Despatch from. Governor Sir George Grey, K.C.B., to His Grace the Duke of Buckingham.

My Lord Duke,—

Adverting to my Despatch No. 106, of the 8th October last, transmitting to your Grace a Petition to Her Majesty from John Topi Patuki, Chief of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe, I have, now the honor, at the request of my Responsible Advisers, to enclose the following additional papers connected with that petition:—

1	A Memorandum from the Hon. J. C. Richmond, Minister for Native Affairs.
2.	Copy of a Report of a Select Committee of the House of Representatives, dated. 23rd August, 1867, on a petition from John Topi Patuki.
3.	A Letter dated 19th August, 1867, by the Hon. Walter B. D. Mantell, a Member of the Legislative Council of New Zealand, to the Governor of this Colony, in support of the Petition of John Topi Patuki to Her Majesty the Queen.

Enclosure 1 in No. 81.
Memorandum by Mr. Richmond.

His Excellency is respectfully requested to forward the enclosed copy of a Report of a Select Committee of the House of Representatives on the subject of a petition of John Topi Patuki, and a copy of a letter by the Hon. W. B. D. Manrell on the same subject, for the information of Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies.

Enclosure 2 in No. 81.
Report of the Petitions Committee on the Petition of John Topi Patuki, Chief of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe.

The prayer of the petitioner is to the effect "that the House will refrain from passing a Bill relative to the Dunedin Princes Street Reserve or its rents, or any other law of similar principle and tendency."

The case of the Princes Street Reserve as viewed by the Provincial authorities of Otago, is clearly laid down in the Report of the Chairman of the Select Committee upon the Dunedin and Port Chalmers Reserves, in the Session of 1865 (vide Appendix to the Journals, F. No. 2), and the petition of the petitioner gives a detail of the case as reviewed from his point of view, and consequently it is not necessary that those details should be reiterated in this Report.

The Committee have not had time or opportunity for examining witnesses as to all the allegations contained in this petition, but they have examined Mr. John Jones, who appears, in the year 1844, when the Otago Block was sold by the Natives of the Middle Island to the New Zealand Company, to have acted as friend to both parties.

That gentleman confirms the statements contained in the first four clauses of the petition. He declares that he has no knowledge of any such arrangement as that specified in the eleventh clause of the petition. He states that the reserve subsequently made by the Governor, when Mr. Mantell was Commissioner of Crown Lands in Otago, contains an area more than four times the area of the two reserves specified in clause 3 of the petition, and which were originally reserved by the Natives, and agreed to by the New Zealand Company's Agents in 1844. He also, on being questioned by the Committee, suggested a plan by which the matter in dispute might be amicably, satisfactorily, and justly disposed of.

The Committee are of opinion that the object of the petitioner will be obtained if a clause is inserted in the Bill now before the House to the effect that nothing contained in the Bill is to be held to affect or prejudice the claim and title of the petitioner and his tribe.

At the same time I am directed to report that the course suggested in the close of the deposition of Mr. John Jones appears to the Committee to be the best way of settling this complicated affair.

Deposition of Mr. John Jones.

Mr. John Jones deposed as follows:—About the year 1844, when the purchase was made for the New Zealand Company, Mr. Daniel Wakefield was engaged on the part of the New Zealand Company, Mr. Symonds on the part of the Government, and Mr. David Scott acted as Interpreter to the New Zealand Company. I was in Wellington at the time, with the principal chief Towaki, of the Middle Island. We all five proceeded to Otago. I landed them in Port Chalmers, and I went to Waikouaiti and brought down to Port Chalmers four or five more chiefs. In truth, the whole tribe was on board the ship, but I mention the chiefs because they acted for the tribe. A meeting took place at Port Chalmers. The Natives showed Mr. Symonds and Mr. Wakefield, among other reserves which they pointed out, four spots. There were two spots which they reserved in Port Chalmers, and two in the place where the town of Dunedin now is. Respecting these four, a dispute arose between Mr. Daniel Wakefield and the chiefs. The first portion of the dispute taken up was about a piece of ground which the Natives used as a burial-ground in Port Chalmers. Mr. Wakefield gave way to the Natives on that account. They then proceeded to where Dunedin now stands, and selected the spots mentioned in clause 3 of the petition, as reserves for boat harbours, distant from one another about two hundred yards. The Natives drew a plan including both those spots, and an altercation took place between Mr. Wakefield and the Natives. Mr. Wakefield insisted upon retaining them, and would not give in to the Natives, and the negotiation came to an end. The whole of the Natives, including Towaki, went back with me in my vessel to Waikouaiti. Ten days elapsed, and a special messenger from Mr. Wake-field arrived at Waikouaiti, and I think he brought me a note, requesting me to use my influence with the Natives to return to Port Chalmers, and to bring the Natives over in order that negotiations might be resumed. I complied with that request, and took the Natives in my vessel again down to Port Chalmers—my object at the time being to forward the views of the New Zealand Company, and to benefit the Natives. In fact, I remonstrated with Mr. Wakefield (at the time that he objected to give up the two reserves in Dunedin), alleging that they were very paltry reserves, and that they were absolutely necessary for the use of the Natives. When negotiations recommenced at Port Chalmers, Mr. Daniel Wakefield gave in, and, as I was acting for the Natives, I distinctly state that these two reserves were exempted from the sale of the block subsequently known as the Otago Block, and that these two reserves are those specified in clause 3 in John Topi Patuki's petition. If I were on the spot, I think I could point out both reserves, within a very few feet of the limits which the Natives assigned to them at the time.

1.	By the Chairman.]—Can you account for the non-insertion of these two reserves in the deed which was executed between the Natives and the Agent of the New Zealand Company?—I cannot account for it; but Captain Cargill, Agent for the New Zealand Company, some fifteen years ago built a stone house for the Natives on one of these reserves, and in fact always acknowledged their right to that reserve, which is known as the Beach Reserve. Towaki, as I said before, drew a plan of these two reserves, and gave it to Daniel Wakefield. This plan should be forthcoming; and if John Topi Patuki is correct when he says, in his petition, that he and his tribe, on the demise of the New Zealand Company, were unable to find written record of these two town reserves, then, in my opinion, the omission was designedly made.
2.	As you acted on the occasion of the sale, as the friend of both parties, you are asked whether you see any way to settle the matter? I have spoken to Mr. Macandrew, the present Superintendent of Otago, and he informed me that he was prepared either to give the Natives a site on the reclaimed land, or, if they preferred it, he would purchase for them a site in Pelichet Bay, close to the water, page 155and erect a brick building, of the value of £500, for their use and that of the Natives of the Middle Island. Such a site and such a building would amply answer all the requirements of the Natives, and be the best way of settling the matter.
3.	Do you know anything about the reserve in the Town of Dunedin specified in the fifth clause of the petition as having beer made by the Governor of the Colony in the year 1853?—Yes. That reserve was made by Sir George Grey, when Mr. Mantell was Chief Commissioner. That reserve contains an area more than four times as large as both the reserves that the Natives originally stipulated should be reserved for themselves; and I may add that, at the time of the original sale, the Natives never laid any claim to have so large an area reserved for them.
4.	Will you read the seventh section of the petition, and then state to the Committee what you know respecting the phrase, that "your petitioner was also entitled to one-eleventh of the sections into which their lands might after their cession be divided"?—I am quite certain that at the time of the purchase no such question as this was mooted.

Enclosure 3 in No. 81.
The Hon. W. B. D. Mantell to His Excellency the Governor of New Zealand.

Sir,—

At the request of John Topi Patuki, I do myself the honor of enclosing a petition addressed to Her Majesty the Queen, by him, as chief of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe Tribe, and of respectfully requesting your Excellency to forward that petition to the Right Hon. the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies.

The petitioner prays Her Majesty to exert her royal authority to prevent certain claims of his tribe from being extinguished or prejudiced by legislation in the General Assembly of this Colony, those claims being, he submits, of a nature which can and should be dealt with by the judicial tribunals of the Empire.

In the endeavour to restrict the allegations of his petition to such only as seemed absolutely needful to show a primâ facie claim to the consideration prayed for, a clerical omission has unfortunately occurred in the third line of the seventh paragraph of his second page. The following statement should have there appeared between the words "cancelled" and "the Governor:"—"without any warning to your petitioner's tribe of the intention so to convey this reserve, and without any opportunity having been afforded to them of being heard in defence of their claim thereto before the Executive Council or the Supreme Court."

As the present appeal of this chief to Her Majesty is designed only to pray for her gracious interposition in order to restrain the action of the Legislature to its proper functions, and to maintain on behalf of that race of Her Majesty's subjects in this Colony which is not represented in its Legislature whatever protection of their rights and interests the courts of the country can afford, it has not been thought necessary there in to advert to the injustice of the Provincial Government's demand for the reserve in question—to the history of the Bill now before the Legislature—or to its repugnance to principles already affirmed during the present Session in "The Private Estates Bills Bill."

I am so unwilling that the accidental omission above noted should in the least weaken whatever force this petition may possess, that I venture respectfully but earnestly to pray your Excellency to forward a copy of this letter to the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Colonies with the enclosed petition.