G.-r6o

1910. NEW ZEALAND.

NATIVE LAND AMENDMENT AND NATIVE LAND CLAIMS ADJUSTMENT ACT, 1915. REPORT BY THE NATIVE LAND COURT ON PETITION No. 84/1915, WIREMU KARAKA AND 53 OTHERS, RE MANGAHAUINI No. 7 BLOCK.

Laid on the Table of the House of Representatives -pursuant to Subsection (3) of Section" S3 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1915.

Native Land Court (Chief Judge's Office), 29th .Line, 1916. The Hon. the Native Minister. 1 forward herewith report by Judge Jones on Petition No. 84 of 1.915, of Wiremu Karaka and 53 others, praying for a redetermination of the relative interests of the owners of Mangahauini No. 7 Block, as provided by section 23 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1915. Unfortunately I did not see the clause referred to until after it became law, or 1 would have pointed out that, as I sat with Judge Raw son at the rehearing in 1912 of the former appeal, I should not be required to make any recommendation as provided by the section referred to. I now respectfully submit to you the report without comment, and beg to recommend pro forma that the Native Appellate Court be authorized to rehear the order made by it in 1912 as to the definition of relative interests only of the owners of Mangahauini No. 7 Block. Jackson Palmer, Chief Judge.

In the Native Land Court of New Zealand, Tairawhiti District.—ln the matter of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1.915, and of a reference by the Chief Judge for inquiry and report in respect of the Mangahauini No. 7 Block. Tins matter came on for hearing before Robert Noble Jones, Judge, al Tokomaru Bay, on the 27th day of March, 1916, and the following report is submitted : — 1. The title to the Mangahauini Block as a whole was investigated and an order made {Inter alia) for Mangahauini No. 7 Block on the 9th May, 1898, and then comprised some 330 owners. 2. After the ancestors had been found, and prior to making the formal order, the question of the relative interests was discussed. On the 2nd May, 1898, the Court minutes show that there was a great deal of confusion over the list, and although it had then been in preparation for over a month nothing was completed. 3. Hemi Wakarara, a conductor, proposed the following division of shares between the respective ancestors: Descendants of Maroro. 800 shares; Kopai, 640 shares; Korongaungau, 230 shares; Ngatamawahine, 130 shares: total, 1,800 shares. The Court then noted that " after a long discussion, by intervention of the Court the parties agree the distribution shall be as follows: Maroro, 900; Kopai, 640; Korongaungau, 230; and Ngatamawahine, 130: total, 1,900 shares: the shares to be apportioned to individuals on that basis and brought into Court to-morrow." 4. On the following day Wi Potae, one of the parties, proposed that the 900 shares allotted to Maroro should be distributed among 207 owners according to their rights under seven subancestors. This was objected to, but from what one can gather the objection was not so much to the method of the division as it was to the quantum that each section was entitled to. The Court o-ave the parties till the afternoon to consider the position, explaining " that the basis of shares