Feb. 14.] THE NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE. 521

Questions relating to Identity of Owners in connection with the Tutira Block.

Office of the Native Land Court for the Ikaroa District, Wellington, 11th February, 1918.

WHEREAS various questions relating to identity of owners have arisen in connection with the Tutira Block, situated in the Provincial District of Hawke’s Bay, notice is hereby given that the questions enumerated below will be inquired into by the Native Land Court sitting at Hastings on Wednesday, the 20th day of February, 1918, at 10 o’clock in the forenoon, or so soon thereafter as the business of the Court will allow.

A. H. MACKAY, Registrar.

1. Succession order dated 11th March, 1884, re Pe, deceased, appointed the following five successors: Apirana Tukotahi, Maora, Werahiko, Hirini, and Peti.

(a.) Question.—Was Hirini the same person as Hirini Kararupe (original owner), to whom successors were appointed by order dated 12th October, 1914 ?

(b.) Question.—Was Peti the same person as Peti Hinetarakea, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 17th August, 1893 ?

2. Succession order dated 12th March, 1884, re Ihakara Poua, deceased, appointed the following six successors: Peti Hinetarakea, Mita, Hirini, Mere, Te Waikau, and Hariata.

(a.) Question.—Was Mita the same person as Mita Hirini, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 8th September, 1906 ?

(b.) Question.—Was Hirini the same person as Hirini Kararupe, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 12th October, 1914, and was Hirini distinct from Hirini Manuao ?

(c.) Question.—Is Mere the same person as Mere Pohio, who is still alive; and is Mere Pohio the same person as Mere Brown, who was appointed one of the successors to Henare Pangopango by order dated 11th October 1916 ?

(d.) Question.—Was Hariata the same person as Hariata Hirini, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 4th November, 1886 ?

3. Succession order dated 1st October, 1883, appointed Piu Watene, Arara Watene, Raniera Watene, and Te Waihaki Watene successors to Watene Tiwaewae, deceased.

(a.) Question.—Was Watene Tiwaewae the same person as Te Watene te Kaharunga, who was an original owner ?

(b.) Question.—Was Te Waihaki Watene the same person as Te Waihaki, deceased, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 14th August, 1895 ?

4. Succession order dated 15th November, 1886, appointed Tuni Arangi, Emeraima Hinekura, Te Rangitahia, and Porokoru successors to Manaena Tini, deceased.

Question.—Was Porokoru the same person as Ema Porokoru, to whom Henare Pohio succeeded by order dated 6th July, 1896 ? Or was Porokoru the same person as Porokoru Tiakipou, who was appointed part successor to Te Moanaroa te Wahapahika by order dated 26th August, 1910 ?

5. Succession order dated 30th September, 1915, appointed Taranaki K. te Uamairangi sole successor to Porokoru Manaena, deceased.

(a.) Question.—Was Porokoru Manaena the same person as Porokoru Tiakipou, who was appointed part successor to Te Moanaroa te Wahapahika by order dated 26th August, 1910 ? And was Porokoru Manaena quite distinct from the Ema Porokoru, to whom Henare Pohio succeeded by order dated 6th July, 1896 ?

(b.) Upon what date did Porokoru Manaena die ?

6. Succession order dated 23rd October, 1896, appointed Raiha Toha sole successor to Toha Rahurahu, deceased.

Question.—Was Toha Rahurahu the same person as Toha, who was an original owner ?

7. Ni Parata Rangi is shown as an original owner.

(a.) Question.—Is Ni Parata Rangi still alive; and, if so, is he distinct from Ni Parata Puna ?

(b.) Question.—If dead, was Ni Parata Rangi the same person as Ni Parata Taki, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 1st May, 1897 ?

8. Succession order dated 17th August, 1893, appointed Wi Pikari and seven others successors to Peti Hinetarakea, deceased.

Question.—Was Wi Pikari the same person as Wi Pakai, to whom Te Mihiroa Pikai succeeded by order dated 8th September, 1906 ?

9. Succession order dated 20th May, 1912, appointed successors to Mita Paku, alias Paku, deceased.

(a.) Question.—Was Mita Paku, alias Paku, the same person as Mita Aotearoa Mita, who was part successor to Mita Hirini by succession order dated 8th September, 1906 ?

(b.) Was Mita Paku, alias Paku, quite distinct from Paku, who was an original owner, and from Paku Huka, to whom successors were appointed by order dated 25th September, 1906 ?

10. Succession order dated 14th August, 1895, appointed Te Aohau Nikitini and Ema Winiata successors to Te Waihaki deceased.

Question.—Is Te Aohau Nikitini quite distinct from Te Aohau Mita ?

11. Succession order dated 4th November, 1886, appointed Kapi Ngawhakakapinga and Te Aohau successors to Hariata Hirini.

Question.—Is Te Aohau the same person as Te Aohau Mita ?

12. Succession order dated 4th November, 1886, appointed Maika Ngamauriuri successor to Hera te Nehu, deceased.

Question.—Was Maika Ngamauriuri the same person as Maika Tuakana, who, with Hera te Nehu, was appointed successor to Wikitoria Kakakino, deceased, by order dated 2nd October, 1883 ?

13. Succession order dated 12th March, 1884, appointed Te Ringa Tuhi part successor to Ani te Ringatuhi.

Question.—Is Te Ringa Tuhi still alive; and, if not, have successors been appointed to her under any other name ?

14. Succession order dated 11th October, 1916, appointed successors to Henare Pango Pango, deceased.

Question.—Was Henare Pango Pango the same person as Henare Pohio, who was appointed sole successor to Ema Porokoru by order dated 6th July, 1896 ?

MAORI LAND ADMINISTRATION NOTICES.

Meeting of the Ikaroa District Maori Land Board.

Wellington, 13th February, 1918.

NOTICE is hereby given that the matters mentioned in the Schedule hereunder written will be considered at a meeting of the Ikaroa District Maori Land Board to be held at Palmerston North on Wednesday, the 27th day of February, 1918, at 10.30 o’clock a.m., or as soon thereafter as the business of the Board will allow.

A. H. MACKAY, Registrar.

SCHEDULE.

APPLICATIONS FOR CONFIRMATION OF ALIENATIONS.