Or.— 2

162

not objecting, but the Muaupoko neve: , opened their mouths. The Assessor then spoke to Muaupoko, and said he did not think " that the title was in the same position as it was from 1873 downwards." No one objected. 105. Did the Assessor explain the difference between the title given by the Court then and the former title of 1873? —The Assessor said, " You must recollect that from 1873 to this time Kemp was the caretaker of the whole land, but now the land is divided into different parts amongst the tribe, and that has done away with the former title." 106. That is, the Assessor explained to the Natives present that the former trust had ceased to exist with regard to No. 11?— The Assessor went through the different divisions and explained the whole matter, so that they would understand that Kemp's former position had come to an end. 107. Who was the Assessor?—Kahui Kararehi. 108. Do you remember the occasion of the Assessor going to Wellington and giving evidence before the Native Affairs Committee?— Yes ; we travelled to Wellington together. 109. Was there any conversation between yourself and the Assessor? —He told me that he was going to Wellington to give evidence before the Committee about Horowhenua, and that he had been asked to go by Kemp, and I said, " What are you going to say when you get there"? He said he was going to state before the Committee, with regard to Subdivision 11, that Kemp and Warena had been appointed caretakers. I said, " Well, I was present at the Court and I understood it differently. I gathered from what I heard that the block was absolutely given to them. I understood from what you explained to the Natives that that was the case. 1 understood you to say that Kemp was no longer a caretaker," and we had an argument. I said to him, " Where are your papers ? If you see them you will see it is different from what you state." He said, " Well, the papers were all burnt at my house." 110. The Chairman.] Can you fix the date of this conversation at all ?—I think it was in 1890. 111. Mr. Stevens.'] In what month was it?—l do not know, but Parliament was sitting at the time. We went to Wellington and returned together. I think it was in 1890, because it was close to the elections. .112. Was it near the end or the beginning of the session ? —lt was about the middle. 113. Had the session ended when you and the Assessor came away ? —No, it had not ended. We left Kemp and others there. 114. Sir W. Biiller.] You have told us about the first proposal to give the Whatanui No. 14 ; that you, as the mouthpiece of these people, objected, and that Kemp on behalf of Muaupoko agreed that you should have what you wanted—l,2oo acres near Eaumatangi?—Yes ; Kemp was very stiff about it until the agreement was brought up. 115. Kemp had a good deal of talk about it outside before it was settled ?—Yes ; I asked Kemp to come and meet the people, and we met at the Eoyal Hotel in Palmerston. 116. At that time had Mr. Lewis arrived? —No. 117. You say you had this korero with Kemp, and that it was stiff. Was it over when Mr. Lewis arrived? —No, it was not over. It was when Mr. Lewis arrived with the agreement that we saw what the effect would be. We then saw it mentioned in the agreement that 1,300 acres were to be cut off, bounded by the Horowhenua Lake. 118. Then as soon as Kemp saw that, he agreed ?—Yes. 119. Then you all agreed —you as representing the uri of Whatanui —to accept No. 9?— Yes; but there was a disagreement about the boundary, because if left out our own houses. 120. That was put right afterwards?—No ; it has never been put right at all. 121 That is the difficult boundary—No. 9 ? —Yes ; Sir Donald McLean told us we should have 1,300 acres, but when Kemp had it cut off it was only 1,200 acres. I wished to have the other 100 acres added to it. 122. Then the only question left unsettled was whether you would have 1,200 acres or 1,300 acres adjoining Euamatangi ?—Yes. 123. With the sole exception of the 100 acres you are claiming, the matter was absolutely settled then ? —Yes, it was through me. 124. Did Mr. Lewis go to your meeting?—No, he came afterwards. When he came he and Kemp went away to have a talk, and we did not see nor hear what their conversation was about. 125. But as the result of the talk, Kemp came and told you he was satisfied ?—Yes, the result of the conversation was that. 126. Then you went back to the Court and informed the Court of it ? —Yes. 127. Kemp told the Court that No. 9 was to be for you ? —Yes. 128. This arrangement has never since been disturbed in any way?—No; but the difficulties existed amongst ourselves with reference to the dispute over the boundary; the Government told us that we must see Kemp and Hunia and try and get it settled. 129. Did the Judge come to any of these meetings that you had out of Court ?—No. 130. Then he would not know what took place between you and Kemp ? —No ; he only knew that we went into his presence and said it was settled. 131. Mr. McDonald.'] I find in the minutes of the Court that " Nicholson, the half-caste, stood up in Court." Is that you?— Yes. 132. Do you remember the date of that occasion when j'ou stood up and addressed the Court? No, I do not know the day, but it was in November, the Court was opened in November. 133. The date is given as the 25th of November; you have no reason to dispute it ?—No ; I dare say it is right. 134. Do you remember what you said in the Court on that occasion ? I will read the note. " Nicholson wishes to know if he may see where the 1,200 acres is to be fixed, and objects to the present position." Do you think that is the substance of what you said?— Yes ; I objected to this Block 14, and wanted it shifted to where it is now,