTAIN AWARDS OF LAND MADE BY THE COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO WEST COAST RESERVES (NORTH ISLAND).

Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives, 1934 Session I, G-06c

G.—6c.

1934. NEW ZEALAND.

THE NATIVE PURPOSES ACT, 1933. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PETITION No. 122, OF 1931, OF TUPITO MARUERA AND ANOTHER, PRAYING FOR RELIEF RESPECTING CERTAIN AWARDS OF LAND MADE BY THE COMMISSIONERS APPOINTED TO INQUIRE INTO WEST COAST RESERVES (NORTH ISLAND).

Presented to Parliament in : •pursuance of the Provisions of Section 27 of the Native Purposes Act, 19,33.

Chief Judge's Office, Native Land Court, Wellington, 10th September, 1934. Petition No. 122 of 1931. West Coast Settlement Land. Pubsuant to section 27 of the Native Purposes Act, 1933, I herewith transmit the report of the Court upon this petition. The land referred to in the petition and report comprised 1,045 acres, situate in Blocks 111 and IV, Carlyle Survey District, and was granted to one Taurua on the 11th September, 1882. Part of the land has since passed to Europeans. It is suggested that grant was made in consideration of the original Maori owners of certain eel-weirs abandoning their rights to the Crown and that the grant was intended as a trust. In my opinion, there can be no doubt that the Commissioner intended the grant for Taurua personally, and was not to be held by him in trust. The Commission under which the award was allocated provides that the Commissioner should in all cases define and ascertain with certainty each parcel of land and the name of the person to whom it was to be granted, and in cases of trust that the names of the trustees and the conditions of the trust should be disclosed. In this case Sir William Pox made a special report and recommendation dated the 25th February, 1882, and was at particular pains to show that Taurua was entitled to such a grant and to give the special reasons for making it a personal one. After discussing the experiences and good offices of Taurua, the report says, " These facts will sufficiently explain the grounds on which the Commissioner has recommended an additional grant of 1,062 acres to be made in favour of Taurua and his heirs personally." The grant as issued was for 1,045 acres only. To indicate that the Commissioner meant this land for Taurua personally it may be observed that in two recommendations for grants of other parcels made on the same day the grants are specifically for Taurua and sixteen others, whose names are mentioned. It is true that the report of the 25th February, 1882, mentions as an additional justification for the personal grant the further good offices that Taurua had rendered in assuring the removal from the Patea River of certain Maori eel-weirs the displacement of which was required in the public interest, but it is quite clear that the Commissioner did not consider there was any trust attached to the grant for that reason. Under these circumstances I have no recommendation to make. R. N. Jones, Chief Judge. The Hon. the Native Minister, Wellington.

G.—6c.

Native Land Court, Hawera, 2nd August, 1934. Pukorokoro Grant 3789. I have the honour to inform you that the Court sitting at Hawera on the 10th May last held the inquiry directed by you into — Petition No. 122, of 1931, of Tupito Mabuera and Another, praying for relief respecting certain awards of land made by the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the West Coast Reserves (North Island), and beg to report as follows : — The particulars and present position of the title are — 1. Name of land : Pukorokoro Grant 3789, or Carlyle Survey District, Sections 5 and 6, Block 3, and Section 29 and part Section 30, Block 4, and Sections 31, 32, and 34, Block 4. Area : 1,045 acres. Title: Land Transfer certificate, Vol. 10, folio 17, dated 11th September, 1882. Grantee: Taurua and his heirs. 2. Taurua died on the 28th April, 1888, and— Ngaropa Taurua, brother (one-half), Raukura Ngapereke, niece (one-quarter), and Horia Matuakore, niece (one-quarter), were appointed his successors. 3. Ngaropa Taurua died on the 27th March, 1893, and Irihapeti Eaukura (f.a.), niece, and Ihipera Koria (f.a.), niece, were appointed his successors in equal shares. These successors are the same persons as Raukura Ngapereke and Horia Matuakore, so that by virtue of the last succession order the whole land became vested in them. 4. On the 20th January, 1915, the land was partitioned under the West Coast Settlement Reserves Amendment Acts, 1913 and 1914, as follows: — (a) Pukorokoro No. 1 and No. 4, comprising Subs. 1 and 4, D.P. 698, part Sections 31 and 32, Block 4, Carlyle Survey District; 275 acres 3 roods 24 perches. Owner : Ihipera Koria. (b) Pukorokoro No. 2 and No. 3, comprising Subs. 2 and 3, D.P. 698, of Sections 31 and 32, Block 4, Carlyle Survey District; 225 acres and 24 perches. Owner: Irihapeti Raukura. (c) Pukorokoro Grant 3789, 1892 Act leases, comprising Subs. 1 to 7 of Sections 29 and 30, Block 4, and Sections 5 and 6, Block 3, and Sections 34 and 37, Block 4, Carlyle Survey District; 542 acres 3 roods 27 perches. Owners: Ihipera Koria (236 shares) and Irihapeti Raukura (309 shares). 5. Ihipera Koria made a gift of 38 acres 3 roods 24 perches of Pukorokoro No. 1 and No. 4 to Pikihuia Wiremu and others, and by virtue of various transfers from Ihipera Koria and the donees Mauley Collard Wybourne of Whenuakura, farmer, became the owner of the whole of Pukorokoro No. 1 and No. 4 with the exception of 1 acre 2 roods 4 perches reserved for burial-grounds. 6. By transfer dated the 14th September, 1921, Irihapeti Raukura sold. 35 acres of Pukorokoro No. 2 and No. 3 to Ngarangi Katitia. 7. By order dated the sth August, 1931, Ngarangi Katitia, alias George Broughton, was appointed sole successor in terms of her will to the balance of Irihapeti Raukura's interest in Pukorokoro No. 2 and No. 3. He was her husband. George Broughton, alias Ngarangi Katitia, therefore became the sole owner of Pukorokoro No. 2 and No. 3, with the exception of 71 acres 3 roods sold to M. C. Wybourne in No. 3. 8. By order dated the 29th October, 1926, — Whaiake Pehimana .. .. .. .. . . f. 1/15 15. 11/15, Pora Pehimana .. .. .. .. .. f. 1/15 15. 11/15, Ihipera Koria Taurua .. .. .. .. . . f. 1/15 15. 11/15, Tahupotiki Wiremu .. .. .. .. . . f. 1/5 47. 1/5, Hinepua Wiremu .. .. .. .. .. f. 1/5 47. 1/5, Rat.ana Tamaiparea .. .. .. .. .. m. 1/10 23. 3/5, Whakarongo Tamaiparea .. .. .. f. 1/10 23. 3/5, Erina Wiremu .. .. .. .. . . f. 1/5 47. 1/5, were appointed successors to the interests of Ihipera Koria in Pukorokoro Grant 3789, 1892 Act leases. 9. Whaiake Pehimana died in December, 1929, and by order dated Bth January, 1932,' — Tiniwa Taiaroa . . . . . . . . .. .. f. 3. 14/15, Nane Taiaroa .. .. .. .. .. f. 3. 14/15, Nakata Taiaroa . . .. .. .. .. .. m. 3. 14/15, Eroparene Taiaroa .. .. .. .. .. .. m. 3. 14/15, were appointed as successors equally to her interest in Pukorokoro Grant 3789, 1892 Act leases.

2

G.—6c.

10. Irihapeti Raukura died on 20th November, 1928, and by order dated 13th August, 1931,— Tametame Ngarangi Katitia .. .. .. .. m. 1/5 61. 4/5, Ngapari Ngarangi Katitia .. .. .. .. ra. 1/5 61. 4/5, Huirua Piki Ngarangi . . .. m. 1/10 30. 9/10, Mukukai te Whena .. .. .. .. m. 1/6 51. 1/2, Tahupotiki Wiremu .. .. .. .. m. 1/6 51. 1/2, Hinepua Wiremu . . . . . . . . . . f. 1/12 25. 3/4, Erina Wiremu .. .. .. .. .. f. 1/12 25. 3/4, were appointed as successors to her interests in Pukorokoro Grant 3789, 1892 Act leases. Therefore the owners of the three subdivisions into which the land has been divided now are : — Pukorokoro No. 1 and No. 4 : 274 acres 1 rood 20 perches. Owner by purchase : Mauley Collard Wybourne. Pukorokoro No. 2 and No. 3 : 225 acres and 24 perches. Owners by purchase and succession-— George Broughton, alias Ngarangi Katitia, 153 acres 1 rood 24 perches; and M. C. Wybourne, 71 acres 3 roods. Pukorokoro Grant 3789, 1892 Act leases : 542 acres 3 roods 27 perches. Owners by succession— Pora Pehimana .. .. .. .. .. ..15. 11/15. Ihipera Koria Taurua .. .. .. .. .. ..15. 11/15. Ratana Tamaiparea .. .. .. .. . . .. 23. 3/5. Whakarongo Tamaiparea .. .. .. .. .. 23. 3/5. Tiniwa Taiaroa .. .. .. .. .. . . 3. 14/15. Nane Taiaroa .. .. .. .. .. .. ..3. 14/15. Nakata Taiaroa.. .. . . . . .. . . .. 3. 14/15. Eroparene Taiaroa .. .. . . . . .. .. 3. 14/15. Tametame Ngarangi Katitia .. .. .. .. ..61. 4/5. Ngapari Ngarangi Katitia . . . . . . .. .. 61. 4/5. Huirua Piki Ngarangi .. .. .. .. .. ..30. 9/10. Mukukai te Whena .. .. .. .. .. .. 51. 1/2. Tahupotiki Wiremu .. .. .. .. .. ..98. 7/10. Hinepua Wiremu .. .. ■ .. .. .. ..72. 19/20. Erina Wiremu .. .. .. .. .. .. ..72. 19/20. Shortly, the petitioners asserted that the land had been granted as compensation for the removal of two ell-weirs named Te Ngana and Ruatuna on the Patea River, that these eel-weirs belonged to two hapus, viz. : Te Ngana to Ngatimanaia and Ruatuna to Ngatitahi or Ngatituatahi; that it was to be divided on the basis of 510 acres for each weir, that Taurua and Tautokai were to be the guardians for the land —Tautokai to be the representative for Ruatuna and Taurua for Te Ngana-— but that, after Tautokai died, Taurua brought the matter before a Court at Wanganui and had himself inserted in the title as the sole grantee. The present owners did not appear, nor were they represented before the Court at the inquiry. They are all, however, of the present generation, and it is doubtful if they could have furnished the Court with any reliable information on the subject of the award. The Court, therefore, had to fall back on the reports of the West Coast Commissions. The facts taken from Mr. Commissioner Fox's report of the 25th February, 1882, appearing in parliamentary paper G.-5 of 1882 on the subject " Reserves for Taurua and the Pakakohi Tribe," and leading up to the gift, may be stated shortly :— The Pakakohi Tribe, of which Taurua was the chief, resided before the war of 1865 on a large area of land between Tangahoe and Whenuakura. The tribe took a more or less active part in the war of 1863-65, but their participation was not taken very seriously, for at its termination they were reinstated on their territory on terms little less favourable than those extended to tribes that had not been in rebellion. When fighting resumed in 1868 Taurua did his best to restrain his people from joining Titokowa.ru and his war-party, but was not entirely successful. He himself remained with his family at Hukatere. He was subsequently taken to Wellington, and he offered to stay there if the Government wished it, but the Government was convinced of his fidelity and he returned to Hukatere. Subsequently Titokowaru, on his way down the coast, reached Hukatere, took Taurua prisoner, and forcibly carried him off with the war-party. Taurua did not take part in any of the hostilities which followed, and when Titokowaru fell back on the Ngatimaru country Taurua" and his tribe, the Pakakohi, returned to their own district, where Taurua induced the whole of his tribe to surrender and give up their arms. They were to the number of upwards of two hundred, including Taurua, taken to Wellington, tried before the Supreme Court, and sentenced to two years' imprisonment with hard labour in Otago. When the term had expired they were sent back to their own country and placed on the reserves that had been set apart for them. Their conduct after the restoration was good, and Taurua personally rendered many services to and exhibited the most friendly feelings towards the Government and Europeans generally. The Commissioner found the hapus west of the Patea River sufficiently provided for, but there remained to be decided the question of what further consideration should be extended to Taurua. With reference to this question, it had been stated to Taurua by Commissioners Fox and Bell in their report G.-2, p. Ivi, sth August, 1880 : — " But we told him some consideration might be shown to him now on account of the punishment he had suffered and his good behaviour since, but chiefly because the extent of the land reserved for him was small compared with that given to chiefs and tribes who like himself had been in arms against us, but had received no punishment at all."

3

Gr. —6c.

The Commissioners added :— " We cannot find that Mr. Sheehan made a promise to Taurua, but he seems to have intended to advise a grant to him for in. sending in a plan of the land between Patea and Whenuakura Rivers the Land Officer at Patea reported that the object of it was ' to enable the Hon. Mr. Sheehan to select a locality for a grant of land to the Chief of the Pakakohi, Taurua, in consideration of services rendered since the return of the tribe from Otago.' " Mr. Commissioner Fox's report of the 25th February, 1882, went on as follows :— " These facts will sufficiently explain the grounds on which the Commissioner has recommended an additional grant of 1,062 acres to be made in favour of Taurua and his heirs personally. It has not, however, been done without receiving a concession of considerable value in return. Numerous eel-weirs have been erected and maintained, probably for centuries, by the Natives across the Patea River, rendering it unnavigable except by the very smallest canoes and (as is said to have been estimated by Sir John Code) diminishing the scour of the current to an extent which may affect the water on the bar by a depth of one or two feet and otherwise injuring the channel of the river. Taurua and others of the tribe asserted most positively that at the time of their being restored to their country Sir D. McLean expressly promised that they should retain the use of their eel-weirs —a statement which the Commissioner has no reason to doubt. The Commissioner, while adjusting these cases, received a requisition on the subject from a large number of settlers residing at Patea and the neighbourhood, some of whom own land up the river, which is seriously aflected by the obstruction of the weirs. In his negotiations with Taurua he therefore made it a condition of the proposed extension that the whole of these weirs should be removed. The great value which Natives invariably attach to their fisheries and the important character of those in question rendered it a difficult task to persuade Taurua to come to terms, and it was not till after several months' delay and the exercise of much tact by Major Parris that he was at last induced to do so, yielding, however, finally with a good grace. There is no doubt that from a pecuniary aspect—to say nothing of the feelings of attachment which Natives always display towards this species of property—the sacrifice, on his part, was a very considerable one, as the removal of the weirs was a considerable advantage to the Government." The inference the Court draws from the reports is that it was the positive intention of the various Commissioners to make a special grant to Taurua for services rendered and on account of the punishment he had suffered, and that the imposition of a condition of the grant that the eel-weirs should be removed was in the nature of an afterthought. Their obstruction of the navigation of the Patea River was detrimental to the interests of the European settlers, and therefore in the negotiations that took place with Taurua in regard to the grant an opportunity appears to have been taken of bargaining for their removal. Whether, if Taurua had refused to consent to their removal, which, it would appear, he had a perfect right to do in view of Sir Donald McLean's promise, the grant would have been made at all, or whether, in such a case, it would have been so extensive as it was, it is now impossible to say. It seems to the Court, however, to be fair to assume that some compensation was awarded to him for the removal of the weirs over and above what would have been granted, if the question of their removal had not arisen. The remarks by the Commissioner clearly show that the weirs belonged not to Taurua alone, but to Taurua and his people, and the difficulty of persuading Taurua to consent to their removal is no doubt due to this fact. What inducements he offered to his people to get them to acquiesce cannot now be ascertained, and in the absence of any evidence as to what these inducements were the contention by the petitioners that Taurua's people should have shared in any additional compensation granted to him for their removal the Court thinks is reasonable. the evidence given by the witnesses for the petitioners that the weirs in question were owned by two different hapus —Te Ngana by Ngatimanaia, of whom Taurua was the chief, and Ruatuna by Ngatititahi or Ngatituatahi, of whom Tautokai was the chief—and that at the meeting at Hukatere it was arranged that the 1,000 acres granted was to be divided on the basis of 500 acres for each weir may be true ; but it seems to the Court to be very improbable in view of the facts as stated in the Commissioners' reports. In the negotiations the name of Tautokai is not mentioned, and there is certainly no written record of any alleged arrangement. The Court does not believe that there is any person, now living who could state with any degree of accuracy what took place at the time or what inducement, if any, Taurua held out to his people to obtain their consent to the removal of the weirs. It may well be that he offered no inducement at all, but, after consideration, simply, by virtue of his position as chief, agreed to their removal as a matter of policy and to prevent friction in the future between his people and the European settlers. I enclose for your information a copy of the minutes also : — (1) Your reference to the Court. (2) The Native Office file. (3) Volume of West Coast Commission Reports 1880 to 1884:. Jas. W. Browne, Judge. The Chief Judge, Native Land Court, Wellington.

Approximate Cost of Paper.—Preparation, not given; printing (390 copies), £4 ss.

By Authority: H. G. Loney, Government Printer, Wellington.—l 934.

Price 3d.]

4