failure after the Court sitting to pay further monies to those who had been awarded interests which were greater than the amount of the advances they had earlier received.
(i) Piahana Honana
In August 1880 Piahana Honana and 24 others petitioned the Premier.
We appeal to you to consider the position of the people who sold the Goldfield to the Government, some of whom received a very small sum of money and others a very large sum; and by the judgement of the Court it was found that the interests of the persons who received the lesser amounts were equal to those who received the larger.
Now what is to be done in the case of the persons whom the Court has found to have such a claim to the Ohinemuri Goldfields, inasmuch as some of them have received such small amounts. It is owing to this being the case that we appeal to the Parliament of this island.
In our opinion the area to which each of the persons interested is entitled by the judgement of the Court should be ascertained, and if it is found that they have not received the amount due then it should be paid to them either in money or land at their option.54
Wilkinson was asked to report on the petition. He replied that
The statement made herein, to the effect that after the Ohinemuri Gold Fields Block had passed the Native Lands Court it was found that the interests of some who had only had small amounts of money were equal in area to the interests of those who had received large sums, is quite correct. But unfortunately for the Natives who got this petition up, they did not leave it to be signed by those only who had had but small sums of money and whose area in land was large. In fact the petition seems to have been got up more for the benefit of those who have already had more than they were entitled to, and are making use of the grievance of the few to further their own cases.
I have annexed to this a Schedule which shows the area allotted to each of the petitioners by the Native Lands Court, and also the amount of money that each one has had, in order that you may see that only a very few of those who signed this petition had any cause to complain. But instead off asking for more, they ought rather to be continually in dread lest the Government should take steps to make them refund some of the money they have had over and above the real value of their interests.
I notice amongst the names that of a Mr Mahony, who is a publican at Ohinemuri. As that gentleman was not awarded any interest in the Ohinemuri block, I am at a loss to understand why his name should be attached to the petition, unless it be that as he most likely participated indirectly in former payments, he like the Natives is anxious to have the whole thing come over again.
As I have stated before, there are some cases which might warrant the sending of a petition for relief. But I cannot say that they are included in the accompanying petition, therefore I am not able to report favourably upon it, and I think I need not give any other reasons than by drawing attention to the Schedule annexed which speaks for itself.55
The schedule showed that, at a rate of 5/- per acre, 7 of the 24 petitioners had been paid less than the worth of their interests, 13 had been paid more than the worth of their interests, I had been paid the right amount, and 3 had neither been awarded an interest in the blocks nor received any payments from the Crown.
54 Piahana Honana and 24 others to Premier, undated. Maori Affairs Head Office file MLP 1881/246. Supporting Papers #B36.81–86.
55 Land Purchase Officer Thames to Under Secretary Native Department, 25 September 1880. Maori Affairs Head Office file MLP 1881/246. Supporting Papers #B36.87–89.
19