MemorandumreMr. J. A. Tole's Complaint as to the Purchase of Maunganui and Waipoua Blocks.

Mr. Tole, after making certain statements, sums up by saying that "Tiopira's grievance therefore is, that though the original purchase money was understood to be £2,000 for each block, yet, since it has been thought necessary to increase that amount to the extent already stated (£500), he asserts that he is justly entitled to his proportion of it, and not that it should be all paid to a co-grantee."

The answer to this is that the original purchase money was never understood to be £2,000 for each block, but was 1s. 1d. per acre, which amounted to less than £2,000 for Tiopira's share, but that at the signing of the deeds I conceded the extra amount, making it come to £2,000, for all his right, title, and interest in both blocks; and, as a proof of that being the case, it will be found that the voucher he signed for the balance of the money stated such to be the case—that is, the voucher acknowledges the receipt of One thousand three hundred and eighty pounds (£1,380) as a final payment for all his right, title, and interest, and acknowledging the former receipt of £620, thus making up £2,000

The amount of the price of Tiopira's half of the land under his agreement was £1,974 3s. 2d. He asked me to make it up to £2,000, which I did, as it was only a matter of £25 16s. 10d. extra.

In settling up with Tiopira, I first read over to him in detail the vouchers for the various sums of money which had been paid to him and his party from time to time by Messrs. Brissenden and Nelson, amounting in all to £620. These payments he admitted. That point having been settled, I told him that by the papers before me, it appeared he had, on receiving-these various sums, agreed to sell the land to the Government for the sum of one shilling and a penny per acre (1s. 1d.). This he said was correct. He said I, being a new purchaser, should enter into a new arrangement. I told him that I was not the purchaser but the agent, and, as he had agreed to sell to the Government at that price, and, on the faith of that agreement, the Government had advanced him such a large sum of money as £620, and had been induced to incur the cost of survey and other charges, that he was bound to carry out his agreement.

I then told him the two blocks contained 72,892 acres, which, at 1s. 1d. per acre, would amount to the sum of £3,948 6s. 4d., the half of which would be £1,974 3s. 2d., which sum he was entitled to, less the £620 deposits. Paul Tauhaere then calculated the amount, and told Tiopira it was correct. They both said they were quite satisfied, but asked me to agree to make even money of it and let it be £2,000. This I agreed to, the difference being, as above stated, £25 16s. 10d.

I then went to the hotel to get the money, and first gave Tiopira the sum of £100 on behalf of Parore (the nature of which I shall presently show), as he (Tiopira) had made it a sine qua, non that that sum should be paid before he would sign the deeds. This sum I advanced out of sums in my hands, as I knew Parore had no funds at the place, and I knew he would repay me even if we did not come to terms as to his interest.

I then counted out £1,380 in notes, and prepared vouchers for Tiopira to sign—one for £100 and one for £1,380—acknowledging the receipt of that amount as being "a payment in full satisfaction of his right, title, and interest in the Waipoua and Maunganni Blocks." These vouchers I read over to Tiopira and Paul in the presence of Judge Symonds, Mr. H. T. Kemp, C.C.; Mr. Clendon, Interpreter of the Court; and Mr. Nelson, my assistant in land-purchase matters, and fully explained the nature of the same to them. Tiopira then signed them in the presence of the gentlemen I have named, and they were attested by Mr. Kemp.

There could have been no possibility of there being any misunderstanding as to the £2,000 being the price of Tiopira's interest, for I remember distinctly, when Mr. Clendon, the interpreter, was reading over and explaining the deeds, he at first explained to them that the two blocks were being sold for £4,000; and I at once corrected him and told him that the arrangement was that Tiopira was selling the whole of his interest for £2,000, which was then his explanation to them.

It is true that there was no total amount of consideration absolutely written in the deeds at the time, and I myself called the attention of the Judge to the fact, and told him that, as I did not yet know what I should have to pay Parore, I could not tell what the full amount was, and at the same +time I asked him to note what I was now paying, and if Parore came to terms he would see what he was to get, which, together with the amount now and formerly paid, would be the price of the two blocks. I also told him that I would not ask him to attest the signatures of Tiopira until I should have come to terms with Parore and he should have signed; or, should I fail to come to terms with him, I would ask him to attest the signatures of Tiopira, aud then insert the £2,000 as the consideration of his interest. The Judge did hot attest the signature of Tiopira then, nor was the attestation clause written in or attested to until after the actual amounts of consideration of money for both blocks had been written in in both deeds, and after Parore had signed them and the whole of the money had been paid. Judge Symonds and Mr. Kemp then attested the deeds and examined them, thereby seeing that the amounts named were true, and in accordance with the payments made.

page 133

The apportionment of the moneys in the deeds, at £2,200 for the one block and £2,300 for the other, was simply a matter of detail, in order to apportion the payments as nearly as I could according to area in round numbers,_for the agreements with both Tiopira and Parore, although quite separate, were in each case not for the two blocks separately, but for each of their undivided interest in the whole area contained in the two blocks; and such division was a matter of no moment to the sellers, as both blocks were owned by the same parties, and the money was, paid in each case in a lump sum.

There was no concealment of anything by me; the whole matter was done in an open and straightforward manner before a Judge of the Court, a Resident Magistrate, and two licensed interpreters, besides being publicly talked about. After Parore came to terms, and I had consented to pay him £2,500, I was asked by some of Tiopira's own people what he had got, and I told them. I saw Paul afterwards, as well as several of Tiopira's people, who must have known it, but they made no complaint, nor did I hear of any till I saw Mr. Tole's letter.

With regard to the question as to whether in the whole arrangements Tiopira has not obtained fully as much and more than Parore, I shall presently show.

It must be remembered that the Maunganui and Waipoua Blocks alone (and not the reserve, Waipoua No. 2) were the subject of investigation before the Court up to the time of its giving its judgment, which: judgment the Court informed the Natives could only be rendered valid by their mutual agreement, or by the Court accepting any voluntary arrangement come to between the parties. The Court did, however, give its judgment, in order, I apprehend, to acquaint the Natives how far their opinion went, and in this judgment they expressed an opinion that Parore had a superior right to Tiopira, and consequently, out of the 72,892 acres before the Court, they awarded to Parore 37,592 (Maunganui) and to Tiopira 35,300 (Waipoua), thus making the award to Parore 2,292 acres in excess of that to Tiopira.

This judgment could not be upheld in consequence of the strange conduct of the Assessor who sat with the Judges, who, having fully concurred with the Judges while they were conferring together, afterwards on the bench gave expression to quite a contrary opinion.

It must be remembered that the Waipoua reserve, containing 12,220 acres, was not under investigation at the time; had it been I have no doubt but that the Court would have awarded to Parore at least an equal interest with Tiopira, if not more, for the Waipoua settlement was his birthplace and continual home until only a few years ago, and in it was planted, and now stands, a fig tree, a present made by His Majesty George IV. to Hongi Hika, the uncle of Parore, who brought it out from England and planted it there. So Tiopira was not entitled by the judgment of the Court to be in the memorial of ownership of' Maunganui at all, but in Waipoua, the lesser of the two by 2,292 acres, and the reserve of 12,220 acres was not before the Court.

It was only by an agreement come to between the parties after considerable discussion, and numerous proposals and counter proposals having passed between them, that it was arranged that Parore and Tiopira were each to have their names inserted in the memorial of ownership for both Waipoua and Maunganui, and that Tiopira should be paid by Parore the sum of £100 out of the proceeds of the sale of timber on a block of land named Waimata, which by the judgment of a former Court Tiopira had been found to have had no interest in, and that the Waipoua reserve should be in the name of Tiopira alone, which reserve was through the whole of that negotiation stated to have been 6,000 acres or there abouts, whereas it afterwards became known to us that it was and is 12,220 acres.

Mr. Kemp and myself had very great difficulty in inducing Parore to agree to these terms, and had we known, as we afterwards did when too late, that the reserve was over 12,000 acres, instead as we understood about 6,000 acres, I am sure that I for one would not have asked him to agree to such terms; and it was that as much as anything which induced me ultimately to agree to pay him £500 more for his interest than Tiopira had sold for: at all events I had to do it, for it was the lowest amount that it was possible to get him to agree to take.

In order to show clearly the proportionate value that Parore and Tiopira have each had out of the whole estate in which they were jointly interested, I have put in the following form:—

A Statement showing the Value separately of the Arrangements as to Title and Sale of Maunganui and Waipoua Blocks.

Tiopira's Share.

	£	s.	d.
Cash paid him by Government	2,000	0	0
Cash paid him by Parore	100	0	0
Value of reserve, 12,220 acres, at 1s. 1d.	661	18	4
Total	£2,761	18	4

Parore's Share.

	£	s.	d.
Cash paid him by Government	2,500	0	0
Value of 250 acres, reserve returned to him, at 1s 1d.	13	10	10
	2,513	10	10
Less amount paid by him to Tiopira	100	0	0
Total	£2,413	10	10

Recapitulation.

	£	s.	d.
Value obtained by Tiopira	2,761	18	4
Value obtained by Parore	2,413	10	10
Excess in favour of Tiopira	£348	76

page 134

Thus it will be seen that out of the block of land extending from the south boundary of Maunganui to the north boundary of Waipoua, including the reserve in question (all of which comprises but one estate as regards Native title), taking the value of the reserve to be only 1s. 1d. per acre, Tiopira has had in land and in money in excess of what Parore has received the sum of £348 7s. 6d., which I consider is considerably more than he is entitled to; and my opinion is borne out by the judgment of the Court, which found him to be entitled to less than Parore by 2,292 acres out of 72,892 acres.

But whether Tiopira has had the best of it or not, the fact remains. He agreed to sell all his interest in the two blocks for the sum of £2,000, and he did it with the full knowledge of what he was about, and he has received that amount in cash. And Parore agreed to sell his interest in both blocks for £2,500, and has received that amount in cash, of which he has paid £100 to Tiopira, as agreed on at the settlement of the question of title.

Te Haurangi: I live at Mataawa. I remember the first bringing of the Opouteke Block before the Lands Court at Kaihu, in January, 1875. Symonds was the Judge. I was there with Heta. I spoke to the Court with respect to our land that was included in their survey; that is, the survey of Wharepapa and party. I was questioned by the Judge. Wharepapa disputed my claim. I said I did not dispute their claim to their land, but only to ours, that is, Heta, Ihaka te Tai, and myself. I said the land had been stolen by the surveyor, by them. The Maoris who assisted the surveyor, Hopeha, and others were asked by the Judge. My claim was admitted by the Court to our land that had been included in this survey. Opokena is the new name of the piece. The plan was placed on the table, and Wharepapa asked me if I knew my piece. I pointed it out; its name is Owhata. I pointed out the other boundary, Te Pukitaru. I cannot point out the line on this plan (produced); but one was made on the plan in Court. The Court ratified it. My name was not written in. Heta then proposed that Wharepapa should be allowed to deal with our piece too. The Court and we all consented to this. It was arranged that my money should be paid to myself by Wharepapa, or some one paying the money, and that myself and Heta should be present when the money was being paid. This is what I said in the Land Court. Wharepapa promised that when he received the money that he would pay our share to us. There has been a great deal of deceit in him: I was at Kaihu when the money was paid for this land. Mr. Preece wrote for us to come. I went, but not Heta. He had also, at Ohaeawai, told me to come I did not see the money actually paid to Wharepapa. I do not know how much he got. I expected to be paid for the area of my piece. I forget now how large the piece was. I did know at the first Court. I cannot say how much I ought to have had Wharepapa did not give me a penny even. I did not know that he gave any to Heta or to Ihaka. Heta may say. I asked Wharepapa for it in Mr. Preece's presence. He replied that Heta and self were thieves. He was obstinate and would not give any. The only money I got at Kaihu then was £10 from Mr. Preece. I returned home. I left £90 in Mr. Preece's hand to bring to Auckland. This was paid to me in consequence of Wharenapa's bad behaviour. The £90 was taken to Auckland by Preece in consequence of a letter I had given him from Ihaka and Heta te Haara. Immediately after I had signed a receipt for the £100, I was told by Mr. Preece that I was to have no further claim on the Government. I would not have signed had I known this before. Mr. Preece and Mr. Kemp alone were present. The money was paid to me before this explanation. I had the money in my possession. I did not return it, nor make any objection to what had been said. Preece wrote a letter for me to give to Heta, and read it over to me. I took the letter to Heta, and gave it to him on my return to Ohaeawai. We both came to Kororareka and saw Ihaka. These two disapproved of what I had done in taking the £10. Heta and self came to Auckland about it. We went to Mr. Kemp's office, and saw Mr. Kemp and Mr. Preece Mr. Preece handed us the £90, and Heta would not receive it, as he did not approve of it, as the land was a large piece. We did not then take it. Heta said he would retain the land. We saw Mr. Nelson. I did not speak to him about this matter; perhaps Heta did. We went back to Kororareka. Before this (our return), Paora Tubaere, Heta, and self were standing in the street at the corner of Queen Street, outside an entrance. Nelson had pointed out the place, saying that was the house of his lawyer. We went upstairs, and Nelson came up after. He interpreted for us. We did not speak, only Nelson: it was he who had advised us not to take the money (£90). He had talked to us at a public-house before this. We met him in Queen street, and said he was very glad to have seen us before we went to the Native Office. He gave us all the information about the area of the land and everything. We went to see Mr. Tole to try to get money from the Government, not from Wharepapa. We all went together to Sir. George Grey. We never said anything; the lawyer did all the talking. Paora spoke a little about his matter with Tiopira. We all went to Colonel Haultain also, then we returned to Kororareka, as I have said. I was not aware that Heta received this £90 while in Auckland.

Before the payment of the money I spoke to Mr. Preece not to pay all the money to Wharepapa. I do not know if he heard me, as there was a noise. I was not present when Wharepapa was paid. I went to the Court House, but the door was closed. I may have got the £100 from Mr. Preece before Wharepapa was paid. Mr. Kemp was present. It was in the day-time, about noon sometime.

James Stephenson Clendon: I am Clerk of Native Lands Court, Kaipara District, sitting at Kaihu. I remember in May, 1865, the investigation of Opouteke Block. I was acting there. The adjudication was in favour of Kamariera Wharepapa, with consent of Heta te Haara and Haurangi. The opposition was in Haurangi's name. During the investigation, Haurangi pointed out a portion of the plan which he claimed. Captain Symonds, the Judge, drew a mark across with a ruler. It was a line between. page 135the two points known to Haurangi. Wharepapa made no objection at the time. He was to be sole grantee, but was to pay Haurangi for the acreage contained in the portion marked off. Wharepapa's name was inserted in several Crown grants, amounting to 80,000 acres in all. He was so put in at request of the Natives to act as agent for them. Mr. Nelson was present at this Lands Court during part of the time. I was present at Kaihu when the purchase was completed at last Kaihu Court (January and February, 1876). I interpreted the deed. I remember Haurangi expressing great dissatisfaction at Wharepapa not acceding to his claims—not giving him what he wanted. It was against Wharepapa, not against the Government. It was both before and after payment for the block. Heta te Haara was not at Kaihu at all, or probably would have got a larger share. Wharepapa had only a small interest in Opouteke. The money was distributed all through the country, to Bay of Islands and else where

John Jermyn Symonds: I am a Judge of Native Lands Court. I held a Court at Kaihu in May, 1875. The Opouteke Block was then adjudicated upon. Kamariera Wharepapa was appointed agent by the Natives concerned, and at their request his name was put in the memorial. Two Natives named Heta te Haara and Te Haurangi were present, and claimed a part of the block. Their claim was admitted. They pointed out the spot before the people in Court and Wharepapa; and a line was drawn across, either by myself or in my presence, to indicate the extent of their claim in a rough way. A note of their claim was made in the Court minutes. The memorial was made to Wharepapa with their full consent. The consent was asked for three times in open Court, and given. The grant would issue in Wharepapa's name alone, and he alone would have the power of selling. Te Haurangi alone was the complainant, not Heta te Haara. In January last, at Kaihu, I witnessed the execution of the deed of sale by Wharepapa to the Government [produced]. Haurangi was at the Lands Court. I do not know if he was present at the signing of the deeds. No protest of any kind was made when the deed was signed and the money paid.

Heta te Haara: It was not my suggestion, at Mr. Tole's office, that we should go to Sir G. Grey it was Mr. Nelson's. Mr. Kemp gave me the £90. When I first went Mr. Kemp said, "Take your money." I said, "Let it be for a future time." At my second going I found Mr. Kemp alone. I said, "I had come to fetch my money." He said, "Very well." Mr. Kemp gave it to me. Mr. Preece was not present then. Mr. Vickers was there. He brought the money upstairs. I knew what the money was—the money brought by Preece from Haurangi at Kaihu. I understood that we should have no further claim upon the Government by Mr. Preece's letter of the 2nd February. I believe that the letter produced is an exact copy of it. There had been no new arrangement about this land since then. I expected to have got £600, as I was told that there was 5,775 acres in our piece. I have applied to Wharepapa for the money, but he said it was all gone from him; that it rested with Petu and others who had the money. I knew that the £90 was with Kemp. Mr. Preece had shown it to us at the Native Office on the first occasion when we declined it before. Mr. Preece said he would not take it as it was not his, and left it with Mr. Kemp. He did not tell us that we might get more afterwards. Mr. Preece and Mr. Nelson both returned to Kororareka in the same steamer with me. On board the steamer, Mr. Nelson said to me that he was afraid of letting Mr. Preece see him talking to me. He did not talk to us in Mr. Preece's presence. I was not at Kaihu when the money was paid I was ill, or should have gone.