This case, which has occupied the Court for the last eight days, is a claim preferred by the Ngatitara tribe to a piece of land called Waihi—the opposing claimants being the Ngatitamatera. The evidence, for the most part tradition, is more than ordinarily contradictory; both parties, however, are agreed upon one thing—that the district in which the block is situated belonged in former times to a tribe called the Ngamarama, and was taken from them by conquest. The Ngatitamatera witnesses say that the first fighting was begun by Ngatitara, who, under Tikitearoha and other chiefs, went to attack the Ngamarama pa at Otawhiwhi, near Katikati, where, instead of gaining a victory, they were defeated with great slaughter. The Ngatitamatera assert that only three out of the whole war-party escaped alive. The Ngatitamatera, who were at this time living at Hauraki, were appealed to by a Ngatitara woman named Hinewaha to avenge the death of her relations. A large war-party mustered under the chiefs Te Kiko, Te Poporo, and others. They proceeded to Owharoa and were there joined by a chief of Ngatitara named Te Whakamaro. At Te Rau-o-te-whero they divided their forces, one party under Te Poporo going south to attack Kouturahi, the other going north to attack the Tawhitiareia pa, which stood upon the block of land now under investigation. Te Kiko's party stormed and took the Tawhitiareia pa and slaughtered the defenders, after which the land was divided among the conquerors. In subsequent battles the Ngatitamatera say they entirely destroyed the Ngamarama. took possession of the whole district, and have remained in possession up to the present day.

The witnesses on the side of the Ngatitara state that their ancestors made war upon the Ngamarama, that they defeated them at Koukaro and Koriori, and took possession of that part of the country; that then an intermarriage took place, and peace was made. That a section of the tribe occupied the land they had seized, and that an arrangement was made with the Ngamarama to the effect that one end of the district should be tapu, and the other open for war. The peace was not of long duration; war broke out again between the two tribes and Tara's son, Tikitearoha, went with a warparty to attack the Ngamarama at Otawhiwhi. Here the Ngatitara witnesses corroborate the account given by the Ngatitamatera as to page 99the defeat of Ngatitara, and the appeal to, and subsequent successful expedition of, the Ngatitamatera, the only discrepancy being as to the number of Ngatitara who escaped from Otawhiwhi and the number that joined Te Kiko. The Ngatitara state that those of their tribe who were in occupation of land at Waihi remained there during the whole of the fighting, and continued in occupation after Tavvhitiareia had been taken, and that the only land taken by the Ngatitamatera was the site of the Tawhitiareia pa. They therefore claim the land as part of their original conquest from Ngamarama.

It appears to the Court to be beyond the bounds of probability that any small number of Ngatitara should have remained in occupation of Ngamarama land, by right of conquest, after the crushing defeat received by their tribe at Otawhiwhi; or that one end of the district should have been at peace while a war of extermination was going on at the other. If the Ngatitara obtained a footing on this land at all at the time they state—which is extremely doubtful— they must have been expelled after the defeat of their tribe at Otawhiwhi. And that the Ngamarama were in possession is evident from the fact that when the Ngatitamatera came to avenge the slaughter of Ngatitara they were residing in their pas at both ends of the district.

It was stated in the case of Owharoa that a considerable period elapsed between the defeat of Ngatitara at Otawhiwhi and the taking of Tawhitiareia, so that the Ngamarama must, during the whole ot that time, have been in undisturbed possession of the land said to have been conquered; and, but for the expedition of Ngatitamatera, might have remained in possession up to the present day, so far as Ngatitara were concerned That one end of the district was tapu and the other left open for war is disproved by the fact that when the Ngatitamatera war-party divided at Te Rau-o-te-Whero, the Ngatitara chief Te Whakamaro joined Te Kiko's party in the attack on Tawhitiareia instead of going with Te Poporo to attack Kouturahi, as he could have done had it been so. The account given by the Ngatitara as to their numbers is altogether unreliable. That they were reduced to a state of great weakness after Otawhiwhi is apparent from the fact that after that battle they were dependent on Ngatitamatera for the redress of injuries sustained at the hands of other tribes.

The evidence given by Tupeka as to the attack of the Ngatitara chief, Te Autororo, upon the Ngamarama, after the battle of Otawhiwhi, and the utter destruction of himself and party, tends much to strengthen the Ngatitamatera case. It is the opinion' of the Court that the Ngamarama, after Otawhiwhi, recovered possession of these lands, and whatever the Ngatitara may have gained previous to Otawhiwhi they entirely lost after their defeat at that battle, and that subsequently the Ngatitamatera, in Maori fashion, extinguished the Ngamarama title. This seems borne out by the fact that the only disputes about these lands of late years have been between the Ngatitamatera and Ngaiteraugi. At the last Court the page 100case of Owharoa was decided in favour of Ngatitara, but the cases are by no means parallel. There, the Ngatitara undeniably conquered the original owners, took possession of the land and remained in possession. Neicher before nor after Otawhiwhi did it appear that the tribe from whom it was vested made any attempt to recover it and the Ngatitamatera had never dispossessed Ngatitara, though doubtless, being the superior tribe, they could have done so had they been so disposed.

The right of conquest by Ngatitara being disposed of, the next question is that of occupation; and here, although we have facts and not tradition to deal with, the evidence is still more contradictory, each party asserting that they cultivated on the land, and that the other did not The Court is of opinion that the occupation of Waihi by Ngatitara since 1865 was by direction or invitation of Te Hira, as we have direct evidence to that effect, but as some of them appear to have lived on the land previous to that under the protection of Ngatitamatera (as otherwise the Ngaiterangi, who claimed that part cf the country, would have dispossessed them) the Court considers that they are entitled to their cultivations, and awards them the fifteen acres round their settlement. Certificates for the remainder of the block will be ordered in favor of the Ngatitamatera.