OFFICIAL Wai 903, A54

Whanganui Gap Filling Narratives

Craig Innes

June 2004 INTRODUCTION...... 6

SECTION ONE: BLOCK RESEARCH NARRATIVES ...... 10

HUIAKAMA (AND MANGAOTUKU)...... 10

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 1...... 10 Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 1A ...... 11 Table 1: Mangaotuku (and Huiakama) Summary ...... 30

MANGAERE...... 31

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 2...... 33 Table 2: Mangaere Summary...... 34

OKEHU...... 35

Table 3: Okehu Blocks...... 41 Table 4: Okehu Blocks (later survey) ...... 42

OKEHU NO. 1...... 43

OKEHU NO. 2...... 43 Table 5: Okehu 2 Partitions...... 44

OKEHU NO. 2A...... 45

OKEHU NO. 2B ...... 45

OKEHU NO. 2C ...... 46

OKEHU NO. 3...... 46

OKEHU NO. 4...... 47 Table 6: Okehu Summary...... 48

RAWHITIROA...... 49

Table 7: Rawhitiroa Partition...... 73 Table 8: Rawhitiroa B Partition ...... 77 Table 9: Rawhitiroa B1 Partition ...... 79 Table 10: Rawhitiroa Current Maori Land ...... 80 Table 11: Rawhitiroa Summary...... 80

1 RANGIWAEA-OTARORO...... 81

Table 12: Rangiwaea-Otaroro Partition ...... 82 Table 13: Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2 Partition ...... 83 Table 14: Rangiwaea-Otaroro Summary...... 83

RANGIWAEA-TARERE...... 84

Table 15: Rangiwaea-Tarere Partition ...... 85

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2...... 85 Table 16: Rangiwaea-Tarere 2 Partition ...... 87

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2B...... 88 Table 17: Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B Partition...... 88

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2B1...... 89

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2B2...... 89

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2C...... 90

RANGIWAEA-TARERE 2D...... 92 Table 18: Rangiwaea-Tarere Current Maori Lands ...... 93 Table 19: Rangiwaea-Tarere Summary...... 93

UMUMORE...... 94

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 3...... 101 Table 20: Umumore Summary...... 102

WHATAROA NO. 2 ...... 103

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 4...... 104 Table 21: Whataroa No. 2 Summary ...... 112

SECTION TWO: TITLE INVESTIGATION NARRATIVES ...... 113

MAIREKURA AND TATARAMOA...... 113

Table 22: Tataramoa block and Mairekura blocks ...... 118 Table 23: Survey Charges Mairekura and Tataramoa 1903...... 119 Table 24: Survey Charges Mairekura and Tataramoa 1905...... 120

POUTAHI...... 121

2 TAKU...... 131

SECTION THREE: RAETIHI SUMMARY & RAETIHI 3 NARRATIVE...... 137

Table 24: Raetihi Summary, Partitions and Alienations (From Record Sheet)...... 139

RAETIHI 3 ...... 141

Table 25: Raetihi 3 Summary ...... 143

RAETIHI 3A (NOW PART TE ATIHAU WHANGANUI BLOCK) ...... 143

RAETIHI 3B...... 146 Table 26: Raetihi 3B Partition...... 146

3B1 AND PART 3B2 CT WN 299/195 ...... 147

RAETIHI 3B1 CT 467/24...... 147

PART 3B2 CT 299/196 ...... 148

PART 3B2 AND PART 4B CT 299/238...... 148

PARTS RAETIHI 3B2 LOTS 8,9,10 BLOCK 1 DP 3230 AND LOT 11 DP 3802. CT WN 299/197 ...... 149

RAETIHI 3B2A...... 150 Table 27: Raetihi 3B2 Partition...... 150 Table 28: Raetihi 3B2A Partition ...... 151

RAETIHI 3B2A1 (CURRENT MAORI LAND BLOCK)...... 151

RAETIHI 3B2A2...... 151 Table 29: Raetihi 3B2A2 Partition ...... 151

PART RAETIHI 3B2A2A (CURRENT MAORI LAND BLOCK) ...... 151

PART RAETIHI 3B2A2B (CURRENT MAORI LAND BLOCK)...... 152 Table 30: Raetihi 3B2AB Partition...... 153

ATIHAU-WHANGANUI PARCELS WITHIN RAETIHI AREA. (CURRENT MAORI LAND) .... 154 Table 31: Current Maori Land Incorporation (includes land outside of Raetihi) . 155 Table 32: Te Atihau Whanganui Blocks Within Raetihi Area ...... 156 Table 33: Summary of Raetihi 3 Alienations ...... 159 Table 34: Permanent land alienations within the Raetihi 3 Partion...... 159 Table 35: Summary of Alienations Raetihi Block...... 160 Table 36: Current Maori Land Raetihi...... 164

3 Table 37: Raetihi Summary ...... 165

SOURCES...... 166

PRIMARY SOURCES ...... 166 Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui...... 166 Archives New Zealand, Wellington...... 166 Maori Land Court Minute Books -...... 167 Land Information New Zealand...... 167

COMPUTER BASED PRIMARY SOURCES ...... 168

SECONDARY SOURCES ...... 168

4 TABLE OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1: LOCALITY MAP ...... 7

FIGURE 2: HUIAKAMA, MANGAERE AND MANGAOTUKU...... 12

FIGURE 3:OKEHU, RANGIWAEA-OTARORO, RANGIWAEA-TARERE AND WHATAROA NO.2 ...... 36

FIGURE 4: RAWHITIROA ...... 50

FIGURE 5: RAETIHI AND UMUMORE...... 95

FIGURE 6: MAIREKURA AND TATARAMOA...... 114

FIGURE 7: POUTAHI AND TAKU...... 122

5 Introduction

The following narrative project was commissioned on 11 December 2003. It is a gap- filling project, which has been completed in three parts.

Section One: Provides the narrative reports for the following blocks, most of which have not been covered by Paula Berhan in her Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000.1

Huiakama (and Mangaotuku) Mangaere Okehu Rangiwaea-Otaroro Rangiwaea-Tarere Rawhitiroa Umumore Whataroa 2

Two of the above blocks: Rangiwaea-Otaroro and Rangiwaea-Tarere were covered by Paula Berghan. However additional information was located and has been presented in this section. The commission originally asked for a narrative of the Kaitangiwhenua block. However it was subsequently found that this block had been covered by Aroha Harris in her Crown Acquisition of Confiscated and Maori Land in Taranaki, 1872- 1881.2 The commission also asked for research of the Huiakama block. This block was a partition of the larger Mangaotuku block. The Mangaotuku and Huiakama blocks were also covered by Aroha Harris, however the additional research completed for these

1 Berhan, Paula Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000: A Resource Document for Whanganui District Treaty Issues Wai 903, #A12. Paula Berghan July 2003.pp. 10-11 2 Harris, Aroha. Crown Acquisition of Confiscated and Maori Land in Taranaki, 1872-1881. Wai 143 #H3 January 1993

6 { f) s

!'o Tongariro !'o Ngauruhoe

c=:::J Whanganui Inquiry district boundary o 10 20 30km 10 20miles Figure 1 Locality map blocks has been included in this report. The Mangaotuku block was also examined by Tom Bennion and Janine Ford in their Te Wera Forest Research Report.3

The focus has been upon the title history of the blocks from title determination to alienation from Maori ownership, whether by sale, public works taking or other form of permanent alienation. As much as possible all parcels of land removed from Maori ownership have been noted. Purchase activity prior to the determination of title has been included where this has been found.

Where the land has been subject to restrictions under sections of Acts which related to the acquisition of Maori land such as part XIII of the Land Act 1908, or section 248 of the Maori Land Act 1931 this has been noted in the text.

Section Two: Is a narrative of the title determination hearings of the following blocks:

Mairekura and Tataramoa Poutahi Taku

The subsequent history of these blocks has been provided by Paula Berghan.

Section Three: Is a brief tabular summary of the Raetihi Blocks in the 20th century. A brief narrative of the 20th century history of the Raetihi 3 blocks has also been provided.

Overview: The narratives do not provide the fully detailed history of each of the blocks. The limitation of time and resources has prevented this. The limitations outlined by Paula Berghan for her narratives are equally applicable to this project. As with the Berghan Narratives, the following block narratives are intended as a resource for futher

3 Bennion, Tom and Ford, Janine Te Wera Forest Research Report, Wai 143 #M34 May 1996.

8 reseach and no attempt has been made to interpret the evidence used. Primary sources have also been accepted on face value.4

The main sources for the project have included Native Land Court Minute Books, Aotea Maori Land Court Block Order Files, Aotea Maori Land Court Alienation Files, Land Purchase Department files, Land Information New Zealand imaged documents and plans, Maori Land Information System imaged documents and New Zealand Gazette Archive imaged documents. The supporting papers include all of the papers referred to in the text with the exception of minute book folios which proved to be illegible on microfilm, MA- MLP ledger tables and the original copies of the Crown Purchase Deeds held at National Archives or at the Land Information New Zealand Wellington regional office. A PDF version of the supporting documents has been created. All translations of Maori texts are contemporary translations, found within the original files. Where possible all of the original documents in Te Reo Maori have been copied and provided in the supporting documents.

4 Berhan, Paula Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000: A Resource Document for Whanganui District Treaty Issues Wai 903, #A12. Paula Berghan July 2003. pp.9-11.

9 SECTION ONE: BLOCK RESEARCH NARRATIVES

Huiakama (and Mangaotuku) Block Order File: TAR 71

The Huiakama block emerged from the title investigation and partition of the Mangaotuku bock. The blocks were located to the north of the Kaitangiwhenua, Toko and Witinui blocks and were bisected by the Mangaotuku Stream. The original Mangaotuku survey extended into the Taranaki confiscation area.

Between 24 June 1874 and 25 December Parris paid a total of £7845 3s 4d for the Mangaotuku block.5

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 1 Date Particulars £ S D Voucher 30/6/1874 D.Callaghan, supplies to 917428 Natives 24/6/1874 Rangihekeiho & ors: [O/a?] 70 131 purchases 20/2/1875 Mangu & ors wages, survey 133 19 856 31/3/1875 W.Black supplies to natives 2 19 3 970 27/2/1875 F.T. Kenny: wages survey 12 12 1146 12/11/1875 Mangu & ors, 2nd payment 530 0 543 13/11/1875 Self Travelling all[owan]ce 16 16 549 19/11/1875 H.L. Skeet [?] do. do. 10 6 6 624 16/12/1875 Mangu & others final payment 7050 702 28/12/1875 Registration of deed 16 815 18/12/1875 Self: Travelling allowance 6 6 848 25/12/1875 Callaghan: food to natives 1 11 3 866 7845 3 4 Incidental expenses transferred 24 2 11 from Whakaahurangi Block folio 166 7869 6 3

5 MA-MLP 7/2 folio. 166. Ledger 1872-1884. National Archives, Wellington. Not Copied.

10 The payments were carried forward to Ledger 3 folio 234:6 Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 1A Date Particulars £ S D £ S D

Purchase Incidental

Brought forward from 7650 219 6 3 ledger No. 2 folio 166

21/7/1880 W. Odgers hire of buggy 1

26/8/1881 W. Rennall & R. Parris: 27 4 6 travelling

12/1884 Various expenses 29 8 11

19/10/1884 Hana Tamehana & husband 150 o/a

Add Huitoki, Kapua and 230 Punuwhakau blocks ledger 2 fol 307 to 9 8030 296 19 8

Mangu presented the evidence for the first title investigation for the Mangaotuku block on 8 November 1875.7 Mangu claimed the land under the ancestor Popo, and provided a whakapapa. He then presented short whakapapa showing his connection to his ancestor Rangi Pohatu. He gave Ngati Ruanui as the iwi and provided the names of 14 other members of Ngati Ruanui to be entered on the title. The objectors were then challenged and Te Kepa at this point stated

6 MA-MLP 7/3 folio. 234. Ledger 1874-1907. National Archives, Wellington. Not Copied. 7 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folios 72-73, Patea, 8 November 1875. Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 1

11 o~I ...... _ ...... __ ...... :.'" • ., ..... o "'111

/ MANGAOTUKU

•

Figure 2 : HUo i ahm~ . Mangaere and Ma,n 9 ao l u kUI that Ropata & Paoro halfcastes of Whanganui & Ngatiruanui had an interest in the land between the Mangaihu River and the Matemateinge Range but that he was not in a position to conduct their case.

Mangu then stated that he “did not recognise their claims as other land had been divided off for them”. Mangu did not name the lands to which he was referring.

The Court then ordered in favour of the 14 names, members of Ngati Ruanui offered by Mangu. Neither Ropata or Paoro was entered onto the title. The outcome of the title investigation was published in the Auckland Provincial Gazette. This announced that a Memorial of Ownership for the Mangaotuku block of 61,200 acres had been awarded to Mangu, Tuanini, Tihirua, Pokau, Nukumaru, Ureteangina, Ruoanini, Kopua, Reiara, Moerewarewa, Pae, Ngarongo, Korie and Komako.8 Fees of £1 for the hearing and £1 for the Memorial were charged.9

On 16 December 1875, the land was subject to a transaction with the Crown. The transaction is recorded on Taranaki Deed 83.10 The deed states that £7650 was paid for the block of supposedly 61,200 acres. The listed sellers of the block were; Mangu, Tuanini, Tihirua, Pokau, Nukumaru, Uruteangina, Kopua, Ruaanini, Reiara, Moerewarewa, Pae, Ngarongo, Korie, Komako, Rangihekeiho, Te Whetu, Mairangi, Rerekopua of Ngati Maru and Ngati Ruanui.

In March 1876 an application was made “by and on behalf of certain aboriginal natives” under Section 58 of the Native Land Act 1873 to have the title determination case reheard. This application was upheld and a rehearing was ordered by Order in Council

8 Auckland Gazette, No. 64. 1875. pages 594-595 Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 28 9 Memorial of Ownership 8 November 1875. Block Order File: Tar 71. Aotea Maori Land Court. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page:42 10 There are two documents in the Crown Purchase Deed bundle, one a duplicate of the order determining Crown interest of 1881. The other is Taranaki Deed 83 ABWN W5279 Series 8102 Box 73. 16 December 1875. Not copied.

13 dated 12 December 1876.11 It was ordered that the rehearing should take place within two years of the date of the first Court Order. The hearing was held in September of the following year:

It was explained to them that the Surveyor had never been on any part of the Eastern Boundary, that there are no marks on the Hills or Angles and nothing by which the land can be known on the ground.

Mangu admitted this and said that it was from want of food, that they could not go round the Boundaries.

The Court stated that since it is clear that the land has not been surveyed the claim must be dismissed. When surveyed a new claim can be sent in.12

The Court was then adjourned.

In November 1880, the Native Minister’s application to have the Crown interest in the Mangaotuku block determined was published in the Gazette. The application was to be heard at the next sitting of the Patea Native Land Court.13 However because of the above decision, the title to the block was still yet to be decided. The rehearing of the title investigation was held in August 1881. Three applications for a hearing had been lodged, one by Mangu, Moerewarewa, Komako and others.14 Te Mira Tonga Te Pakeke, Tonga, Takiora and Heke Te Pakeke lodged another application.15 The other application was made by the Governor.16

11 New Zealand Gazette, 11 December 1876. No. 69.p.865. NZGA image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 29 12 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 79, Patea, 14 September 1877, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 2 13 New Zealand Gazette 25 November 1880, No.111.p.1684. NZGA image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 31 14 New Zealand Gazette 21 July 1881. No. 60.p.945. NZGA image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 32 15 New Zealand Gazette 21 July 1881. No. 60.p.946. NZGA image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 33 16 ibid.

14 The hearing was held at Patea. A sketch plan was produced to the Court. The interpreter Joseph Dalton explained that his wife was a claimant, and that her counsel was unable to attend until 2pm the next day. The case was then adjourned to the following day.17

A Mr. Duncan appeared on behalf of Te Mira Tonga and others. Major Parris appeared on behalf of the Crown (according to Aroha Harris; Parris had retired in 1875, but had been recalled “on special service to the West Coast Commission” in 1880. Parris as Civil Commissioner had previously been involved in the implementation of McLean’s instructions for the confiscated lands).18 Mangu also appeared and was sworn under the baptismal name of Penaha. Mangu gave Ngati Maru as the hapu and presented a whakapapa, which appeared to show a different line from Hineoro to that presented in November 1875.19 The ancestor given for the claim was Te Maniorongo.

Mangu stated that occupation had been maintained since Te Maniorongo, and that “others have lived on this land besides us- some of the Ngatiruanui lived on it with us”. Mangu said that Hamua is the hapu, which lived on the land. He said that Te Mira Tonga, Te Pakeke, Tonga, Takiora and Heke Te Pakeke are members of Ngatituri. Objectors were then challenged and three objections were made.

Mr. Duncan on behalf of Ngatituri then called Tonga (also known by the baptismal name of Pirimona) to give evidence. Tonga gave a whakapapa showing his connection to Tuwhakaroa. He also gave a whakapapa for his wife Te Mira, through her father and her mother.20 Tonga also presented three whakapapa for Takiora Dalton, each of these

17 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 181, Patea, 16 August 1881, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 3 18 See Harris, Aroha. Crown Acquisition of Confiscated and Maori Land in Taranaki 1872-1881 Wai 143 #H3 January 1993 pages 5-6. 19 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 182, Patea, 16 August 1881, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. See Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 72, Patea, 8 November 1875. Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 1 20 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 183, Patea, 17 August 1881, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 4

15 whakapapa demonstrated a connection with Tuwhakaroa.21 Tonga stated that all the ancestors had lived on the land and he named cultivations on the land. He was not sure if Te Awhiowhio was within the block (Mangu confirmed that it was).

Tonga said that the occupation had only been interrupted once but the enemies were defeated and occupation had been maintained since. He said that there were many burial places on the land including at Huiakama. The rivers on the land were also used for fishing. Tonga stated that he himself had just returned from fishing on the block and that he had eel weirs on the Mangaotuku River. He said that pigeons were caught on the Miro and Kahikatea trees within the block.22

Tonga was cross-examined by the Court. He said that he objected to Mango, but also admitted that Mango had a claim. Parris then asked Tonga whether his brother in law had received any money from the Government. Tonga replied that he did not know.23

Piupiu was then sworn and confirmed that they believed the evidence given by Tonga regarding occupation was correct. Mangu was then called and also agreed with the evidence presented by Tonga. The three people who had earlier raised objection, Tito Hanotaua, Nga Hurumanu and Ruaanini all agreed with Mangu. Mangu said that he would present a list of names for the following day.24

Ruaanini presented the list when the hearing resumed. Mr. Duncan said the names of the other side were on the application. The names were then read and objectors challanged. Hana Tamihana then said: “I want my name inserted in the order”. No objection to this was made.25

21 Ibid. fols. 183-184. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 4 22 Ibid. fol. 185. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 5 23 Ibid. fol. 186. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 5 24 Ibid. 25 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 187, Patea, 18 August 1881, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 6

16 The Court then considered the Crown’s claim over the block, and an adjournment was ordered to allow the parties to reach agreement. When the hearing resumed at 11:30am Major Parris and Mr. Duncan reported that they had been unable to reach agreement. Mr. Duncan said that the deed did not appear to be a duplicate and that he must take exception to it under Section 83/73. Major Parris then stated “this is not a rehearing” to which Mr. Duncan replied “then if the sale is one affected before the claim was heard the title must be invalid or void.”26

The Court then declared the persons named in the list presented by Ruaanini and those on the list of applicants to be the owners of the Mangaotuku block of an estimated 58,000 acres. The subdivision of the block was then considered.

Mangu said that he had sold the block “about five years ago- I and my people received £7000 for this land.”27 Mr. Duncan pointed out that “the sale had taken place before the land had been before the Court”. Tonga was then sworn and the list of owners was read out. Tonga said that there were additional owners to those listed, they were presently at Parihaka. In addition to these, he said that Takiora, Heke te Pakeke and Mangu knew of others interested in the land.28 He stated that the principal area of occupation was at Huiakama and that many of the dead were buried there. Tonga said that they would be satisfied if they were located there on the western part of the block.

Under cross examination by Parris, Tonga said that his brother in law had received money for the land. Mira Tonga was then sworn and stated that her brother, Heke had not shown her the money and that she had been vexed when he had told her of it. She said that he had initially refused to accept the money from Parris. However she said that he had received £50 from Te Rangihekeihu for the land and she had put in a claim to a Mr. Clarke after the sale. When cross examined by the Court Mira Tonga said she did

26 Ibid. fol. 188. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 6 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. fol. 189. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 7

17 not know whether her brother had accepted the money afterwards or not.29 Mira Tonga said that she only knew of £50 being paid for the land and that she herself had not received any money for the land.

Piupiu was then sworn, and stated that all of the certified owners and all of those named by Tonga had ancestral rights to the land and these rights were equal and extended over the whole block.30

Mangu then gave evidence. He named a number of other people who he considered had an interest. He also believed that if the Court was to award land to the non-sellers the western area should be the area awarded. The case was then adjourned. When the case resumed that afternoon, Major Parris stated that he would not be calling any more witnesses and said that he wished to draw attention to the expense that the Crown had incurred in the survey and to the fact that part of the block lay within the confiscation boundary.31

Mr. Duncan then addressed the Court and asked that 8/30 of the block be awarded to his clients in the part of the block west of the Mangaotuku River. Major Parris objected that this was unfair as this area was the best land in the block. He said that the cultivations of both parties were “over the whole block”. The Court ordered that 8/30 of the block was the property of Te Miro Tonga Te Pakeke, Tonga Te Pakeke, Takiora and Heke Te Pakeke and that the Crown had acquired the rest of the block. The Court was then adjourned.

When the Court resumed the next day Major Parris said that an arrangement had been made on the partition.32 Because the claimants had desired the better part of the land they

29 Ibid. fol. 190. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 7 30 Ibid. fol. 191. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 9 31 Ibid. fol. 193. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 10 32 Taranaki Native Land Court MB 1, folio 194, Patea, 19 August 1881, Microfilm, New Zealand Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 10

18 were to receive only 8540 acres (8/30 of 58,000 acres was 15,467 acres so the claimants would receive a little over half the area to which they might have been entitled), however he stated that this block would be still subject to a survey lien of 8/30 of the total £1247 3s 8d survey cost. Mr. Duncan agreed to the terms. Major Parris then asked for an order in favour of the Crown for the approximate area of 50,000 acres remaining.

Mr. Duncan then asked for an order for the 8540 acre Huiakama block awarded to his clients.33 He asked that no restriction be placed on the title. He was informed by the Court that the owners would have to provide proof that they owned other lands. Pirimiona (Tonga) then swore under oath that they had plenty of other lands. The Court then ordered that the names of Te Mira Tonga Te Pakeke, Pirimiona Tonga and Takiora Dalton be entered on the register as tenants in common in equal shares. No restriction was to be put on the title and a survey lien of £332 1s was recorded. Hone Pihama then addressed the Court:

Hone Pihama desired the Court to consider the advisability of inserting other names besides the three named.

Mr. Duncan said –the last speaker has not been recognised by any one of the owners of the land those interested have apled [applied].

The matter was explained to Hone Pihima and he appeared satisfied.

Title for the Huiakama block was awarded to Te Mira Tonga Te Pakeke, Pirimona Tonga and Takiora Dalton, the wife of Joseph Edwin Dalton licensed interpreter on 19 August 1881.34 Fees of £1 for the hearing, £1 for the Certificate and 10s 6d for witnesses were charged. ML 30/A indicates that the Huiakama Block was bounded on the western side

33 Ibid. fol. 195. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 11 34 Order on Investigation of Title, Huiakama. 19 August 1881. Patea District. Provincial District of Taranaki. Huiakama and Mangaotuku Blocks Block Order File TAR 71. No plan with order. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 41

19 by the confiscation boundary and lay on the Mangaotuku stream.35 Both ML 30/A and ML 24 indicate an area of 8540 acres.36

Parris reported his view of the case to the Under Secretary of the Land Purchase Department the day after the hearing on 20 August 1881. Parris believed that Heke Pakeke had received £55 of the original purchase money, yet was admitted on to the title. He also believed that “several others, I have no doubt (but I can not prove so) participated at the same time, although their names were now brought forward as new claimants.”

So far as I am aware the title to the 8540 acres is vested in Te Mira Tonga Pakeke, Pirimona Tonga and Takiora Dalton in equal shares and alienable. To this Hone Pihama objected and asked that the names of all the eight claimants admitted by the Court should be entered in the order of the Court, this was however objected to by Mr. Duncan and overruled by the Court and from what I have heard there is a design to purchase it by private individuals. I may further state that only the three whose names appear on the Court Order appeared in Court consequently there was no one to protect the interests of the absentee new claimants admitted.

Parris described the history of the transaction of the block as “very extraordinary”. He described the first survey as a “flying survey” which had been conducted to avoid expense. He believed that the new survey, used in the recent case was in fact practically a copy of the previous flying survey:

In my opinion the original survey plan was quite as good as the one before the Court at this sitting, and but for the unnecessary objections made to it, the decision made at the first sitting of the Court in 1875, would never have been disturbed; whereas the consequence is that the natives who sold on the first occasion, after such a lapse of time have supported new claims, which have now been admitted by the Court, the original sellers knowing they would be no losers but in all probability gainers if rumour is right.

Parris implied that Duncan had sought to limit the number of names entered onto the title to facilitate the sale of the land. Parris reported the confirmation his suspicion in a post script:

35 ML 30/A Huiakama. Taranaki Land District. Approved May 1883. Landonline image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 18 36 ML 24 Huiakama. Taranaki Land District. Approved May 1883. Landonline image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 17

20 Since writing the above report I am informed that the block of land referred to 8540a was purchased last night and the Deed signed. The five other claimants admitted before the Court will probably not get a farthing of the money.37

A minute entered onto the cover sheet indicates that Mr. Parris was thanked for closing the “long outstanding purchase”.

On 22 August R.S. Thompson, the husband of Hana Tamihana, who had been inserted on to the title of the Mangaotuku block wrote to Judge Puckey of the Native Land Court. He pointed out that his wife had been recognised as an owner of Mangaotuku, that she had not received any money, that she did not sign the deed of transfer and that “since the order in favour of Her Majesty the Crown Agent –Major Parris appears to be disposed to ignore her application for either money or land in satisfaction of her claim.” Thompson asked the Judge to stay the Order in favour of the Crown until the interests of Hana Tamihana had been considered.38 A note on the reverse of this letter read as follows:

Mr. Parris on behalf of the Crown applied for an order vesting 22/30ths of the Mangaotuku in the Crown objections were challenged no one appeared. An order was then made. It may be true or not that Hana Tamihana did not in any way participate in the sale of Mangaotuku to the Crown which was made some years ago after the land had been adjudicated on the first time by the Court. her name was not in the first order and very likely would not have been admitted now had the land not been sold.39

A few days later, Parris sent a telegraph to the Under Secretary in which he repeated his concern that there had been irregularities in the investigation:

In my report of the 20 inst on the result of the investigation by the Court of the new claims to the Mangaotuku block I explained that the Court admitted eight new claims five of whom were not present but were put in for no other purpose than to swell the acreage one of them Heke I protested against he having received £55 of the purchase money when paid in 1875 but my objection was overruled by the Court. The memorial of ownership was made out in the names Louisa Dalton Mira & Tonga. Honi piehama [sic] protested & requested that the eight who had been admitted by the Court should have their names put in

37 R.Parris to The Under Secretary, Land Purchase Department. 20 August 1881. MA-MLP 81/323 (with 84/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 125-129. 38 R.S. Thompson to Judge Puckey, Native Land Court Patea. 22 August 1881. Copy with MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 98 39 Note dated 25 August 1881. Author of note unclear. Copy with MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 99

21 the memorial of ownership but this was also overruled & only the three as above were put in[.] The same evening those three signed a conveyance of the 8540 acres to mr Duncan Mr Thomas Bayley & Major Brown for £800. Today Mira and Tonga have made a complaint to me that only £10 each has been given to them out of the purchase money[.] Can nothing be done to intercept the confirmation of the title of the purchasers[?] the circumstances being a direct disregard of the vested interest confirmed by the Court. The intriguing that has been going on is truly painful.40

Gill replied:

If the five Natives were held by the Court to have an interest in the land and they were not included as Grantees in the Court order I think it a fair reason for an application for a Rehearing.

In the payment for the land if any wrong has been done [to] Nira and Tonga, they should write to the Fraud Commissioner so that he may not pass the Deed without their being present when the investigation takes place. Mr Rennell might assist them.41

Soon after this Rennell reported to Gill that the Chief Surveyor was unable to estimate the area of the Government land within the Mangaotuku block.

I am unable to state what the area of the Government land within it will be until the survey is made as there is a portion of it to be cut by order of the Court and called “Huirama” [corrected in margin] moreover the survey in the first instance was so loose, that it is perfectly unreliable to take out areas. We have already found out an error of a mile and a half between two points only about 3 miles distant.42

In January 1882 Sheridan asked Rennell if the survey had been completed and whether the boundaries could be provided to enable the proclamation of the land.43 Sheridan asked a near identical question over a year later on 29 March 1883.44 Rennell replied

40 R. Parris to R. Gill. [date illegible but prior to 27 August] MA-MLP 1881/452 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 119-121 41 R. Gill to R. Parris 26 August 1881. MA-MLP 1881/452 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 117-118 42 Rennell quoting Chief Surveyor, Rennell to the Under Secretary Land Purchase Department. 28 August 1881. MA-MLP 1881/452 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 115 43 Sheridan for the Under Secretary to W. Rennell. 13 January 1882 (incorrectly marked 1881 in original). MA-MLP 1883/96 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 113 44 Sheridan for the Under Secretary to W. Rennell. 29 March 1883. MA-MLP 1883/96 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 110

22 that the survey had been completed but not the plotting. He wrote that the surveyor was completing as much work as possible before the winter, when he will complete the plotting work.45

In June 1883, Robert Thompson wrote to the Native Minister complaining about the Mangaotuku block transaction:

It may be in your recollection that on one of your visits to Pungarehu in the year 1881, I mentioned to you the difficulty I had in getting a settlement of my wifes claim in the Mangaotuku Block, and that you kindly advised me to apply for a subdivision.

Thompson went on to relate that an application had been sent in that year for the sitting of the Native Land Court in Waitara, but that his wife’s application did not appear in the Gazette.

I wrote to the Registrar pointing out that all the witnesses in the hearing of the Mangaotuku Block lived near Waitara and that it would be a great convenience if the application for subdivision were heard at that place. I received in reply a letter from the Registrar saying that my wifes application would be gazetted for hearing at Patea, where the block came before the Court for adjudication. There has been no Court held at Patea since the time I speak of and as all the land in the vicinity of that place has been adjudicated upon it is not at all likely that a Court will sit there in the immediate future.

My object in writing to you is to point out that the difficulty experienced by my wife is not felt by other natives interested in the Block who have obtained an allocation of their interests in the land, a detailed survey, and a purchase of their claims without the mediation of the Court, and with the assistance of the Native Agent for the Crown at Taranaki; and I would respectfully ask that the same facilities may be extended to my wife in the matter referred to. That you may perfectly understand the case, I will submit for your perusal a statement of the facts –

In August 1881 the Mangaotuku Block came before the Court at Patea. On the hearing of the claims my wife appeared and was admitted after pleading her own claim in Court which were agreed to by the other natives present and her name was duly inserted on the Order of the Court. There were the names of seventeen other grantees on the order, fourteen of whom had received money from and agreed to sell to the Crown Agent, Mr Parris. The other three grantees contracted to sell their interests to Mr. T. Bayley of Taranaki and by arrangement with Mr Parris I believe these interests were allocated on the map of the Block. I interviewed Mr Parris on the subject of my wifes interest and that gentleman at first denied that she had an interest, and subsequently said he was not going to pay any more money on Mangaotuku. I respectfully submit to the Hon. The Native Minister that I did not ask for money but simply wished to have a settlement of my wifes claim.

45 W. Rennell to Under Secretary Land Purchase Department. 30 March 1883. MA-MLP 1883/96 (with 1883/213). Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 109

23 Thompson believed that the grantees of the Huiakama block had received more money on that block the week prior to his letter. He believed that the transaction only required the signature of the Judge for the balance of the money to be paid and the transaction completed:

These natives having sold their interests experience no difficulty in obtaining a subdivision. Is the subdivision legal? and if it is legal, is it just whilst my wifes claim remains unsatisfied? I respectfully yet earnestly ask the Hon. the Native Minister to enquire into the matter. The Crown having purchased the fourteen shares is owner of the fourteen interests and is in a position to make a subdivision by arrangement. With deference I press upon the Hon the Native Minister the desirability of this course which would save the expense of the Court. If the three who have sold to Mr Bayley have had their claims settled the only other claimants are the Crown by purchase and my wife by order of the Court. If the three who have sold can obtain subdivision why cannot my wife who wishes to keep her land for her children do the same? All the claimants were admitted by the same Court and are on the same footing, why then the distinction? My wife does not wish to lock up land from settlement but she wishes to secure some for her children. Of the many thousands of acres of land on which my wifes claims have been proved she cannot call one acre her own. What she has not lost by confiscation she has been deprived of through the trickery of unscrupulous natives who have sold to Government and others. My wife pleaded her own case in the Court and was not admitted through “love and affection”. Could all the grantees in the Block do the same and substantiate their claims? I doubt it.46

Thompson’s letter was referred to Gill, the Under Secretary of the Land Purchase Department. Gill replied:

The Native Land Court was requested to ascertain and determine what interest the Government had in this block of land. It did so and ordered that 43950 acres should [illegible] in Her Majesty. I know nothing more of the matter.47

Gill wrote a further minute on the subject on 24 July, where he recommended to the Minister that the matter should be referred to the Native Land Court. The Native Minister agreed:

46 R.S. Thompson to the Native Minister 20 June 1883. NO 1883/1863 [MA-MLP 1883/183] (with MA- MLP 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 104-107 47 Minute, 19 July 1883. NO 1883/1863 [MA-MLP 1883/183] (with MA-MLP 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 103

24 Mr. Thompson asks me, in effect, to enquire into his wife’s title. Such an enquiry must rest with the Native Lands Court which [is] the only legally constituted tribunal for the purpose.48

Gill asked the Chief Judge to read Thompson’s letter on 8 August.49 He also wrote to Thompson on that day and related that he had been instructed by the Native Minister to inform him that any inquiry must be made by the Native Land Court. A form to be signed by Hana Tamihana was sent with this letter.50 Meanwhile the registrar of the Whanganui Native Land Court reported that he had sent the Freehold Order awarding title to the Crown of the Mangaotuku block for the signature of Judge Puckey in Wellington on 2 August 1883.51

On 13 August Puckey wrote to Gill and related his recollection of the case:

1. The case was heard by the Court and an order made. Then the land was bought for the Crown, all or nearly all the money being paid to a native called by the natives Mangu but by Mr. Parris Mango. 2. A rehearing was applied for & granted when it was called the applicants were not present, it [lapsed?]; & the land was then erroneously deemed to be native land. 3. The block came in for hearing before me at a Court held at Patea Aug 16th 81. Mr Parris represented the Crown & called Mangu to give evidence in support of the claim of the persons found at the first hearing to be the owners, but as it did not matter to him who got the land having nothing to [illegible] he virtually threw Mr Parris overboard and did not oppose the claims of persons he did not recognise as having any right at the first hearing. Mrs Thompson was one of them. The facts being too clear to escape the notice of the Court on Mr Parris application the larger part of the block including Mrs Thompson’s interest was awarded to the Crown. Mrs Thompson being herself present in the Court & not objecting, believing [probably?] as I did that some small payment would be made.52

48 Minute, 30 July 1883. MA-MLP 1883/183 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 102 49 Minute, 8 August 1883. ibid. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 102 50 Under Secretary Land Purchase Department to R.S. Thompson, 8 August 1883. MA-MLP 1883/183 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 100 51 Registrar Whanganui Native Land Court to Under Secretary Land Purchase Department. 2 August 1883. MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 101 52 Judge Puckey to Mr. Gill 13 August 1883. MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 96-97

25 Sheridan ask\ed whether Mangaotuku could be proclaimed waste lands or would the matter have to be dealt with first.53 The Native Minister directed that a copy of Mr. Thompson’s letter be sent to Parris for an explanation. The Minister commented, “I really do not at present see what is to be done.”54

A copy of Thompson’s letter was sent to Parris on 14 December 1883 and Parris outlined his recollection of the events in a letter to the Under Secretary of the Land Purchase Department of 21 December 1883. Parris wrote that the land had first passed through the Court in November 1875 and that the land was soon after purchased by the Government, the Deed of Cession being executed on 16 December 1875.

Some time afterwards a rehearing was applied for, which was granted, but on being called for at the appointed time, the applicants (Wanganui natives) did not appear, having in the meantime discovered that they had misunderstood the boundaries of the block.

Parris argued that the survey had not been completed “on scientific principles” because of the expense and because the land was in an isolated area. This was, he stated, verbally agreed to by the Government. He believed that the second survey was no better than the first, and that because the lines of the first survey were not followed. An area of only 47,400 acres was included rather than the 61,200 he believed had originally been purchased. Parris believed that the partition of the Huiakama block had been the result of a deal made with the claimants:

Mangu the principal native in the sale of the block to the Crown and who rejected at the first Court the new claimants referred to, was at the second Court bribed with a money payment –not to oppose their claims and it was only by intriguing that they succeeded.

In the matter of Hana Thompson my impression at the time was that she was provided for in the block awarded to the newly admitted claimants; and I still think she should have been and am at a loss to understand what process of reasoning or ruling could have included her interest –in the award to the Crown. [Gill noted in the margin the comment: “See evidence page 11 Hana Tamihana was an admitted owner under Mangu”]

53 Minute, Sheriden. 20 August 1883. MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1883/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 94 54 Minute, Bryce. 23 August 1883. MA-MLP 1883/224 (with 1883/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 94

26 Parris claimed that Hana Tamihana had complained to him that she had not received any money from the sale of the Huiakama block, which to him confirmed his belief that she had been part of the claim for that block. Parris disputed that Robert Thompson had approached him for a settlement after the case. Parris claimed that Thompson had been too intoxicated to talk to anyone, and that he had been ejected from the Court because of his drunkenness. 55

Gill noted in the margin that Parris had consented to the allocation of the 8540 acre block. Gill also noted to the Native Minister:

Mr. Parris’s recollection of the Matter is at variance with the evidence and the letter of [illegible] Judge Puckey who heard the case.56

The Native Minister concluded that it would not now be possible for the Native Land Court to hear the case because that Court did not have jurisdiction over Crown lands and the land had been awarded to the Crown. He believed that if the previous proceedings were set aside that the position of the Crown would be strengthened. He therefore argued:

Whatever claim Hana Thompson may have would appear to be a moral or equitable one in the ordinary sense of the term and in no sense a legal one.57

The title order for the remainder of the Mangaotuku block which was awarded to the Crown in August 1881, was for an area of 38,860 acres, and only included the area to the east of the Huiakama block.58 The area to the west of the Huiakama block, which lay within the confiscation boundary was not part of this Crown award.

55 Parris to the Under Secretary, Land Purchase Department. 21 December 1883. MA-MLP 1883/405 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 69-76 56 Minute, Gill to Native Minister. 14 January 1884. MA-MLP 1883/405 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 68 57 Minute, Bryce, 26 January 1884. MA-MLP 1883/405 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 68 58 Order Determining Crown Interest. 19 August 1881. Huiakama and Mangaotuku Block Order File TAR 71. Aotea Maori Land Court. Wanganui. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 38-39

27 Robert Thompson wrote to the Native Minister on 2 July 1884 asking for assistance in having the hearing on his wife’s claim heard.59 Bryce then wrote to Lewis noting:

This is a matter which ought to be settled, and as the first step appears to be a hearing before the Native Land Court, I think it should be expedited.60

An application for the partition of the Mangaotuku block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette of 17 July 1884.61 Hana Tamihana was the applicant. The hearing was held at Wanganui on 6 September 1884.62 Mr. Thompson appeared on behalf of his wife, Hana Tamihana.

The Court: This matter appears to be out of the jurisdiction of this Court. The application is signed by Hana Tamihana, and her name does not appear in the Grant or Memorial of Ownership.

Mr. Thompson argued that his wife’s name was handed into the Court as an owner. Therefore she was competent to make the application.

Mr. Gill said this is vested in the Crown –Hana was put in by Mango. She must look to him.

The case was then adjourned until 2 pm, when the Court stated that it had in its possession an order vesting the whole block in the Crown. The application was then dismissed. Two days after the hearing Thompson wrote to the Under Secretary of the Land Purchase Department stating that he and his wife;

recognise the fact that our legal rights under the Native Land Laws of the Colony are at an end and that we will submit to that decision and give up all claims upon and in respect of the land itself. We do so the more readily in asmuch as we rely upon your discussion made at the hearing of the case namely that Hana Thompson had a claim to the block through Mangu

59 Thompson to Native Minister 2 July 1884. NO 1884/2227 (with MA-MLP 1884/213) Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page:66 60 Note, Bryce to Lewis. 2 July 1884. NO 1884/2227 (with MA-MLP 1884/213) Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page:67 61 New Zealand Gazette 17 July 1884. No.84. p.1131. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 34 62 Whanganui Native Land Court MB 7. Fol. 362-363. 6 September 1884. Microfilm National Archives. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 12

28 We ask therefore that our claim be treated by the Government as a purely equitable one and as Hana Tamihana has never received any money from Mangu nor the Government on the block we ask that a sum of £316.0.0 be paid us in full satisfaction and discharge of all claims against the land.

We make the application for the sum on the basis of 38,000 acres having been acquired in freehold tenure by the Crown from (15) fifteen Native owners (of which my wife was supposed to have received payment) at the price of 2/6 per acre.63

On 22 September Thompson wrote to the Native Minister asking for the payment, stating:

I would respectively ask, Sir, that taking into consideration that my wife has been ten years trying to preserve the birthplace and burial places of her ancestors from time immemorial down to the generation immediately before her; from alienation, she should receive prompt satisfaction of her claim when greatly against her wish she had to accept money in lieu of land, in consequence of the Native Lands Division Act not being applicable to matters for which one would think it was intended. Should my wife receive what she asks, it would not reimburse the amount of money expended in proving her claim.64

Gill recommended to the Native Minister that the claim should be favourably dealt with. However he believed that the claim for £316 was in excess of that to which Hana Tamihana was entitled. He argued that the Crown had been awarded 22/30 of the block and not 15/30. He also argued that the value of the interest of Hana Tamihana might not have been equal to some of the other owners. He recommended that Hana Tamihana should be offered £150.65 This recommendation was approved. Gill instructed Sheridan to inform Thompson that the Government was prepared to pay £150 to Hana Tamihana as a full settlement of her claim.66 On 6 October Thompson wrote to Gill, the Under Secretary of the Land Purchase Department accepting the offer:

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of the 23rd alt. and in doing so accept on behalf of my wife of your offer of £150. in full settlement of all her claims on the Mangaotuku Block[.] The substantiation of her just right has been a very

63 R. S. Thompson to Under Secretary, Land Purchase Department 8 September 1884. MA-MLP 1884/173 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 61 64 Extract from R.S. Thompson to the Native Minister 22 September 1884. MA-MLP 1884/183 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 55-56 65 Gill to Native Minister 15 September 1884. MA-MLP 1884/173 (with 1884/213). National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 58-59 66 Minute, Gill to Sheridan, 23 September 1884. MA-MLP 1884/173 (with 1884/213) National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 60

29 expensive process and I hope there will be no delay in forwarding the voucher for signature so that she may at least enjoy the mere remnant of her property.67

Correspondence with this letter indicates that the deed was redrafted to include this transaction. A note on Taranaki Deed 83 dated 20 October 1884 indicates that Hana Thomson was an owner but had not received any of the money paid for the block. £150 was therefore paid to Hana Tamihana and her husband Robert Thompson. The total amount paid for the portion of the Mangaotuku block awarded to the Crown was therefore £7800. If each of the 22 shares had an equal value, they would have been worth a little less than £355 each. The Mangaotuku block of 38,860 acres was declared waste lands of the Crown in August 1885.68

A note on ML 30/A indicates that a Certificate for the Huiakama block was issued on 9 June 1884. This was Certificate of Title 17/46 issued to Thomas Bayly (the date indicated on the Certificate is 2 June 1884).69 Soon after two new Certificates of Title were issued for the Huiakama block, two undivided thirds to Thomas Bayly (CT 17/70) and one undivided third to Andrew Duncan, who had represented the claimants at the rehearing of the title to the Mangaotuku block (CT 17/69).70

Table 1: Mangaotuku (and Huiakama) Summary Mangaotuku (and Huiakama) Summary Original Area* No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 47400 1 47400 0 0 * Area derived from sum of Huiakama and Mangaotuku title orders. Does not include the area within confiscation area. Area differs from original survey.

67 R. Thompson to The Under Secretary Land Purchase Department. 6 October 1884. MA-MLP 84/191. National Archives, Wellington. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 49 68 New Zealand Gazette 20 August 1885, No. 49.p.972. NZGA image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents page: 36 69 TN 17/46 Huiakama. 2 June 1884. Landonline Image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 18a- 18b. 70 TN 17/69 Huiakama. 24 October 1884. Landonline Image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 19-20. TN 17/70 Huiakama. 24 October 1884. Landonline Image. Mangaotuku Supporting Documents pages: 21-22.

30 Mangaere Block Order File: TAR 16271

The Mangaere block was located to the north of the Huiakama and Mangaotuku blocks. On 5 September 1878 notice was given that the Crown had entered into negotiations for the purchase of the Mangaere block.72 This was a little over ten months before the determination of the title for the block. A magnetic survey was approved as such as ML 44 in 1879.73 The unusually shaped block comprised two separate areas of 5520 acres and 730 acres, which straddled the Mangaotuku Block. The total area was 6250 acres. The block lay on Mangarere Stream.

An application for the hearing of title to the Mangaere Block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette on 19 June 1880. Mangu was named as the applicant.74 The hearing was held at the Native Land Court on 16 July 1880. Judge Heaphy presided.75 The plan ML 44 was produced before the Court.

Mangu appeared as the claimant for the block. He claimed the land through his ancestor Tuwhaka. Mangu who was a member of the Tuhikitea hapu stated that Tuwhaka had owned the land. Tuhikitea was the child of Tuwhaka. Mangu stated that he himself had lived on this land, that he was presently living there, and that his ancestors had always had possession of the land. He named seven cultivations; Pakipaki, Te Akohea, Rangituri, Te Pou, Pukerata, Ohape and Ngakorako. There were also three burial places, Pukerata, Tokatoka and Pawhenua.

71 Block Order File sent to Archives New Zealand Wellington :Tar 162 –MISSING According to staff. Refer to Memorial of Ownership. DOSLI Number 3956. ABWN Series 8910. W5278 Box. 29. Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Not Copied. 72 New Zealand Gazette. 5 September 1878. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 5 73 ML 44 Mangaere Block. Magnetic Survey 1878, Skeet Surveyor, approved 1879. Taranaki District. Landonline image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 4 74 New Zealand Gazette 19 June 1880. No. 63. p.924. NZGA image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 7 75 Taranaki MB No. 1 folios 119-120. Microfilm copy, Archives New Zealand Wellington Office. Mangaere Supporting Documents pages: 2-3

31 Mangu submitted a list of names to appear on the title. There was no objection raised and the Court stated title was to be awarded upon the receipt of a certified plan, to six owners as tenants in common. A fee of £2 was recorded in the minutes. The names of the owners were published in the New Zealand Gazette in September 1880.76 Mangu was appointed as the Trustee for the 11 year old boy, Matarenga.77

In July of the following year Takiora Dalton applied for the partition of the Mangaere Block.78 However the Mangaere block was sold soon after this for £781 5s on 25 August 1881.79 The Crown application to have its interests in the block defined was published after the transaction on 8 September.80 The Trust Commissioner confirmed the sale on 22 September 1881.81 The block was declared to be waste lands of the Crown in November 1881.82

The sale was also recorded on the Maori Land Court Memorial of Ownership. The Chief Judge certified the sale to have been completed on 22 January 1883.83 The following payments for the block were recorded in the Land Purchase Department ledger:84

76 New Zealand Gazette, 2 September 1880. No.85. p.1281. NZGA image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 8 77 New Zealand Gazette, 9 September 1880, No. 86. p.1290. NZGA image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 9 78 New Zealand Gazette, 23 July 1881. No. 60. p.949 NZGA image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 10 79 Crown Purchase Deed. Taranaki 174. Mangaere. 25 August 1881. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252 Archives New Zealand. Not copied. 80 New Zealand Gazette, 8 September 1881. No.71 p. 1161. NZGA image. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 12 81 Crown Purchase Deed. Taranaki 174. Mangaere. 25 August 1881. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252 Archives New Zealand. Not copied. 82 New Zealand Gazette. November 17 1881, NZGA image. p.1521. Mangaere Supporting Documents page: 14 83 Memorial of Ownership. DOSLI Number 3956. ABWN Series 8910. W5278 Box. 29. Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Not Copied. 84 MA-MLP 7/2 folio 170. Ledger 1872-1884, National Archives, Wellington. Not copied.

32 Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 2 Date Paid by Particulars £ S D Voucher 24/8/1876 C. Brown Mangu & 100 287 anor: 1st payment 24/11/1877 Do Tuanini & anr 32 391 2nd “ 20/12/1877 Do Tuanini 3rd “ 18 432 5/11/1878 Do Mangu & ors 100 889 4th “ 8/6/1878 McDonnell & Te Rangi 10 1014 Brassey Pokau & ors 4th “ 17/3/1879 Do Tuanini 5th “ 25 1713 8/7/1880 C. Brown Uruanini & 25 488/9 ors 7 & 8th “ 8/9/1881 Robt. Parris Takiora & 335 3 4 469-472: [ors?] final 527 pay 20/9/1881 Do Moerawarewa 134 1 4 539: 540 & ors do. 31/10/1881 Native Land 2 562 Court fees 28/8/1882 Buckland: 2 2 645 valuation’s fee 783 6 8

33 Table 2: Mangaere Summary Mangaere Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 6250 0 6250 0 0

34 Okehu Block Order File: WH 182

The Okehu block was surveyed in 1880 by Alfred Mathews. Winiata te Puhaki assisted and was paid 10 shillings a day for his work. This payment was later queried by Gill:

I think 10/- a day an excessive charge for a native pointing out the boundaries of his own land.85

Booth informed Gill that “There was a special (verbal) authority by Mr Sheenan to pay Winiata Puhaki 10/- a day as guide, owing to his superior knowledge of the county.”86

Matthews had experienced some difficulties with the Okehu survey. Unfortunately the file concerned with this issue now appears to be missing. However the Register of Inwards Correspondence for the Land Purchase Department reveals that a Mr. Keast had a claim against Matthews expenses incurred during the Okehu survey and requested that any payments to Matthews be stopped until the matter was decided by the District Court.87 Keast soon after asked that his claim be withdrawn.88

It is unclear what happened to the negotiations for the Okehu block. In November 1879 Booth was instructed to cease negotiations for blocks which had not been put through the Court.89 Soon after the instructions were received the block was one of several listed as under negotiation which had not been through the Native Land Court. In December

85 Minute Gill to Booth. 13 December 1880. MA-MLP 1880/739. National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 143 86 Minute Booth to Gill. 23 December 1880. MA-MLP 1880/739. National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 143 87 Keast to Land Purchase Department. 10 May 1880. Register of Inwards Correspondence, Native Lands Purchase Department. MA-MLP 2/5. National Archives Wellington. Not Copied. 88 Keast to Land Purchase Department. 3 June 1880. Register of Inwards Correspondence, Native Lands Purchase Department. MA-MLP 2/5. National Archives Wellington. Not Copied. 89 MA-MLP 1879/620 Instructions to James Booth. 27 November 1879. Okehu Supporting Documents page: 148

35 --.

RANGIWAEA·TARER£ • \

L,~. l_ -.. .. ~- ,. , . Wi" Rang""",, ••T~r~re 'l 'll'h_. No.2 '

R.an!ltwaoa.Otltoro ~"

WHATAROA NO_2

RANGIWAEA OT~ORO OKEHU

Fig ure 3 : Oke hu , Ra ng iwaell·Otarg rtf, Ra n 9iWllu, fa re re and Wh·ata rOil NQ ,2 1879 James Booth listed the “Okehu” block of 5000 acres (originally listed as 15,000 acres, the “1” was struck out) as a block under negotiation. Booth listed the block as one which was contracted for survey, but which had not been put through the Native Land Court. The schedule noted that the survey had not at that stage commenced. The Surveyor, Matthews had been contracted to survey the block on April 30 1879.90 Although, the survey had been contracted in 1879, it does not appear that the block was surveyed at the time. The first survey for Okehu is ML 1675 surveyed by McKay in 1898.91

A Crown application for a hearing for the Okehu block was published in March 1884.92 In November 1886 Butler contacted the Native Land Purchase Department asking for instructions:

Re Okehu Block application by Governor for definition of Interest of Crown Kahiti [Jany – January?] is a sum of two thousand & seventeen pound has been advanced on this Block at the rate of ten shillings per acre. Is it your intention to complete purchase of Block or shall I apply to court to cut out a sufficient area to cover advances consider rate far too high.93

In reply, Lewis the Under Secretary asked for clarification, as to whether the block had passed the Court and whether the owners were anxious to sell.94 Butler replied that the land had not passed the court and that the case had been adjourned.95 Lewis then instructed Butler:

90 James Booth, Return, showing the state of his negotiations in Progress. 5 December 1879. MA-MLP 1879/595. National Archives, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 157 91 ML 1675, Maungakaretu SD. Wellington Land District. McKay Surveyor. September 1898 Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 40 92 New Zealand Gazette 1884. No.41 p.597. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 70. 93 Butler to Under Secretary, Land Purchase Department, 14 November 1886. MA-MLP 1886/466 (with 1903/62). National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 142 94Under Secretary Land Purchase Department to Butler, No date (likely 15 or 16 November 1886). MA- MLP 1886/466 (with 1903/62). National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 141 95 Butler to Under Secretary, Land Purchase Department, 16 November 1886. MA-MLP 1886/466 (with 1903/62). National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 140

37 Please treat agreement as confidential; land is not worth more than one third of the price. Crown claim could only be heard after native title ascertained.96

The Crown applied to have its interest in the Okehu block defined in 1884 and again in late 1886.97 This was over fifteen years before the title to the block was determined. The next correspondence in the Land Purchase Department file is dated 15 July 1903 (see below).

In July 1895 the Crown application for a charging order against Okehu and other blocks was published.98 The application asked for a charging order of £346 for the survey of the Okehu block. The survey charge for this block was the largest for all of the listed blocks. On 10 September 1895 the Commissioner of Crown Lands for the Wellington District asked for charging orders against the blocks listed in the Panui.99

Title investigation for the Okehu block was held on 11 May 1903.100 Judge Butler presided. The papatupu claim was made for the Okehu block of 1370 acres indicated on WD 1675. Arama Tinirau presented the claim.

Arama Tinirau claimed the land on the grounds of ancestry from Taikopae and his sister Te Ratoihi. He stated that the rights to the block had been maintained by occupation, and he provided a whakapapa showing his connection to Taikopae. He also provided a whakapapa for Te Ratoihi.101 Arama Tinirau admitted Tauhua Kereti as she was his tuahine. Tuahua Kereti did not set up a separate case. Wi Pauro claimed a right to the

96 Under Secretary Land Purchase Department to Butler. 16 November 1886. MA-MLP 1886/466 (with 1903/62). National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 139 97 New Zealand Gazette. 31 March 1884. No.41 p. 587. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 70 New Zealand Gazette. 23 December 1886. No.67. p. 1694. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 71 98 New Zealand Gazette 11 July 1895 No. 52. p.1087. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 73. See also, Te Kahiti o Niu Tireni 1895, No. 31, 11 July 1895. p.259 Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 72 99 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 26, fol. 241 Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 2-6 100 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 50, Wanganui 11-13 May 1903, Folios 374-378, minute book 51, Wanganui 14 May, 9-10, 15 June 1903, Folios 1-3, 11-20, 26-32. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 7-29 101 Ibid. Fol. 375. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 8

38 land, which was also recognised by Arama Tinirau.102 Mereaina Rauangina stated that they had the same claim as Arama Tinirau, but that they would not press that claim.

The Court asked for lists of names. Arama Tinirau provided list ‘A’, which was read out and passed without objection. Tauhua Kereti presented list ‘B’ which was also passed without objection. Weraroa Kingi then claimed a right from Rangituhia and put in list ‘C’. Arama Tinirau objected to all on that list. Rauangina then stated that she would seek an arrangement with Arama Tinirau, and if that failed a separate case would be made. She made her claim through her ancestor, Tongaiti.103

The case resumed the next day. List ‘D’, presented by Akapita Te Akitoro was read out and passed without objection. Arama Tinirau agreed for the inclusion of three more names Mereama Rauangina, Pikimairawea Kereti and Te Roi Anikanara. Mereama Rauangina then withdrew her claim.104

A Mr. Manson then asked for an adjournment to allow Winiata Te Pahaki to appear. The case was then adjourned to the following day. Winiata Te Pahaki had not discussed the matter by the next hearing of the case so it was further adjourned to the following day 14 May.105

When the case resumed on 14 May, Arama Tinirau advised the Court that he admitted that Rangiteamia had the right to the land. He then gave a whakapapa for Rangiteamia. The Court stated that it was satisfied that Rangiteamia had the take to the land. The lists were then handed back to the parties. The Court was then adjourned till 15 May.106

102 Ibid. Fol. 376. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 9 103 Ibid. 104 Ibid. Fol. 377. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 10 105 Ibid. Fol. 378. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 11 106 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 51 Folio 1, 14 May 1903, Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 12

39 The revised lists were read out on the following day, but several objections were raised, including objections from people who had sat through the other sittings without claiming. The case was then adjourned.107

The case did not resume until 9 June 1903. The lists were then read out again and Tohiria Pirato objected that some of his near relatives had been left out. Another list was handed in by Poria Kerei and read out, but Arama Tinirau objected to everyone on that list. A Mr. Jones also objected to the list. Poria Kerei Hira then stated that they would set up a case from Rangihaereroa.108

Kairahi Papakino claimed a right through Tongaiti and handed in a list. Arama Tinirau objected that the claimants did not have any right by occupation. Mr. Jones objected on the same grounds.109

Poria Kerei Hira then presented her party’s case. She presented a whakapapa for Rangihaereroa. She stated that none of the claimants or the counter claimants had ever been to the land, and that the land had been used by the ancestors. Poria Kerei Hira was cross-examined by Arama Tinirau.110 She admitted that she could not prove occupation, but added “…nor can you.”111

Kairahi Papakino then presented their claim through Tongaiti. A whakapapa for Tongaiti was then presented. Kairahi stated that they had been over the block and that there were clearings (waerenga) on the block. Kairahi stated that they had helped clear land on the

107 Ibid. Fol. 3. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 13 108 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 51 Folio 11, 9 June 1903, Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 14 109 ibid. fols. 11-12. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 14-15 110 ibid. fols. 12-13. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 15-16 111 ibid. fol. 17. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 17

40 block. Kairahi Papakino stated that there were no kainga on the land and that none of the claimants to the land had lived on it.112

Arama Tinirau then gave evidence. He stated his objection to Poria Kerei Hira and her party as based upon his belief that while they had an ancestral right, they had no rights derived from occupation. He argued they had not set up a claim to the lands of Rangihaereroa before. Arama Tinirau was prepared to accept the admission of Kairahi Perata and Katera Poni.113

The case resumed the next day on 10 June. Tohiora Puato presented another list of names which was objected to by Arama Tinirau. The list was then withdrawn. The Court ruled that the case of Poria Kerei Hira did not prove any right by occupation and that it must therefore be disallowed. The parties then asked to discuss the relative interests.114 When the case resumed the lists of names were presented and read out without objection. The parties asked that the block be divided into four parts.115 The block was then, as suggested divided into four parts as indicated on ML 1675.116

Table 3: Okehu Blocks Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Okehu No. 1 100 0 0 100 15 Okehu No. 2 564 0 0 564 51 Okehu No. 3 315 0 0 315 40 Okehu No. 4 391 0 0 391 13

112 ibid. fols. 14-15. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 17-18 113 ibid. fols. 17-18. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 20-21 114 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 51 Folios 19-20, 10 June 1903, Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 21-22 115 Ibid. Fol. 26. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 23 116 ML 1675, Maungakaretu SD. Wellington Land District. McKay Surveyor. September 1898 Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 40

41 However a later survey of the block (ML 1954) indicates a slight revision of the areas of each of the divisions.117 The difference appears to correlate to the removal of 3a 1r 37p for a road soon after the title investigation in 1903.118

Table 4: Okehu Blocks (later survey) Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Okehu No. 1 99 3 0 99.75 Okehu No. 2 562 2 10 562.56 Okehu No. 3 314 0 32 314.2 Okehu No. 4 390 0 1 390.01

The Land Purchase Department retained an interest in the block. Correspondence from Sheridan to Goffe listed the payments made for the block over fifteen years previously. It was noted that a number of names of those who had previously received payments were found to be “not in the title neither are their heirs”. Sheridan instructed Goffe:

As soon as lists are handed in you had better go carefully through them and ascertain which of the claimants have had advances from Gov[ernmen]t or are the heirs of Natives who have had advances.119

Two further applications for the partition of the Okehu block were lodged Hawira Puhaki in 1905 and 1906.120 The Crown applied to have part of the Okehu block cut off to satisfy unpaid survey liens of £85 10s 9d in 1907.121 However these applications did not lead to any division of the land.

117 ML 1954 Approved 9 June 1907. Wellington Land District. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 39 118 New Zealand Gazette, 8 October 1903. No. 79. p.2169. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 39 119 Minute Sherdan to Goffe. 7 June 1903. MA-MLP 1903/62. National Archives, Wellington. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 136 120 New Zealand Gazette, 18 May 1905. No. 45. p.1161. NZGA image; New Zealand Gazette, 25 May 1906. No. 39. p.1364. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 76-77 121 New Zealand Gazette, 2 May 1907. No. 40. p. 1413. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 80

42 Okehu No. 1 An application for partition of the Okehu No. 1 was published in May 1907.122 Tarihira Kereti and Monika Ruke were the applicants. The application for the block partition was heard on 2 July 1907. The applicants wanted 25 acres cut from the block to allow a sale of their interest.123 An order was made for the division of the block into Okehu No. 1A and Okehu No. 1B. However an application was later made to cancel this partition and the order was therefore cancelled.124

An application for the right of road through the Okehu No. 1 block was made in October 1907.125 By this time however the block had already been sold (although the sale was yet to be confirmed).126 The block was entered onto a Certificate of Title under the Land Transfer Act in October 1911.127 The transfer of the block to Eliza Catherine Collier was entered onto the Certificate of Title on the same day.

Okehu No. 2 When the application was made for the road access through the Okehu No. 1 block in October 1907 it was recorded that Eliza Collier had a 42 year lease over the Okehu No. 2 block.128 However when the lease was entered onto the Certificate of Title the lessee was recorded as Anna Margaretta Henderson. The lease was transferred to Eliza Collier on 13 January 1912.129

122 New Zealand Gazette, 2 May 1907. No. 40 p. 1410. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 79 123 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 56, Folios 17-18. 2 July 1907. Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 30-31 124 Ibid, fol. 36 Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 32 125 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 57, Folio 167, 10 October 1907. Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 34 126 ibid See also CT WN 192/299. 127 CT WN192/299 13 October 1911, Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 42 128 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 57, Folio 167, 10 October 1907. Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 34 129 CT WN 170/126 22 July 1907. Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 45

43 The matter of a proposed sale of the block was presented to the Native Land Court in November 1915.130 The non-sellers held a total of 117 shares and wanted the “front” of the block. Treadwell acting for the purchaser objected to this as access was through Okehu 1 to Okehu 2 and through Okehu 4 to Okehu 3. Treadwell stated “we offer them a strip on either side of 3, with access”. After a conference with the parties another suggestion was put forward, however Treadwell said that he was not certain that the purchaser, Collier would agree to the suggested boundaries. The Okehu No. 2 block was then partitioned into Okehu No. 2A, Okehu No. 2B and Okeku No.2C.131 A survey lien of £13 4s 2d was lodged against the title of 2B.132 A survey lien of £3 4s 6d was imposed on the 2A block of 23 acres, which was awarded to 6 owners.133 No survey charge appears to have been noted on the Partition Order for 2C. The Court fee of £1 was paid 21 April 1920.134

Table 5: Okehu 2 Partitions Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Okehu 2A 23 0 10 23.06 6 Okehu 2B 94 0 0 94 4 Okehu 2C 445 2 10 445.56 26

130 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 68, Folios 144-145. 5 November 1915. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 37-38. 131 Ibid. See also Partition Orders, 2A, 2B and 2C. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 59-69 132 Partition Order. Okehu 2B. 5 November 1915. Whanganui Native Land Court. MLIS image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 63 133 Partition Order. Okehu 2A. 5 November 1915. Whanganui Native Land Court. MLIS image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 59 134 Partition Order. Okehu 2A. 5 November 1915. Whanganui Native Land Court. MLIS image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 65.

44 Okehu No. 2A ML 3418 indicates that Okehu No. 2A was largely covered with bush and in fact both 2A and 2B contained the only area of bush on the Okehu 2 block. This might suggest that the two smaller blocks were of an overall lower value than the Okehu No. 2C block.135

A meeting of the owners was held in January 1951 to decide upon the proposed sale of the block. However the resolution was not carried.136 Another meeting of the owners of the block was held on 28 June 1957 and at this meeting a resolution to sell was carried.137 The block was sold for £400 in two parts, the northern portion of 11 acres, 2 roods and 25 perches to Henry Carey Collier for £200 and the southern part of 11 acres, 2 roods and 9 perches to John Morrel Bristow Collier also for £200.138 Okehu No. 2A remained under Certificate of Title 170/126 until 1958 when the fresh Certificate of Title 791/60 was issued to six owners. Nearly two months later, the transfer in two parts to Henry Carey Collier and to John Morrell Bristowe Collier was recorded.139

Okehu No. 2B ML 3418 indicates that Okehu No. 2B shared an area of bush with Okehu 2A. Certificate of Title 267/55 for the 94acre block was awarded to Whakapu Ngahoari, Hoani Moutoa and Anateira Okura on 27 April 1920.140 The block was transferred to Eliza Catherine Collier on the same day. The land was subject to the restrictions under Part XIII of the Land Act 1908 and Section 74 of the Native Land Amendment Act 1913. In or around

135 ML 3418, Okehu 2A, B & C Blocks, Dix and Wall Surveyors, April 1919, Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 41 136 Miscellaneous Alienations Action Sheet. Aotea MLC file 3/6598, Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 111 137 Miscellaneous Alienations Action Sheet. Aotea MLC file 3/6598, Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 102 138 Order Confirming Resolution of Assembled Owners. 28 January 1958. Aotea MLC file 3/6598, Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 108 139 CT WN 170/126 Okehu 2. 22 July 1907. Landonline image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 44- 46. CT WN 791/60 Okehu 2A. 6 June 1958. Landonline image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page 47. 140 CT WN 267/55 Okehu 2B. 27 April 1920. Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 48-49

45 1951 the land was recorded as also subject to the restrictions imposed by Section 248 of the Maori Land Act 1931.

Okehu No. 2C Certificate of Title 267/54 for the 445a 2r 10p block was awarded to Eliza Collier on 28 April 1920.141 ML 3418 indicates that the land was free of bush and was described as “Hilly open country”. The land was subject to the restrictions imposed by Part XIII of the Land Act 1905 and Section 74 of the Native Land Amendment Act 1913. In or around 1951, the land was listed as subject to restriction under the Maori Land Act 1931, Section 248.

Okehu No. 3 E.C. Collier applied for a consent to lease the Okehu No. 3 block in 1906.142 When the lease was entered onto the Certificate of Title it was recorded as a 21-year lease from 20 April 1907. Four of the proprietors, Winiata Nikora, Rakera Te Keu, Ateria Te Raroa and Te Roi Anikanara were not involved in the lease. 143

The Okehu No. 3 block of 314 acres and 32 perches was entered onto a Certificate of Title under the Land Transfer Act on 5 October 1909. A survey lien and a survey charging order mortgage were recorded against the block on 22 July 1907. The Certificate of Title 190/196 indicates that the block was transferred from the Aotea District Maori Land Board to Eliza Collier on 4 September 1925. The block was subject to the restrictions imposed by section 74 of the Native Land Amendment Act 1913. In 1951 or 1952 the land was subject to the restrictions imposed by Section 248 of the Maori Land Act 1931.144

141 CT WN 267/54 Okehu 2C. 28 April 1920. Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 50-51 142 New Zealand Gazette, 1 November 1906. No. 92. p. 2880. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 78 143 CT WN 190/196, Okehu 3. 5 October 1909, Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 52-53 144 ibid.

46 Okehu No. 4 The Okehu No. 4 block was exempted by Order in Council on 23 July 1907 from Section 117 of the Native Land Court Act 1894. This was to allow for the alienation by sale.145 Soon after, a road was put through the Okehu No. 4 block in October 1907.146 By this time however the block had already been sold (although the sale was yet to be confirmed).147 Three roods and 39 perches was removed for the road, which was to provide access to the owners of the Okehu No. 3 block. An application for the confirmation of the sale of the Okehu No. 4 block was published in the New Zealand Gazette in December 1908.148 An application for the partition of the block appeared in the same issue. Rapera Waiata was the applicant.149

Okehu No. 4 block was entered onto a Certificate of Title under the Land Transfer Act in May 1909.150 The sale of Okehu No. 4 for £782 was considered before the Wanganui Native Land Court on 11 February 1909.151 The alienation to E.C. Collier, wife of Henry Collier of Wanganui was confirmed by the Court.152 The transfer was recorded on the Certificate of Title on 5 October 1909.153

145 CT WN190/197, Okehu 4. 26 May 1909, Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 54- 55. 146 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 57, Folio 166, 10 October 1907. Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 33 147 ibid. 148 New Zealand Gazette, 23 December 1908. No. 106. p.3320. NZGA image. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 83 149 Ibid. p. 3321. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 84 150 CT WN190/197, Okehu 4. 26 May 1909, Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 54- 55 151 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 59, Folio 25, 11 February 1909. Wanganui. Okehu Supporting Documents Page: 36 152 Confirmation Register Whanganui Land Court, Aotea Maori Land Court, Not Copied. 153 CT WN190/197, Okehu 4. 26 May 1909, Landonline Image. Okehu Supporting Documents Pages: 54- 55.

47 Table 6: Okehu Summary Okehu Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 1370 7 1370 0 0

48 Rawhitiroa Block Order File: TAR 324

The Rawhitiroa block lay in the Taurakawa and Kapara Survey Districts and was, at the time of the 1885 survey, covered in forest.154 A hearing for the title investigation for the Rawhitiroa block was scheduled for 10 April 1878 at the Wanganui Native Land Court. Katene te Okeroa, Hemi Matanginui, Menehira Wahiawa and Hohepa te Poki were the applicants.155 However the scheduled hearing did not eventuate. A hearing of the claim for the Rawhitiroa block was then scheduled for 3 January 1879, also at Wanganui.156 The same applicants were listed for this claim, which also did not proceed.

In November 1879, William Williams reported to the Native Minister that he had been offered a large block of land known as Rawhitiroa by the Ngarauru tribe. He reported that the “Hawera people” were still uneasy with smoke being seen on the ridges of Mount Egmont. Williams believed that the land might be purchased for 2s 6d per acre.157 A note on this letter indicates that the Minister instructed Gill to inform Williams that he did not wish to purchase the land.158

Nearly two years later, Wiremu Kauika, Hakaraia Tenawiki and others offered the Rawhitiroa area for sale, as well as their interests in the Kaitangiwhenua reserve (a note

154 ML 19A, Rawhitiroa Block. Robert Annabell surveyor. 1885. Taranaki Land District. Landonline Image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 45 155 New Zealand Gazette 14 March 1878. No.22 p.317. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 80. 156 New Zealand Gazette 9 December 1878. No.122.p.1736. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 82. 157 William Williams to The Native Minister, 26 November 1879. MA-MLP 1879/569 (with 1893/100), National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 211-212. 158 Note by Gill on reverse of William Williams to The Native Minister, 26 November 1879. MA-MLP 1879/569 (with 1893/100), National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 210.

49 O~, ______~~ • ,., ... ---

RAWH lnR'OA

..•• , •1 1 •

.. ' •" ", '- • • Figure 4 Rllw h il i r03 on the letter indicates that this interest may have been in the Kaharoa No.3 block).159 Gill instructed Butler to reply:

Say that the Government declines at present to enter into any negotiation for the purchase of the Rawhitiroa Block. The Native Land Court should first Investigate the Title.160

More than two years later, the Chief Surveyor reported problems surveying the area:

The natives will not permit us to make a survey of the Rawhitiroa & Kaimanuka Blocks. I believe Messrs Brassey & McDonnell are having a sketch plan made to submit to the Native Land Court upon which to investigate titles. What do you propose to do in the matter? Will you consent to a sketch plan being received by the Court?161

A note dated 31 October 1884 indicates that a staff surveyor was authorised to survey the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka at an estimated cost of £233 6s 8d for Rawhitiroa and £520 16s 5d for Kaimanuka.162

The hearing for the determination of title of the Rawhitiroa block was scheduled for 22 April 1884 “and following days”. Three applications were published; one by Ngaraupo, Uru te Angina, Hohepa Poki, Matanginui, Wahiawa, Piki Koutuku, Wiremu Kauika and Moe Tapapa, another by Hohepa Poki and the other by Wiremu Kauika, Uru te Angina, Hohepa Poki, Wahiawa, Moetu, Tararoa, Kaiwhare, Puakotiri, Rauangi and Poharama.163 However the title investigation hearing for the block was not held until 12 November 1884.164

159 Wiremu Kauika, Hakaraia Tenawiki and others? to Mr. Gill. 16 November 1881. MA-MLP 1881/492 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 206-208. 160 Minute from Gill to Butler on MA-MLP 1881/492 (with 1893/100) National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 203. 161 Chief Surveyor to Gill, Under Secretary Land Purchase Department. 10 March 1884. MA-MLP 1884/64 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 201. 162 Note on Letter from McDonnell to Gill 21 October 1884. (Part of original letter cut out). MA-MLP 1884/200 (with 1893/100). Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 199a 163 New Zealand Gazette 31 March 1884. No.41 pp.595-597. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 84-86. 164 Whanganui NLC MB 07, folio 495. 12 November 1884. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 6

51 The first to address the Court was Te Piki Kotuku who stated that he had no money for expenses and wanted the case withdrawn. Moetu seconded Te Piki. However Wiremu Kauika said that he wanted to continue with the case and said that he would pay the £1. Te Piki asked if there was any sale connected with the block, to which he was answered that there was not. Te Piki said that he objected to the land being sold.

Wiremu Kauika then presented his evidence. He stated that he lived at Piraunui, up the Waitotara River. He named Ngati Porua as his hapu. He claimed the Rawhitiroa block through the ancestor, Porua, and said that the land had been occupied up until the present. Kauika claimed that the occupation had been interfered with only once, when people from Whanganui had entered the area to try to take the lakes. Kauika said that this incursion had been beaten off.

Kaiaroto objected to the evidence provided by Kauika and claimed part of the block. Taiwiri te Wheteki (Mrs. Cribb) said she also objected on the same grounds as Kaiaroto, though under a separate claim. Kauika objected to both Kaiaroto and Taiwiri.165

Kaiaroto asked the Court to wait to allow Te Keepa to conduct his case. The Court declined to wait, and said that he could either withdraw or conduct his own case “one or the other, at once.” Kaiaroto replied that he had no money with him to give evidence. The Court stated that no credit could be provided for the fees and that he must “either go on, or withdraw.” Kaiaroto repeated that he had no money and asked that Taiwiri continue with her evidence and that he would try to find some money.

Taiwiri was then sworn. She stated that she claimed a part of the block, the area of Omaru which is a stream which contributes to the Waitotara River. She claimed the block under her ancestor Rangitautahi on her father’s side and provided a whakapapa, showing her connection to Rangitautahi. She also had a connection to the same ancestor

165 Ibid. fol. 496. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 7.

52 on her mother’s side, for which another whakapapa was provided. She said that her father, Paorotoho had lived on the block and had grown potatoes and had harvested fern root on the land.166 Paparata was the name of the cultivation. She said that occupation had been maintained from Rangitauhi to her father, but that she was not sure when her father had left the land to reside on the Whanganui River. Under cross-examination by the Court, Taiwiri said that she believed that most of the land belonged to the people of the Whanganui. However she also said “I have no one here I can call, I am here by myself, and I am young.” Under cross-examination by the assessor, Taiwiri indicated on the plan the area she claimed was from the mouth of the Omaru Stream to its source. She said that she was unable to describe the boundaries:

my father could, he is up the Whanganui River, and never heard of the Court. I happened to come by chance.

Is it only the name you know, nothing else?

That is it. I have heard of the names from my father but don’t know of my own knowledge.167

Kaioroto was then sworn. He said that he lived at Pipiriki around 70 miles up the Whanganui River. He claimed a part of the block through the same ancestor as Taiwiri; Rangitautahi. He provided a whakapapa showing his connection to Rangitautahi. He said that occupation had been maintained on the block since Rangitautahi and that he himself had just arrived from there. Kaioroto also said that he had not heard of the hearing and that he had only arrived by chance. He claimed the area from the north of Rotokohu to the junction of the Omaru stream with the Waitotara River. Kaioroto believed that this area was the boundary between Ngati Rauru and Whanganui. He named bird snaring places and a residing place called Te Ana near the Omaru stream.168 Korakonui was the name of a plantation on the block. Kaioroto repeated that he only claimed a part of the block and that the larger portion belonged to other people who were not in attendance. Kauika then cross-examined Kaioroto:

166 Ibid. fol. 497. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 8. 167 Ibid. fols. 497-498. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 8-9 168 Ibid. fol. 499. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 10

53 Q. How is it I did not see you when I was cutting the line?

Ans – You went like a thief, when you cut the line.169

He said that he had not attended the papatupu meetings for Matemateaonge and Te Kaipo because he did not know that these were about the boundary with Paraetai. He said that his people had received the Gazette notices, but did not know when the case would be held. The Court then cross-examined Kaioroto. Kaioroto said that they had gone to attend the case in April but had been forced to return:

We were down in April, and stayed some time, 2 months, and on account of destitution we had to return home. I heard that the Court would be adjourned from Whanganui to Waitotara, but not the day. My people did not know of it or they would have come.170

Kaioroto said that he was at Pipiriki when he had heard of the case. He had little time and had not told the tribe, but had told several individuals including Te Keepa. He said that they were hauhau and did not get notices. Kaioroto had heard of the case on the Tuesday and had left on the Wednesday, arriving on the Friday.171 He said that his claim was the same as Tauwiri and that the bulk of the land belonging to Rangitautahi lay largely outside of the boundaries of this block. He said the area that he claimed was named “Whakaihuwaka”. Kaioroto said that his witnesses, including Te Keepa were absent. The case was then adjourned until 2 pm.

Kauika was then sworn. He claimed the land through his ancestor Porua and provided two whakapapa showing his connection through his mother and father.172 Kauika said that the name of the block, Rawhitiroa was from the range of hills at the centre of the block. “Whakaihuwaka” was he claimed wholely outside of the block. He named cultivations and settlements belonging to his people on the block. He said that he had

169 Ibid. fol. 500. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 11 170 Ibid. fol. 501. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 12 171 Ibid. fol. 502. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 13 172 Ibid. fol. 503. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 14

54 peach trees and karaka trees on the block.173 Kauika said that he had never heard of any cultivations or houses belonging to Whanganui on the land.

Wiremu Kauika said that there had been fighting between the Whanganui and his people near the land, but that the Whanganui had incurred on the area to take people for the purpose of food and not to take possession of the land, and that in any case they were defeated.174 Referring to the defeat at Kouramutu, Kauika said that some Ngati Rauru had been killed by the Whanganui, but that this fight had resulted in the eating of the slain rather than the taking of the land. He said that this defeat had been soon after avenged at Mangapukutea.

Kauika said that the boundary with Kaitangiwhenua had been determined “at our own meetings at Kaipo & Papatupu” which had been advertised. He said that the Whanganui people had been invited and that they, and Ngati Ruanui had attended. The boundaries of the Kaitangiwhenua block had been determined at this meeting, but Rawhitiroa had been left for another occasion.175 Kauika said that the Whanganui people had not interferred with his survey of the Kaitangiwhenua block.

What Taiwiri said about Kaioroto, also what he said is not true; and the others they say are absent, if they were here, and stated the same, they would also be wrong. I am speaking truly to the Court, that if the Court would wait & go with me they would see the truth of what I say, but it would take too much time.

Kauika was then cross-examined by Tauwiri and then by Kaioroto.176 He was asked about Te Rua Whakahoro, the road claimed by Kaiaroto:

Who were my ancestors [that] used that road?

Ans. I know nothing about your ancestors, I heard that road was used by your ancestors, to the Ngatiruanui country, an open road, but the land is mine.

173 Ibid. fol. 504. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 15 174 Ibid. fol. 505. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 16 175 Ibid. fol. 506. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 17 176 Ibid. fol. 507. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 18

55 Kauika called Tienara Tararoa as his witness. Tienara Tararoa stated that he lived at Kaipo, Waitotara and that he was a member of Ngati Porua. He named and described a number of trees on the block.177 He also named three pa, Maraeariki, Apiti and Otaihiku.178 He said that the road, Te Rua Whakahoro did not pass through the block:

…it is a road of the Whanganui, close on to the Ngatiruanui country, it is not through this block. It ascends by the Utapu; up Whanganui River, along a range on to Te Ruawhakahoro, on to Matemateaongi, and to Patea & c.179

The case was then closed. The decision of the Court was announced the following day:

We have heard a great deal of evidence on both sides, and after due consideration, we decide.

We think Taiwiri has altogether failed to assert her right and we disallow her claim.

Also Kaioroto, the same as Taiwiri.

And, we decide that it is for “Ngati Porua”, who have substantiated their claim.

The Certificate will be issued when the map is properly certified to & c, in Whanganui.

List to be handed in at once.

List handed in by Kauika.

Court says, children and Parents are not to be put in together while Parent is alive; but if the Parents wish it, children & Parents one share.180

An interloctory order for the Rawhitiroa Block of 42,560 acres was awarded to 60 owners on 13 November 1884.181 No restriction was put on the title. A total of £5 8s in fees was charged of the owners.

177 Ibid. fol. 508. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 19 178 Ibid. fol. 509. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 20 179 Ibid. fol. 510. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 21 180 Whanganui NLC MB 07, folio 510. 13 November 1884. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 53 181 Court Order. Rawhitiroa Block. Whanganui Land Court. 13 November 1884. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 53

56 In February 1885 Wiremu Kauika offered Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka for sale to the Government at the rate of 7 shillings an acre. Kauika wrote that; “the management of these lands was given in to my hands by my people that is to say by Uru te Angina the leading chief of Ngarauru”. He said that he wished to retain 1500 acres in the Rawhitiroa block and 4000 acres in the Kaimanuka block for the support of the owners.182 Gill indicated his opinion of the offer:

The lands offered for sale are yet unsurveyed. They have been through to the Court on Sketch plans only. –One of the blocks “Rawhitiroa is under consideration of the Chief Judge on a rehearing application. The land is hilly rough bush country and worth 3/6 per acre only. The land is on the Waitotara river about 30 miles from the Coast in a straight line. 183

Gill noted on the margin of the translation of Kauika’s letter that Kauika had agreed to sell the land for 3s 6d per acre, the owners to pay the cost of the survey.184

Mr Annabell was at that time on the land surveying the two blocks. It was estimated that the survey might take 6 months to complete if there was no interference. However Annabell believed that interference was likely; “…the work would have been done before if they had not objected. Can you do anything to keep the Maoris from interfering?”185

In March 1885, Thomas McDonnell wrote to Gill:

During my late business here [Wanganui], the natives placed in my hands for survey and sale the blocks Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka on the Waitotara river. Several of the owners

182 Wiremu Kauika [to whom is not indicated] 27 February 1885. MA-MLP 1885/41 (with 1893/100) National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 197-198. 183 Minute, Gill to Native Minister 2 March 1885. MA-MLP 1885/41 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 184 Note by Gill, 2 March 1885. On Wiremu Kauika [to whom is not indicated] 27 February 1885. MA- MLP 1885/41 (with 1893/100) National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 197 185 District Survey Office [name illegible] to R. Gill (Under Secretary Land Purchase Department). 27 February 1885. MA-MLP 1885/54 (with 1893/100).National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 195

57 were here today and wish me to offer Rawhitiroa to the Government making a reserve for the tribe of blank [in original] acres on the shores of the chain of lakes on the block.186

McDonnell believed that the land could be purchased for 3s 6d per acre, less survey expenses and duty. He reported that the Maori concerned owed him money, which they would be able to pay once the land is sold. McDonnell also reported that he was going to receive a commission for his trouble. He also stated that he first had dealings with the block in 1878-1879, but that the survey had fallen through because of the lack of funds. Gill instructed Mr. Sheridan to reply:

that the Government last week received a letter offering Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka to them for purchase and that the Native Minister has agreed to purchase the two blocks of land as soon as the survey is complete and orders of ownership issued by the Native Land Court.187

Wiremu Kauika wrote to Gill and reported that he had run into difficulty when he reported that he had not received an advance on the land.188 He told Gill that if a Pakeha was to offer a higher price for the land that it would be accepted, and the cost of the survey refunded. Gill replied:

When you came to see me you gave me to understand that you had full authority to act from your people. From your letter it appears that it was not so. I made you two offers for the land, one of which you agreed to. Friend be careful what you are doing, live by past experience.189

Rahukatea te Kupenga wrote to Balance the Native Minister on 30 March 1885 that they had heard that Wiremu Kauika had gone to Wellington to sell the Kaimanuka and Rawhitiroa blocks. They complained that Wiremu Kauika did not have the authority to

186 McDonnell to Gill, 5 March 1885. MA-MLP 1885/54 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 193-194 187 Gill to Sheridan. MA-MLP 1885/54 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 194a 188 Wiremu Kauika to Gill, 17 March 1885. MA-MLP 1885/63 (with 1893/100) National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 189-191. 189 Gill to Wiremu Kauika (instructions to Davies 18 March 1885) MA-MLP 1885/63 (with 1893/100) National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 189

58 sell the Kaimanuka block as he was not the chief of that land.190 Gill instructed Davis to reply:

should he and his people desire to sell the land to the Government, his letter will have the careful consideration of the Native Minister.191

On 20 April 1885 an agreement was made on the part of Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Kauwhare, Rahukatea te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa on behalf of the owners to sell the whole of Rawhitiroa of an estimated 42,560 acres and Kaimanuka of an estimated 14,270 acres at the rate of 3s 6d per acre. The vendors were to pay the costs of the survey. The vendors also agreed to sell the Kaitieke (not related to the current Kaitieke blocks which were set aside “For the use of aboriginal Natives” under the Land Act 1908 on 23 November 1908 within the Waimarino area192) and Te Ngaue blocks.

Wiremu Kauika and others wrote to Gill on 21 April 1885 and confirmed the offer to the Government of the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka blocks. They also advised:

Mr. Gill, do not pay any regard to the letters that people may send you with reference to Kaimanuka, all those lands are in your and my hands193

The writers complained that they had not received a reply to their telegrams and that they felt “very “pouri”” with regard to the Kaimanuka and Rawhitiroa blocks. Soon after, Wiremu Kauika asked if the Native Minister was in Wellington, as “we desire to go there

190 Rahukatea te Kupenga to the Native Minister 30 March 1885. MA-MLP 1885/1035 (with 1893/100). Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 187a 191 Minute, Gill to Davis, 14 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/1035 (with 1893/100). Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 186 192 New Zealand Gazette. 28 January 1909. p.199. No.6, Not Copied 193 Wiremu Kauika, Moe Tapapa and Te Amo to Gill. 21 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/104 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 183-184

59 about the four blocks of land Rawhitiroa, Kaimanuka, Te Ngaire and Kaitieke.”194 However Kauika was advised not to incur the cost of the journey to Wellington:

Kauika asks if Mr. Ballance is in Wellington as he wants to see him on land matters. I have told him that he should write and not incur expense of a trip to Wellington. Please inform him that Mr. Balance is here just now, but advise him against coming to Wellington in the hope of getting an advance on his lands without sufficient means to return. Urangi Kaiwhare sent here by Kauika is in a fix how to get back.195

McDonnell replied that he explained this to Wiremu Kauika. McDonnell wrote that Kauika; “is trying to get advances on land from anybody who will listen to him but he is acting without consent of Chiefs or tribe”. McDonnell asked that any offers of sale to the Government be referred to him.196 Kauika apparently ignored the advice not to travel to Wellington, for the next letter to the Minister was sent from Wellington on 27 April 1885.

Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Waiwhare, Kahukaka te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa wrote to the Native Minister to offer the sale of Rawhitiroa, Kaimanuka, Te Ngaue and Kaitieke for 3s 6d per acre:

Sir, my tribe was very determined to send us here, for Te Whiti Tohu, and Titokawaru are about to visit Waitotara in May or June. From two to five thousand people are expected and we have come hither to endeavour to get some money to purchase food for the visitors, as is according to Maori custom we wish to purchase flour, tea, sugar, cattle, cups, and all other requisites. We now pray that you will let us have £2000 to be charged against Rawhitiroa, Kaimanuka, Te Ngaue and Kaitieki, and enable us to meet the visitors in a becoming manner.197

Gill responded by suggesting caution to the Minister:

194 Wiremu Kauika Telegram to Davies (Interpretor) 21 April 1885 1885/108 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 180 195 Sheridan [?] to McDonnell 24 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 179 196 McDonnell to Sheridan. 25 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 178 197 Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Kaiwhare, Kahukaka te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa to the Native Minister. 27 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with MA-MLP 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page:175-175b

60 You have already approved of the purchase of Kaimanuka and Rawhitiroa 57,800 acres, and as soon as the Native Land Court issues final orders the purchase will be made. What is [being?] asked is that a large advance of money be made on land that the owners themselves are quarrelling about. Until they agree I cannot recommend that any advance be made, in fact the payment should be final and not an advance.198

However the next day Gill noted that the payment of an advance had been agreed to:

These natives (four) had interview with the Hon Native Minister and assured him that there was now no quarrel or dispute among themselves as to the sale of the lands mentioned to the Government. Native Minister authorised my paying to them £500 [underline in original] as part of purchase money.199

The payment was made the next day.200

Meanwhile, the applications for the rehearing of the title determination case were considered by the Chief Judge of the Native Land Court. An application for the rehearing of the claim to the part of Rawhitiroa known as “Rawhitiao” by Meiha Keepa te Rangihiwinui and others was dismissed by the Chief Judge on 23 April 1885.201 An application by Taiwiri te Wheteke for the rehearing of the claim was dismissed by the Chief Judge on 25 April.202 Another application for the rehearing of the claim lodged by Te Kaiaroto Hamuera and another was dismissed on the same day.203

Tawhiri Te Wheteke then petitioned Parliament on the matter:

198 Note by Gill, 27 April 1885, on the reverse of the translation of Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Kaiwhare, Kahukaka te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa to the Native Minister. 27 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with MA-MLP 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 175a 199 Note by Gill, 28 April 1885, on the reverse of the translation of Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Kaiwhare, Kahukaka te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa to the Native Minister. 27 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with MA-MLP 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 175a 200 Note by Gill, 29 April 1885, on the reverse of the translation of Wiremu Kauika, Te Uranga Kaiwhare, Kahukaka te Kupenga and Moe Tapapa to the Native Minister. 27 April 1885. MA-MLP 1885/108 (with MA-MLP 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 175a 201 New Zealand Gazette 30 April 1885. No.26p.518. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 89 202 Ibid. pp.518-519. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 89-90 203 Ibid.p.519. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 90

61 PETITIONER states that a block of land called Rawhitiroa, in the Wanganui District, was heard by the Native Land Court without being properly gazetted, in consequence of which she was unable to be present. She also complains that the Interpreter performed his duty improperly, and that the Judges did not give their judgement in the proper and ordinary way. She prays for a rehearing, or for such compensation as my seem just.204

The Committee reported that it:

regrets that the time at its disposal has not been sufficient to enable it to make such inquiries as would justify it in reporting an opinion on the subject matter of this petition.205

The ‘Tauwhiri Wheteke’ petition appeared again the following year.206 This time an answer to the petition was given:

I am directed to report as follows: That rehearing cases are provided for in the Native Land Court Bill now before the house.

However the Native Land Court Act 1886 did not allow for an appeal for rehearing in this or similar situations.

On 1 May 1885 Wiremu Kauika telegraphed the Minister after arriving at Waitara:

On my arrival here William Kells was very angry with me for not getting you to stop our [illegible] debts to him and of our blocks these several amounts are owing for four years [.] he will take out warrents for Uru, myself & the others on Monday next wire him you will stop £380 and pay him when you are paying us for Rawhitiroa & Kaimanuka blocks for our tribe.207

Gill noted the reply:

204 AJHR 1885. I2. No. 350. p. 33. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 43 205 AJHR 1885. I2. No. 350. p. 33, see also p. 25 No. 48. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 42-43 206 AJHR 1886. I2. No.350. p. 11. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 40 207 Telegraph, Wiremu Kauika to the Native Minister. 1 May 1885. MA-MLP 1885/834 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 172

62 As soon as you forward to me the list of division of the purchase money as agreed to your tribe, and the survey of the land is completed, the balance of the money will be paid to you. I cannot correspond with persons to whom you owe money.208

On 13 May 1885 Pango Peina wrote to the Native Minister from Waitotara to express disapproval of the payment made to Wiremu Kauika for the Rawhitiroa block. Pango Peina believed that “he was not authorised by the tribe to apply for any money upon the land.”209 Gill wrote; “There are 60 Grantees in this block. Pango Peina is an owner to the extent of one third of a share or Interest.210

In June 1885 Uru Te Angina reported the arrival of Wiremu Kauika at Waitotara. He wrote that Wiremu Kauika and the others had brought the five hundred pounds with them. Wiremu Kauika had three hundred, Kahukaka one hundred pounds and Te Uranga and Moe Tapapa had one hundred between them. Uru Te Angina reported “I have given a portion of Kauika’s three hundred pounds to Te Whiti’s people,…”. He expressed his approval of the actions of Wiremu Kauika, and wrote that the arrangements with the lands were to be in “Kauika’s hands”.211

On the same day Uru Te Angina, Wiremu Kauika, Piki Kotuku, Te Harawira Tararoa and Kahukaka te Kupenga wrote to Ballance and Gill asking that when the survey of Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka is complete, that the money be paid in a lump sum and not divided among the individuals “because there are many people having interests who are not included, some people have many children, while some have only one”. They had

208 Note by Gill 5 May 1885, on the reverse of Telegraph, Wiremu Kauika to the Native Minister. 1 May 1885. NO 1885/1834 (with MA-MLP 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 173a 209 Pango Peina to the Native Minister. 13 May 1885. MA-MLP 1885/1834. (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 171 210 Minute, Gill 9 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/1834. (with 1893/100).National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 169 211 Uru Te Angina to Ballance and Gill, 8 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/149 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 167-168

63 decided that Wiremu Kauika and Te Piki Kotuku were to receive the money for the Rawhitiroa block.212

However also on 8 June, one of the supposed signatories to the letter to Ballance and Gill, Piki Kotuku telegraphed Ballance asking that the payments for the Kaimanuka and Rawhitiroa blocks be ceased.

Cease giving money to the men who are going in reference to our land, Kaimanuka and Rawhitiroa. That is being done by Kauika only, not by me or by Uru te Angina or by the people owning the land. Proceed cautiously in this matter.213

Gill recommended that no further advances should be made and that the balance should be paid when the survey is completed in three months. Gill noted that Wiremu Kauika had been told this when the £500 had been paid.214

On 24 June, Rakei and Pohorama asked for an advance of £25 to pay their expenses while at Wellington on the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka blocks.215 Sheridan’s minute on this application read:

These people had £500 a few weeks ago on the distinct understanding that no further advances would be made until after survey and signing of deeds. There are 164 owners to be dealt with and if the bulk of the money is not on the table at the time they will not sign the deeds, the people who have had the advances generally get out of the way on such occasions.216

212 Uru Te Angina, Wiremu Kauika, Te Piki Kotuku, Te Harawira Tararoa and Kahukaka te Kupenga to Ballance and Gill. 8 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/150 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 163-165 213 Piki Kotuku to Ballance 8 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/151 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 159 & 161 214 Gill, note to Under Secretary Native Department 10 June 1885. On reverse, Piki Kotuku to Ballance 8 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/151 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 160 215 Rakei and Pohorama to Native Minister Ballance. 24 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/163 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 156-157 216 Minute, Sheridan to Lewis. 25 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/163 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 155

64 Lewis agreed with Sheridan and recommended to the Minister that the applicants be informed “that the above understanding cannot be departed from”.217 The next day Lewis instructed Davies (the interpreter?) “Please write nice letter”.218

In July 1885 Taiwiri, Paora Toho and Te Pohutu wrote to the Native Minister complaining about Wiremu Kauika and the land negotiations:

We the undersigned Maoris of Ngatitukapua, living at Tieke inland of Whanganui, wish to inform you.

That we have heard that Wiremu Kauika and the tribe of Ngatiporua of Waitotara, have assumed the control of a block of land near the Maungapukatea Block, we believe the name of the block is Kai-tieke. That land belongs to us, and we are about to have it surveyed[.] Understand that the land is still ours, and we are not willing that others shoud assume the control of it.219

Sheridan asked McDonnell to find out where exactly the land referred to was located.220 Sheridan thought that the land might be within the Kaitangiwhenua block. McDonnell however believed that the land referred to was probably within the Rawhitiroa block:

This land is on the northeasterly side of the Rawhitiroa block near to the proper right bank of the Wanganui river & likely to be a portion of Rawhitiroa[.]

Taiwiri is a hunchback living with a European by whom she has children. At the sitting of the Native Land Court at Waitotara she & other natives advanced a claim to Rawhitiroa but failed to prove their right[.] Afterwards they applied for a rehearing which the Chief Judge refused & Gazetted.

I do not think the Waitotara natives have made any fresh claims to land in that neighbourhood or I should know of it but think it probable the persons have written alluding to their former claim to a portion of Rawhitiroa.221

217 Minute, Lewis to Native Minister. 25 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/163 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 155 218 Minute, Lewis to Davies. 26 June 1885. MA-MLP 1885/163 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 155 219 Taiwiri, Paora Toho, Te Pohutu, 18 July 1885. MA-MLP 1885/2495 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 152-154 220 Minute Sheridan to McDonnell, 5 August 1885. MA-MLP 1885/2495 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 151 221 McDonnell to Sheridan 7 August 1885. MA-MLP 1885/2495 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 150

65 Sheridan wrote to Lewis:

I think the writers might be informed that if they have any interest in the land no one can sell it but themselves.222

On 15 September Wiremu Kauika reported to Lewis that the survey of Rawhitiroa was complete up to the reserve of 1500 acres. Wiremu Kauika informed Lewis that he was very angry with the surveyor for taking so long, “Let the government send a letter to that surveyor, instructing him to get the work done quickly.”223

On 18 September McDonnell sent an urgent telegraph to Sheridan reporting that Piki Kotuku and Wiremu Kauika and the surveyor Annabell were in Wanganui and that Piki Kotuku wanted the money for Rawhitiroa paid now that the survey was complete and before the survey of Kaimanuka is commenced with. Annabell reported that his survey of Kaimanuka will be stopped “unless the natives are communicated with”. McDonnell asked that the matter be immediately brought to the attention of the Native Minister.224

Sheridan wrote a minute to Lewis giving his opinion:

Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka should be dealt with at the same time. It is absurd to think that two men are going to complete the sale of a block in whole there are 60 owners. Nothing can be done until plan is checked and certificate issued.225

Lewis then wrote to McDonnell:

When plan is approved and certificate of title issued money will be paid at Waitotara at a meeting of all the owners, each owner will receive his share of the money as he signs the

222 Note Sheridan to Lewis 10 August 1885 on McDonnell to Sheridan 7 August 1885. MA-MLP 1885/2495 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 150 223 Wiremu Kauika to Lewis. 12 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/269 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 148b-149 224 McDonnell to Sheridan. 18 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 148. 225 Minute Sheridan to Lewis. 18 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 147a

66 deed –it cannot be paid in a lump sum to one or two individuals as Kauika and others appear to imagine.226

McDonnell replied:

Have interpreted your telegram to natives & [desired?] piki Kotuku not to obstruct survey of Kaimanuka[.] Natives pleased Kauika is not to get more money & understand he has sent for £3 though through C Cooke Sol[icito]r.227

Survey Office reported the issue of the possible obstruction of the survey to the Under Secretary of the Native Department.228 McDonnell was told that the purchase of the two blocks was part of a single agreement and it would not be ‘prudent’ to deal with them seperatedly:

The Natives will therefore see that any obstruction to the Kaimanuka survey, as threatened will only delay indefinately the final settlement.229

Lewis replied to the Chief Surveyor:

I do not anticipate any serious opposition to the Kaimanuka survey and I shall feel obliged by your instructing the surveyor to proceed to work without taking any [notice?] of the threats referred to.230

Cooke wrote to the Native Minister on behalf of Wiremu Kauika asking for an advance of £3000 for himself and others now that the survey is completed. “The money I understand is required to pay pressing demands.”231 Lewis asked Sheridan to inform

226 Lewis to McDonnell. 18 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 147 227 McDonnell to Lewis, 19 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 146 228 Chief Surveyor to Under Secretary 21 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/272. (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 144 229 Minute of Lewis to McDonnell 24 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/272. (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 143 230 Minute of Lewis to Chief Surveyor. 24 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/272. (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 143 231 C. Cooke to Native Minister 18 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 145b

67 Cooke that no more money will be paid on Rawhitiroa until the Kaimanuka survey is completed and the purchase of both blocks closed.232

On 27 October the Supreme Court Ordered that with respect of any interest held by or accruing to Uru te Angina in the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka blocks he was to pay £303 14s 4d to Thomas McDonnell.233 McDonnell took similar action against Wiremu Kauika, Kahukaka, Kupenga, Te Weka te Kupenga jointly with Uru te Angina, and was awarded £432 3s 4d for debts and interest.234 Sheridan noted “I believe you will find that the operation of the orders is barred by the provisions of section 88 of “The Native Land Act 1873””. 235 A note on the orders indicates that the debts were reported to the Public Works Department so that the payments to the named owners could be prevented.236

On 1 December 1885 storekeeper William Kells took similar action against the interest Wiremu Kauika held in the Rawhitiroa block. Kells was awarded £392 6s.237 On 10 December Henry Nicolas was awarded £86 3s 5d against the interest Uru te Angina held in unnamed blocks.238 On 3 December Wiremu Kauika, Piki Kotuku and Uru te Angina signed an agreement with Kells authorising the payment of interests they held in the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka blocks to pay the debt of £392 6s which had been charged

232 Minute Lewis to Sheridan. 29 September 1885. MA-MLP 1885/270 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 145a 233 Supreme Court Order, McDonnell vs. Uru te Angina, 27 October 1885. MA-MLP 1885/319 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 136a 234 Supreme Court Order, McDonnell vs. Uru te Angina, Wiremu Kauika, Kahukaka, Kupenga, and Te Weka te Kupenga 27 October 1885. MA-MLP 1885/319 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 136c 235 Note, Sheridan 6 November 1885. MA-MLP 1885/319 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 136d 236 Ibid. 237 Supreme Court Order, Kells vs Wiremu Kauika. 1 December 1885. MA-MLP 1885/362 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 135 238 Supreme Court Order, Nicolas vs Uru te Angina. 10 December 1885. MA-MLP 1885/376 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 133

68 against Wiremu Kauika.239 Kells then took out an injunction to prevent the payment of any money to Wiremu Kauika, Piki Kotuku or Uru te Angina until the debt had been paid.240 Ballance instructed Lewis to inform Kells that the injunction would be resisted but that Kells would receive assistance in the recovery of the debt.241

On 11 December Thomas Fisher reported that there was a concern at the delays in the purchase of the Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka blocks:

Several natives seem frightened it will be like Kaitangiwhenua & Mangapapa find [sic] they have lost the land, and receive no money for it.

One of the strongest growlers is Pehira te Piki Kotuku, and I have advised him to go down to Wellington and see you himself in company with Wiremu Kauika who is coming down next week.242

Fisher asked when the payment for Rawhitiroa might be made as he was planning a month’s holiday in February or March but did not want to be absent when the payment was made.243 Lewis replied that he was directed by the Minister to inform Fisher that the payment would be several weeks yet and would certainly not be made in February.244

The solicitors Fitzherbert and Marshall wrote to the solicitors Buller and Gully on 15 December 1885 regarding the charging orders awarded against Uru te Angina:

We have seen Col. McDonnell one of the Plaintiffs who are seeking to enforce the £675 judgement. It appears that Uru is the chief of the tribe owning the land in question & these

239 Order, Wiremu Kauika, Piki Kotuku and Uru te Angina in favour of William Kells. 3 December 1885. MA-MLP 1885/394 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 133a 240 Kells to Ballance. 16 January 1886. MA-MLP 1886/17 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 125-126 241 Note on reverse Kells to Ballance. 16 January 1886. MA-MLP 1886/17 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 126a 242 Thomas Fisher to Ballance. 11 December 1885. MA-MLP 1885/385 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 131e 243 Fisher to Ballance 27 January 1886. MA-MLP 1885/385 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 130 244 Lewis to Fisher. 29 January 1886. MA-MLP 1885/385 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 131a

69 debts though in his name are in reality for advances, goods supplied & c to other natives, his name being taken for the sake of convenience & we understand when the purchase money is being distributed amongst the different owners the charging orders against Uru will be recognised & paid by the tribe. Under these circumstances we think it advisable to proceed and if possible make the rule absolute, informing the defendant of our reasons for so proceeding.245

On 6 February 1886 Chapman and Fitzgerald advised that the Government should move to set aside the orders which had been awarded against several of the owners of Rawhitiroa and Kaimanuka arguing that:

1.The order virtually makes a charge on Native lands 2.There is no debt accrued or accruing due to the Native and consequently nothing to be charged. Our reasons for thinking this last are as follows: There is no contract by all the native owners to sell. And even if there were money would not be due till the conveyance was signed. 3. The order is against Public Policy as tending to fetter the Government in acquiring Native Land as no Native will convey until he gets his money.

We await instructions as to whether we shall apply to set the orders aside. In the event of our receiving such instructions we propose to suggest taking one test case to decide all.246

Lewis reported to Chapman and Fitzgerald that he had been instructed to ask them to take the course of action suggested. However he warned:

The Native Minister does not wish the objection, that there is no contract by all the owners to sell, raised in such a way as to imply an admission that the partially signed agreement which is in existence is invalid.247

Chapman and Fitzgerald reported to the Native Minister on 27 March that the charging orders had been set aside; “There is now no legal obstacle, connected with these orders, to the payment of the purchase money”.248

245 Fitzherbert and Marshall to Buller and Gully. 15 December 1885. MA-MLP 1885/391 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 129a 246 Chapman and Fitzgerald re Charging Orders. 6 February 1886. MA-MLP 1886/60 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 117a 247 Minute of Lewis to Chapman and Fitzgerald 10 March 1886. MA-MLP 1886/60 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 117 248 Chapman and Fitzgerald to the Native Minister 27 March 1886. MA-MLP 1886/102 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 113

70 Sheridan reported to Lewis that the debt to Kells remained outstanding:

In May 1885 Kauika and two other Waitotara chiefs came to Wellington to offer Rawhitiroa, Kaimanuka and other blocks on the Waitotara river to the Government. The offer was accepted and they obtained an advance of £500 on the purchase money to enable them to discharge some tribal debts. After they returned home Kauika telegraphed that he had disposed of the £500 without having paid a storekeeper named Kells a debt of £350, and that unless the Department would guarantee to do so out of the balance of the purchase money he would be sent to prison. The reply was to the effect that the balance of the purchase money would be paid on the completion of the survey and that Kauika could then make his own arrangements with his creditors.

To facilitate these arrangements as far as possible Rawhitiroa was paid for in cash at Waitotara on the 16th of March last.

You will remember that Kauika sat at the table with a list collecting an amount from each share as it was paid. Speaking for myself I was certainly under the impression that he was acting for Mr Kells, and I was very much surprised when all was over to find that the whole amount passed into the hands of another creditor, Mr. Fisher.

Mr. Kells followed us down to Wanganui and took out warrents against Kauika and some of the other chiefs. I advised him against this step and told him that if the owners generally signified their willingness to a proportionate reduction from each share in Kaimanuka, to met his claim, that it would be added to the proportion of the original advance of £500 to be charged to that block, and collected for him in that way. Kauika agreed to this and I gave Mr Kells a form of order to get signed by as many of the owners as possible to give effect to the stoppage & he returned it to me last April signed by about one third of the owners, all he said that resided at Waitotara. Nearly the whole of the shares have since been paid, minus a proportion of Mr. Kells claim and a final [illegible] taken in each case he now, therefore urges that the full amount of his claim should be paid over at once to Kauika, Uru, and Piki, as representative chiefs, in accordance with the many verbal promises made to him, and in terms of the order above referred to, in consideration of which he has all along refrained from taking extreme measures against the natives. [underlining in original]249

Lewis recommended to the Native Minister that the three rangatira be paid as Kells had requested.250 Instructions were sent to Sheridan confirming this.

The Crown sought to have its interests determined in the block in February 1887.251 A. J. Butler produced a deed of sale which he said had been signed by all of the owners of the block and all the successors of the deceased owners had also signed. The Crown applied

249 Sheridan to Lewis. 21 August 1886. MA-MLP 1887/197 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 106 & 108-109 250 Minute Lewis to Native Minister 23 August 1886. MA-MLP 1887/197 (with 1893/100). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 107 251 Whanganui NLC MB. 12. Fol. 302. 14 February 1887. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page:25

71 for the whole of the block. Several objectors appeared. Poari Kuramate and Hohepa Te Riri objected because the application for a rehearing had been rejected by the Chief Judge. The Court ruled that it could not uphold these objections, but that the objectors were free to petition Parliament if they were aggrieved.

Keepa Tahukumutea said that he had been advised by the Native Minister to petition the case, which he had done. He objected to an order being made for the Crown before the petition was answered. The Court overruled this objection and ordered that the block be vested in the Crown. 252

An objection to the Rawhitiroa plan was considered in April of the same year.253 The Court concluded that the objections:

were put forward to as some sort of general objection to the [way] in which case was originally dealt with.

The objection was overruled and the plan confirmed.

The block was divided in April 1887. The Crown applied for confirmation of the decision of 14 February and asked that the Rawhitiroa A block of 35,300 acres be awarded to the Crown and that the Rawhitiroa B block of 1500 acres be awarded to “the whole of the original owners”. There were no objections and the Crown was awarded the Rawhitiroa A block of 35,300 acres.254 The much smaller Rawhitiroa B block remained in Maori ownership and was located in the southern portion of the block.255 Sixty six owners were listed as tenants in common for the block. The Crown Purchase Deed was signed on the

252 Ibid. fol. 303. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 26 253 Whanganui NLC MB. 13. Fol. 187. 13 April 1887. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 27 254 Whanganui NLC MB. 13. Fol. 189. 13 April 1887. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 29. Order Determining Crown Interest. Rawhitiroa A. Whanganui Land Court, 14 April 1887. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 54-55 255 Memorial of Ownership. Rawhitiroa B. Whanganui Land Court. 14 April 1887. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 56-57

72 same day.256 The deed records that the Crown paid £5442 1s 8d for the Rawhitiroa A block. The Rawhitiroa A block was proclaimed as Crown land in May of 1887.257

Table 7: Rawhitiroa Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rawhitiroa A 35300 0 0 35300 Crown Rawhitiroa B 1500 0 0 1500 66

A little over nine years after the sale of the Rawhitiroa A block, the Government advertised the land for grazing runs. The asking rental was 1 ¾d per acre. The general character of the block was advertised as follows:

The Rawhitiroa Block is a very rough one, rising from 250ft. above sea level on the Waitotara River to 2,000ft. near Puteore Trig. The whole block is very much cut up with slips and gutters, and, when cleared, will only be suitable for grazing sheep. All the sections are well watered.

All the advertised sections were still covered in forest.258

The matter of the sale of the Rawhitiroa and other blocks was the subject of a complaint in June 1890. This was reported in some length in Berghan under the Mangapapa section:

This is to declare that the Hapu of Ngarauru thievishly sold the whole of Whakaihuaka block to the first and second Governments, in other words they thievishly sold the 5 blocks of Whakaihuwaka to the Government. Following are the names of the blocks:- Mangapapa No.2 14,379 acres Rawhitiroa No.1 35,202 “ Rawhitiroa Reserve 1,500 “ Rawhitiroa Whakauahi 36,702 “ Maungarau Kaitieke 20,620 “

256 Crown Purchase Deed Taranaki 212. 14 April 1887. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252. Archives New Zealand Wellington. Not Copied. 257 New Zealand Gazette 26 May 1887. No.33.p.677. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 92 258 New Zealand Gazette 3 September 1896. No.68 pp.1488-1489. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 98-99

73 Let not the above block be sold to any European or Europeans in New Zealand because the Ngarauru Hapu who thievishly sold them is an entirely different Hapu to Whanganui the real owners of the whole of the Whakaihuaka Block, that is, of all the above blocks, thievishly sold by Ngarauru to the Government. Let not therefore a single acre of that block, Whakaihuaka, be sold to the Europeans.

We did not conceal the sale of this block by them when you and your member friends, Europeans and Natives including Hoani Taipua and Wi Parata, came to the meeting held at Rangitikei and convened by Taupo and Whanganui. The whole matter was explained to you on that occasion. Ngarauru sold this land to Mr Ballance when he was Native Minister. Mr Butler paid the money to Ngarauru the stealers of our land. We request therefore that Whakaihuaka be not sold to the Europeans and as you are the Parent of the Maori people we pray that you will consider our grievance as brought about by the dishonest action of these people.

Now our ancestors and forefathers had a very severe law as an instance in connection with this same block will show. A native named Tapawa once went and took up his residence on the above block. He then commenced appropriating everything that he could lay hand upon to his own use and killing the Kakapos on it too – in fact he commenced to establish himself permanently on the land.

When Rangihuki heard of this he at once set out to kill the the despoiler and Tapawa and he fell by Rangihuki’s hand and no attempt was ever made to seek satisfaction. Now we, Whanganui, still resent the action of these people. The reason why the survey has not been done is the oppressive acts of the Government with regard to surveyors.

When Sir Donald McLean was Native Minister surveyors could easily be employed both by Natives and Europeans.

We request that you will give this most important matter your careful consideration because you are the principal Administrator of the law and consequently the proper person to judge between right and wrong.

When the cause of ones illness is discovered the proper cure is administered and the illness is cured. If therefore the land is “mate” ( ) [blank in original] the proper cure must be applied and that cure is the law. It is for that law to inquire into the nature of the complaint and see whether it is curable or not.

Should you arrive at any conclusion please let us know.259

Sheridan wrote a minute to Lewis on 8 July 1890:

These lands hae been passed through the Native Land Court and sold long ago. Some to Europeans, some to the Government.260

259 Berghan Reference: 26 June 1890, Ihakara Tarakapi et al, MA/MLP 1890/283, Nat Arch, Supporting Papers, Vol.6, pp.3310-3312. Berghan Supporting Documents page numbers (last pages of supporting documents). 260 Berghan Reference: 8 July 1890, Sheridan to Lewis, MA/MLP 1890/283, Nat Arch, Supporting Papers, Vol.6, p.3309 Berghan Supporting Documents page numbers (last pages of supporting documents).

74 Lewis recommended to the Native Minister that the writers be informed:

the matters were settled by the Native Land Court according to law & that the matter cannot now be reopened.261

On 20 August 1890, Rangiahua Tarakapi again wrote to Mr Lewis and the Native Minister complaining about the transactions:

Greeting to you two the Guardians of the law and also of the two races. We have seen your letter of the 11th of July last saying hat Mangapapa No.2 and Rawhitiroa were heard before the Native Land Court. That is perfectly true, but then they were thievishly put through by Ngarauru, inasmuch as they gave the said blocks other names. The following are the names given by the ancestors to these blocks and are therefore their proper names. Mangapapa No.2 is Rakautihitihi and Rawhitiroa Nos 1 and 2 and Rawhitiroa Whakauahi No.2 are really Kaharoa, Ruangarahu and Mangamaire. The name Rawhitiroa was intended to blind the Whanganui tribe lest their fraud should be discovered.

Kaitieke is the name of a river. It was through this name that the others came to be found out. The name Kaitieke is a true one, but Maingarau is a thievishly given name as its proper name is Taumataoaokehu. It was through Kaiteike that I disovered all.

In the month of December, 1886, in Mr Ballance’s time, I went to make inquiries and to search at the office of the Government Surveyor and there I discovered Kaiteike, Rawhitiroa and other blocks and in fact discovered the whole fraud.

Friends, Mr Lewis and Mr Mitchellson, your last word in your letter is to the effect that this question of Rawhitiroa and other blocks cannot now be reopened. Why cannot this be done and why cannot the law deal with a person who has committed a fraud? My decided word is, it can be done and that it is a matter which can easily be dealt with. Let not the Government trample this matter under their feet, but on the contrary let the fraud come before the law to be carefully inquired into by the law. The law is not “an ignorant being” like the Ngaraurus are who are fraudulently selling the lands of Whakaihuaka. These bad people too, Ngarauru, are stealing sheep belonging to the Europeans and some of them have been put into gaol by their own Europeans for sheep stealing.

This is a last word of mine to you, do not protect and save the thieves, Ngarauru. Let my accusation against the thieves, Ngarauru, be submitted to law and let the law decide whether the charge is unfounded (false) or true.

Friends, let Ngarauru come to law and let not the Government prevent (?protect) the thieves. My heart is set upon myself and Ngarauru going to law and I will never cease from declaring Ngarauru as land stealers and stealers of European sheep.

I request therefore that Ngarauru and myself be heard before the law so that the law may know who are right and who are wrong. Please reply, whether you comply with my request or not, so that I may know. 262

261 Minute Lewis to Native Minister. 9 July 1890. MA-MLP 90/222. Berghan Supporting Documents page number 3309 (last pages of supporting documents).

75 Lewis minuted the Native Minister: “I do not see anything to be gained by continuing this correspondence.”

Nearly a year and a half after the partition, Rawhitiroa B was entered onto Certificate of Title 20/159.263 In June 1890 Hetoroka Tautahi said that the owners would write to Mr. Butler and Mr. Lewis asking for the money they had not received for the Rawhitiroa block.264 However in response the Court explained:

when the land was put through the Court it was supposed to contain 42,000 odd acres. On its being surveyed it was found to contain 36,800 acres of which the Government purchased 35,300 acres leaving 1500 acres to the natives. Therefore the natives had no claim. The trouble arose owing to the over stating of the land in the first instance.

An application for the individualisation of the Rawhitiroa B block lodged by Wi Kauika was published in August 1891.265 Later, an application by Wi Kauika for the partition of the Rawhitiroa B block was published in the New Zealand Gazette of 2 June 1892.266 The block was further partitioned into Rawhitiroa B1 and Rawhitiroa B2 in November 1892. Rawhitiroa B1 covered an area of 1458 acres and was awarded to 45 owners.267 The much smaller Rawhitiroa B2 block of 42 acres was awarded to 24 owners.268 Fees of 20 shillings were recorded on the partition orders for both blocks.

262 Berghan Reference: 20 Aug 1890, Tarakapi to Lewis, MA/MLP 1890/283, Nat Arch, Supporting Papers, Vol.6, pp.3303-3305. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: Berghan Supporting Documents page numbers (last pages of supporting documents). 263 CT TN 20/159. Rawhitiroa B. 21 October 1888. Taranaki Land District. Landonline image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 48-50 264 Whanganui NLC MB 18. Fol. 77. 20 June 1890. Waitotara. Micofilm National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 32 265 New Zealand Gazette 13 August 1891. No. 59p.924. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 94 266 New Zealand Gazette 2 June 1892. No.44.p.783. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 95 267 Partition Order. Rawhitiroa B1. Whanganui Land Court. 7 November 1892. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 58-61 268 Partition Order. Rawhitiroa B2. Whanganui Land Court. 7 November 1892. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 72-74

76 Table 8: Rawhitiroa B Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rawhitiroa B1 1458 0 0 1458 44 Rawhitiroa B2 42 0 0 42 24

Fisher wrote to Sheridan on 13 January 1894 suggesting that Rawhitiroa B1 might be purchased at £15 per share and that there were 39 shares for the whole block of 1458 acres.269 Sheridan asked for a valuation of the land in question adding; “This is I think the less valuable portion of the block of 1500 acres recently partitioned”.270 Mr Robinson was asked to report on the value of the land. His report was made on 5 March 1894:

Nearly the whole of this block is very rough land, all the frontage next the Waitotara river consisting of steep spurs and ridges, the latter having birch growing upon them. About 200 acres at the back next [to] the lakes is rather better, the hills being lower,…There is scarsely a Homestead site on the whole reserve, and the block as a whole is similar in character to the adjoining Rawhitiroa block the small reserve of 42 acres (Rawhitiroa B No. 2) on the north western corner, is equally rough with the rest. At the best it can only be valued as inferior 2nd class land at from 10/- to 12/6 per acre selling value,271

Robinson went on to state that the proposed £15 per share would amount to more than 8 shillings per acre and would “but a small margin for expenses of survey, sale & c.” However Robinson concluded:

I think it would be advisable to purchase this land as otherwise it is certain to be taken up, at an even higher value by some speculator.

Fisher reported the reaction to the subsequent offer of £5 12s 2 d per share:

they cannot see their way , they say to accept offer of £5 12s 2d per share (37 ½ acres).

The general feeling seems to be that £12 per share would be accepted –which would mean about 6/- per acre. I am satisfied the gov[ernmen]t. will have no trouble in getting 6d

269 Fisher to Sheridan 13 January 1894. MA-MLP 1894/3 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 228 270 Minute Sheridan to Surveyor General. 2 February 1894. MA-MLP 1894/3 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 227 271 Memorandum, Robinson to Chief Surveyor, Taranaki, 5 March 1894. MA-MLP 1894/163 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 224-225

77 per acre rent for this, which will represent 8% on purchase money at £12 per share and the piece in itself will be a stumbling block directly to settlement (if held by Natives as a Reserve) as the land adjoining on the South are taken up and on the opposite side of the river settlement has gone beyond it, and it has Gov[ernmen]t. roads made past it. I think the Natives are not asking anything out of the way, as I feel certain that if the law allowed such titles as this to be dealt with they could get 8 or 9/- per acre.272

Sheridan asked the Surveyor General to consider the proposal at double the price offered.273 The reply was : “I cannot advise buying at a price higher than 3/- the land is inferior altogether”.274 Fisher was then informed that the Surveyor General “cannot see his way to recommend any increase in the price offered for Rawhitiroa B Block”.275

The Crown continued purchasing of the Rawhitiroa B1 block, acquiring 37 11/24 of the total 39 shares in the block.276 The Crown Purchase Deed Taranaki 249 indicates that the Crown had paid £218 14s to the owners.277 This indicates that the price paid was at the lower offer of less than £6 per share. The Crown applied for the partition of the Rawhitiroa B1 block in 1896.278 Rawhitiroa B1 was partitioned in June 1896 on the determination of the Crown interest. The Crown was awarded the Rawhitiroa B1A block of 1400 acres.279 The much smaller Rawhitiroa B1B block of 58 acres was located next

272 Fisher to Sheridan 4 July 1894. MA-MLP 1894/163 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 223 273 Minute Sheridan to Surveyor General, 6 July 1894. MA-MLP 1894/163 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 221 274 Minute Author Illegible to Sheridan. 16 July 1894. MA-MLP 1894/163 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 221 275 Sheridan to Fisher. 16 July 1894. MA-MLP 1894/163 (with 1899/79). National Archives, Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 222 276 Schedule of Shares Sold to Government. No date. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 62-63 277 Crown Purchase Deed. Taranaki 249. 22 June 1896. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252. National Archives, Wellington. Not Copied. 278 New Zealand Gazette 19 March 1896. No.19 p.497. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 97 279 Order Determining Crown Interest. Whanganui Land Court. 22 June 1896. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 66-67. Whanganui NLC MB. 29. Fols. 346-347. 22 June 1896. Wanganui. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 33-34

78 to the Rawhitiroa B2 block and was awarded to four owners who were to pay 20 shillings in fees.280 No restriction on alienation was put on the title.

Table 9: Rawhitiroa B1 Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rawhitiroa B1A 1400 0 0 1400 Crown Rawhitiroa B1B 58 0 0 58 4

In March 1899 the application by the Minister of Lands for the determination of Crown interests in the Rawhitiroa B1B block was published in the New Zealand Gazette.281 In May 1899, the Rawhitiroa B1B block of 58 acres was also awarded to the Crown.282 The block was declared to be Crown land in the New Zealand Gazette of July 27 1899.283 The Crown paid £8 12s 10d for the block.284 Te Ikatere, Taia Wirihana and Karena Taiwhitopou were listed as the sellers.

By 1900 only the Rawhitiroa B2 block remained in Maori ownership. The block was surveyed by Percy Holt in 1898.285 The survey indicated that the block was of low value; “Very steep and broken Papa formations covered with forest, Rata, Tawa, a few Rimu etc.”286 On 10 April 1899 the owners of Rawhitiroa B2 were charged £8 for surveys, or only 12s 10d less than the owners of Rawhitiroa B1B were paid for their entire block of

280 Order Determining Ownership of Residue. Whanganui Land Court. 22 June 1896. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 68-69 281 New Zealand Gazette 30 March 1899 No.29 p.722. NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 100 282 Order Determining Crown Interest. Whanganui Land Court. 5 May 1899. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents pages: 70-71 283 New Zealand Gazette 27 July 1899. No. 64. p.1361 NZGA image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 102 284 Crown Purchase Deed. Taranaki 271. 2 July 1898. ABWN 8102 Acc W5279 Box 74. Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Not copied. Deed Taranaki 277 is missing at National Archives, Wellington and in the aperture card files at LINZ Regional Office Wellington. 285 SO 1046 Section B2 Rawhitiroa Block, Kapara SD. Taranaki Land District. Percy Holt Surveyor. Approved 29 November 1898. Landonline Image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 47 286 Ibid.

79 58 acres.287 A survey charge of £10 required for the discharge of the lien was later recorded on the Memorial Schedule. By 1 June 1967 the survey lien had grown to £20 recorded on the title.288 This block remains in Maori ownership today with a total of 200 current owners.289 The block was determined as freehold Maori land 28 September 1984.

Table 10: Rawhitiroa Current Maori Land Current Maori Land Blocks Derived from the Rawhitiroa Block Block ID Area (acres) Area (ha) Owners Rawhitiroa B2 17454 42 17 200

Table 11: Rawhitiroa Summary Rawhitiroa Summary Original Area* No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 36800 3 36758 42 0.1% * Area from sum of Rawhitiroa A & B.

287 Charge for survey. New Plymouth Native Land Court. 10 April 1899. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 76. See also Taranaki NLC MB. 01A. Fol. 79. 10 April 1899. New Plymouth. Microfilm. National Archives Wellington. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 35 288 Memorial Schedule. Rawhitiroa B2. Image of paper copy. MLIS image. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 77 289 Rawhitiroa B2 Block. Block ID: 17454. MLIS Block Details Report, List of Current Owners Report. Current Maori land spreadsheet provided by Maori Land Court indicates 193 owners. Rawhitiroa Supporting Documents page: 1

80 Rangiwaea-Otaroro Block Order File WH 297E

See Paula Berghan Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000 pages 792-801 for the title investigation of the Rangiwaea blocks.

An Order on Investigation of Title for the 200-acre Rangiwaea-Otaroro block was issued to 23 owners in April 1893.290 Fees of 20s were charged for the order. The sketch of the block with the order shows that the block was bounded on the southern side by Pikopiko Stream and adjoined the Okehu block which lay to the north and east. No part of the block was declared inalienable.

The Crown purchased shares in the Rangiwaea-Otaroro block and applied to have the interest in the block determined in the Native Land Court. The hearing was held in June 1896 and the Crown was awarded Rangiwaea-Otaroro No. 1 of 100 acres.291 The Rangiwaea-Otaroro No. 1 block was declared to be Crown land in October 1897.292 The block was listed on the same deed as six other Rangiwaea blocks, Rangiwaea 1-3, Rangiwaea-Kapurangi and Rangiwaea-Tarere No.1. Together the area subject to the transaction was 54,400 acres sold for £13,600.293

290 Order on Investigation of Title, Rangiwaea-Otaroro, 19 April 1893, Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents pages: 32-33. 291 Order Determining Crown Interest. Rangiwaea-Otaroho 1. Whanganui Native Land Court. 16 June 1896. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents pages: 9-10 292 New Zealand Gazette, 7 October 1897. No. 86. p.1748. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 24 293 Wellington Deed 762, 16 June 1896, Aperture Card, Land Information New Zealand Wellington Regional Office. Not Copied. New Zealand Gazette, 7 October 1897. No. 86. p.1748. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 23

81 Table 12: Rangiwaea-Otaroro Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rangiwaea-Otaroro 1 100 0 0 100 Crown Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2 100 0 0 100 11

Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2 of 100 acres was awarded to 11 owners, who were charged 20s in fees.294 No part of the block was declared inalienable. The Crown continued purchases of the remaining land and the applications to determine the Crown interest in Rangiwaeaa-Otaroro No. 2 appeared in a number of the Gazettes.295 However, no order was made from these published applications and the Crown application to have its interest determined was again published in May 1907.296

The application was to be heard on 25 May 1907. Sheridan appeared for the application and stated that the Crown had acquired 30 acres of the land and that the block was occupied by the owners and that he wished to consult with them; “I only open this case so that the Maoris may arrange as to the piece for the Crown.” The hearing was adjourned to 27 May.297

When the case resumed Sheridan announced that he had agreed with Takarangi Mete Kingi, the representative of the non-sellers that the Crown would take the south-eastern part of the block. He also said that the Crown would pay the proportion of the survey lien owed on the land relative to the area the Crown wished to acquire, and that the

294 Order for Residue. Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2. 16 June 1896. Whanganui Native Land Court. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 11-12 295 New Zealand Gazette, 18 December 1902. No. 103. p.2734 NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 25; New Zealand Gazette, 17 December 1903. No. 95. p.2651 NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 26; New Zealand Gazette, 29 June 1905. No. 60. p.1564 NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 27; New Zealand Gazette, 25 May 1906. No. 39. p.1368, NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 28 296 New Zealand Gazette, 2 May 1907. No. 40. p.1415 NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 29 297 Whanganui Native Land Court minute book 55 fol 216. 25 May 1907. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 4.

82 Crown would pay the whole of the survey cost for the new boundary.298 The Crown was then awarded Otaroro 2A of 30 acres on 27 May 1907.299 The residue of 70 acres was awarded to eight owners, who were not charged court fees.300 No restriction upon alienation was recorded against the residue block.

Table 13: Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2 Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2A 30 0 0 30 Crown Rangiwaea-Otaroro 2B 70 0 0 70 8

An application under Section 3 of the Maori Real Estate Management Act 1888 (Amendment Act 1893) for the payment of monies owed to the two minors, Ngarape Hori Turangapito and Haumapu Hori Turangapito was considered by the Whanganui Native Land Court on 26 October 1909. The value of the shares possessed by the minors was £3 15s each. It was submitted that clothes were now required by the minors and that the transfer had been approved by the Governor. A receipt for the purchase money by the Public Trustee was also presented. The payment was consented to by the Court.301

A Land Transfer Search Form in the Block Order File indicates that the land was sold to Eliza Collier in 1910.

Table 14: Rangiwaea-Otaroro Summary Rangiwaea-Otaroro Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 200 3 200 0 0

298 Whanganui Native Land Court minute book 55 fol 220. 27 May 1907. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 5 299 Order Determining Crown Interest. Rangiwaea-Otaroho 2A. Whanganui Native Land Court. 27 May 1907. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 13 300 Order for Residue. Rangiwaea-Otaroho 2B. Whanganui Native Land Court. 16 June 1896. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents pages: 14-15 301 Whanganui Native Land Court minute book 60 fols 107-108. 26 October 1909. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents pages: 2-3

83 Rangiwaea-Tarere Block order file WH 297A

`See Paula Berghan Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000 pages 792-801 for the title investigation of the Rangiwaea blocks.

On 19 April 1893 the Native Land Court issued an interlocutory order awarding Rangiwaea-Tarere block of an estimated 300 acres, upon the approval of a certified map to 67 owners.302 A fee of 20 shillings was noted on the order. No part of the block was declared inalienable.

Notice was given that the Crown was entering into negotiations with the owners of the Rangiwaea-Tarere block in September 1894.303 The Crown later sought to have its interests determined in the Rangiwaea-Tarere block and Rangiwaea-Tarere 1 of 15 acres was awarded to the Crown. Rangiwaea-Tarere No. 2 of 285 acres was awarded to 62 owners on 16 June 1896.304 A fee of 20 shillings was noted on the title order. The Rangiwaea-Tarere No. 1 block was declared to be Crown land in October 1897.305 The block was listed on the same deed as six other Rangiwaea blocks, Rangiwaea 1-3, Rangiwaea-Kapurangi and Rangiwaea-Otaroro No.1. Together the area subject to the

302 Order on Investigation of Title. Whanganui Native Land Court. 19 April 1893. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 48-52 303 New Zealand Gazette. 13 September 1894. No. 67. p.1423. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 100. 304 Order for Residue. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2. 16 June 1896. Whanganui Native Land Court. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 57-61 305 New Zealand Gazette, 7 October 1897. No. 86. p.1748. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Otaroro Supporting Documents page: 24 See also Wellington Deed 762, 16 June 1896, Aperture Card, Land Information New Zealand Wellington Regional Office. Not Copied.

84 transaction was 54,400 acres sold for £13,600.306 In July 1901 the owners of Rangiwaea- Tarere No. 2 were ordered to pay £5 2s 9d for the cost of the survey.307

Table 15: Rangiwaea-Tarere Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rangiwaea-Tarere 1 15 0 0 15 Crown Rangiwaea-Tarere 2 285 0 0 285 62

Rangiwaea-Tarere 2 An application by Tiemi te Wiki and others for the partition of the Rangiwaea-Tarere No. 2 was to be heard in July 1901, however no partition order was made at this time.308 The Minister of Lands sought to have the Crown interests acquired in the Rangiwaea-Tarere No. 2 block determined in December 1902.309 The adjourned application of Tiemi te Wiki and others to have the block partitioned appeared in the January 1903 Gazette.310 The land was not partitioned at the January sitting of the Native Land Court in Whanganui. The application by Tiemi te Wiki and others for the partition of the block appeared in the December 17 New Zealand Gazette.311 An application to have the Crown interests in the block defined appeared in the same issue.312

306 Wellington Deed 762, 16 June 1896, Aperture Card, Land Information New Zealand Wellington Regional Office. Not Copied. New Zealand Gazette, 7 October 1897. No. 86. p.1748. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 102 307 Charging Order for Survey. 30 July 1901. Whanganui Land Court. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 62 308 New Zealand Gazette, 20 June 1901. No. 60. p.1329. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 104 309 New Zealand Gazette, 18 December 1902. No. 103. p.2734. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 106 310 New Zealand Gazette, 15 January 1903. No.4. p. 140. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 107 311 New Zealand Gazette, 17 December 1903. No. 95. p.2649. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page:109 312 New Zealand Gazette, 17 December 1903. No. 95. p.2651. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 110

85 The Crown interest in Rangiwaea-Tarere 2 was finally determined in May 1904. The Crown was awarded Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A of 12 acres and 18 perches, which included a quarter acre urupa.313 The Crown paid £71 5s to four owners for the land.314 The payments were made between 24 January 1898 and 10 December 1900.

The area declared Crown land was 11a 3r 18p.315 However the current area for the Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A block is 4.9017 ha. (12a 0r 18p) which is a quarter acre more than originally declared Crown Land.316 There is no indication of the location of the urupa on ML 1898. A note on Wellington Deed indicates that the ¼-acre urupa should have been taken account of:

if urupa is within the net 11-3-18 then ¼ac to be reserved as a urupa round graves there and north boundary to be moved so as to give Crown net 11-3-18.317

A note on the deed indicates that 11-3-18 was awarded to the Crown:

This deed was produced in the Native Land Court at Wanganui on 31 May 1904 on subdivision of Rangiwaea-Tarere 2. when 11-3-18 was cut off at South end of block in satisfaction of Crown purchase –and named Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A.318

The Copy of the Order determining Crown interest in Rangiwaea-Tarere 2, which awarded Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A to the Crown, originally awarded 11a 3r 18p to the

313 Order determining Crown Interest. Whanganui Native Land Court. 31 May 1904. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 68-69 314 Wellington Deed 908. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 111 Crown Purchase Deeds 1901-1907. National Archives, Wellington. Not copied. No date on Deed. 315 New Zealand Gazette. 1 September 1904. No. 73. p.2110. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 111 316 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A block Terraview 1997. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 17 317 Note on Wellington Deed 908. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 111 Crown Purchase Deeds 1901- 1907. National Archives, Wellington. Not copied. 318 Note by Judge Batham on Wellington Deed 908. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 111 Crown Purchase Deeds 1901-1907. National Archives, Wellington. Not copied.

86 Crown. This figure was written in pencil. This was amended in pen to include the urupa making a total of 12a 0r 18p.319

The remainder of the block was divided into three parcels. These three partitions were awarded to Maori owners. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B of 158 acres 3 roods and 7 perches was awarded to seven owners.320 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C of 90 acres, 2 roods and 27 perches was awarded to 44 owners.321 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D of 20 acres, 2 roods and 34 perches was awarded to six owners.322 No restriction on alienation was entered onto the title for the three partitions and 20 shillings in fees was recorded on each of the titles.

Table 16: Rangiwaea-Tarere 2 Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rangiwaea-Tarere 2A 12 0 18 12.11 Crown Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B 158 3 07 158.79 7 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C 90 2 27 90.67 44 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D 20 2 34 20.71 6

The Minister of lands again applied to have the Crown interest in the Rangiwaea-Tarere No. 2 block determined in June 1905.323 However this application did not lead to any further partitioning of the land.

319 Wellington Deed 908a. Order Determining Crown Interest. 31 March 1904. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 111 Crown Purchase Deeds 1901-1907. National Archives, Wellington. Not copied.. 320 Partition Order. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B. Whanganui Native Land Court. 31 May 1904. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 71-72 321 Partition Order. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. Whanganui Native Land Court, 31 May 1904. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 86-89 322 Partition Order Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. Whanganui Native Land Court 31 May 1904. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 130-131 323 New Zealand Gazette. 29 June 1905. No. 60. p.1564. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 113

87 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B was entered onto Certificate of Title 151/83 in June 1906.324 Part of the land (see Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 below) was exempted by Order in Council from Section 117 of the Native Land Court Act 1894 for the purpose of alienation by way of mortgage.325

Two applications for the partition of “Rangiwaea-Tarere” block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette of 25 May 1906. One application was lodged by Tiemi te Wiki, the other by Taiuru te Rango.326 The Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B block was partitioned in June 1906. Rangiwaea 2B1 of 111 acres and 34 perches was awarded to 3 owners who were charged 20 shillings.327 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2 of 47 acres, 2 roods and 13 perches was awarded to four owners, who were also charged 20 shillings.328 Taiuru te Rango would make two further applications for the partition of the “Rangiwaea-Tarere” block in 1908 and 1909, however these applications did not lead to the further partitioning of any of the Rangiwaea-Tarere blocks.329

Table 17: Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 111 0 34 111.21 3 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2 47 2 13 47.58 4

324 CT WN 151/83. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B. 20 June 1906. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 38-39 325 Ibid. See also Gazette notice, MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 75 326 New Zealand Gazette. 26 May 1906. No. 39. p. 1366. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 115 327 Partition Order. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1. Wanganui Land Court, 28 June 1906. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 76 328 Partition Order. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2. Wanganui Land Court, 28 June 1906. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 77 329 New Zealand Gazette. 23 December 1908. No. 106. p.3321. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 119; New Zealand Gazette. 22 July 1909. No. 61. p.1920. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 120.

88 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 The Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 block was leased to William Thomas Carter for a 21-year lease from 9 September 1905.330 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 was exempted from section 117 of the Native Land Court Act 1894, for the purpose of a mortgage in October 1908.331 The block was then mortgaged by the owners to the State Guaranteed Advances Office in July 1910.332 The land was also entered onto Certificate of Title 196/226 in July 1910.

An application for confirmation of the alienation of Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 was published in the New Zealand Gazette in April 1916.333 The purchaser was William Carter and the date of the transaction was given as 13 October 1915. The block transferred from the Maori owners to William Thomas Carter in October 1917, subject to the restrictions imposed by Part XIII of the Land Act 1908.334 The block transferred to John Laurenson in July 1920. The land was later acquired by John Fraser Scott in June 1926. John Fraser Scott was the next of kin of the owner of Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C; Heeni Makitonore or Heeni Scott and succeeded to the Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C block through the Maori Land Court in 1960. The mortgage on the land transferred to Heni Scott in 1928. The Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 block was transferred from John Fraser Scott to Winifred Miria Wise, Ernest Jack Lloyd and Peter Murry Hankins in 1987.335

Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2 The application for confirmation of the sale of Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2 was published in the New Zealand Gazette in April 1916. The date of the transaction was given as 20

330 CT WN 196/226. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1. 7 July 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 40-42 331 Extract from New Zealand Gazette, 1 October 1908. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 75 332 CT WN 196/226. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1. 7 July 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 40-42 333 New Zealand Gazette, 20 April 1916. No. 47.p.1186. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 124 334 CT WN 196/226. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1. 7 July 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 40-42 335 Ibid.

89 November 1915, William Thomas Carter was the purchaser.336 However the block did not transfer at this stage, and the land was entered onto Certificate of Title 264/133, on 9 May 1917.337 Four Maori owners were recorded on the title.

An application for the partition of the block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette in April 1920.338 Eru Wiripene was the applicant. However the block had already been sold, the transfer to William Thomas Carter was recorded on the Certificate of Title on 31 January of the same year.339 The land was subject to the restrictions imposed by Part XIII of the Land Act 1908. The land was transferred to John Fraser Scott (the next of kin of Heni Scott see Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B1 entry) in 1926. The land was transferred to Winifred Miria Wise, Earnest Jack Lloyd and Peter Murray Hankins in September 1987.

Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C An application for a consent to lease the Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C block was published in January 1907. The proposed lease was to W. T. Carter. C.T. Potaka acted as Mr. Carter’s agent with the application.340

The application by the Commissioner of Crown Lands for an order cutting off a portion of Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C and 2D in payment for unpaid survey liens was published in 1910.341 Similar applications were made in 1913342 and in 1914.343 The amount owed was £2 13s 3d. 2C and 2D were not adjoining blocks.

336 New Zealand Gazette, 20 April 1916. No. 47.p.1186. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 124 337 CT WN 264/133. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2. 9 May 1917 Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 43-44 338 New Zealand Gazette, 29 April 1920. No. 42. p.1350. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 128 339 CT WN 264/133. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2B2. 9 May 1917. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 43-44 340 New Zealand Gazette 17 January. No. 4. p.192. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 118 341 New Zealand Gazette 7 July 1910. No. 67. p.1933. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 121

90 A meeting of owners was called together in May 1917 to consider a proposed sale of the block to William Thomas Carter at a price of £3 per acre.344 However the block was not sold to Mr. Carter. An application by Te Koro Panitua for the partition of the block appeared in the Gazette in September 1919, however no partition of the block was made on this application.345 A similar notice appeared in April 1920, with a similar result.346

The survey lien on Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C was released with the payment of £2 13s 3d on 13 July 1920.347 The land was entered onto Certificate of Title 270/23. A 42 year lease to William Thomas Carter from 20 March 1907 was entered onto the Certificate of Title in July 1920.348 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C was subject to an exchange order in April 1930.349 The interests of eight owners were vested in Reweti (or Pokaiatua) Paki. The block was transferred by the Aotea District Land Board under Part XVIII (which dealt with the powers of assembled owners) of the Native Land Act 1909 to Turiki Bates on 31 July 1931.350

342 New Zealand Gazette 6 November 1913. No. 81. p.3379. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 122 343 New Zealand Gazette 30 July 1914. No. 69 p. 2995 NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 123 344 New Zealand Gazette. 3 May 1917. No. 78. p.1899. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 126. See also New Zealand Gazette. 8 March 1917. No. 42. p.893. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 125 345 New Zealand Gazette. 25 September 1919. No. 116 p.3016. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 127 346 New Zealand Gazette. 29 April 1920. No.42. p.1350. NZGA image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 128 347 Notice of Release of Lien. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 13 July 1920. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 98 348 CT WN 270/23. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 21 July 1920. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 36-37 349 Order of Exchange. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C, Wanganui. 14 April 1930. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 80-81 350 CT WN 270/23. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 21 July 1920. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 36-37

91 The block was then entered onto Certificate of Title 428/218.351 The land was subject to the restrictions imposed by Section 74 of the Native Land Amendment Act 1913. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C was subject to another exchange order in March 1945. Turuki Bates exchanged her interest in the land, valued at £630, which was then vested in Heeni Scott (or Makitonore).352 A succession order vested the land with John Fraser Scott in October 1960. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C was Europeanised under Part 1 of the 1967 Act on 10 October 1968.353 The block transferred from John Fraser Scott to Winifred Miria Wise, Ernest Jack Lloyd and Peter Murray Hankins in September 1987.

Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D The Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D block of 20 acres, 2 roods and 34 perches was awarded to 6 owners on 31 May 1904.354 In April 1985, the Public Trust Office contacted the Maori Land Court with regard to the rates due on the land. The owner of the surrounding European and Europeanised lands, John Fraser Scott was the occupier of this block as well. The Public Trustee as statutory manager of the affairs of John Fraser Scott asked for clarification of the situation from the Maori Land Court before payment of the rates was made.355 C.D. Bryers, on behalf of the Registrar of the Court replied that the land was Maori Freehold land, and that John Fraser Scott was not an owner, but as occupier was responsible for the rates.356 Mr. Bryers noted that there was “no record of there ever having been an alienation of the block.”

351 CT WN 428/218. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 22 July 1931. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 33-35 352 Order of Exchange. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 20 March 1945. MLIS image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 79 353 CT WN 428/218. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2C. 22 July 1931. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 33-35 354 Partition Order, Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D, Block Order File. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 130-131 355 G.D. Pointon (for the District Public Trustee) to the Registrar, Maori Land Court Wanganui, 19 April 1985. Aotea MLC file 3/10255 Aotea Land Court Wanganui. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 133 356 C.D. Bryers (for Registrar) to District Public Trustee. 26 April 1985, Aotea MLC file 3/10255 Aotea Land Court Wanganui. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents page: 134

92 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D is the only block of Maori land currently remaining in the Rangiwaea-Tarere area.357

Table 18: Rangiwaea-Tarere Current Maori Lands Current Maori Land Blocks Derived from the Rangiwaea-Tarere Block Block MLIS ID Area (acres) Area (ha) Owners Rangiwaea- 19352 20.7125 8.382 104 Tarere 2D

Table 19: Rangiwaea-Tarere Summary Rangiwaea-Tarere Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 300 6 279.2875 20.7125 7%

357 See Block Details Report and List of Current Owners Report. Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D. MLIS. Rangiwaea-Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 45 & 46

93 Umumore Block Order File: WH 367 The survey of the 842-acre Umumore block was conducted by Messrs Thorpe, Mathews and Monro. The plan for the block was compiled from that survey by F. Harold Tronson.358 The plan was sent to the Chief Surveyor on 20 April 1881.

Two claims for the Umumore block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette of 23 June 1881.359 One group of claimants were in the Gazette listed as “Winiata Te Puhaki and Paroto Te Rangiwhakahekea” the other “Winiata Te Kakahi, Tapa Parato, Mata Kiripa, and Paroto Te Rangiwhakaekea”. There are three application forms held in the Aotea Maori Land Court for the Umumore block. The first is dated 28 January 1880. Winiata Te Kakahi, Taha Paroto, Mata Karipa and others were the claimants. Ngatitara was given as the hapu.360 The second, dated 23 June 1880 had Winiata Te Puhaki and Paroto te Rangiwhakekea listed as claimants. Ngatitara was also given for the hapu.361 On 6 August 1880 Winiata Te Kakahi wrote to the Land Court complaining that the claim for the Umumore block had not been investigated.362 A note on the letter read “This claim will appear in the next Whanganui Notice. It was omitted from the last as it was not surveyed.” A third application for the block was dated 16 August 1880, and was lodged by Winiata Te Kakahi and Paroto Te Rangiwhakaekea, the hapu was given as Ngatitamatautahi.363 While clearly some variation in spelling of the names of the

358 ML 554. March 1881 F. H. Tronson surveyor. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 16 359 New Zealand Gazette, 29 June 1881. No.51.pp.821 & 824 NZGA image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 21 & 22 360 Application form, Umumore Block Order File WH 367. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 30 361 Application form, Umumore Block Order File WH 367. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 32 362 Untranslated letter. Winiata Te Kakahi ki te Tumuaki Kaiwhakawa, 6 August 1880. Umumore Supporting Documents page: Umumore Block Order File WH 367. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 28 363 Application form, Umumore Block Order File WH 367. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 31

94 RA ETIHI

-- ~ '. -" A ~ ---.-

~ I

\ '. '",. flgure 5 : Raetlhl and Umumo re applicants was evident, it appears that Winiata Te Kakahi appeared on all three applications for the title investigation.

Before the title to the block had been awarded, the Native Minister applied to have the Crown interest in the block determined on 25 June 1881.364 The Crown application for the subdivision of the block was entered on the subdivision register on 10 July 1881.365 The case was sent to Judge Brookfield for adjudication. The court sitting to hear the title investigation for the Umumore block was to sit at Upokongaro on 1 August 1881. However, an application was made on behalf of Winiata Te Kakahi for an adjournment to allow the claimants to attend the hearing. The hearing of the claim was therefore adjourned.366

The investigation of the title for the block was held at Upokongaro and began on 22 August 1881.367 Winiata Kakahi was sworn and said that he belonged to Ngati Tara. He claimed the land by ancestry and occupation. A whakapapa was apparently given, though this was not recorded and the minutes simply noted “pedigre put in” The name of the block, was he said derived from the name of the kainga upon it. There were plantations and bird snaring trees on the land. Winiata Kakahi said that the plantations on the block had been maintained to the present. Objectors were then called and six objectors and counter claimants were listed.

Metera te Urumutu was then sworn. He claimed the land through his descent from Tamawhara. He also appears to have also provided a whakapapa, however this was also not recorded in the minutes. Metera te Urumutu claimed the land along with the others

364 Native Minister to The Chief Judge, Native Land Court Auckland. 25 June 1881. Block Order File. WH 367 Umumore. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 33 365 Subdivision Register No.1. p.13. Whanganui Maori Land Court. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Not copied. 366 Order of Court for Adjournment. Whanganui Land Court, Upokongaro. F.M.P Brookefield and E.M. Williams Judges. 1 August 1881. MLIS image. Winiata Te Puhaki and Paroto Te Rangiwhakahekea were both listed as applicants on the gazette notice. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 18 367 Whanganui Native Land Court minute book 3 fol. 335. 22 August 1882. Upokongaro. Repro 273. National Archives Wellington. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 2

96 listed as objectors and counter claimants. He said that he and the others, with the exception of Te Keepa (also referred to as Te Kapa in the hearing), whom he was unsure of, had occupied the land. Metera te Urumutu stated that they had kept cultivations on the land as late as 1879. He objected to the claim of Winiata Kakahi through Ngati Tara, who he believed had never possessed the land.368

Metera was then cross-examined by Mr Cooke, acting on behalf of Winiata. He admitted recognising Winiata’s claim in Rangitaua because of his descent from Tamawhara. However Metera te Urumutu claimed that he had the greater right to Umumore. Metera claimed the land through his mother and said that he had grown potatoes on the land. Winiata responded by saying that he was claiming the land through Tamatautahi the father of Rehia and not Tamawhara. Metera said that all the claimants were of the same line.

Te Keepa was then sworn. They stated that they were also of Ngati Tamawhara. Te Keepa said that the evidence given by Metera for the ancestry was correct. Another whakapapa was then apparently given but also not recorded in the minutes.369 Under cross-examination Te Keepa denied that Winiata Kakahi had any right to the land and if Metera had previously recognised the right of Winiata in Rangitaua, then Metera was wrong. Te Keepa said that they had hunted on the land, and had done this as a matter of right, not as a guest. Under cross-examination by the Court Te Keepa agreed that most of Metera’s evidence was correct, with the exception of recognising Winiata’s claim through Tamawhara. Te Keepa denied that Winiata had any right through Tamatautahi either. However the minutes then noted; “[Being pressed, the witness admitted that Winiata had a good claim through Tamatautahi]”

Rorohiko was then sworn.370 Rorohiko also said that they were from Ngati Tamawhara. He agreed with most of the evidence presented by Metera, however they disputed that

368 Ibid. fols. 335-336. Umumore Supporting Documents pages: 2-3 369 Ibid. fol. 337. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 4 370 Ibid. fol. 338. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 5

97 Metera had occupied the land in a permanent fashion. Rorohiko also denied that Winiata had any right to the land. He said that he himself had left the land when he had enlisted as a soldier. The land was used for hunting and fishing and was not a place of permanent occupation. Rorohiko listed four children of Tamatautahi: Tamawhara, Kahuroa, Hinekuao and Tamatautahi (II).371 He denied that Tamatautahi had a daughter named Rehia.

Kiritahanga was then sworn. They named Ngati Kahui as the hapu and Kahuiparera as the ancestor. A whakapapa was apparently presented, but also not recorded. Kiritahanga believed that Winiata did have a claim to the land through Tamatautahi; “he is a relative of mine through a younger branch.” Kahuiparera was descended from both Tamatautahi and Tamawhara. Kiritahanga said that Kahuiparera was a child of Tamawhara. Kiritahanga also denied that Tamatautahi had a daughter named Rehia.

When the case resumed on 24 August Poratau te Kahui was sworn to give evidence.372 Poratau made their claim through Kahuiparera. They said that their mother and grandmother had lived at Umumore, but this was not a permanent occupation. The land was used for hunting and fishing. Poratau said that Winiata had lived on the land regularly and had a good claim.373 However Poratau could not say whether Metera had a good claim. Under cross-examination, Poratau denied that the land had a pa or plantations. Poratau said that they had occupied the land since 1876 and that they had last been on the block in the previous summer. Under cross-examination Poratau said that Rehia was the daughter of Tamatautahi and that “Kahuiparera descends from the same stock”.374

371 Ibid. fol. 339. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 6 372 Whanganui Native Land Court minute book 3 fol. 340. 24 August 1882. Upokongaro. Repro 273. National Archives Wellington. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 7 373 Ibid. fols. 340-341. Umumore Supporting Documents pages: 7-8 374 Ibid. fol. 342. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 9

98 Te Morehu gave evidence next. They also said they were of Ngati Kahui and claimed a right to the land through Tamatautahi.375 Te Morehu said that the land had been owned by their ancestor Ururangi and that their mother and grandmother had used the land. They themselves had planted crops on the land forty years before.

When the case of the counter claimants closed Winiata Kakahi presented his case. All the counter claimants with the exception of Poratau agreed that Rorohiko would conduct their case.376

Winiata said that he had occupied the land. He denied that Metera had ever occupied the land. Winiata said that he had earlier objected to a part of Umumore being included in the Rangataua survey. He denied that Ngati Kahuiparera were the owners of the land. Under cross-examination by Poratau Winiata stated:

I am the sole owner of this particular block; there is no one else beside me. Individual claims to parcels of land do exist by occupation of them. I cannot say whether claims of actual sole ownership exist.

Pressed further the minutes record that Winiata had said: “The owners of this land are myself, & others of whom I am aware, [or with whom I am aquainted.]”.

Due to the presence of the Chief Judge, the hearing was adjourned to 25 August.377 The Court announced its decision on 25 August. It was highly critical of the witnesses and the evidence presented in the case:

Before announcing their decision in this case, the Court, through the Presiding Judge, desires to express their great regret that in so many cases, and in none so noticeably as in this, the Native witnesses appeared to have set all regard to truth entirely on one side.

The Court went on to state that it had been tempted to dismiss the case altogether:

375 Ibid. fols. 342-343. Umumore Supporting Documents pages: 9-10 376 Ibid. fol. 344. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 11 377 Ibid. fol. 347. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 14

99 but looking at the fact that a common descent of all the parties from Tamatautahi was the one thing in which an agreement was established, and that no party could shew, or [illegible] anything beyond occassional visits to the ground for hunting or fishing purposes, they were of the opinion that the justice of the case would best be met by admitting all to an interest in the block; according to the list annexed.

The title to the block was determined at Upokongaro on 25 August 1881. Eleven owners of the Ngati Tara and Ngati Tamawhara hapu were named by the Court:

Winiata Te Kakahi Kiritahanga Mata Ihaka Karipa Poroto Te Rangiwhakaekea Pehi Pita Metera Te Urumutu Te Kapa Rotohiko Te Kapa Potatau Te Kahui Morehu

Court fees of £2 for the hearing, £1 for the Memorial and 14s for witnesses were charged. A survey lien of £52 12s 6d was registered against the block on the same day.378 A note on ML 554 indicates that the Crown purchased the block on 15 September.379 The Umumore Block was declared waste lands of the Crown in November 1881.380

378 Order of Court for Survey Lien. Te Umumore Block. 25 August 1881. MLIS image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 19 379 ML 554. March 1881 F. H. Tronson surveyor. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 16 380 New Zealand Gazette, 17 November 1881. No.100.p.1520 NZGA image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 24

100 The following payments are recorded for the block:381

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 3 Date Particulars £ S D Voucher 21/2/1879 Paranihi te Kiritahanga o/a 33 1450 4/2/1879 McDonnell & Brassey’s 67 1 1241 payments 4/4/1879 Do. Commission & c. 87 10 1172, 1241 29/5/1879 Hori Nikirau: o/a 25 2202 28/10/1879 S. Manson: food to natives 3 2 1122 16/1/1880 G. Mair: travelling 6 2 6 10 31/12/1879 Winiata te Kakai: survey guide 4 2129 14/1/1880 J. A. Thorpe: o/a survey 19 5 6 2170 30/6/1880 Do. Do. 12 17 465 257 18 Less amount transferred to 50 Rangataua West ledger 3 fo 216 207 18 15/9/1881 Winiata te Kakahi & ors final 304 17 522 pay’ F.E. Hamlin: interpreting 1 1 620 Total 513 16

On 12 December 1881, the Under Secretary of the Native Land Purchase Office on behalf of the Native Minister asked that a certificate of title for the block be endorsed and

381 MA-MLP 7/2 folio 314. Ledger 1872-1884. National Archives, Wellington. Not Copied.

101 that the conveyance to the Crown be forwarded.382 A note on this request indicates that the Memorial had not yet been endorsed and discrepancies had been noted with some of the signatures:

Memorial has not yet issued, Order being dated 25 Aug. 81.

There are the following discrepancies

In order In deed Kiritahanga Paraniti te Kiritahanga Paroto te Rangiwhakaekea Tapapatotote Rangiwhakaekea Metera te Urumutu Meteria Rotohiko te Kapa Rotohiko

Other signature correct

Deed passed by Trust Comm H.H. 21.12.81

Another note on this letter indicates that the endorsed memorial had been sent to the Governor nearly a year later on 1 December 1882. A further note on this letter indicates that the lien of £52 12s 6d had been paid in June 1882.

Nearly a year after the block had been declared Crown land the owners of the block were published in the New Zealand Gazette.383 Nearly ten years later the block was one of several declared set apart for special settlement.384

Table 20: Umumore Summary Umumore Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 842 0 842 0 0

382 Under Secretary, Native Land Purchase Office to Chief Judge Native Land Court Auckland, 12 December 1881. Umumore Block Order File WH 367. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 34 383 New Zealand Gazette, 10 October 1882. No.85.p.1462 NZGA image. Umumore Supporting Documents page: 25 384 New Zealand Gazette, 31 March 1892. No.28.p.539 NZGA image.Umumore Supporting Documents page: 27

102 Whataroa No. 2 Block Order File: WH 421

Whataroa No. 2 adjoined the very much larger Rangiwaea Block, and is quite separate to the other Whataroa block, for which title was determined in 1869.385 The Whataroa No. 2 block is shown on ML 460. The survey indicates that the block comprised of “Low hills” with “very good light soil on lower slopes & about creeks” the land was forested with “black and white pine” with some scrub.386 Whataroa No. 2 is also shown on the plan ML 1454.387

In 1879 James Booth listed the “Wataroa” block of 3000 acres as a block under negotiation. Booth listed the block as one which was contracted for survey, but for which the survey had not been commenced. The Surveyor, Thorpe had been contracted to survey the block on May 31 1879.388 James Thorpe, surveyed the block in January 1880, however the area of the block after this survey was only 492 acres.389 It is unclear what happened to the negotiations for the Whataroa block. Booth was however instructed to cease negotiations for blocks which had not been put through the Court.390 Soon after the instructions were received the block was one of several listed as under negotiation which had not been through the Native Land Court. Although there was nothing noted alongside this block, some of the other blocks in the schedule had notes indicating Booth’s opinion of whether the purchase might be abandoned.391

385 Berghan, Paula. Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000, p.1096. 386 ML 460 Whataroa No.2. J. Thorpe surveyor. January 1880. Landonline Image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 46 387 ML 1454 Rangiwaea Block, Wellington District. Approved 1900 Landonline Image. Rangiwaea- Tarere Supporting Documents pages: 18-25. See also figure 3. 388 James Booth, Return, showing the state of his negotiations in Progress. 5 December 1879. MA-MLP 1879/595. National Archives, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 82 389 ML 460 Whataroa No.2. J. Thorpe surveyor. January 1880. Landonline Image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 46 390 MA-MLP 1879/620 Whataroa No. Supporting Documents page: .72 391 James Booth, Return, showing the state of his negotiations in Progress. 5 December 1879. MA-MLP 1879/595. National Archives, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages:92

103 The following payments are recorded in the Land Purchase Department ledger:392

Land Purchase Ledger Payments Table: 4 Date Particulars £ S D Voucher 22/4/1879 Rio Tahakawa 1st pay’ 100 1799 5/9/1879 Moora Rukuwai 2 “ 10 764 20/9/1879 M.A. Laing: horse [illeg.] 2 13 4 1127 30/11/1879 J.A. Thorpe: o/a survey 24 16 6 1451 30/10/1879 Rio Tahakawa: survey guide 7 10 1635 31/5/1880 J.A. Thorpe: final payment o/a 16 11 244 survey 161 10 10

A Crown application for a hearing for the Whataroa block was published in the New Zealand Gazette in March 1884.393 An application for the subdivision of the interests acquired by the Crown in the “Whataroa” block appeared in the New Zealand Gazette of 23 December 1886.394 Several of the other blocks listed in the schedule were in the immediate area of Whataroa No. 2 so presumably this notice was for the Whataroa No. 2 block.

The title investigation for the Whataroa No. 2 block was held in September 1907.395 Six applications for the block were scheduled for the hearing, but one was withdrawn and the other applicants determined that application number 27 brought by Kerei te Hokowhitu should be heard and that the other applicants should appear as counter-claimants. Arama

392 MA-MLP 7/2 folio 243 Ledger 1872-1884. National Archives, Wellington. Not Copied. 393 New Zealand Gazette 31 March 1884. No.41 p.597. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 57b. 394 New Zealand Gazette 23 December 1886. No.67 pp.1693-1694. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 57d-57e. 395 Wanganui MB No. 57, Folios 94-96, 103-107, 110, 114-130, 138-142. 24, 27, 30 September, 1 October 1907. Wanganui, Microfilm Copy, Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 2-45.

104 Tinirau merged his claim with that of Kerei te Hokowhitu. The claimant essentially argued that the whole of the land had been gifted on the birth of a child, Rio Te Hokowhitu. Several of the counter claimants either argued that the gift did not occur or only applied to a part of the land. Evidence was produced in favour and against the claimed gift of the land.

Te Aohau Nikitini gave evidence in favour of the claim, stating that Kaiawate of Ngati Tamarua had gifted the land to Porokina and his wife Te Raira, upon the birth of their son Rio Te Hokowhitu. The land had been used for bird catching. Te Aohau Nikitini stated that Rio Te Hokowhitu offered the land for sale in 1879, and that Rio and the surveyor had gone to survey the land where they were met by the descendants of Tamarua who had gone with them. Nikitini said that Rio had received £100 on account for the land, but had died around 1884. The current applicant, Kerei Hokowhitu was the son of Rio te Hokowhitu. He had delayed the application for title of the land because he had been engaged in looking after the lands of his mother.396

The objectors were then challenged. Weraroa Kingi counter-claimed on behalf of himself and others. Tarihira Kereti and Henare Haeretuterangi also lodged a counter- claim. Arama Tinirau merged his case with the claimant.

Weraroa Kingi stated his claim by right of occupation under his ancestor Tamarua. He stated that Ngati Rangi was now in occupation of the land. Weraroa Kingi said that he had never heard the claim that the land had been gifted until three years previously. He said that his brother and his elders had received money for lands in this area, and that he himself had been involved with all the transactions in this area. He said that part of the land being claimed was part of Okehu, and that Whataroa was the area on which the kainga of those who were entitled to Okehu were located. He said that his ancestors had gifted other lands, but not this piece and that he would have been told of any gift.397

396 Wanganui MB No. 57, Folios 94, 24 September 1907. Wanganui, Microfilm Copy, Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 2 397 Fol. 95. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 4-5

105 Weraroa believed that Tarihia and his claimants had already received their share of lands in the area with the Okehu block. Weraroa gave a whakapapa showing his link to Tamarua.398 He said that the land had been used for the hunting of birds and that there was a kainga on the land.399 According to Weraroa the boundaries of the land were different in 1871 and included the Tutaenui block.400 Weraroa believed that the descendants of Rawhitiao, Tamarua’s brother may have had the greater interests in the nearby but separate Rangiwaea block.401 However Weraroa’s witness Rotopiko Paira contradicted Weraroa on the key points, stating that he could not deny the gift to Rio. He asked Weraroa to withdraw the claim as he believed that Weraroa had no right to the land.402

Te Aro objected that Rio had not been given the whole of the land in question. Te Aro was positive that part of the land had been gifted, they had been informed of the gift by elders of Ngati Rangi. He also believed that Rio had sold the land and that the survey had marked off the area subject to the gift.403

Wereroa called Minihia Te Kooro who said that he believed that Rawhitiao was the younger sister of Tamarua and that her people also had a right to the land. He believed that Rio had sold Whataroa in 1879 and had distributed the money.404

Henare Haeretuterangi claimed the northern portion of the block, north of the road to Tutaenui.405 He believed that only the part south of that road had been subject to a gift

398 Fol. 96. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 6 399 Ibid. 400 Ibid. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 7 401 Fol. 97 Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 8 402 Fol. 103. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 12 403 Fol. 104. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 14-15 404 Fol. 105. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 16-17 405 Fol. 106. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 18

106 from Pairama to Porokura. He provided a whakapapa showing his descent from Rawhatiao.406 Henare Haeretuterangi said that he had gone to the land to shoot pigeons when he found that the survey had included the northern section. He said that Kerei and his opponents had never been to the land while he had nephews who kept dairy cows on the land and he himself kept a three-legged pot there beside a lake.407

The case resumed on 27 September, but was adjourned to 28 September. The case did not resume until 30 September.408 Under cross-examination Henare Haeretuterangi denied that the land had originally belonged to Tamarua alone, but to Tamarua, Rawhitiao and Rangipaerero [Rangihaereroa?]. When he found that the survey included the northern portion he told his father and protested to the surveyor. He did not know why his father had said that Okehu and Whataroa belonged to Tamarua.409

Tarihira Kereti was sworn and stated that they claimed the land by ancestry to Rawhititiao.410 They did not know why Te Ao had previously stated that the land belonged to Tamarua. They did not know why the descendants of Tamarua had gifted land.

William McDonnell said that they had spoken to Te Aro about the Whataroa block and that the boundaries outlined by Te Aro corresponded to the plan. He said that the survey of the Murimutu lands was conducted in moonlight because of the opposition of Ngati Whiti and Ngati Tama. “None of the Wanganui natives came to assist us.” McDonnell also believed that only a part of the block, that to the south of the track to Tutaenui was included in the gift. He did not believe that anyone had been killing birds on the block in the last 15 years. McDonnell said that he had only seen the descendants of Tamarua

406 Ibid. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 19 407 Fol. 107. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 20 408 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 57, fol. 114. 30 September 1907. Microfilm Copy, Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 23-24 409 Fol. 115. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 25 410 Fol. 116. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 26

107 hunting on the land, and that he had not seen any of the donees shooting on the land.411 He believed that Te Ao had gone to object to the Whataroa survey. Although he said he had heard of the gift of land from Pairama to Rio he believed that Ngati Rangiwhitiao had not given their part.412 He also believed that Rio received money for the block from the Government.

Te Aohau Nikitini claimed the northern part of the block. Their witness, Raihania Takapa acknowledged that a gift had been made.413 When the case resumed on 1 October Te Aohau Nikitini called Stuart Manson, who stated that he was the husband of a Ngati Rangi woman. He said that he had first heard of the gift some 30 years before.414 He had heard of the sale of the land by Rio, but did not know why the sale did not proceed.

Mereaina Rauangina gave evidence that she knew of the gift of the land. She said that Weraroa was her nephew.415 She said that the land had been gifted for the child Rio Hokowhitu. Rio and Pehemana had the land surveyed and this survey was not conducted in secret. She believed that the gift was well known and generally recognised by Ngati Tamarua. She believed that Weraroa, might not have known of the gift as he was of a “younger generation”.416

Kerei te Hokowhitu then gave evidence. He said that he lived at Karioi. Kerei te Hokowhitu said that the land had been gifted to the parents of Hokowhitu. He then went on to name trees and areas on the block.417 Although he admitted that others may have continued to hunt on the land, nobody would have dared to use the named trees on the

411 Fol. 119. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 29 412 Fol. 120. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 30 413 Ibid. 414 Whanganui Native Land Court, minute book 57, fol. 123. 1 October 1907. Microfilm Copy, Archives New Zealand, Wellington. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 33 415 Fol. 124. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 34 416 Fol. 125. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 35 417 Fol. 126. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 36

108 block. “No doubt since guns came into use Ng[ati] Tamarua have gone onto this block since the gift, but they had no right to do so.” Kerei te Hokowhitu denied that the gift had been made by Pairama, he believed it had been made by Kaiawatea.

Kerei te Hokowhitu recalled the sale of the block. He believed Rio had received £100, and that he himself had received £30 and a greenstone weapon from his father. Rio had sent money to Ihipara the wife of Pehemona, though she had at first refused to accept this. He believed that the sale to the Government in 1879 had not been completed because the block had not been surveyed.418

Arama Tinirau was then sworn. He said that he belonged to Ngati Tamarua, and that he believed that the land had been gifted. He believed that if the land had not been the subject of a gift it would have been included in the Okehu block.419 He disputed the claim by Henare Haeretuterangi that the gift did not include the northern portion and he said that Te Aro had been present at the survey and that this survey had not been made in secret.420 Arama Tinirau recalled that Rio had sold the land and that no-one had objected to this sale. He said that he himself had no right to the land.421

The decision of the Court was that the block had belonged to Ngati Tamarua and that the block was gifted by Kaiawatea on the behalf of Ngati Tamarua to the parents of Rio Hokowhitu.422 The Court believed that the land had been given to support the new child. In deciding against Weraroa the Court also rejected the argument that the gift had only extended to the trees used for birding, agreeing with the argument put by Mr. Fox that the supply of food from those trees was more important than the land itself.

418 Fol. 129. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 39 419 Fol. 130. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 40 420 Fol. 138. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 41 421 Fol. 139. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 42 422 Fol. 141. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 44

109 The Court also rejected the argument of Henare Haeretuterangi who had claimed that the Whataroa No.2 block included land, which had not been part of the original gift. The Court concluded that the father of Henare Haeretuterangi, Te Aro had been involved in the survey and had acknowledged the gift of Whataroa. The Court awarded the land to Kerei te Hokowhitu.

A Native Land Court Certificate of Title for the 492 acre Whataroa 2 block was awarded to Kerei te Hokowhitu in October 1907. A fee of £12 was charged £1 for the order, £1 for witnesses and £10 for the hearing.423 In November of 1907 two applications for the consent to lease two parts of the block was published.424 One part was to be leased by William Cochran, the other by William Strachan. A year later the Commissioner of Crown Lands applied to cut off a portion of the land to satisfy a survey lien of £43 9d.425 Another application to have a portion removed for an unpaid survey lien appeared in the Gazette of July 1909.426 An unpaid survey lien of £53 16s 2 d was listed for the block.

On 15 October 1909 the block was entered onto Certificate of Title 191/114. Kerei te Hokowhitu was listed as the sole owner. Two leases for two parts of the block from 7 October 1909 were entered on the day of the issue of the title. These leases were however later surrendered.

In June 1910 the Commissioner of Crown Lands sought to cut off a portion of the block to satisfy an unpaid £53 16s 2d Survey Lien.427 It is unclear as to what this charge is in

423 Title Order. 4 October 1907. Block Order File Whataroa 2. Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 47 424 New Zealand Gazette 7 November 1907. No.96 p.3313. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 57g 425 New Zealand Gazette 23 December 1908. No.106 p.3324. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 57h 426 New Zealand Gazette 8 July 1909. No.57 p.1808. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 57i 427 New Zealand Gazette. 9 June 1910. No. 57. p.1704. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 58.

110 reference to. A payment of £35 had been paid for the survey on 20 February 1909428 and a further payment of £10 15s 5d had been paid for the interest on 30 July 1909.429 There appears to have been some confusion with these payments, a question mark had been noted after the block name of Whataroa and “No. 2” appears to have been added on the form for the payment of the interest. A note written for the Registrar of the Native Land Court Wellington on the reverse of the payment of £35 reads “there is no lien attaching this block registered in this office.”430 There does not appear to have been any survey other than the 1880 survey registered for the land.431 In September 1910, soon after the notification of the intention to recover the lien of £53 16s 2d an application for the confirmation of the transfer of the block (in fact part of the block was to be sold) was published.432 The parties to the transaction were William Robert Cochrane and Barnicoat and Treadwell acting for Kerei te Hokowhitu. The transfer of part of the block to William Robert Cochrane was recorded on 18 October 1910.433 The new Certificate of Title 200/49 for 99a 1r was issued to William Cochrane on the same day and the land was subject to restriction under Part XIII of the Land Act 1908.434

Kerei te Hokowhitu died after the transfer of the first part of the block. A Succession Order awarded the land to Porokoru te Patu, Ngareta te Patu, Mere Tumua and Tatiaua Waikuku subject to the life interest in favour of Mere Ngataapu on 9 May 1913.435

428 Notice of Release of Lien. 20 February 1909. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 64-65 429 Notice of Release of Lien. 30 July 1909. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 63 430 Note on reverse of Notice of Release of Lien. 20 February 1909. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 65 431 The Index of Maori Land Surveys held at the Land Information New Zealand Regional Office only records one survey for the block. No other surveys recorded on Terraview. 432 New Zealand Gazette. 8 September 1910. No. 82. p.3384. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 59 433 CT WN 191/114 Whataroa No.2. 15 October 1909. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 51 434 CT WN 200/49 Whataroa No. 2. 18 October 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 52-54 435 Succession Order. Whataroa Block Order File WH 421. 9 May 1913. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 62

111 The application for the confirmation of the sale of the second part of the block was published in the July 1914 New Zealand Gazette.436 The purchaser was William Strachan of Ruawai, the sellers, Porokoru te Patu and others. The transmission of the estate of Kerei te Hokowhitu to Porokoku te Patu, Ngareta te Patu, Mere Tumua and Tatiaua Waikuku was recorded on 15 April 1915. The transfer of the remainder of the Whataroa No.2 block was recorded on the same day.437 Certificate of Title 232/184 for 386a 3r 35p was also issued to William Strachen of Ruanui on that day. The land was subject to restriction under the Land Act (though this part is illegible on the Certificate of Title). This restriction was later suspended under Section 175 (8) of the Land Act of 1948. The land was later subject to the restrictions imposed by section 248 of the Maori Land Act 1931.438

Table 21: Whataroa No. 2 Summary Whataroa No.2 Summary Original Area No.of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 492 0 492 0 0

436 New Zealand Gazette. 2 July 1914. No.63. p.2665. NZGA image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 60. 437 CT WN 191/114 Whataroa No.2. 15 October 1909. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents page: 51 438 CT WN 232/184 Whataroa No.2. 15 April 1915. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Whataroa No. 2 Supporting Documents pages: 55-57.

112 SECTION TWO: TITLE INVESTIGATION NARRATIVES

Mairekura and Tataramoa

The title determination hearing for the neighbouring Mairekura and Tataramoa blocks were heard together in March 1903. Both blocks were located on the banks of the Makotuku River, near the township of Raetihi.

The Tataramoa block was first scheduled for a title hearing on 10 April 1878. Wiari Turahui, Makareta Keina, Harata Paritaihuia and Harata Rekoreko were the claimants.439 However title to the block was not determined at that time.

Pirihira Te Tia, Maketu and Te Wharerangi wrote to Lewis, Under Secretary Land Purchase Department in March 1886:

I have a claim to make, and I request that you would send us the money for Tataramoa, £1500. This is the whole amount for which we make the application that you would send it at once on the receipt of this letter. Enough.440

Sheridan asked Butler if the block had passed the Court, to which Butler replied:

Tataramoa has not yet passed the Court[.] An application for hearing has been received but it has not been Gazetted yet.441

The Commissioner of Crown Lands applied to have a survey charging order of £144 17s awarded for the Mairekura block. The date of the hearing was to be 30 July 1898, or “as

439 New Zealand Gazette 16 March 1878 No.22 p.315. NZGA image. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 93 440 Pirihira Te Tia, Maketu and Te Wharerangi to Lewis, Under Secretary Land Purchase Department.31 March 1886. MA-MLP 1886/108 National Archives, Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents pages: 113-114 441 Minute Butler to Sheridan 10 April 1886. MA-MLP 1886/108 National Archives, Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 112.

113 ! ! ! • - • • - -

J I

/-. -• ~

•• • • .. " • soon thereafter as the business of the Court will allow.”442 The hearing was held on 20 August 1898. A Mr. C. Brown on behalf of the Commissioner of Crown Lands asked that the sum be reduced by £28 13s on account of the survey of the road.443 The amount owing on Mairekura was therefore £116 10s.

The hearing for the title investigation of the Mairekura and Tataramoa blocks was held on 3 March 1903 at Wanganui. Ema W. Hipango and Tarewa Heremaia appeared as applicants. W.W. Hipango stated that the claim was based upon ancestry from Te Atakamoari. A whakapapa for Te Atakamoari and Puku was presented.444

The counter claimant Pauro Marino did not deny the rights of the ancestors given by W.W. Hipango but claimed a right for himself and others from Tamatautahi. He asked for an adjournment to allow his people to attend. Neha Winiata also claimed under Tamatautahi as well as Hinemata. Neha Winiata also wanted an adjournment. Both Neha Winiata and Pauro Marino stated that they only claimed a small portion of the block, the part, which adjoined Waimarino. The case was then adjourned.

On 19 March, Neha Winiata again asked for an adjournment to allow the parties who had just arrived to discuss the case.445 The hearing was then adjourned to the next day, when Wiki Keepa applied for another adjournment to allow Arama Tinirau who had an application for the Tataramoa block to appear. She said that her husband was away and there was not anyone else to take her case. The Court replied that it was not prepared to adjourn the hearing for one claimant. W.W. Hipango denied that any part of Tataramoa

442 New Zealand Gazette 14 July 1898. No. 53 p.1136. NZGA image. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 95 443 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 38, fol. 319. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 4 444 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 294. 3 March 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 6 445 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 313. 19 March 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 8

115 was included in the Mairekura claim. However an application for adjournment was lodged and there were no objectors.446

The hearing resumed on 31 March. Ema Hipango and Tarewa Heremaia were again named as the applicants. Arama Tinirau, who was still absent, was named as the applicant for Tataramoa, which was included in Mairekura. Wi Kiriwehi appeared for the counter-claimants Pauro Marino and Neha Winiata and stated that the right of Arama Tinirau to Tataramoa was not disputed and that he would be included among the clients of Wi Kiriwehi.447 He stated that the northern portion he outlined was the exclusive property of his clients.

Wi Kiriwehi repeated that the claim was based upon the rights derived from Tamatautahi and Hinemata. He then called Neha Winiata who named Ngati Tara as the hapu.448 He then presented a whakapapa showing his connection to both Tamatautahi and Hinemata. He then gave an account of some of the history of the block. Neha Winiata believed that the boundary between the Whanganui and his people was on this area. He named kainga on the land and said that Tamatautahi had rights at Ngapakihi, Raetihi, Tawhitoariki among other places. He was then cross examined. Evidence presented by the father of Neha Winiata denying rights over Tamatautahi was read. Neha Winiata could not account for the statements of his father.449

Poria Kaihunu was then sworn and gave Ngati Kahui and Ngati Hinemata as their hapu.450 A whakapapa showing their connection to both Hinemata and Tamatautahi was also provided. Poria stated that the boundary on the plan between the two parties was correct. Poria also stated that the area was the junction of a number of boundaries and

446 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 315, 20 March 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 9 447 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book, 50 fol. 321, 31 March 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 10 448 Ibid. fol. 322. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 11 449 Ibid. fol. 324. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 13 450 Ibid. fol. 325. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 14

116 had in former times been a meeting place. The witness then gave an account of the history and occupation of the block and was then cross-examined. Poria said that Arama Tinirau was the principal owner of Tataramoa.

Tapa Paroto was sworn and gave their hapu as Ngati Tara.451 Tapa Paroto agreed that the evidence given by Neha Winiata on the ancestors was correct and that the whakapapa was correct. He said that Tataramoa had been occupied by Tamatautahi and the descendants of Tamatautahi. He said that Tataramoa had been excluded from the Waimarino block and that the boundary of that block had been altered because it had belonged to the descendants of Tamatautahi.452 When the hearing resumed the next day Tapa Paroto admitted that the boundaries in the claim put by Ema Hipango in February 1889 was correct.453

Erueti Turangapito was then sworn. He gave Ngati Kahui as his hapu, he also claimed through Ngati Puku. He admitted the right of Arama Tinirau to Tataramoa. Erueti Turangapito stated that he could not trace descent to Tamatautahi.454 He also gave evidence on the survey. The Court then intervened and stated that it was clear that there was no dispute that part of the block north of a line between Hukaroa and the junction of the Makotuku and Mangawhero streams belonged to one party, the part to the south belonged to the other. All the Court therefore had to decide was the owners for the northern part (or Tataramoa). As Tinirau, one of the claimants to this portion would arrive the next day, the hearing was adjourned to 3 April.455

When the hearing resumed W.W. Hipango submitted a list of owners for the southern portion of Mairekura. The list was read out without objection and then passed. W.W.

451 Ibid. fol. 329. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 18 452 Ibid. fol. 331. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 20 453 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 334. 1 April 1903. Wanganui, Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 21 454 ibid. fol. 335. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 22 455 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 337. 1 April 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 24

117 Hipango then suggested that the shares for each of the three ancestors, Teko, Rangiroari and Kairahi be divided. After a discussion it was decided that all three ancestors were equally entitled. No decision had been made by the following day so the Court was adjourned to 6 April.456

When the case resumed W.W. Hipango submitted a list with shares allocated which was read and passed after some small alterations. The Court was then adjourned to allow the parties to divide the block into parcels.457 A tracing was presented the following day for the division of the block into ten parcels.458

The orders were made on 6 May 1903.

Table 22: Tataramoa block and Mairekura blocks Bloc Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Tataramoa 544 0 0 544 126 Mairekura A 587 2 2 587.5125 5 Mairekura B 470 3 31 470.94375 5 Mairekura C 354 1 20 354.375 3 Mairekura D 228 1 36 228.475 9 Mairekura E 279 3 4 279.775 3 Mairekura F 186 2 2 186.5125 4 Mairekura G 223 3 10 223.8125 3 Mairekura H 233 0 23 233.14375 5 Mairekura K 116 2 11 116.56875 3 Mairekura L 116 2 11 116.56875 3

456 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 352. 4 April 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 26 457 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 353. 6 April 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 27 458 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fol. 353. 6 April 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 28

118 A survey charging order had been made in favour of the Surveyor General for £144 17s on 20 August 1898. The interest for five years at five percent from 30 May 1898 was £36 13s making a total of £181 10s, which was apportioned to the blocks as follows:459

Table 23: Survey Charges Mairekura and Tataramoa 1903 Block L S D Tatataramoa 31 0 0 Mairekura A 32 0 0 Mairekura B 25 5 0 Mairekura C 19 0 0 Mairekura D 12 5 0 Mairekura E 15 0 0 Mairekura F 10 0 0 Mairekura G 12 0 0 Mairekura H 12 10 0 Mairekura K 6 5 0 Mairekura L 6 5 0

The Commissioner of Crown Lands again applied for survey charging orders for some of the blocks in May 1905.460 This application indicates a significant increase in the charges.

459 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 50, fols. 357-365. 6 May 1903. Wanganui. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 29-38 460 New Zealand Gazette 18 May 1905. No. 45 p.1161. NZGA image. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents page: 98

119 Table 24: Survey Charges Mairekura and Tataramoa 1905 Block L S D Tatataramoa 49 11 9 Mairekura A 54 3 9 Mairekura B 43 9 10 Mairekura C 32 15 10 Mairekura D 21 4 6 Mairekura E 25 18 7 Mairekura F 17 7 5 Mairekura G 20 15 9 Mairekura H 21 9 1

A Native Land Court Certificate of Title was issued for the Tataramoa block 6 May 1903.461 Title was awarded to 126 owners in unequal shares. Fees of £3 for the hearing, £1 for the order and 8s for witnesses were charged.

Title for the block was sent to the Land Transfer Office in May 1913 and entered onto the Provisional Register.462 However a note entered onto this document reads “D.L.R. directed that Title need not be issued for this PR.” Certificates of Title under the Land Transfer Act were granted in 1913 and 1916 after the block had been partitioned.

Refer to Paula Berghan Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000 for the subsequent history of this block.

461 Native Land Court Certificate of Title. MB 50/357. Whanganui Native Land Court. 6 May 1903. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents pages:78-84 462 WN PR 6/57 Tataramoa, 6 May 1913. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Mairekura and Tataramoa Supporting Documents pages: 53-62

120 Poutahi

The 1955-acre Poutahi block adjoined the Huikumu Block (which lay to the west) and the Waimarino block (which lay to the north).463

The Poutahi block was first brought to the Court in February 1899.464 Wiremu Ngapaki told the Court that the block shown on WD 1444 had been the subject of a meeting and that it had been decided that the two ancestors, Pare Kitae and Tunui a Taika would be the ancestors. It was also decided that a number of hapu under these two ancestors would be the agreed hapu:

1. Puku | 2. Hekeawai | Pare Kitae 3. Hinekino | 4. Maru Poho |Tunui a Taika 5. Hinetui | 6. Rangi Mihia |

On Friday 24 March 1899 Wiremu Kiriwehi asked to address the Court on the matter of the Poutahi block. The Judge pointed out that a number of the interested parties were not present. The Court was asked for a time to hear the case and it was decided that the case would resume on Monday.

When the case resumed on Monday 27 March, Taurerewa addressed the Court and stated that it had been agreed that the case would not be resumed and that they would petition Parliament that part of the Poutahi block had been wrongly included in the Waimarino block. He asked that the hearing is delayed until the next session of Parliament. The Court agreed to the delay of the case until after the conclusion of the next session of Parliament on the understanding that if Parliament did not act on the petition the Court

463 ML 2767. Poutahi. Approved 1915. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Poutahi Supporting Documents page:37 464 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 40 (Judge Ward’s MB 40), fol.62. 10 February 1899. Pipiriki. Microfilm National Archives. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 2

121 i , .-.;.' ..-­ , .p;"::""

TAKU - '--...... ,..,=:--.....

»- ~ -----

t 9-'=-­ •

Fi gure 7 : hku and p(jut

However the case did not resume after the close of the 1899 session of Parliament, and the petition, if it was submitted, has not been located. The title investigation did not resume until over 12 years later.

On 24 January 1912 the case resumed and the lists considered.466 After several days of discussion some of the shares were agreed and some of the lists passed. But the undivided shares were yet to be decided. The case was adjourned. The case was heard again in June, however the list which had been previously passed was not presented and the case stood down again.467

On 31 July 1912 the investigation resumed with the matter of the lists still undecided.468 A Mr. Izard stated that he represented “some natives, but they were not here today.” The Court told Mr. Izard that the date of the hearing had been set and that some parties had travelled a considerable distance so the case must proceed. The list of names and shares presented by Hinetui were passed. However the shares of Whakapai’s list presented by Marupoho were not complete. The lists of names under Hekeawai were not passed.

The lists under Hekeawai were then considered. The pages of the lists were then read and objectors challenged. Some pages of lists (lists 1, 3-9) passed as read or with minor alteration, however Potatau objected to many others. Potatau admitted that some of those listed were descendants of Hekeawai, but argued that they did not have rights of

465 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 40 (Judge Ward’s MB 40), fol.120. 27 March 1899. Pipiriki. Microfilm National Archives. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 6 466 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 64, fol. 352. Wanganui 24 January 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 8 467 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 52, fol. 319. Wanganui 14 June 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 11

123 occupation. From 31 July to 3 August several folios of evidence were presented in favour and against many of the submitted lists.469 The case essentially revolved around a dispute over the allocation of 400 out of the total of 2122 shares. The 400 shares had originally been allocated to the descendants of Hekeawai.

After the lists were read Tuatini called Takaiora who was then sworn to give evidence. Takaiora stated that he had seen the block occupied as a youth. He had seen his mother and uncle gathering food for the Ohinemutu feast near Pipiriki. Takiora stated that the descendants of Maketu occupied the land shooting pigs and snaring birds until the survey of Tawhito Ariki.470 Takaiora gave whakapapa showing the connection to Hekeawai and to Hekeawai’s child Weka.471 Under cross-examination by Wi Kiriwehi Takaiora named the places of occupation on the block.

Much of the evidence was specific to the individual lists. Hamarama for instance gave a whakapapa showing the connection of those listed on list 21 to Hekeawai.472 However under cross examination he said that he did not know the rights of the family to the block, though he believed that they should be included under Parikitai “they being of rangatira blood”.473 Hamarama claimed a right to the land through Hekeawai and on account of his belief that he himself had hunted pigeons on the land. He said that he had been hunting with Potatau. Hamarama provided a whakapapa showing his connection to Hekeawai. He did not know the boundaries of the land and had not been there in over ten years. 474

468 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 138. Wanganui 31 July 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 12 469 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 138-141. Wanganui 31 July 1912. Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 142-148. Wanganui 1 August 1912. Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 150-154. Wanganui 2 August 1912. Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 158-159. Wanganui 3 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 12-36 470 Ibid. fol. 140. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 14 471 Ibid. fol. 140-141. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 14-15 472 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 150. Wanganui 2 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 23 473 Ibid. fol. 151. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 24 474 Ibid. fol. 146. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 20

124 Tuatini said that he had the boundaries of Morikau altered to exclude part of Poutahi.475 He also argued that the only occupation rights on the block were associated with hunting, and the kainga on the block were only hunting kainga.476 Tuatini denied that Potatau had any kainga on the block. He believed that Ngati Pare, who derived their name from Parekitai the mother of Hekeawai and Puku had rights to the land.

Ani Tangiwai provided evidence in support of list 14.477 She believed that Poutahi had been used to gather rats, birds and berries and that all of the descendants of Hekeawai had a right to get food from Poutahi. Arama Tinirau also gave evidence. He stated that the two children of Parekitai both had equal rights and that these rights had not been divided by Parekitai. He believed that the land was a source of food such as birds, rats and berries. He had not heard of any kainga on the block, though he had not been there. 478

The case of the objections was then closed, and the evidence in rebuttal was then given. Wiremu Kiriwehi called on Potatau to give evidence.479 Potatau stated that he lived at Raetihi. He then outlined his objections to several of the lists.480 Potatau admitted going hunting with Hamarama, but said that they had hunted on another area and not Poutahi.481 When the hearing resumed on 5 August Potatau provided a short whakapapa for his

475 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 146. Wanganui 1 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 20 476 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 147. Wanganui 1 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 21 477 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 151. Wanganui 2 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 24 478 Ibid. fol. 152. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 25 479 Ibid. 480 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 153-154. Wanganui 2 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 26-27 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fols. 158-159. Wanganui 3 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 28-29 481 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 159. Wanganui 3 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29

125 father a descendant of Hekeawai.482 He said that his father had occupied the land and had a kainga, named Opakea, where potatoes were grown and birds caught. Potatau named the events for which food was gathered on the land. He said that Poutahi was named after a single Tawa tree which had been used for spearing birds and was a distinctive land mark.483 He said that his ‘grandparents’ Te Hori and Tutahi had killed Apepa for stealing birds at the Miro tree at Tawhiwhi. He then provided a whakapapa showing his connection to Tutahi. Potatau said that other land had been taken as utu for the killing of Apepa.484

Potatau argued that those on the lists to which he objected had no occupation rights and that they had been allowed in as part of an agreement that the members of the Hekeawai hapu should have 400 shares. He said that only the descendants of Hekeawai who had maintained occupation had a right. Now that objections had been raised Potatau wanted these shares allocated to those who had kept to the agreement. He said that their only right had been by aroha. Under cross examination Potatau stated that he was not a descendant of Puku but rather of Tunuiataika and that Puku and Tunuiataika were not related. He said that Puku had been set up in the Taku case, but that the Court did not find in favour of Puku, as Puku had rights at Paekaka and not Taku. 485

Wi Keriwehi then gave evidence. He said he had been living at Foxton when he first heard of the Waimarino case. He gave Ngati Pare as his hapu.486 He said that Tutawha had asked that part of the Poutahi block be removed from the Waimarino case.487 Wi Keriwehi said that he and Wi Pauro and Taurerewa had gone to “Well[ington]” to try to put the boundary right, however they had failed in this bid. Wi Keriwehi said that he had put in an application for the hearing of the block but had arrived 3 or 4 weeks after the

482 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 161. Wanganui 5 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29a 483 Ibid. fol. 162. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29b 484 Ibid. fol. 163. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29c 485 Ibid. fol. 164. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29d 486 Ibid. fol. 165 Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29e

126 case for the Poutahi block had been opened at Pipiriki. He said that he had found that the boundaries and lists had already been decided. He stated that he had then lodged a petition but had been told that the surveyor had already surveyed the block. Wi Keriwehi said that he supported Potatau in his claim for occupation and that he supported Potatau’s objection on the grounds of lack of occupation to some of the lists, which had been presented. However he maintained that Tunuitaika had been “admitted by a sentimental arrangement.”488 He believed that the rights to the land were derived from Puku.489

The hearing resumed on 6 August.490 Eruera Sutherland summarised his case. He said that Potatau had not established chieftainship over the land, that there were no kainga on the land and that it was a hunting ground. He said that the talk of the appeal was due to the larger proportion of the shares being allocated to Puku despite the fact that Hekeawai was a full brother.

Wi Kiriwehi in summary stated that Hekeawai had not been considered until the case was heard at Pipiriki and that the descendants of Hekeawai had no take to the land but had been included out of aroha. Hekeawai had not lived on Poutahi whereas Puku “went to Paekaka & Poutahi.”491 He said that Potatau did have kainga on the land. He rejected the idea that those of rangatira descent could make a claim without proof of occupation:

The rangatira’s powers were limited by the consent of the people, therefore of little effect over land. Potatau alone of Hekeawai is entitled to say who should come in or be left out as he alone has occupation. His father is Hekeawai & mother, Marupoho I ask that Tukaiora’s list be struck out as he has spoken against us.

487 Ibid. fol. 166. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29f 488 Ibid. 489 Ibid. fol. 167. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29g 490 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 171. Wanganui 6 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 29h 491 Ibid.fol. 172. Poutahi Supporting Documents page:29i

127 The lists were then discussed and a number of issues and objections were raised, and a conference was held outside.

Mariana said she admitted that according to the whakapapa she had been fairly treated taking 50 shares under Matou, but she objected to Aropeta Tamumu [?] receiving 100 shares: he is a stranger.

The Court then stated that the lists and shares had been passed and that if Mariana objected she must lodge an appeal. The case was then closed and the Court reserved its decision.492

The Court’s decision was announced on 29 August 1912.493

By agreement of the interested parties an ancestor was set up for this land and noted by the Court at Pipirki on ___MB

Nothing further was done to complete the title till last year when the shares were allotted to the hapu branches as follows:

Under Parekitai:

Puku’s descendants 1122 shares Hekeawai “ 400 “

Under Tunui a Taika: [since? –illegible] allotted

Marupoho 400 “ Hinetui 200 “ Total shares 2122

The Court is now moved to complete an order on investigation by settling the individual ownership & the respective interests.

The case has proved an unsatisfactory one on which to adjudicate.

The ancestor was fixed by agreement many years ago; and it does not now appear if ever it was explained how Tunuiataika comes under or with Parikitai. It is now stated he was not even a relative. This Court however is bound by what was arranged and confirmed by the former Court.494

492 Ibid. fol. 173. Poutahi Supporting Documents page:29j 493 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 235. Wanganui 29 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 31 494 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 236. Wanganui 29 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 32

128 The Court stated that it had become obvious that an appeal would be lodged and that the case had proceeded with a “bitterness that has increased the difficulty of the Court in arriving at a satisfactory solution.”495

The Court related that the meeting held prior to the hearing had shown a general agreement that many of the names had been agreed to although they could not be supported by occupation. This had been because this was one of the last areas of land to be investigated for title;

and a wish was expressed to include all the hapus whether supported by occupation or not. But because some of these threatened to join in an intended appeal against the allocation of hapu shares, they are now objected to as having no occupation in support of their claim.

The Court went on to state:

The evidence adduced as to occupation shows that the strongest occupation right of any claimant is very slender indeed, although Potatau has a stronger claim thro[ugh] his parents occupation. The land is clad in Bush and has only occasionally been visited on expeditions for gathering such foods as berries, birds & rats. In recent years visits to the land have practically ceased.496

The Court went on to largely uphold the objections put by Potatau disallowing lists, 10- 13, 15, 17, 19, 21 and 22. List number 14, although considered doubtful by the Court “but in view of the general weakness of occupation it is admitted for 10 shares.” For list number 16 the Court concluded:

Claimant alleges he was on land with Potatau his 2nd cousin shooting. Potatau says he took Hamarama to Taku & Tuterimu, not to Poutahi, & that his family left Manganui o tea at time of Hamarama’s grand parent Ropia. The latter no doubt had some occupation claim; and even assuming Potatau’s statement to be [credit? –illegible], in view of the general slender occupation we think these names should be admitted for 24 shares.497

495 Ibid 496 Ibid 497 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 63, fol. 238. Wanganui 29 August 1912. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 34

129 The Court determined that the evidence for occupation given by Tuatini te Waiho was conflicting, however as they had been “instrumental in having a part of Poutahi excepted from Morikau No. 2” the list was admitted for 72 shares. The Court then confirmed the awarding of the shares as follows:498

Puku: 1122 Marupoho: 400 Hinetui: 200 Hekeawai: 400

A Freehold Order was issued for the block on 29 August 1912.499 The title was awarded to the 543 listed owners in unequal shares. £16 10s was paid for the hearing, 16s for the witnesses. A £7 10s 6d survey charge was noted on the Freehold Order.

The case was subject to an appeal under Subsection 1 of Section 50 of the Native Land Act 1909 lodged by Tangiwai and others. The appeal was scheduled to be heard on 2 October 1912.500 The decisions of 29 January and 29 August were the subject of the appeal.

The Poutahi block was issued a Certificate of Title under the Land Transfer Act in July 1917. The Certificate of Title was issued to 543 owners in unequal shares.501

Refer to Paula Berghan Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000 for the subsequent history of this block.

498 Ibid. fols. 239-240. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 35-36 499 Berghan, p.621. WNPR 6/335 Te Poutahi, (Freehold Order 29 August 1912). Unclear on image as to when the block was entered onto the Provisional Register, the dates on the stamps suggest 1917. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 38-53 500 New Zealand Gazette 19 September 1912. No. 7 p.2766. Poutahi Supporting Documents page: 61 501 CT WN 247/136 Poutahi. 4 July 1917. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Poutahi Supporting Documents pages: 54-60

130 Taku

The 2040-acre Taku block adjoined the Huikumu Block (which lay to the east) and the Waimarino No.3 Block (to the north).

The title investigation for the Taku block was heard in the Whanganui Native Land Court sitting at Taihape on 8 March 1912. Taurerewa Tuwharetoa was the applicant. The application was queried by the Court. Information had been received by the Court implying that the block was already part of a title. Taurerewa Tuwharetoa argued that the block was quite separate from the Waharangi block, which he said bounded the Taku block on one side, on the other side by Waimarino No.3 (Survey plans, ML 3301, and ML 1981 indicate that the Taku Block adjoined the Waimarino, Ngaporo, Huikumu, Tauwhare and Paekaka blocks, however one of the Waharangi partitions was named Paekaka see Berghan Narratives p. 1026). The Court stated that it did not have an approved plan, and the registrar had been communicated with, but that no reply had been received as yet. The case was therefore adjourned to 21 March.502

The case resumed on 21 March at Taihape. Taurerewa Tuwharetoa appeared as the applicant, Tuatini te Waiho merged their claim with Taurerewa Tuwharetoa, Kanapu was to conduct their case. Wiremu Kiriwehi appeared on behalf of himself and others of Ngati Pari as counter claimant.503

Kanapu claimed the land on the grounds of ancestry and occupation. The claim was made through two ancesters; Tupui who had the greater right, and his brother Tumahuki. Kanapu argued that some of the descendants of Tumahuki, those of which who had returned to the land had certain rights.

502 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 62 fol. 32. Taihape 8 March 1912. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents page: 1 503 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 62 fol. 111, Taihape 21 March 1912. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents page: 2

131 Wiremu Kiriwehi objected to the claim on the grounds that the named ancestors only had a claim over a portion of the block, and that he had a valid claim under his ancestor Puku. Wiremu Kiriwehi argued that the descendants of Puku had occupied a portion of the Taku block. Kanapu objected to this claim, so Wiremu Kiriwehi stated that he would set up his case. He then provided a whakapapa showing two lines from Puku.504 He also provided another line from Hinewai who was a descendant of Puku.

Wiremu Kiriwehi stated that there had been cultivations just outside of the Taku block on the Ngaporo and Paekaka blocks. He also stated that there had been rat catching places and Weka snaring places in the portion that he claimed. A totara had also been felled at Mataiopuanga and a canoe made which was taken down the Whanganui River. The canoe was also called Mataiopuanga.505

Wiremu Kiriwehi said that the area had been used to snare birds and rats. He said that there were no kainga on the area he claimed. Rat catching had ended when the rats (presumably the Polynesian rats) had become extinct.506 Wiremu Kiriwehi argued that the portion he claimed was properly part of Paekaka (or Waharangi No. 7). He then went on to describe the area he claimed in detail.507

The hearing resumed on 22 March.508 Wiremu Kiriwehi continued his description of the area he claimed. The case for the claim of Kanapu then began. Tuatini te Waiho was then sworn and he provided a whakapapa showing the connection to Tumahuki and Tupui.509 He claimed the whole of the block on the plan. He named many different areas of the block, which had been used for cultivations as well as hunting.510 Tuatini te Waiho

504 Ibid. fol. 112. Taku Supporting Documents page: 3 505 Ibid. fol. 113. Taku Supporting Documents page: 4 506 Ibid. fol. 114. Taku Supporting Documents page: 5 507 Ibid. fol. 116. Taku Supporting Documents page: 7 508 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book 62 fol. 117, Taihape 22 March 1912. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents page: 8 509 Ibid. fol. 118. Taku Supporting Documents page: 9 510 Ibid. fols. 119-125. Taku Supporting Documents pages: 10-16

132 stated that there was a canoe from Mataiopuanga, but that was given by Harawiru to Te Peehi. He had not heard of the canoe mentioned by Wiremu Kiriwehi.511 He believed that Wiremu Kiriwehi and his people had no rights on the block.512 He said that when Wiremu Kiriwehi and Kanuta(?) had brought pakeha to Tawa o Parekitai (which he believed was outside of the Taku block) at the time of a proposed sale in 1880 that his father and his people had taken firearms and stopped them.513 Under cross examination Tuatini te Waiho argued that the Paekaka boundary was correct and that he had been present at the survey.514

Potatau Rangiwaiata was then sworn. Potatau Rangiwaiata provided a whakapapa for Tupui.515 He largely corroborated the evidence provided by Tuatini te Waiho, and disputed the evidence provided by Wiremu Kiriwehi. He said that they had run cattle on the block and that this had not been disturbed.516 Potatau Rangiwaiata argued that Wiremu Kiriwehi had no rights to this land, that his land was on Paekaka and that this block did not encrouch upon Paekaka. He also said that his people had shot birds on the southern part of the block claimed by Wiremu Kiriwehi.517

Taurerewa Tuwharetoa was sworn. He stated that the canoes gifted to Harawira were answered with return gifts of a cask of gunpowder for the Mataiopuanga canoe and tobacco for the other canoe.518 A flour mill was also given in payment for another canoe. Taurerewa Tuwharetoa denied that the elders of Wiremu Kiriwehi ever made a canoe at Mataiopuanga. He also denied that the Paekaka block boundary extended into the Taku block boundary. Under cross-examination by Wiremu Keriwehi, Taurerewa Tuwharetoa

511 Ibid. fol. 121. Taku Supporting Documents page: 12 512 Ibid. fol. 122. Taku Supporting Documents page: 13 513 Ibid. fol. 123. Taku Supporting Documents page: 14 514 Ibid. fol. 125. Taku Supporting Documents page: 17 515 Ibid. fol. 127. Taku Supporting Documents page: 18 516 Ibid. fol. 128. Taku Supporting Documents page: 19 517 Ibid. fol. 129. Taku Supporting Documents page: 20 518 Ibid. fol. 130. Taku Supporting Documents page: 22

133 said that he could not explain why his father Uenuku had not objected to the evidence given at Pipiriki that Ngati Pari had made the Mataipuanga canoe. Taurerewa Tuwharetoa denied that it was his own ancestors on his Ngati Pari side who had made the Mataipuanga canoe.519 Wiremu Keriwehi asked Taurerewa Tuwharetoa directly about the boundary:

Q As we are both under Puku I ask you as man to man where is the correct boundary of Puku

Ans I will say that the boundary has already been fixed by the Court. (Witness after warning from Judge persisted in fencing question)520

After Taurerewa Tuwharetoa was cross examined the Court was adjourned to the following day.521 The case resumed on Saturday 23 March. Wiremu Kiriwehi stated that as his witness had not appeared, that he would close his case. The Court then reserved its decision.522

The decision was given on 29 March.523 The Court summarised the claim put by Wiremu Kiriwehi as a claim to a small part of the block being part of Paekaka. The Court stated that Wiremu Kiriwehi had reduced the area of his claim by around a third under cross examination, and that he had further reduced the area he claimed by smaller amounts. The Court admitted that Wiremu Keriwehi may have been disadvantaged by the absence of his witness, although it was pointed out that the witness had been notified. The Court also stated that there was “considerable doubt as to whether the Southern boundary of this block does not cover some very small portion of Paekaka,…” and therefore the claim put

519 Ibid. fol. 131. Taku Supporting Documents page: 23 520 Ibid. fol. 132. Taku Supporting Documents page: 24 521 Ibid. 522 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book. 62 fol. 132. Taihape, 23 March 1912. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents page: 24 523 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book. 62 fol. 147. Taihape, 29 March 1912. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents page: 25

134 by Wiremu Kiriwehi that the Paekaka block north-eastern boundary properly extended into Taku. The Court concluded however that as the

weight of evidence is very much against Kiriwehi the Court feels bound to dismiss his claim though it admits that the manner in which Taurerewa Tuwharetoa answered the last question asked in cross-examination was not calculated to inspire confidence.524

Wi Kiriwehi claimed that the line to the West of Horokowhai dividing Paekaka and Ngaporo was wrongly placed and the Court desires to make it clear that the present decision is not intended to prejudice that contention in any way.

The successful party was then invited to submit a list of names. Kanapu announced that they wished to give Wiremu Kiriwehi 20 acres for aroha. This was accepted by Wiremu Kiriwehi who submitted two names, himself and Te Rui Hohepa. The list of names for the bulk of the block was presented by Kanapu and the list was read without objection. The list was then passed with the addition of Wiki te Hukinga and Pano te Hukinga.525

However problems arose with the allocation of shares. Kanapu said that this was because some of the people were absent.526 The lists were not submitted until the following year.527 Potatau asked that the block be partitioned. The Court advised that an application for the partition should be made.528

The Taku block was issued with a Freehold Order on 23 January 1913.529 Title was awarded to 177 owners in unequal shares. A fee of 10s for the hearing and 20s for the order was charged and paid. The block was entered onto the Provisional Register 13 June 1922. The block was entered onto a Certificate of Title under the Land Transfer Act on

524 Ibid. fol. 149. Taku Supporting Documents page: 27 525Ibid. fol. 150. Taku Supporting Documents page: 28 526 Ibid. fol. 152. Taku Supporting Documents page: 30 527 Whanganui Native Land Court, Minute Book. 64 fols. 46, 56, 62-64. 22-23 January 1913. Microfilm, National Archives Wellington. Taku Supporting Documents pages: 31-35 528 Ibid. fol. 63. Taku Supporting Documents page: 34 529 Berghan, p.856. WN PR 7/21 Taku (Freehold Order 23 January 1913). Entered onto Provisional Register 13 June 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Taku Supporting Documents pages: 39-50

135 the same day.530 As with the Freehold Order issued nearly ten years previously, the certificate issued under the Land Transfer Act was issued to 177 owners in unequal shares.

Refer to Paula Berghan Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000 for the subsequent history of this block.

530 WN 291/3 Taku, 13 June 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Taku Supporting Documents pages: 51-54

136 SECTION THREE: RAETIHI SUMMARY & RAETIHI 3 NARRATIVE.

Section three presents a brief tabular summary of the alienations of the Raetihi block and a brief narrative of the 20th century history of the Raetihi 3 blocks. For the history of the Raetihi blocks prior to 1900 refer to Berghan’s narratives.

The 17,200-acre Raetihi block lay between the Makotuku Stream and the Mangawhero River between the Waimarino block (which lay to the north-west) and the Otiranui, Tawhito Ariki, Umumore and Rangataua blocks (which lay to the south-east). The Ngapakihi block, which had originally been named Raetihi No. 1 lay to the south-west. The Urewera block (labelled ‘Huriwera Block’ on ML 769) adjoined the north eastern side of the Raetihi block. The present township of Ohakune is located to the south-east, across the Mangawhero River within the area of the original Rangataua block. The 1886 survey of the Raetihi block describes the area as: “Flat and gently undulating ground heavily timbered, Rimu, Totara, Matai, Kaikai, Tawhera, Rata Etc”.531

Between 1899 and 1959 the Raetihi block was subject to a number of Crown purchases which together accounted for over 9000 acres of the block. There were also a number of significant public works takings, both by the central and local Governments. Significant public works takings included a scenic reserve, railway, a metal pit, roads, a sewage scheme and refuse tip. The 1250 acres of the 4B block which was removed for scenic purposes was taken under the Public Works Act 1908. A proportion of the original area of the block is now managed by the Department of Conservation as part of the Tongariro National Park. The location of the proposed main trunk railway through the northern part of the block was indicated on the 1886 survey.532 The proposed main trunk railway and

531 ML 769 Raetihi. John Annabell Surveyor 1886. Wellington Land District. Landonline image.IMAGE Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 1 532 Ibid

137 the “Wamarino Road”, as well as the proposed road to Pipiriki were shown on the first Certificate of Title issued for the land in 1891.533

The land was also subject to a large number of private purchases. Private purchasing was a significant factor in the alienations of the Raetihi No. 2 partition. The Raetihi Small Farm Settlement was located largely within the area of the Raetihi No. 2 partition (it also included sections derived from Raetihi 3B1 and a small part of the Umumore block and old Mangawhero riverbed).534 Raetihi X and Y were located within the area of the original Raetihi 2 block.

A large proportion of the current Maori land within the Raetihi area is vested with the Proprietors of Atihau Whanganui. The Atihau Whanganui Incorporation owns 71 parcels of land within the Raetihi area, all of which lay within the area of the Raetihi No. 3 and Raetihi No. 4 partitions. The lands vested in the Atihau Whanganui Incorporation are around 85% of the total current Maori land within the area of the original Raetihi block. All of the current Maori freehold lands within the area of the original Raetihi block are now located within the area of the Raetihi No. 2 and Raetihi No. 3 partitions.

A large number of supporting documents have been gathered for the brief narrative and the tables presented below. Only the pages relating to the narrative have been numbered. All of the rest of the documents have been sorted into broad categories and are included in the PDF copy of the supporting documents.

533 CT WN 57/293 Raetihi. 4 February 1891. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 39-43 534 K34233 and K27813, Land Information New Zealand, Wellington Regional Office. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 189-195

138 Table 24: Raetihi Summary, Partitions and Alienations (From Record Sheet) Parcel TO Date Area (ARP) Note 1 27/2/1889 3400:0:00 Crown 2A 23/6/1896 202:0:00 Crown 2B1A 31/8/1905 80:0:00 European 2B1B 31/8/1905 242:2:08 European 2B1C 31/8/1905 80:0:00 European 2B1D1A 17/8/48 Cancelled See X and Y 2B1D1B1 10/7/50 5:0:00 Europeanised 2B1D1B2 10/7/50 Cancelled See X and Y 2B1D1C1 6/12/49 Cancelled See X and Y 2B1D1C2A 3/5/60 0:1:00 Maori Freehold 2B1D1C2B 3/5/60 Cancelled See X and Y 2B1D2 18/5/11 93:1:04 European 2B1D3A Pt. 19/1/22 12:3:05 European 2B1D3A Pt. 19/1/22 2:0:00 European 2B1D3A1 17/4/30 18:1:33 2B1D3A2A 1/2/63 1:0:30 2x on RS Europeanised- Since reverted to ML (C.I.) 2B1D3A2B 1/2/63 35:3:27 2x on RS 2B1D3B 19/1/22 70:0:00 European 2B1D3C 19/1/22 70:0:00 European 2B1D3D 19/1/22 70:0:00 European 2E1D4 18/5/11 6:2:00 2B2A 4/7/07 160:3:00 European 2B2B1 18/5/11 161:1:01 European 2B2B2 18/5/11 80:2:20 European 2B2B3A 8/12/14 119:1:24 European 2B2B3B1A 13/5/37 5:0:00 2B2B3B1B 13/5/37 74:3:24

139 Parcel TO Date Area (ARP) Note 2B2B3B2 29/7/20 119:3:32 European 2B2C1A 23/1/13 17:1:05 2B2C1B1 12/4/60 17:1:07 Europeanised 2B2C1B2 12/4/60 17:1:01 2B2C2A1 22/1/13 107:1:08 European 2B2C2A2A 24/8/38 26:3:11 Crown 2B2C2A2B 24/8/38 26:3:13 European 2B2C2B1 24/8/38 19:0:03.7 European 2B2C2B2 24/8/38 171:0:33.3 Crown 2B2C3A 20/5/11 96:2:36 European 2B2C3B 20/5/11 193:1:39 European 2B2C3C1 21/9/15 16:0:16 European 2B2C3C2A1 28/8/40 20:1:33.4 2B2C3C2A2 28/8/40 8:3:25 Europeanised 2B2C3C2B1 29/9/65 1:0:00 Europeanised 2B2C3C2B2 29/9/65 19:2:12 282C3C2C1 15/8/49 0:1:00 Europeanised 2B2C3C2C2 15/8/49 16:2:20 2B2C3C2C Pt. 14/5/37 271:2:08 Crown 2B3A 22/9/10 195:3:06 European 2B3B 22/9/10 117:2:19 European 2B3C1 9/6/13 78:3:00 European 2B3C2 9/6/13 236:0:07 European 2B3D1 30/10/19 39:3:00 European 2B3D2 30/10/19 39:0:34 2B4 14/7/00 3:0:00 3A 23/6/96 1294:0:00 Combined with 4B. now part Te Atihau Whanganui

140 Parcel TO Date Area (ARP) Note 3B1 2/8/10 322:3:12 Crown 3B2A1 29/5/26 75:1:14 3B2A2A 13/6/28 5:2:30 Parcel TO Date Area (ARP) 3B2A2B1 27/4/54 0:2:00 PO cancelled 3B2A2B2 27/4/54 136:2:29 PO cancelled 3B2B 7/9/17 1404:3:12 Now part Te Atihau Whanganui 4A 23/6/96 526:0:00 Crown 4B & 3A 23/6/96 3000:1:24.3 Combined with 3A now part Te Atihau Whanganui 5A 23/6/96 2063:0:00 Crown 5B1A 24/7/58 105:1:17 Crown 5B1B 24/7/58 461:1:35 Crown 5B2 31/5/07 80:3:30 European 5B3 31/5/07 403:3:12 Crown 5B4 31/5/07 121:1:32 Crown X 14/7/61 113:3:05 European, (part former Raetihi 2) Y 14/7/61 140:3:08 Part former Raetihi 2

Raetihi 3 The whole Raetihi block was entered onto Certificate of Title 57/293 on 4 February 1891.535 The Raetihi No. 3 partition of 3237 acres was entered onto Certificate of Title

535 CT WN 57/293 Raetihi. 4 February 1891. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 39-43

141 101/99 under the Land Transfer Act on 13 March 1899.536 Forty owners were listed on the title.

536 CT WN 101/99 Raetihi 3. 13 March 1899. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 44-45

142 Table 25: Raetihi 3 Summary Block Date TO Acres Hectares Notes 3A 23/6/1896 1294 523.6818 Sold to Crown (later vested in Aotea Maori Land Board and later subdivided) 3B 23/6/1896 1943 786.3321 Repartitioned 3B1 2/8/1910 322.83 130.6473 Sold to Crown 1938 3B2 2/8/1910 1637.18 662.5647 Repartitioned 3B2A 7/9/1917 232.35 94.032 Repartitioned 3B2A1 29/5/1926 75.34 30.4891 3B2A2 29/5/1926 150.66 60.9731 Repartitioned 3B2A2A 13/6/1928 5.69 2.3017 3B2A2B 13/6/1928 144.98 58.6714 Repartitioned (later cancelled) subject to right of way. 3B2A2B1 27/4/1954 PO cancelled 3B2A2B2 27/4/1954 PO cancelled 3B2B 7/9/1917 1404.83 568.5327

Raetihi 3A (Now Part Te Atihau Whanganui Block) The Raetihi 3A partition of 1294 acres was entered onto Certificate of Title 101/100 on 13 March 1899. Certificate of Title 101/99 had been issued for the Raetihi 3 partition on the same day. The title to the Raetihi 3A partition, which was the northern part of the Raetihi 3 block was issued to Her Majesty the Queen. The removal of 9a 3r 22.6p of the block for the purpose of a road was recorded on 15 January 1919.537

The land eventually returned to Maori ownership. Apparently in exchange for lands taken for scenic purposes, the title for the Raetihi 3A block was issued to the Aotea

537 CT WN 101/100 Raetihi 3A. 13 March 1899. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 46

143 District Maori Land Board on 9 September 1911. The 1294a 1r 28p partition was entered on to Certificate of Title 192/246. A search of the title history of the block in 1962 concluded that the 3A block was vested in the Aotea District Maori Land Board “presumably” in exchange for the part of 4B which was removed for the scenic reserve.538 A 15-year timber lease from 1 July 1909 was recorded on the title on 16 December 1911. Part of this timber lease was surrendered on 8 May 1922. Lot 3 of DP 4518 was subject to a 21-year lease to Alexander Oliver from 1 July 1918. Lot 2 DP 4518 was also subject to a 21-year lease from 1 July 1918 to William Tucker. Both leases were entered onto the title on 5 November 1922. In November 1922 the Certificate of Title 192/246 was cancelled and two new certificates issued, 299/194 and 299/239.539

The 1917 Survey, DP 4518 indicated that the sections derived from part of 3A, 3B2 and 4B blocks was partly standing bush, partly milled bush and partly milled, burnt and grassed land.540 The original cadastral lines for 3A, 3B2 and 4B are indicated on this survey.

Certificate of Title 299/194 was issued on 3 November 1922 for a 878a 1r 29p portion of the Raetihi 3A block which lay to the west of Tohunga Road. A 15 ½ year lease of the timber cutting rights from 1 July 1909 was recorded on the title in December 1911. However this lease was later surrendered. A series of leases were recorded on the title from 1925. On 23 March 1954 the land was vested in the Maori Trustee. The Certificate of Title was cancelled in January 1970 and CT 7D/391 issued in its place (see Part Te

538 Berghan Supporting Papers page. 10526. See also Page 10527. Block Order File, Raetihi 3. Aotea Maori Land Court, Wanganui. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 187-188 539 CT WN 192/246 Raetihi 3A. 9 September 1911. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 47-48 540 DP 4518 Subdivision of Part Raetihi 3A, 3B No. 2 & 4B Blocks. Dix and Wall surveyors. December 1917. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 12

144 Atihau Whanganui block below).541 The western part of Raetihi 3A is now Lot 75 DP 29360 which is owned by the proprietors of Te Atihau Whanganui Incorporation.

The area to the East of Tohunga Road was amalgamated with parts of the Raetihi 3B and Raetihi 4B blocks and entered onto Certificate of Title 299/239 on 3 November 1922. The title was issued to the Aotea District Maori Land Board. The total area of the new title covered 915 acres and included Lots 1-4, 13 and 14 of Deposited Plan 4518. Lots 1, 13 and 14 were subject to a lease of timber cutting rights for 15 ½ years from 1 July 1909. However this lease was later cancelled. The land was subject to a series of leases from 1918. 4.2 perches was removed for a road in 1928. The land was vested in the Maori Trustee on 23 March 1954.542

Lot 3 DP 4518 of 153a 13p was removed from the title in January 1960 and Certificate of Title 879/14 was issued in its place (Lot 3 would later be entered on CT 7D/391 along with the other Raetihi lands vested in the Maori Trustee).543 The title for the rest of the block was cancelled in June 1964 and Certificate of Title C2/681 was then issued. Certificate of Title C2/681 was for an area of 756a 3r 21.8p and was subject to three 21- year leases, each from 1 July 1957.544 The certificate of title was cancelled on 26 January 1970 and, along with the other Raetihi vested lands (and many other vested lands outside of the Raetihi area) entered onto Certificate of Title 7D/391. These lands are now vested with the proprietors of Te Atihau Whanganui.

The land previously known as Raetihi 3A which lays to the east of Tohunga road has been divided into a number of separate parcels and is also now owned by the proprietors of Te Atihau Whanganui Incorporation.

541 CT WN 299/194 Part Raetihi 3A. 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 49-50 542 CT WN 299/239 Parts Raetihi 3A, 3B and 4B. 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 51-54 543 CT WN 879/14 Lot 3 DP 4518. 27 January 1960. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image.Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 55

145 Raetihi 3B The Raetihi 3B block of 1943 acres was entered onto Certificate of Title 101/101 on the same day as 3A. Certificate of Title 101/99 for Raetihi 3, the block from which both blocks were derived was cancelled on the day it was issued. For the parts of 3B which were amalgamated with 3A see the Raetihi 3A section above.

10a 24p of the Raetihi 3B block was removed for a public road in 1903 and another parcel of 2r 29.5p was removed for a road in 1909.545 The Raetihi 3B block was transferred to the Aotea District Maori Land Board in November 1910.546 Certificate of Title 101/101 was cancelled and the Certificate of Title 203/183 was issued in its place.547

The Raetihi 3B block was partitioned in August 1910.548

Table 26: Raetihi 3B Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Raetihi 3B1 322 3 12 322.83 4 Raetihi 3B2 1637 0 28 1637.18 27

Despite the partition, the whole of the block was entered onto Certificate of Title 203/183 on 21 November 1910. The title was issued to the Aotea District Maori Land Board. The land was subject to a series of leases. An area of 3a 3r 38.5p was taken for the purpose of a road in 1912. A further 8a 1 r 32p was removed for a road in 1915. Another

544 CT WN C2/681 Parts Raetihi 3A, 3B and 4B. 2 June 1964. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image.Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 56-57 545 CT WN 101/101, Raetihi 3B. 13 March 1899. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 58-59 546 Ibid. 547 CT WN 203/183. Raetihi 3B. 21 November 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 60-62 548 Partition Order Raetihi 3B1. 2 August 1910. MLIS image. Partition Order Raetihi 3B2. 2 August 1910. MLIS image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 157-161

146 parcel of 2a 3r 9p was removed for the purpose of a road in 1919. Certificate of Title 283/183 was cancelled “except as to Pohue Street and Lundius Street”, and the new titles 299/195 299/196 299/197 299/232 299/238 and 299/239 were issued in November 1920.549

3B1 and Part 3B2 CT WN 299/195 The Raetihi 3B1 and part of Raetihi 3B2 blocks were entered onto Certificate of Title 299/195 on 3 November 1922. The parcel covered an area of 638a 2r 12p, being the 3B1 partition and lots 1 and 2 of DP 3713 which were part of the Raetihi 3B2 partition. The title was vested in the Aotea District Maori Land Board. The 3B1 subdivision was subject to a 21-year lease from 1 July 1908. Lot 2 DP 3713 was leased for a period of 20 years from 1 January 1917. Lot 1 DP 3713 was subject to a grant over timber cutting rights for 10 years from May 1917. However the timber cutting rights were later surrendered. The Lot 1 DP 3713 block was leased for a period of 15 years from January 1926. The block was thereafter subject to a series of leases. The Raetihi 3B1 block was apportioned to Mata Ihaka, Heeni Scott, Tame Karipa (Houra Karepa) and Tiemi Morehu by an order of the Court which was produced 29 November 1938. The Raetihi 3B1 parcel was then entered onto Certificate of Title 467/24 (see 3B1 entry below). Lots 1 and 2 DP 3713 were transferred to Anastasia Veronica Allen on 14 July 1958 under Part XXIII of the Maori Affairs Act 1953. 550 The two lots covered an area of 299a 3r.551

Raetihi 3B1 CT 467/24 The Raetihi 3B1 block was entered onto Certificate of Title 467/24 and sold to the Crown in 1938. The transmission of the interest of Tame Karipa to Alice Hodson and Gertrude Mabel Hodson was recorded on the title on the same day as the transfer of the interests of Alice Hodson, Gertrude Mabel Hodson and Tiemi Morehu to the Crown on 29 November

549 CT WN 203/183. Raetihi 3B. 21 November 1910. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 60-62 550 CT WN 299/195 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 63-64 551 CT WN 795/46 Lots 1 & 2 DP 3713. 14 July 1958. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 65

147 1938. The transmission of the interests of Mata Ihaka deceased to Heeni Scott was also recorded on that day. Heeni Scott transferred her interest to the Crown on 19 December 1938. The land had been leased to Bank of New Zealand for 10 years from 1 July 1921, though this lease was transferred to the Crown in December 1938.552

Raetihi 3B1 became part of the Raetihi Farm Settlement, under Section 4 (1) Small Farms (Relief of Unemployment) Unemployment Act 1935. Part of the 3B1 became part of Section 24 Raetihi Farm Settlement shown on SO 22551.553

Part 3B2 CT 299/196 Certificate of Title 299/196 was issued to the Aotea District Maori Land Board on 3 November 1922. The land included Lots 5,6 and 7 of DP 3802, together covering an area of 525a 1r 19p. The land was subject to Part XV of the Native Land Act 1909 and was subject to a series of leases.554 Together with other Raetihi vested lands, this land was entered onto Certificate of Title 7D/391. The land is now vested with the proprietors of Atihau Whanganui Incorporation.

Part 3B2 and Part 4B CT 299/238 Certificate of Title 299/238 was awarded to the Aotea District Maori Land Board on 3 November 1922. A relatively small proportion of the 688a 2r 4p under the Certificate of Title 299/238 was derived from the Raetihi 3B2 block. This land was subject to a series of leases. The land under Certificate of Title 299/238 was later entered onto Certificate of Title 448/230.555 Part of this certificate of title was cancelled and Certificates of Title

552 CT WN 467/24 Raetihi 3B1 29 November 1938. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 70-71 553 K 34233, Land Information New Zealand, Wellington Regional Office. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 192-195. See also K27813, Land Information New Zealand, Wellington Regional Office. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 189-191 554 CT WN 299/196 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 72-73 555 CT WN 299/238 Part Raetihi 3B and Part Raetihi 4, Lots 5-12 DP 3230. 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 66-67

148 897/36 and 897/34 were issued in its place.556 The remainder of the land was, along with the land under 897/36, 897/34 and many other vested lands in the Whanganui area entered onto Certificate of Title 7D/391.557 The land is now vested with the proprietors of Atihau Whanganui Incorporation.

Parts Raetihi 3B2 Lots 8,9,10 Block 1 DP 3230 and Lot 11 DP 3802. CT WN 299/197 The parts of Raetihi 3B2 being Lots 8,9,10 Block 1 DP 3230 and Lot 11 DP 3802 were entered onto Certificate of Title 299/197 on 3 November 1922. Together the title covered an area of 422a 3r 23p more or less. Parts of Lots 8, 9 and 10 of DP 3230 were subject to a grant of timber cutting rights from 1 July 1909, though these rights were later surrendered.

The land was subject to a series of leases. One rood was removed from Lot 11 DP 3802 for the purpose of public Road on 26 February 1945. In October 1958, the remainder of Lot 11 DP 3802 was transferred to Norman Frank Fredrickson and entered onto Certificate of Title 810/24.558 The transfer of Part Lot 11 DP 3802 block involved an area of 176a 0r 30p.559

The remainder of the title was cancelled and the new Certificate of Title 897/35 issued in its place. Certificate of Title 897/35 was later cancelled, becoming part of Certificate of Title 7D/391.560 This land is now vested with the proprietors of Te Atihau Whanganui.

556 CT WN 448/230 4 February 1936. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 68-69 557 CT WN 7D/391 26 January 1970. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 96-103 558 CT WN 299/197 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 74-77 559 CT WN 810/24 Lot 11 DP 3802. 15 October 1958. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 78-80 560 CT WN 7D/391 26 January 1970. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 96-103

149 Raetihi 3B2A The Raetihi 3B2 block was partitioned in September 1917.

Table 27: Raetihi 3B2 Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Raetihi 3B2A 232 1 16 232.35 6 Raetihi 3B2B 1404 3 12 1404.83 27

A block of land, largely corresponding to the Raetihi 3B2A partition, being the sections shown on ML 2187 was entered onto Certificate of Title 299/232 on 3 November 1922.561 The title was awarded to the Aotea District Maori Land Board. The block was divided into 30 sections, bisected by three access ways.562 The smaller sections may have been intended as house sections.

The title history of land which was entered onto Certificate of Title 299/232 was complicated by the fact that the titles held under the Maori Land Court diverged from the Land Transfer title. Some of the public works takings listed in the next paragraph were also associated with the Maori Land Court partitions listed below under separate entries.

Part of the land (19.16 perches) of Certificate of Title 299/232 was removed for the purpose of a public road on 1 September 1937. A further 1r 31.5p was removed from the 3B2A1 partition for a road prior to 1967.563 The Raetihi 3A2A2A partition was set apart as a Maori Reservation on 7 March 1939.

561 CT WN 299/232 Raetihi 3B2A 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 81-83 562 ML 2187 Part Raetihi 4B Part Raetihi 3B. Dix and Merchant Surveyors May 1910. Landonline image. Supporting Documents page: 7 563 Date illegible, between 24 January 1961 and 28 February 1967. CT WN 299/232 Raetihi 3B2A 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 81- 83

150 Raetihi 3B2A was partitioned in May 1926.564 The 3B2A1 partition was not recorded on Certificate of Title 299/232 until 20 January 1999.

Table 28: Raetihi 3B2A Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Raetihi 3B2A1 75 1 14 75.34 6 Raetihi 3B2A2 150 2 26 150.66 4

Raetihi 3B2A1 (Current Maori Land Block) The Raetihi 3B2A1 block was two separate areas of 50a 3r 4p and 24a 0r 30p. The land was entered onto Certificate of Title 52D/862 on 20 January 1999. The land was subject to a compensation certificate under Section 19 of the Public Works Act 1981 on 20 March 1997. The land is subject to a 50 link wide access way to and from the Ohakune- Horopito Road.565

Raetihi 3B2A2 The Raetihi 3B2A2 block was partitioned in June 1928.

Table 29: Raetihi 3B2A2 Partition Block Acres Roods Perches Decimal Owners Raetihi 3B2A2A 5 2 30 5.69 1 Raetihi 3B2A2B 144 3 36 144.98 4

Part Raetihi 3B2A2A (Current Maori Land Block) The area on which Raetihi 3B2A2A now lays was the site of a small clearing in 1910.566 ML 4328 shows a number of structures were located on the block in 1933, including

564 Partition Order Raetihi 3B2A1. 29 May 1926. MLIS image. Partition Order Raetihi 3B2A2. 29 May 1926. MLIS image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 162-164 565 CT WN 52D/682 Raetihi 3B2A1. 20 January 1999. Wellington Land District. MLIS image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 84-86 566 ML 2187 Part Raetihi 4B Part Raetihi 3B. Dix and Merchant Surveyors May 1910. Landonline image. Supporting Documents page: 7

151 several “whares”, a cottage, a cultivation and several named buildings (a Whare Tupuna and related structures?) all within a fenced area.567 Raetihi 3B2A2A was declared a Native Reservation in 1939.568

Raetihi 3B2A2A was entered on to Certificate of Title 33B/513 on 9 December 1988. Makere Marino was listed as the sole owner.569 On 23 June 2000, the land was listed as subject to:

a Right of Way, Water Supply, Stormwater and Sewage drainage, Telecomunication and Electricity Supply in Gross pursuant to Section 315 Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 over the part herein marked A ML 5608 to Her Majesty the Queen (for Education purposes)570

Part Raetihi 3B2A2B (Current Maori Land Block) ML 2187 indicates that the area was largely covered in bush and swamps in 1910.571 By the next survey in 1926 much of this bush had been cleared.572 By 1936 all of the block was clear land.573

In January of 1961 2a 3r 7p was taken for the purpose of a metal pit. The metal pit was to include part of the old Mangawhero River bed.574 The area removed included the land which had been cut off from the rest of the block by a change in the course of the river. The land was vested in the Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the Borough of Ohakune

567 ML 4328 Raetihi 3B2A2A and Raetihi 3B2A2B. Wall, Bogle & Payne surveyors. October 1936. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 15 568 New Zealand Gazette 1939 p.272. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: Not Copied 569 CT WN 33B/513 Raetihi 3B2A2A. 9 December 1988. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 87-89 570 Ibid. See also ML 5608 Easements over Raetihi 3B2A2A. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 36 571 ML 2187 Part Raetihi 4B Part Raetihi 3B. Dix and Merchant Surveyors May 1910. Landonline image. Supporting Documents page: 7 572 ML 3965 Raetihi 3B2A1 and Raetihi 3B2A1. October 1926. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 13-14 573 ML 4328 Raetihi 3B2A1 and Raetihi 3B2A1. October 1936. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 15 574 CT WN 299/232 Raetihi 3B2A 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 81-83

152 when this parcel was entered onto Certificate of Title F2/844 on 7 December 1966. The transfer to John Francis O’Toole was produced on the same day. The land was then transferred to J.A. Lim Yock Ltd in February 1968. The land has been transferred four times since then.575

Five acres of 3B2A2B was removed for the purpose of a refuse tip on 28 August 1967.576 The land was vested in the Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the Borough of Ohakune under Certificate of Title 5A/1125. The refuse tip was vested in the Waimarino District Council in November 1989.577

Five years after the removal of the land for the refuse tip, 16a 1r 18p was removed for the purpose of a sewage scheme on 2 October 1972. Less than two years later a further 3750m2 (0.93 acre) was removed for the sewage scheme on 24 April 1974. Both parcels were vested in the Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of the Borough of Ohakune.578

The 3B2A2B block was partitioned in 1954, however ,the partitions 3B2A2B1 and 3B2A2B1 were cancelled in August 1990.579

Table 30: Raetihi 3B2AB Partition Block Date Area (A) Note Owners 3B2A2B1 27/4/54 0.5 PO cancelled 6/8/1990 1 3B2A2B2 27/4/54 136.68 PO cancelled 6/8/1990 15

575 CT WN F2/844 7 December 1966. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 90-91 576 CT WN 299/232 Raetihi 3B2A 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 81-83 577 CT WN 5A/1125 11 September 1967. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 92-93 578 CT WN 299/232 Raetihi 3B2A 3 November 1922. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 81-83. See also SO 28382 and SO 30018. Wellington Land District. Landonline images. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 29 & 30-31 579 Order Cancelling a Partition Order. Aotea MLC Minute Book 15 fols. 278-280. 6 August 1990. MLIS image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 183

153 The Part Raetihi 3B2A2B Block was entered onto Certificate of Title 52D/683 on 20 January 1999. A right of way 50 links wide through 3B2A1 (CT 52D/682) is noted on the title.580 A sewer easement and a right of way through the Part 3B2A2B parcel allowed access between the sewage scheme and the refuse tip.581 However this easement and right of way do not appear to have been recorded on Certificate of Title 52D/863. The land was subject to a compensation certificate under the Public Works Act [1981?] on 20 March 1997.

Atihau-Whanganui parcels within Raetihi area. (Current Maori Land) Part of Raetihi 3B, Raetihi 4B and most of Raetihi 3A are now part of the Te Atihau Whanganui Incorporation lands.582 Te Atihau Whanganui lands includes numerous parcels of land within the Whanganui area, including parts of the Morikau, Ohotu, Paetawa, Waharangi, Raetihi and other blocks. The Atihau Whanganui Incorporation owns many parcels of land under separate titles under the Land Transfer Act.

Certificate of Title for the Part Atihau-Whanganui block of 101,453a 14.99p “more or less” was issued to the Maori Trustee on 26 January 1970. The whole of the land was vested in Aata Karaitiana and 4022 others as tenants in common in unequal shares on 26 March 1970. Fresh certificates of title were also issued on 1 January 1970 for numerous parcels of land within the block “for leasing purposes only”.583

Deposited Plan 29360 of August 1967 shows the original location of Te Atihau Whanganui blocks, which were located within the area of the original Raetihi block.584

580 CT WN 52D/683 Part 3B2A2B. 20 January 1999. Wellington Land District. Landonline Image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 94-95 581 See SO 28382 and SO 30018, Wellington Land District. Landonline images. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 29 & 30-31 582 Atihau Whanganui Incorporation. Block ID 42885. Block Order File. MLIS. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 583 CT WN 7D/391 26 January 1970. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 96-103 584 DP 29360 Plan of Pts Atihau Whanganui, Compiled by Survey Office. August 1967. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 20

154 Several of the parcels were dealt with in the brief narratives above. The original Te Atihau Whanganui parcels numbered 1 through to 75 of Deposited Plan 29360. The largest parcel Lot 75 DP 29360 covered an area of 878a 1r 29p and is located within the area of the Raetihi 3A block. The smallest parcel was Lot 2 DP 29360 of 1a 2r 24p. The 75 parcels were vested in the Proprietors of Atihau-Whanganui on 11 December 1970.585 The land vested in Atihau Whanganui within the Raetihi and other blocks is also shown on ML 5162.586

Since the formation of the incorporation a number of Te Atihau Whanganui blocks within the Raetihi area have been alienated. Most of these alienated parcels are located to the east of Old Station Road. Today there is a total of 71 parcels of land within the original area of the Raetihi block which are owned by Te Atihau Whanganui Incorporation. Several of the parcels are very small sections of revested road.

Table 31: Current Maori Land Incorporation (includes land outside of Raetihi) Current Maori Land: Atihau Whanganui Block MLIS ID Area (acres) Area (ha) Owners Atihau 42885 101414.408 41041.018 1 –Proprietors of Whanganui Atihau Whanganui

585 CT WN 7D/391 26 January 1970. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents pages: 96-103 586 Sheet 1 ML 5162. Atihau Whanganui Block. Compiled in Survey Office. May 1967. Wellington Land District. Landonline image. Raetihi Supporting Documents page: 21

155 Table 32: Te Atihau Whanganui Blocks Within Raetihi Area Current Maori Land: Te Atihau Whanganui parcels within the Raetihi Area. Parcel Hectares Acres CT Lot 2 DP 29360 0.6677 1.65 8A/72 Lot 2 DP 53922 0.8114 2.01 25A/10 Lot 4 DP 29360 0.9895 2.45 20C/207 Lot 5 DP 29360 0.9100 2.25 8A/14 Lot 7 DP 29360 1.4278 3.53 20C/208 Lot 8 DP 29360 1.4468 3.58 20C/209 Lot 10 DP 29360 2.2746 5.62 20C/210 Lot 11 DP 29360 1.9911 4.92 8A/72 Lot 13 DP 29360 2.8189 6.97 8A/93 Lot 14 DP 29360 2.6408 6.53 8A/26 Lot 16 DP 29360 3.3632 8.31 8A/93 Lot 17 DP 29360 3.9869 9.85 8A/93 Lot 22 DP 29360 5.2837 13.06 8A/93 Lot 23 DP 29360 5.5214 13.64 8A/26 Lot 24 DP 29360 7.3303 18.11 8A/63 Lot 25 DP 29360 7.9559 19.66 8A/63 Lot 26 DP 29360 5.3951 13.33 8A/63 Lot 27 DP 29360 5.5401 13.69 8A/63 Lot 28 DP 29360 3.8235 9.45 8A/63 Lot 29 DP 29360 2.6085 6.45 8A/46 Lot 30 DP 29360 2.4767 6.12 8A/63 Lot 31 DP 29360 3.7722 9.32 8A/63 Lot 32 DP 29360 2.9423 7.27 8A/24 Lot 33 DP 29360 2.8073 6.94 8A/32 Lot 34 DP 29360 2.3100 5.71 8A/46 Lot 35 DP 29360 3.5405 8.75 8A/17 Lot 36 DP 29360 3.5415 8.75 8A/17

156 Parcel 0 Acres CT Lot 38 DP 29360 0 0 8A/18(no area located for this parcel) Lot 39 DP 29360 10.3412 25.55 8A/18 Lot 40 DP 29360 9.7104 23.99 8A/18 Lot 41 DP 29360 11.3368 28.01 8A/18 Lot 42 DP 29360 12.4003 30.64 8A/85 Lot 43 DP 29360 5.8669 14.5 8A/60 Lot 44 DP 29360 10.2517 25.33 8A/85 Lot 45 DP 29360 10.4424 25.80 8A/60 Lot 46 DP 29360 5.5293 13.66 8A/60 Lot 47 DP 29360 4.7753 11.80 8A/60 Lot 48 DP 29360 3.0716 7.59 8A/25 Lot 49 DP 29360 5.4521 13.47 8A/71 Lot 50 DP 29360 5.7281 14.15 8A/60 Lot 51 DP 29360 4.7290 11.69 8A/60 Lot 52 DP 29360 5.4023 13.35 8A/60 Lot 53 DP 29360 7.5674 18.70 8A/60 Lot 54 DP 29360 3.1133 7.69 8A/60 Lot 55 DP 29360 20.4398 50.51 8A/18 Lot 56 DP 29360 16.1900 40.01 8A/18 Lot 57 DP 29360 29.9495 74.01 25D/419 Lot 58 DP 29360 20.6971 51.14 8A/62 Lot 59 DP 29360 20.2165 49.96 8A/62 Lot 60 DP 29360 36.3964 89.98 25D/419 Lot 61 DP 29360 23.2593 57.47 25D/419 Lot 62 DP 29360 20.2089 49.94 25D/419 Pt. Lot 63 DP 29360 36.3086 89.72 25D/419 Pt. Lot 64 DP 29360 66.6107 164.60 25D/419 Pt. Lot 65 DP 29360 88.7488 219.30 25D/420 Pt. Lot 66 DP 29360 88.8616 219.58 25D/419

157 Parcel 0 Acres CT Pt. Lot 67 DP 29360 66.0168 163.13 8A/91 Lot 68 DP 29360 67.8329 167.62 8A/70 Lot 69 DP 29360 56.4890 139.59 8A/20 Lot 70 DP 29360 63.9757 158.09 8A/23 Lot 71 DP 29360 56.5573 139.76 8A/22 Lot 72 DP 29360 56.6307 139.94 8A/22 Lot 73 DP 29360 60.2804 148.96 8A/21 Lot 74 DP 29360 64.9996 160.62 8A/21 Lot 75 DP 29360 355.4885 878.43 8A/42 Lot 28 SO 28243 0.0635 0.16 25D/419 revested road Lot 29 SO 28243 0.0916 0.23 25D/419 revested road Lot 30 SO 28243 0.0339 0.08 25D/419 revested road Lot 31 SO 28243 0.0355 0.09 25D/419 revested road Lot 34 SO 28243 0.0003 0.0007 25D/419 revested road Lot 35 SO 28243 0.8934 2.21 25D/419 revested road Total 1521.1721 3758.97

158 Table 33: Summary of Raetihi 3 Alienations Summary of alienations from Raetihi 3 –Excluding roads Acres Hectares Date To 3B1 322.83 130.6473 1938 Raetihi Small Farm Crown Settlement Pt. Raetihi 3B2 & Lots 1& 299.75 121.3088 1958 2 DP 3713 Private Part Lot 11 DP 3802 176.19 71.3031 1958 Private Pt Raetihi 3B2A2B 2.79 1.13063 1961 Council Metal Pit Sec 53 Blk VIII Makotuku 5 2.0235 1967 Refuse Tip SD Council Pt Raetihi 3B2A2B 16.36 6.6219 1972 Council Sewage Pt Raetihi 3B2A2B 0.93 0.3750 1974 Council Sewage TOTAL 823.85 333.4102

Table 34: Permanent land alienations within the Raetihi 3 Partion % of total Alienation Date range Area (a) Central Government 39% 1938 322.83 Private Purchase 58% 1958 475.94 Local Government 3% 1961-1974 25.08

159 Table 35: Summary of Alienations Raetihi Block Summary of alienations from Raetihi –Largely Excluding roads

Partition Acres R P Dec Hectares Date To Ref. 1 3400 3400 1375.98 18/2/1899 Crown WN 81/192 2A 202 202 81.7494 13/2/1899 Crown WN 101/97 Pt. 2B 27 2 01 27.51 11.1318 1/10/1914 PW WN 101/98 Railway Pt. 2B1D 4 2 32 4.7 1.9021 12/4/1915 PW WN 101/98 Gravel Pit 2B1D3D 70 26/4/1927 WN 373/88 RS Date of new 70 28.329 Private title. Transfer 1917 2B1D2 93 1 4 93.275 37.7484 14/2/1924 Private 309/210 2B3C2 236 7 236.04375 95.5269 23/2/1925 Private WN 317/111 2B1D3B 70 70 28.329 21/5/1927 Private 376/14 RS 2B1D3C 70 70 28.329 26/4/1927 Private 373/88 RS 2B2C2A2 26 3 11 26.82 10.8535 24/8/1933 Crown Partition Order 2B2C2B2 171 33.3 171.21 69.2879 24/8/1938 Crown Partition Order. RS 2B1A 80 80 32.376 9/12/1938 Private WN 203/184 2B1D1B1 5 5 2.0235 10/10/1968 E’sed WN 5B/23 2B1C 80 80 32.376 14/2/1924 Private RS 309/53 2B1B 238 3 23 238.89 96.6803 29/11/1938 Private RS (area differs) 309/211

160 Partition Acres R P Dec Hectares Date To Ref. Pt. 2B1D3A 12 3 5 12.78 5.1726 16/6/1924 Private 314/216 313/102 Pt. 2B1D3A 2 2 0.8094 11/12/1956 Private 691/57 SC order MLIS 2B1D3A2A 1 0 30 1.19 0.4806 20/11/1968 E’sed MS B4/1111 2B2A 160 3 25 160.91 65.1188 9/8/1920 Private 196/176 2B2B1 161 1 1 161.26 65.2604 20/2/1924 Private RS 567/233 228/266 2B2B2 80 2 20 80.63 32.6289 4/11/1914 Private RS 228/266 228/267 2B2B3A 119 1 24 119.4 48.3212 18/6/1918 Private RS 254/183 2B2C1B1 17 1 5 17.28 6.9937 1/11/1968 E’sed RS 2B2C2A1 107 1 8 107.3 43.4243 5/5/1941 Crown 460/132 2B2C2A2B 26 3 13 26.83 10.8586 6/2/1957 Private RS 729/98 467/25 2B2C2A2A 26 3 11 24/8/1938 PO MLIS. 472/87 26.82 10.8535 Crown (25/7/1939) 2B2C2B 190 0 37 190.23 76.9866 4/7/1941 Private 317/164 K34233 2B2C3A 96 2 36 96.73 39.1446 29/11/1938 Private RS 285/218 K34233 Pt. 2B2C3B 193 1 39 193.49 78.3069 13/12/1931 Private 285/219 2B2C3C1 16 16 16.1 6.5157 13/9/1921 Private RS 288/53 288/52 2B2C3C2A2 8 3 25 8.9063 3.6044 1/11/1968 E’sed RS 2B2C3C2C1 1 0.25 0.1012 18/7/1969 E’sed RS Pt. 2B2C3C2C 271 2 8 271.55 109.8963 29/5/1939 Crown 288/52 470/276

161 Partition Acres R P Dec Hectares Date To Ref. Pt. 2B3A 88 1 22 88.39 35.7704 26/5/1926 Private See also 357/77 & 361/42 Pt. 2B3A 17 0.11 0.043 21/4/1949 Road 435/179 Pt. 2B3A 103 2 32.92 103.71 41.9697 10/10/1955 Private 435/179 2B3B 117 2 19 117.62 47.6003 18/3/1925 Private 255/288 Pt. 2B3C1 64 1 11 64.32 26.0298 19/8/1924 Private 314/285 314/284 Pt. 2B3C1 12 1 4.11 12.28 4.968 5/2/1959 Private 314/284 442/171 2B3D1 39 3 0 39.75 16.0868 12/1/1921 Private RS 278/103 2B1D3A2A 1 0 30 1.19 0.4806 10/10/1968 E’sed RS Pt 2B2B3B2 44 34 44.21 17.8928 18/7/1972 Private 323/258 10B/200 3B1 322 3 12 322.83 130.6473 29/11/1938 Crown 467/24 Pt Lot 11 DP 3802 176.19 176.19 71.3041 1958 Private Pt. 3B2A2B 2.79 2.79 1.1291 1961 PW Metal Pit Sec 53 Blk VIII 5 1967 Refuse Tip Makotuku SD 5 2.0235 PW Pt. 3B2A2B 16.36 16.36 6.6209 1972 PW Sewage Pt. 3B2A2B 0.93 0.93 0.3764 1974 PW Sewage 4A 526 526 212.8722 13/3/1899 Crown 101/103 Pt 4B 115 0 26 115.16 46.6063 1/2/1910 Crown 240/241 Railway Pt 4B 1550 1550 627.285 5/6/1911 Crown 193/92 Scenic Res

162 Partition Acres R P Dec Hectares Date To Ref. 5A 2063 2063 834.8961 13/2/1899 Crown 101/106 5B1A 105 1 17 105.36 42.6377 15/9/1959 Crown RS 287/205 ML 4695 Pt. 5B1 461 1 35 461.47 186.7564 7/10/1952 Private 589/83 RS incorrect 5B2 80 3 30 80.94 32.7554 9/7/1920 Private RS 271/63 5B3 403 3 12 403.83 163.428 6/8/1916 Crown RS 244/215 5B4 121 1 32 25/10/1919 RS Alienation Notice MLIS 121.45 49.1508 Private (See also 268/131?) X 113 3 5 113.78 46.0473 1/8/1967 Private RS Alienation Notice MLIS Lot 1 DP 53922 (Te 37.21 22/7/1983 25A/9 8A/60 Atihau Whanganui) 37.21 15.0589 Council Lot 3 DP 53922 (Te 1129 22/7/1983 25A/11. 8A/60 Atihau Whanganui) 1.43 0.5792 Council Lot 4 DP 53922 (Te 22/7/1983 Esplanade 8A/60 No area located. See Atihau Whanganui) Reserve also 7D/391 3.01 1.2200 Council TOTAL 3391.48 1372.5298

163 Table 36: Current Maori Land Raetihi Current Maori Land Blocks Derived from the Raetihi Block Block MLIS ID Area (acres) Area (ha) Owners 2B1D1C2A 19479 0.25 0.1012 1 2B1D3A1 19851 18.46 7.4689 12 2B1D3A2B 19850 35.92 14.5358 108 2B1D4 19849 6.5 2.6304 411 2B2B3B1A 19848 5 2.0234 11 2B2B3B1B 19847 74.75 30.2506 19 2B2B3B2 19846 75.66 30.6185 27 2B2C1A 19845 17.28 6.9934 48 2B2C1B2 19844 17.26 6.9833 21 2B2C3C2A1 19178 18.96 7.6723 1 2B2C3C2B1 19485 1 0.4046 1 2B2C3C2B2part 44485 17.38 7.0342 1 2B2C3C2B2 Pt 19843 2.19 0.8875 12 Lot 1 DP 84315 2B2C3C2C2 19842 16.16 6.5404 1 2B3D2 19841 39.21 15.8687 57 2B4 19840 3 1.214 1 3B2A1 19838 74.82 30.2787 109 3B2A2A 19837 5.69 2.3016 33 3B2A2B 19399 119.46 48.3443 36 Y 19839 140.80 56.9797 401

Total 689.75 279.1315 Including Atihau 3758.97 1521.1721 Whanganui blocks Total Maori Land 4448.72 1800.3036

164 Table 37: Raetihi Summary Raetihi Summary Original Area No. of Partitions Area alienated Area Remaining % Current ML 17200 Numerous 12751 (approx) 4448.8919 26%

165 Sources

Primary Sources

Aotea Maori Land Court Wanganui.

Block Order Files

TAR 71 Huiakama and Mangaotuku WH 182 Okehu TAR 324 Rawhitiroa WH 297E Rangiwaea-Otaroro WH 297A Rangiwaea-Tarere WH 367 Umumore WH 421 Whataroa No. 2

Alienation Files.

Aotea MLC Alienation file 3/6598 Okehu 2A Aotea MLC Alienation file 3/10255 Rangiwaea-Tarere 2D

Archives New Zealand, Wellington.

Crown Purchase Deeds,

Taranaki 174. Mangaere. 25 August 1881. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252 Archives New Zealand.

Taranaki 212. 14 April 1887. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252. Archives New Zealand Wellington.

166 Taranaki 249. 22 June 1896. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 73. Taranaki Crown Purchase Deeds 147-252. Archives New Zealand Wellington.

Taranaki 271. 2 July 1898. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 74. Archives New Zealand, Wellington.

Wellington Deed 908. ABWN Series 8102 Acc W5279 Box 111 Crown Purchase Deeds 1901-1907. National Archives, Wellington.

MA-MLP Land Purchase Department files

MA-MLP 2/5 Register of Inwards Correspondence MA-MLP 7/2 folio. 166. Ledger 1872-1884. MA-MLP 7/3 folio. 234. Ledger 1874-1907. MA-MLP 1879/595 MA-MLP 1884/213 MA-MLP 1886/108 MA-MLP 1890/222 MA-MLP 1890/283 MA-MLP 1893/100 MA-MLP 1899/79 MA-MLP 1903/62

Maori Land Court Minute Books -

Microfilm and Reproductions, Whanganui and Taranaki Minute Books, 1865-1912

Land Information New Zealand

Crown Purchase Deeds, Maori Land Surveys Index.

167 Computer based Primary Sources

Landonline. Land Information New Zealand images of ML, DP and SO plans, images of paper titles including Land Transfer Office Certificates of Title and Provisional Register titles. Computer freehold register records for current land titles.

Maori Land Information System. Maori Land Court. Images of paper titles and other Maori Land Court documents. Block Details Reports of current Maori Lands.

New Zealand Gazette Archive. Lexisnexis NZ Ltd. Images of the New Zealand Government Gazette.

Secondary Sources

Berhan, Paula “Block Research Narratives of the Whanganui District 1865-2000: A Resource Document for Whanganui District Treaty Issues” Wai 903, #A12. July 2003.

Harris, Aroha. “Crown Acquisition of Confiscated and Maori Land in Taranaki, 1872- 1881.” Wai 143 #H3 January 1993

168