No. 17.
Copy of Memorandum from Mr. Alexander Mackay, to Hon. the Native Minister, relative to the bush parcels.

Sir,—

With reference to the portion of the Native reserve at Kaiapoi known as the bush parcels, which the Natives now ask a Crown grant for, the land in question was set apart by Mr. Buller in 1861-62, under the bush divisional scheme, and consists of four blocks containing in the aggregate about 316 acres, 174 of which were allotted in small parcels under that arrangement to 104 individuals, and the remainder is claimed by about 20 others.

In 1865, by the direction of Mr. Mantell, the then Native Minister, 52 acres off the eastern end of the block nearest Woodend, were allotted in two parcels of equal area, and Crown grants ordered to be issued to Teone Topi Patuki, and Matiaha Tiramorehu respectively. The Kaiapoi Natives to be allowed a certain time—five years were agreed on—to remove the stumps. The quantity now remaining to be dealt with may be estimated at about 264 acres. Mr. Buller in his report on the individualization of the Kaiapoi reserve remarks:—

"That the partition of the bush was altogether a separate matter to that of the open land, and it was not proposed that Crown grants should be issued to the holders of bush parcels under the arrangement then made, as the sub-division of the land was merely provisional, and was not made with a view to individualization, but as an adjustment of disputed claims; and that in accordance with the intention of the scheme, each Native as he removed his allotted share of the bush, would quietly appropriate the land, until such time as the whole of the bush was removed."

Mr. Buller named 10 years as about the period he thought it might take to do so, and, "that, when the time came, the land would then become unencumbered public property of the runanga for some purpose of general benefit."

It is evident that the original intention was not to sub-divide this land for individual occupation, but rather that it should be appropriated to some purpose of general benefit, and I am afraid that any attempt to sub-divide it now would meet with strong opposition, as there are so many conflicting interests to deal with. The Natives themselves, as will be seen by the annexed letters, do not wish the land to be sub-divided, but that it should be granted to them in common, and that there should be no laying off of boundaries, i.e., internal boundaries. The Government cannot issue to them a grant of this description, such a title as they ask for could only be obtained through the Native Land Court, and it seems that the most feasible plan of dealing with the matter would be for them to send in a claim to the Court in the usual way.

I presume it will not be long before the Court visits the southern Provinces, and, as a sitting will most likely be held at Christchurch to adjust the claims to Intestate Estates, this question could be dealt with at the same time.

The chief object they wish to attain, is to obtain a valid title to enable them to deal with it in a legal manner. At present, the land in question is in the occupation of a settler named Hinge, under certain conditions for grazing purposes, who pays them a rental of 5s. per acre, but, in consequence of the Native Title not being a good one at law, any disputes arising between the Natives and the present occupant are placed out of court, consequently any appeal to the Bench at Kaiapoi on a question of the kind is of no avail.

It appears to me, knowing the whole of the circumstances, that the proposal to sub-divide this land is one that would be very difficult to carry out, as the Natives have always been exceedingly

page 116clamorous and disputatious in the matter. In the early part of 1868, when at Kaiapoi settling the Moeraki question, I attempted to lay off a small portion of the bush land, to make room for a few Natives who were unprovided with land, but I found it quite impracticable to carry out the intention, so much opposition being brought to bear against me, both collectively and individually. First I had the runanga to contend with, and then the interest of each occupant on the bush parcel, apportioned him by Mr. Buller, to fight against.

I succeeded in the end in laying off about 120 acres on a portion where there were fewer interests to combat with, but that was entirely owing to the circumstance, that the most of the occupants were to participated in the arrangement.

There is an important point to be considered in the matter of the proposed sub-division, and that is, who is the land to be allotted to? It is obviously unfair to allot it to the individuals who now have the use of it, as they already hold farms of 14 acres under the original apportionment, as such a course would be giving them an undue advantage over other grantees who were not fortunate enough to secure a share of the bush division, but who have as great a claim to participate in any benefit now to be derived from the land as those in possession, and any attempt to allot a portiou of the land to a few Natives at Kaiapoi who are still unprovided for, would in all probability meet with strong opposition, as the bush allottees consider they have a reversionary interest in the land, and any proposal that would deprive them of such interest would be sure to be opposed.

The Government of course only wish to aid them in settling the matter, and have no desire to dictate as to the manner of the sub-division, and if they cannot agree amicably amongst themselves how it is to be done, the fault is simply their own.

I would propose that, instead of attempting a sub-division of the land, one of two courses should be adopted as a means of settling the matter, either that the land should, with the consent of the Natives, be brought under the operation of "The Native Reserves Act, 1856," to enable it to be legally dealt with by the Commissioner, Mr. Tancred, or else that the Natives should be instructed to send a request in the usual form to the Native Land Court to adjust the matter at its next sitting at Christchurch.

Neither of the proposed courses would interfere with existing interests. The land at present is chiefly used as a common to graze their stock on, and as they will always require land for that purpose, it seems to me that it would be as well if they would consent to dedicate it to that purpose, as that would be one means of fulfilling the original intention, "that it should be set apart for some purpose of general benefit." But besides this, they would always be sure of deriving a small revenue from it—they receive about £60 a year from it now—which could be devoted to some purpose in which they are all interested; for instance, they have to contribute a certain sum annually in aid of the School there, and also a proportion of the Minister's stipend; and this would seem to offer a ready means of doing so.

I notice in Mr. Tancred's minute of the 24th August, 1869, on the subject of sub-dividing the before mentioned land, that he alludes to the Moeraki claim. This claim no longer exists, as the matter was arranged by me in the early part of 1868, and finally adjudicated on by the Native Land Court at its sitting at Christchurch in the same year.