More Info →4 February 1869

Description

Thursday 4^th February

Court opened at 10 am.

Present – the same

Judgment delivered.

Mr. Buller on behalf of the crown appealed against this decision. Written appeal handed in.

Mr. T. U. Cook applied for expenses.

Court allowed £2 – 2 – 0.

Paretao Block.

H Munro – Judge Ihaia Porutu – Assessor

Judgment

The court has carefully considered the evidence in this matter and is of the opinion that Parakaia Te Pouepa has succeeded in establishing a claim over the piece of land called Paretao shown on the sketch map produced before the court.

It is evident that he was the first to occupy the land after Haowhenua and that he remained there for some time. It is urged on behalf of the crown that his occupation was only temporary. There is a discrepancy in the evidence on this point. Parakaia asserts that he lived on the land for several years and the witnesses on the side of the crown that he only resided on it for a short period.

The court after investigating the evidence is of opinion that he must have occupied the land for about the space of three years that is from shortly after Haowhenua (1836) until about the time of the Kuititanga (1839). He then left of his own accord and in accordance with the known migratory habits of the Maoris, went to live elsewhere.

The land remained unoccupied for some time, until Hakopa, Wereta and others came and took up their abode upon it, living in the houses built by Parakaia and party which were still standing at the time, they continued to reside on the land until the time of the sale of the block to the government. Parakaia appears to have visited the place occasionally during this period, but not to have lived permanently upon it.

In 1852 a block of land called Te Awahou of which Paretao is a part was offered for sale to Mr. McLean at that time Chief Lands Purchase Commissioner Searancke, Nepia Taratoa, Parakaia and their section of the Ngatiraukawa opposed the sale, and the negotiations were not completed till they had withdrawn their opposition.

Parakaia became a party to the sale, and his name is in the deed whether written by himself, which he appears to deny, or written by another, his name is there, and we must therefore assume that the commissioner looked upon him in the light of our owner, and considered his signature necessary.

The Paretao was excluded from the sale, and is mentioned in the deed as excluded, but it does not state that it was reserved for any particular party.

Parakaia states that he caused the Reserve to be made for himself, but this is not borne out by the evidence, he appears however to have assisted in laying it off, and as he said in his address to the court, it is not likely he would take the trouble to mark the boundaries of a block of land, which he had no interest in.

In the year 1864 Paretao was offered for sale. Parakaia objected as soon as he heard of it not to the sale, but to the price asked £1000 – saying to Wereta that if he could get £3000 he would accept it. Wereta’s reply was, “E wahi ki te tika, i tau ka tika” as much as to say, will try and if you can get more will and good. Finding that Wereta was determined to sell Parakaia went on to the land and ran a boundary line through the block, to mark off what he considered his share, intending that Wereta and party should sell the remainder if they chose to do so. This being an entirely arbitrary boundary not based upon anything, the court entirely ignores it.

There are only five owners to this land that the court has any cognizance of, the four who signed the deed and Parakaia.

The decision of the court therefore is

That Parakaia is entitled to one fifth of the land within the red lines shown in the tracing before the court, which if it contains four hundred and forty acres, will be eighty eight acres.

The land to be laid off in such a manner as not to interfere with existing arrangements.

Memorandum

Eighty eight acres awarded to Parakaia Te Pouepa as delineated on the sketch map and agreed to by Parakaia in open court together with Mr. Buller on behalf of the crown.

Description

Eighty eight (88) acres bounding on the river Manawatu towards the west, and bounding on line marked out by Parakaia to the north and bounded by crown land to the east and by the boundary of the land sold by Wereta Te Waha and others to the crown and known as the Paretao block to the south, always excepting the piece of land marked C on the map containing ten (10) acres including Mr. Stewarts house and improvements which is bounded on the west and north by lines shown on the map.

The two road lines one chain wide across said piece of land are also excepted, namely those marked AA and BB, but it is understood that Parakaia gets 88 acres exclusive of the said 10 acres so excepted and if the two road lines aforesaid.

The piece of land in question to be marked out on the ground by Mr. Stewart as survey or on behalf of both parties.

Notice of appeal withdrawn by His Honor J. E. Featherston for Mr. Buller Otaki February 4^th 1869.

Otaki

In the matter of the claim

of Parakaia Te Pouepa to

the Paretao Block.

I hereby give notice of appeal against the decision of the court in the above case, on the following grounds.

1. That the decision is in violation of the ruling of the Native Lands Court in the Himatangi case which absolutely excluded the claim preferred on behalf of Ihakara and the Patu Kohuru founded on temporary occupation.

2. That the alleged occupation by Parakaia Te Pouepa for a period of three years, on which the decision in his favor mainly rests, is in no way established by the evidence before the court.

J. E Featherston – Land Purchase Commissioner Dated this fourth day of February 1869.

Boundaries of 88 acres awarded to Parakaia arrangedxxx.

By a public road excluding 10 acres site of Mr. Stewarts Mill.

Mr. Buller withdrew notice of appeal. Interlocutory order in favor of Parakaia if proper plan produced within 6 months.

Te Kawaroa

Case called on. No appearance of claimant – Case dismissed. Govt purchase.

Waiariki No. 2

Claimant called – no appear. Twice advertised – Dismissed. Surveyed

Tutangatakino

No appearance of claimant. Twice advertised – Dismissed. Surveyed

Te Makarangirangi

Claimant stated that the land had been surveyed, that the surveyor had got the map and was absent. Adjourned.

Makuratawhiti

No appearance. No survey. Twice advertised – Dismissed.

Hakuwai

No survey. Twice advertised –Dismissed.

Hakuwai No. 2

Surveyed – Mr. Knight has plan. He is absent. Adjourned.

Tawaroa No. 2

No appearance of claimant. Agent had no authority to appear. Adjourned.

Hakuwai No. 3

Mr. Hughes surveyor said that he had not been able to mark off counter claims in accordance with the order of court, owing to disputes among claimants and counter claimants. Adjourned.

Rekereke

Map with Mr. Knight who did not appear. Adjourned.

Paremata

Map with Mr. Knight. Adjourned

Pekapeka

Map with Mr. Knight. Adjourned.

Te Uruhi

No appearance. No map. Dismissed.

Takapuotoiroa

New map ordered by the court with Mr. Knight. Adjourned.

Whakamaungaariki

No map. Twice advertised. Dismissed.

Adjourned till tomorrow.

Identification