Monday April 20th
Court sat at 10 am.
Present – same judges (3) and assessors (2).
Te Hakuai No. 3 – Parakaia Te Pouepa
(Continued from above in this book)
Mukakai appeared – cautioned to speak truth.
Of Ngati Kauhata. My piece of land is included in Parakaia’s survey. Moroati has been on to the ground. I took possession of my piece at the ‘kuititanga’. It was a ‘motu koromuku’. There were no stumps. The ‘ngaherehere’ was on the other side of the ‘roto’. A former bed of the Otaki stream. I and Hori Karapiro and others who are dead went with me to cultivate that land. We cultivated for 4 years. Hori and Te Mateawa had gone there before. Taramate a ‘tamaiti’ of mine was with the party who first went. I followed immediately after Taramate, next day. Hori and Te Mateawa had been there since the first coming of Ngatiraukawa. Taramate is dead. Hori is living. A great many of Mateawa who were there are living. The place where the Mateawa and Hori cultivated was near this which I claim but not the same. I joined them when they cleared the piece claimed by me. I was constantly in occupation from the time of going there up to the taking of Rauparaha by the ‘pakeha’ and when he came back. That was the year I ceased to cultivate. I then moved to Tuahiwi which is near. Hori is my ‘teina’. He is jointly interested. I ask for a grant in the names of myselfand some of the Mateawa. I can not say who till I have conferred with Te Mateawa about it.
Xd by Parakaia.
Te Mateawa took this land and I ‘uru’ at the ‘kuititanga’. Taramate is not a Mateawa. Ngati Kauhata is our ‘hapu’. I was not placed there by Mateawa. I went of my own motion. The land had been flooded and was only fit for ‘taro’ and I planted ‘taro’ there. It was not Wairau who took me there. Wairau was a ‘Hunoanga’ of mine. It was Hori Karapiro and Taramate. Taramate came at the ‘kuititanga’. It is true that I lived at that place. I did cultivate also on the ‘tahuna’. That land belonged to Ngati Whakatere. I went there through Taramate also and to Waopukatea, also a ‘taro’ ground. That land belonged to Te Koroheke of Ngati takihiku. I cultivated Tuahiwi. It belonged to Rangitiora a relation of mine – dead. ‘He mahi noa iho i runga I tona whenua’. Hori and Kiharoa and Matenga te Matia are interested in that land and their children, Moroati and others, my relatives, gave me the right to be there. I did not hear you say you were going to sell this land “Hakuai” to Dr. Hewson. I did not ask you for money. I did get some money from you for my ‘taro’ plantation. I received £1.
By Court.
After the survey of the land, about this time last year, Parakaia came to me and brought £2. I asked him where he got it. He said he had sold the land for £8. He gave me £1 which I took. Wairau is dead. His children are living.
Moroati Kiharoa – Sworn.
Of Ngati Pare. Knows the land. Has heard evidence of last witness. Knows the land. Witness indicates on plan the claim of Mukakai. Dividing the claim into two nearly equal portions by a line running nearly north and south is an old channel. The year of the ‘whakahoro’ (between Haowhenua and Te Kuititanga). The year we worked at Tuahiwi. The land included in Parakaia’s survey. It was ‘Koromiko’ and ‘karamuramu’. We (the Ngatipare) were at a place close to this. The land Hukuai was first cultivated the year of the ‘kuititanga’. Hori Karapiro and Nikora went and cultivated and Taramate and Mukakai and Wairau ‘uru’ed and planted ‘taro’. On the other side of the boundary were the Mateawa – Hare Hemi and others. It was ‘koromiko’. No cultivation but I heard that Hori Ngawhare cultivated. Hori Karapiro Nikora Te Iti, Waharahi Te Rangi Katana. Mukakai and Taramate and Wairau never saw Parakaia living there. Hare Te Were came here from Ngapuhi after Ngatiraukawa were settled here. H never cultivated. He came here at the ‘kuititanga’ and after a few years left. He was here last year and staid a short timeand being in want of money to get away he got Parakaia to sell this land to raise money.
Xd by Parakaia.
The Hakuai was our place of residence. It was land taken by Te Patukhuru. It was given to my father Kiharoa by Parihuingaruru. It belonged to Puritea, her husband and Keremeneti. Their son has given me that land lately. The parents are dead. Keremeneti is living.
I never sawany person cultivating this portion of your claim east of the boundary of Hori Karpiro’s cultivation. The persons owning land near are, you at Te Rekereke, on the other side of the river and we on the same side as your claim. Hori and Mukukai were not interfered with. I never saw. The Patukohuru gave us the land ‘Hakuwai’ and we occupied. I saw the two cultivations of Te Rangi Katana on the land surveyed by you. Taramate is dead. Left no children. I never heard that you occupied that land. Your place was at Te Rekereke on the other side of the river. Your house is about 4 ½ chains from this land.
Hare Hemi Taharape – Sworn.
Of Mateawa. Knows the land, has seen the pegs of the survey. I and Mateawa claim a portion of this land. Another piece belongs to Ururoa. A portion also belongs to Te Moroati. I apply for a separate certificate for the portion I claim. I have not procured any survey.
Ururoa Kikopiri
Otaki. I have been to the land and have seen the surveyors marks. I own a portion of the land included in Parakaia’s survey. When I went on to the ground, the survey was finished. The surveyor had leftand I saw only the marks. I was not present at this survey of Parakaia’s. I own land adjoining Parakaia’s claim and my claim includes a portion of that land included in Parakaia’s survey. When my land was surveyed by Hughes he showed me the ‘pou’ of Parakaia on my land and I told him it was wrong and that I should pull it up. There were severatl ‘pous’ and I did pull up 2 ofthem. After the survey was finished and on Saturday last I went there again and pulled up the rest. I have sent an application for investigation of this claim.
Further hearing of this case adjourned to future sitting.
Continued at pp725 in this book.
Plan referred to Mr. Hughes to show boundaries of counter claimants and natural features.
Court adjouned at 1.30 pm.Dourt resumed at 2.30 pm.
Rekereke Tauaroa No. 2 – Tamihana Te Rauparaha
Continued from pp166 (previous book of this copy).
Hutana and another.
Continued from pp 166 (previous book of this copy).
Tamihana Te Rauparaha – appeared.
Land surveyed by Mr. Knight – plan not certified bide note pp 165 (see pp previous book).
Hutana – called, did not appear.
Further hearing of these cases adjourned to a future sitting of the court at Otaki. These claims to be heard together as conflicting with one another.
(Dontinued at pp 724 and 725 in this book)
Paremata – Tamihana Te Rauparaha
Tamihana Rauparaha appeared.
Surveyed by Mr. Knight – plan not produced.
Tamihana stated that he was not prepared to go on with the case in consequence of the illness of his wife and Parahihia. Tamihana put in a sketch plan of his claim stating that he wished to have a hearing of the claim upon the sketch for the purpose of obtainingan interlocutory order as there are a number of conflicting claims. Sketch of claim received.
Objectors challenged.
Hoani Taipua appeared as an objector. Claims a portion of the east end of claim. Cn not define. I appear only an an objector and not as a counter claimant.
Reupena Te Kairangi – appeared. Stated that he claimed a large portion of the land included in Tamihana’s sketch. Appears as an objector.
Nopera Te Ngiha – appeared. Same claim as Reupena.
Rota te Tahiwi – Of Ngati mai Otaki appeared and stated that he claimed a large portion of the land surveyed by Tamihana. Appeared as an objector.
Parakaia Te Pouepa appeared as a counter claimant to detached portions of land included in Tamihana’s survey near junction of Otaki and Rangiuru. Appears as counter claimant.
Hapeta Te Rangi Katukua appeared as a counter claimant – stated that he claims a piece of land included in Tamihana’s survey in east portion of the block.
Aperahama Te Ruru appeared and stated that he claimed the site of Paremata ‘pa’ and cultivation. Counter claimant or joint claimant with Tamihana.
Rakapa Kahoki appeared. Claims in two places included in Tamihana’s survey. Appears as counter claimant.
Hearing adjourned to a future sitting.
(continued at pp 726 in this book).
Court adjourned at 5 pm.
Court sat at 8 pm.
Tekihana I Otaki – Topi Te Kahuwhara
Adjourned from last sitting (see previous book).
Claimant – called – did not appear
Taia informed the court that the applicant was at Taupo and that no survey had been made.
Case dismissed.
Pekapeka – Winia and another
Adjourned case from last sitting (see previous book).
Winia Pohotiraha – appeared.
Land surveyed by Mr. Knight.
Claimant stated that she had employed Mr. Knight to survey this land and had paid him £6. Land situated at Waikawa supposed to contain 70 acres. Mr. Knight surveyed the land in January last at which time his license had lapsed.
Hearing adjourned to a future sitting for want of plan.
(Continued at pp 734 in this book)
Kahuera – Paramena Pehitane
Adjourned case from last sitting (see former book).
Paramena Pehitane appeared.
Mr. Hughes appeared and tendered a plan of this claim not certified which the court declined to receive. It appeared that a boundary line which had been agreed on between Ngati wehiwehi and Ngati mai Otaki and respecting which an application had been made to the court – ran across this claim.
It was considered desirable that the question of the boundary line should be disposed of before investigating claims on either side of it.
The hearing of this claim was therefore adjourned to a future sitting of the court.
Moroati Kiharoa appeared as joint claimant and stated that he should oppose the boundary alleged to have been agreed to. His c0-claimants Ngatipare did not agree to the boundary.
Rawiri Te Wanui appeared as objector alleging that Ngatipare had no land in the locality claimed and that the portion south of the boundary line agreed upon between Ngati mai Otaki and Ngati Te Ihi ihi encroached upon the lands of the former who were his co-claimants.
Hearing adjourned to a future sitting of the court after the settlement of the question of tribal boundary between Ngati wehi wehi and Ngati mai Otaki by the court.
Mr Hughes appeared and called the attention of the court to a conflict of boundaries of claims which had been heard and disposed of at this sitting of the court and which had only now been discovered by him. It was found that the west boundary of Maringiawai No. 1 for which a certificate had been ordered to Hemi Kuti encroached upon Hurihangataitoko No. 3 for which a certificate had been previously ordered to Hape Horohau and others also that it encroached upon Hurihangataitoko No. 2 for which a certificate had been previously ordered in favor of Ururoa Ripia.
Mr. Hughes was directed to prepare a tracing showing the alterations necessary to make the boundaries coincide and to proceed to the ground and stake out the boundaries correctly.
(see pp 709 in this book).
(The error has arisen from the fact that the east boundary of Hurihangataitoko surveyed by Mr. Swainson in July 1867 was not pointed out to Mr. Hughes who surveyed Maringiawai in September 1867. The difference in the boundary common to these blocks appears to have escaped the notice of the Inspector.
Tutangatakino No. 1 – Te WateneTe Whena, Erana Tuporo
Adjourned case from last sitting (see previous book)
Watene Te Whena appeared.
Land surveyed by Mr. Hughes – stated that Erana and he have arranged their difference and that the latter was present and assenting to the survey.
Mr. Hughes stated that the plan had been recently forwarded to Wellington for certificate and had not been returned.
Hearing adjourned to a future sitting for want of plan.
Whakamaunga Ariki – Hororuoua Toremi
Adjourned case from last sitting.
Claimant called – no appearance.
Hearing adjourned to a future sitting at Otaki.
Ohehumu Atutahi informed the court that the land had not been surveyed.
Court adjourned at 10 pm.
