131

G.—2.

21. Throughout these proceedings Kemp was spokesman for the tribe?— Yes. 22. Do you remember his introducing No. 12—1,300 acres—and do you remember anything which took place when he introduced it ?—Yes. 23. He asked for a certificate in the name of Ihaia Taueki. Do you remember asking him to give further information ?—Yes ;he asked for a certificate in his own name. A Native got up and raised objections to that, and the matter was adjourned to a subsequent time —I think the day following. 24. And on the day following what happened?— They had it arranged, and the order was made. 25. Do you remember saying in the Court that you asked for information, and that Kemp said something. You thought it necessary when one name was put in to ask for the meaning of it ?— Yes ; I asked who were the parties interested, and the Court was told to mind its own business ; and the implication was, though-the words were not used, that we were simply giving effect to an arrangement. 26. You made no inquiries, but gave effect to a voluntary arrangement ?—I do not know that I said that in the Supreme Court, but it had the effect of preventing the Court from exercising any discretion. We found we were sitting administratively, and in no other way. We have two Dranch;>s—administrative and judicial—and we were sitting then administratively. 27. The Chairman.'] So that you merely carried into effect what you were satisfied was the verbal arrangement made by the Natives outside, and did not go on to explain the effect of this, but merely said, " You have arranged so and so, and we carry it out"?— That was so. We were taken up very shortly by Kemp, in a manner that only Kemp would do. I thought it was not an improper question to ask, considering that the Natives are not very well informed in many respects; but we adhered to our role, and did no more. 28. Sir W. Buller.] The order was made not in the name of Kemp, but in that of Ihaia Taueki?—Yes. 29. Do you remember, after a number of subdivisions were made, going to what we call the residential part .of the Block No. 11—15,000 acres ? —Yes. 30. The portion on which the lake is situated, comprising the cultivations and burial-places of the people, making 14,000 odd acres?— Yes ; I remember going to that. 31. What took place when the matter was brought on? It was brought on by Kemp, was it not, who applied for an order and certificate in his own name? —Yes. 32. Did he make the application or did Alexander McDonald ?—lt was Kemp who spoke to the Court. Mr. McDonald was there ; I think he was there always. 33. He appeared to be advising Kemp? —I cannot recall that. I know that McDonald was there acting very effectively ; but really I forget whether it was Kemp he was acting for. I distinctly remember that he was acting for Kemp in the matter of the railway; and, I should think, he must have acted all through for him, but I am not clear about that. 34. Do you recollect that it was Kemp who asked for an order in his own favour ?—lt was Kemp who addressed the Court. It is what he said that I remember. Ido not say McDonald may not have made the formal application ; it is possible that he may have ; but it was Kemp's speech that I remember. 35. Will you state to the Commission your recollection of that speech ?—I have stated it in the Supreme Court. Kemp stated that he wished to forego what became No. 11 (Subdivision 9 had been already cut off some days before. It was by that time out of the Court. Mr. Lewis came up and ordered it out of the block before No. 11 existed). From the earliest stages there were a number of Te Whatanui's descendants about Palmerston. Some of them were stopping at the same hotel as myself, and one sat opposite me at every meal and tried to approach me in respect to the interest that Kemp, it was said, was going to cut off for them, and said that the land was not good. I told him that he had no locus standi in the Court, and that I could not pay any attention to him; that their names were not in the title. 36. But what portion did you understand him to be referring to when he said the land was bad ?—That was the portion proposed to be given which was still in a pending condition. In due time, Kemp said that he was going to give a piece of land of 1,200 acres to Whatanui's descendants. He said that his friend, who was dead—referring to Sir Donald McLean—had asked him to do so (I am only speaking from memory), and though he had not promised to do so to his friend while he was alive, now that he was dead he would carry out his friend's wish. There was some little difficulty about the marking-off of this at the time. Then Mr. Lewis appeared on the following day. He came up, I believe, on purpose from Wellington about it; and it was when he was there that the boundaries of this land were defined technically. One line was to run parallel to the two parallel banks of the river Hokio, and 2 chains from this projection [indicated] . Then it turned to a right angle to avoid the Uru pa. I remember it well, because it was surveyed wrong, and I sent it back to be surveyed right, as I did not approve of it. When the boundaries had been defined in the records of the Court, Mr. Lewis, for the Government, removed the land out of the Court during the sitting of the Court. 37. That is, he accepted it on behalf of the descendants of Whatanui?—Oh, no. He simply said that, for reasons the Government had, they withdrew it from the jurisdiction of the Court; and he mentioned the treaty between Kemp and McLean in order that the matter might be settled. 38. Before the removing of it, had the Court not made an order in favour of Kemp for this portion?—No ; Ido not think so. This point has always been a matter of reflection to my mind, when it came back to me for signing—what my authority was for signing. 39. Was it not afterwards referred to Court to ascertain who the special beneficiaries were ?— Not to my Court; but I think I was right.