143 4t I 20 - [email protected]

Transcription

--.
~4"~- .'"-~'¥
•..
'>--'''-'.--' .-.' .. ~ , __
.~ .:0 ••
,M," •• ,. __ •• .. • • .•
'"7' , . - . • • • •
.....
,
,
~;.~ _ ' _ • • _._
••••••
~.'
•
"',
' ••.•
"
'.'
.• ~
'.1, \. '. ,. '. \',
/
· 143
4t
I 20
,
An "Iniquitous Job-?
Acquisition of the Waitotara Block by the Crown
"I;i;
q:. "
"),
:,
,./ !
A report by Aroha Harris
(
commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal
Pipiri 1993
Contents
page.
iii
Abbreviations and Terminology
Introduction
iv
Note About the Author
v
v
Note About Sources
The Claim and the Commission
,I!j
Summary of the Report
vii
Map of the Waitotara Block
ix
l.
Crown Acquisition of the Waitotara Block
1.1
Waitotara in Pre-treaty Transactions
1
1.2
Waitotara and Maori Opposition to Land Sales
2
1.3
Waitotara Used to Oppose the Kingitanga
3
1.4
The First Instalment
6
"
1.5
~\. 6
External Boundaries Surveyed
8
Reserves Surveyed
11
i.7
Limbo: Suspension of the Transaction
14
~.8
·1
Transaction Resumed 1862
18
1.9
Acquisition Concluded
35
1.10
General Themes
r"
,0,
38
./
/,.
2.
The Fallout
l
i' J
Maori Response to the Transaction
41
The Road to Waitotara Leads to War
43
2.3
Waitotara and the Cameron-Grey Dispute
54
2.3.1
2.4
Field and Featherston Join In
63
The Case is Closed
70
3.
Reservations About Reserves
3.1
The Reserves on Paper
73
3.2
The Reserves go to the Native Land Court
75
3.3
The Reserves on the Ground
76
AV'
/.3t'
~.
· ii
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3. 3.5
3.3.6
3.3.7
3.3.8
3.4
Okehu
Pakaraka
Nukumaru
Maenene
Maraetoa
Te Karaka
Te Auroa
Kaipq
Maori Freehold Land Remaining in the Reserves
.....
76
76
78
78
79
79
80
81
81
Waitotara Reserves
..:..:.;:,
,
82
t
3.5
Alienation: Pakaraka, Nukumaru,
Kaipo
Land Alienated from Pakaraka Reserve
Land Alienated from Nukumaru Reserve
3.5.1
3.5.2
Partition and
Te Karaka and
Table Showing
Table Showing
3.5.3
3.5.4
3.6
Table Showing Land Alienated from Te Karaka Reserve
Table Showing Land Alienated from Kaipo Block
Potential Issues Arising Regarding Reserves
86
87
87
Bibliography
92
83
84
85
List of Supporting Documents
1.
Volume One
Volume Two
'.
--,
Table Showing Maori Freehold Land Remaining in
,,
~
94
97
iii
Abbreviations and Terminology
AJHR
a:r:p
Appendices to the Journals of the House of Representatives
Acres:roods:perches. This is the imperial measurement for
land. There are forty perches in a rood, and four roods in
an acre.
Consideration A legal term to describe that which is given in
return for a promise; for the purpose of this report
money given in return for (the promise of) land.
DOSLI
Gov
Ibid
MA
Department of Survey and Land Information
Governor
same as above
Maori Affairs series (National Archives, Wgt.n)
MA-MLP Maori Land Purchase Series (National Archives, Wgtn)
MLC
Maori Land Court
Mt
Maunga
NLC
Native Land Court
No.
number
NZ
NZG
New Zealand
New Zealand Gazette
NZPD
New Zealand Parliamentary Debates
R
Ra
River
range
RDB
Raupatu Document Bank
Secy
Secretary
Str
Stream
Vol
Wgtn
volume
Wellington
WH
Whanganui
WP
Wellington Province series (National Archives, Wgtn)
:.~
~.
.....
- .•.._._ ......................•.. ,.........•.- ...-- ...
--.----~~.
iv
.':
Introduction
';'.
,
.
",
Note About the Author and the Commission
Ko Aroha Harris taku ingoa.
ahau, kei raro i
I te taha
taku matua, no Mangamuka
0
a Maungataniwha, tetahi
0
nga poupou
0
te whare
tapu 0 Ngapuhi. I te taha 0 taku whaea, no Mitimiti ahau kei roto
i te rohe 0 Te Rarawa ki Hokianga.
E mahi ana ahau mo te tari nei 0 te ropu whakamana i te tiriti 0
Waitangi, kei raro i te tari ture, mo nga tau e rua.
I mua 0 taku
mahi i konei, i mahi ahau mo te Kooti Whenua Maori kei Whangarei.
I te tau 1989, ka whiwhi ahau i te tohu 0 te matauranga 0 te Whare
Wananga 0 Tamakimakaurau, ara he B.A. Ko te nuinga 0 aku mahi i te
tari nei, he mahi rangahau mo te muru me te raupatu 0 Taranaki
whanui.
Aa, i mahi hoki ahau i etahi 0 nga kereme i ti.
I
',.,.
whakatakoto kaupapa, i whakaako tauira ahau i nga tikanga rangahau.
Koina etahi 0 aku mahi i konei. Na, ka tuhi ahau i tenei purongo
i raro i te whakahaere 0 ta matou kaiwhakahaere i nga mahi rangahau,
ara ko Tom Bennion.
I
have been employed as
Division for three years.
a
researcher by the Waitangi Tribunal
Prior to my employment here, I worked as
an advisory officer for the MaorL. Land; Court at Whangarei.
I
graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degre~;~n Maori Studies from the
University of Auckland in 1989.
i,;"
.'.
~
My work for the Waitangi Tribunal division has mostly been concerned
with the Taranaki group of land claims known as Wai 143. This has
included the completion of
a
report on the title histories of
reserves made in certain Crown purchases about New Plymouth prior
to
1860.,
and a
report about the Crown acquisition of
Taranaki 1872-1881.
These reports are known as Wai 1i3
F23 and H3 respectively.
land in
~ocuments
Document H3 was published as a part of the
Waitangi Tribunal research series in 1993.
I have also completed
appraisal reports for Wai 125, Raglan Pilot Reserve, and Wai 174,
Ngati Kotinga claims. In 1991, I helped design, implement and tutor
.
,'
·
':.;';
...
v
'
a three week claimant researchers' basic training course.
Note About Sources
The main sources used in undertaking this research have been the
Raupatu Document Bank,. Appendices to the Journals of the House of
Representatives (AJHRs), the records of the Wellington Province at
National Archives, Wellington, and manuscripts held at the Alexander
Turnbull Library and the Wanganui Regional Museum.
There are some
gaps in the records available which has meant that certain matters
of detail cannot be positively ascertained.
from
the
main
storyline
and themes
This has not detracted
presented
in
this
report I
although it may lead to the conclusion that the full details of the
history of Waitotara may never be known.
It is the opinion of the
author, however, that there is ample material for the tribunal to
investigate the matter and draw its own conclusions.
The Claim and the Commission
The Waitotara block is located at on the'west coast of the North
Island, northwest of Wanganui.
Okehu rivers.
It lies between the Waitotara and
Research into the Waitotara block has been motivated
by Wai 137, a claim by Gary Potonga Nielson dated 8 December 1987. 1
This claim was joined with other
r'
Taranaki~laims
by direction of the
Waitangi Tribunal dated 10 July 1990, ~ild now forms part of Wai
.
143. 2
/.'
j
This report was commissioned by ~he Waitangi Tribunal, by a
direction dated 14 October 1992, which required an investigation
into and the production of a report about the Waitotara purchase. 3
Production of this report was supervised by Tom Bennion, Acting
Research Manager.
Acknowledgement is also due to Noel Harris who
produced the map on page ix.
Tena korua aku hoa mahi.
The claimant, on behalf of himself and Nga Rauru Kitahi,
1
Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 1. 6.
2
Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 2.21.
3
~laims
to
·., •.•
,~._
•• ,,_,.t.J"'~'''''''':\o..I~ ...Ir .... ~
..:~..,";
...
~.
:·:tft
'~'
A
vi
1~~
be prejudicially affected by acts which have allowed Ngarauru
'. .:' "~".:: . :~~:;""~~:.i\:·~~
land;'>f~:'7;St:':~
including reserves and wahi tapu, to pass into the ownership ,o:(?(:?[;/~
local government authorities - the Nukumaru Domain Board and ,the' '
'f
!':'
Wai totara County Council in particular. 4
A site of particular
importance to the claimants is Waikaramihi, a coastal wahi tapu on
which the Nukumaru Domain is located.
On 22 June 1990, this claim
was added to by a claim by Ngarauru to:
other land,
wahi tapu,
Nga Taonga Katoa,
Tangaroa
all
&
resources alienated from us [Ngarauru] by acts, policies &
practices of Governments & Local Bodies & Departments of
Governments and individuals. 5
The Nukumaru domain, which prompted this research, is identified on
While this was,
the map which follows.
in the beginning, a key
element of Ngarauru claims, it soon become apparent from documents
submitted with Wai 137 and evidence taken in hearing that the land
on which Nukumaru domain is located was part of the Waitotara block,
("" :"
acquired by the Crown in 1863, hence this report on the Waitotara
block.
The Waitotara transaction is arguably the genesis of the
difficulties Ngarauru are now faced with.
For the claimants, the
alienation of Ngarauru land has led to the loss of access to natural
resources
and
the
exclusion
of
Ngarauru
participation in the decision making
government (F1). 6
to
more
pr~pesses
meaningful
operated by local
Continued alienation/ from reserves originally
retained from the Waitotara block for
subjected
from
contemporary
th~~'~enefit
methods
of
of Maori have been
alienation.
This
'creeping confiscation' is also a concern of claimants (F1).7
4 Due to restructuring of local goverment in recent years,
administration of the Nukumaru domain may have changed.
The
local government organisations now administering this district
are the Wanganui District Council and the Waitotara Community
Board.
5
Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 1.6(b).
6
Wai 143 doc F1 Evidence of Ngarauru Iwi
Statements, 14 act 1991, Te Ihupuku Marae, Waitotara.
7 Ibid, Te Tangato
0
Ngaa Rauru.
Closing
vii
The claimants seek the return of land contained in the Nukumaru
domain, compensation for lime and shellrock taken from the quarries
and cOmpensation for sections sold within the domain for holiday
homes. 8
The claimants also want to be put into an ·economically
viable position where they can restore and maintain their marae
without government "handouts", facilitate the higher education of
their young people, and administer their own resources in their own
way for their own people.
They ask for an opportunity to "take a
meaningful part in [the] actual decision making processes" of local
government.
Consultative and advisory positions are unacceptable
to the claimants (F1).9
Summary of the Report
The Waitotara transaction was a very complicated and intricately
detailed
affair,
which
this
report
attempts
to
describe
methodically.
Briefly, this report is about a block of land in the
Wellington Province for which a deposit of £500 was paid by Donald
i
\.
McLean in 1859, even though the land had been included in previous
Maori initiatives to withhold land from sale to Europeans.
For
various reasons, the transaction was not finalised until 1863.
During the period that had lapsed, numerous Maori with interests in
Waitotara registered their opposition to the sale of Waitotara.
While there was debate over whether the laRd ought to be sold in the
/,
first place, there was also debate over t.he size of the reserves and
the price of the land. Nonetheless, theUtransaction was concluded
"~I
;
under the direction of Isaac Featherston, Superintendant and Land
Purchase Commissioner for Wellington Province. The group of Maori
he concluded the transaction with in 1863, was not the same group
of Maori who McLean had made the original agreement with in 1859.
Protest from Maori continued after the transaction was concluded,
and culminated in a battle with imperial troops underkhe command
8
9 Wai 143 doc Fl Evidence of NgarauruIwi
Statements, 14 Oct 1991, Ihupuku Marae, Waitotara.
Closing
viii
of General Cameron at Nukumaru in January 1865. Throughout much of
1865 and 1866 Cameron and Grey and their respective allies argued
amongst themselves about the fairness or otherwise of the Waitotara
purchase, and its influence on war in the Waitotara district. Those
for and those against the purchase each put their case before the
imperial government, but eventually the imperial government declined
to act, saying it had no control over the matter.
The primary purpose of this report is to examine the actual
transaction that took place between Maori and the Crown for the
Waitotara block and its numerous surrounding circumstances.
However, alienation of land within the reserves made for Maori is
also a concern of claimants. This is cursorily examined in chapter
..:1.
I
..•• ; . : •.•
three. Eight reserves were originally made, measuring in tota~ 6713
acres and 8 perches. Less than 20% or 1305 acres and 24.46 perches
now remains as Maori freehold land. Questions are raised regarding
the way in which the first title to the reserves was determined by
the Native Land Court, that is, by naming a maximum of ten owners.
Methods of alienation are also identified, where possible. Three
of the eight original reserves were completely alienated by early
this century.
One of the reserves is still held under one title,
with less than two acres taken for roading purposes.
Alienation of
land from the remaining four reserves is largely accounted for by
alienations confirmed by the court orthEt])istrict Maori Land Board
or with the Maori Trustee acting as agen't/ for the owners, and the
: . J'
,\
transformation of Maori freehold land ~o General land under the
Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1967 Part I.
Land taken for Public
Works also features as a method of alienation.
In total, this report examines a transaction for land that perhaps
the Crown ought not to have pursued.
When the transaction was
eventually concluded, reserves for the benefit of MaorL were set
aside.
80% or more of the total land contained in these-reserves
has subsequently been alienated.
J
.~
:';-
Hawera
47km
I
I
I
~
I
I"~
...............
--,
I
I
I
I
I
(
I
;
r
[
1I______ _
~
....
Nukumaru
~,
X
----""-/
,~
~
i
c
t
. :-:-:-:-: -:-:.:-:.:.:.:.:.:- :-:-;
:~-:.;.
1----1
1____ 1 Reserves
(: : :
»~~ ~~~:: ~ ~ ~: ~: ~::::::
.........................
:::::::~::::::::::::.:-:-:.:
"o
""
"g
~
Wangonul
-: -:';':;:-:':-:'.' .
.~.~
(.
12km
[
~
~ Current Moori land
!2ZLJ
Nukumaru domain
recrefltionol reserve
5km
3mi
......................
MAP OF WAITOTARA. BLOCK
Source: AAFY 997/W15, and Maori land maps, Maori Land Court, Wanganui
and Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 1.6
··Alj~~~
';,.
j! ..
.",,,,,J,, .:.~".""'''~~~:. 'tL\;~' I:'.,':., '........', ,·:;:1
.:;
. . r:
,
,
.
"
' ~
;" ....
Chapter 1
Crown Acquisition of the Waitotara Block
1.1
Waitotara in Pre-treaty Transactions
When Donald McLean paid a £500 deposit for the Waitotara block
in 1859, it may not have been the first time the block had been
dealt with in the context of land alienation.
In 1839, Reverend
Henry Williams, in an attempt to thwart the impending New Zealand
Company purchase of Wanganui, claimed to have purchased all the
land between Rangitikei and Patea for the benefit of Maori.
The
New Zealand Company basically ignored Williams' claim and went
oh to acquire land at Wanganui.
,:.: . ,:':>.:..
While the company did not
acquire the Waitotara block, a short exploratory trip was made
of the Waitotara district. 10
claim similar to Williams',
The company itself could make a
having
'acquired'
the
land from
Manawatu to Patea by a deed transacted at Waikanae in 1839 and
signed by three Wanganui chiefs. 11
awarded 40,000 acres at Wanganui.
Eventually, the company was
.
Acquxpition of land on the
I
West Coast was later continued by the Crown, first by McLean,
,I,
followed by Serancke in 1858, then Feathe~~ton in 1862.
Once the
Rangitikei block was purchased in 1849, the next area of land in
the Wanganui district suitable for European settlement was the
Wai totara block. 12
10 M J G Smart & A P Bates The Wanganui .Story Wanganui, 1972
pp 48-50.
11 J Luiten Whanganui ki Porirua: an exploratory report
commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal on early Crown purchases
unpublished, Wellington, 1992 p 7.
12 Rex H Volkerling From Sand to Papa: a history of Wanganui
County pp 57-8.
"
.
".
,:
.~
:;-;
.~ ~
2
1.2
Waitotara and Maori Opposition to Land Sales
It is difficult to consider the Crown's acquisition of the
Waitotara block without reference to increasing opposition from
Maori to land sales which developed in the 1850s. In 18-54, a hui
was held at Manawapou for the purpose of uniting Maori under the
kaupapa that no more land be sold to Europeans
(AI (a) : 126) .13
The boundaries decided upon in which to operate this initiative
were Okurukuru in the north to Kaiiwi in the south. Waitotara
was, therefore, included in this area. A hatchet had been passed
around at the Manawapou meeting as a symbol of the united
agreement not to sell land. 14 That hatchet was later allegedly
sold by Rioterepi of Waitotara to a Pakeha. A Ngatiruanui taua
went to Wai totara demanding the life of Rioterepi in return.
According to Reverend Richard Taylor, this taua thought that by
selling the hatchet they had sold the land it represented.
(:.
A meeting similar to that of Manawapou was held at Pukawa in
1856. According to Taylor, a unanimous decision was made that
no more land should be sold to Europeans.
It was also decided
that:
Tongariro
was
circumference
the
was
centre
the
Taranaki, Ngatiruanui,
Titokura.15
of
a
circle
Hauraki,
of
,Waikato,
Waitotara, /Wanganui,
which
the
Kawaimokau,
Rangitikei,
.l..
This area was to be a "Rohe Tapu" and no chief was to infringe
upon it by selling land within its boundaries.
It was intended
to formalise the agreement in a written document to be subscribed
13 Wai 143 doc A1(a)', Ann Parsonson The Purchase of Maori
Land in Taranaki 1839-1859 (revision of Report AI) unpublished
report commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington, 1991
p 126.
14 Qms-1994, Taylor Journal 1856-1859, entries for 20 April
1857 and 23 Jan 1858, Alexander Turnbull Library.
15 Qms-1994 pp 18-19, entry for 14 Dec 1856.
•
' . , •• , '
'
•• ' •••••
"-0.
--"-'---'---'~""".l._'-'
____
. · ........ ..:.....:"l ..... ..... _.......... _...... ____ ..................... _ ........
""~-t...:_,
~\
_.~
__
~.
________________ ' ... _ .... __________________ .....
3
to by "all the head.chiefs". For the second time in two years,
Wai totara was included in an agreement not to sell land to
Europeans.
The growing opposition of Maori to land sales
eventually culminated in the appointment of Te Wherowhero as
Maori King.
Not only were Maori expressing dissatisfaction in the 1850s by
developing a policy of opposition to land sales, but the
government was proceeding with caution in its land dealings. In
(
1855 the District Commissioner of Wellington had been told not
to begin any fresh acquisitions until an assessment of
acquisitions already in progress was made and the boundaries of
land already acquired were examined. 16 Similarly, the District
Commissioner was also instructed to:
use the greatest possible caution in cases where the Title
is disputed, or a difference of opinion exists on the minds
"
of the Native owners; and upon no account to enter into
negotiations for the purchase, until such differences have
been amicably settled between the patties concerned. 17
.... " ....
These instructions seem largely to have been issued in response
to the numerous disputes about reserves, boundaries and payments
that had arisen in Hawke's Bay and waira~pa following a series
of acquisitions made in quick successio~;{ thy McLean. 18
~i
1.3
'
Waitotara Used to Oppose the Kingitanga
On 25 February 1859, a service by Taylor was held at the church
16
AJHR 1861 Cl No. 33 p 268.
17
AJHR 1861 Cl No. 35 p 269.
18 For a
fuller explanation, see J Hippolite Wairoa ki
Wairarapa: an overview report· commissioned by the Waitangi
Tribunal unpublished report commissioned by the Waitangi
Tribunal, Wellington, 1991.
4
at Heriko or Jericho. 19
This church was near Kaipo pa on the
southern bank of the Waitotara, and had been built by the people
of Kaipo· in August 1858. 20
This was also a pa that Te Ua
Haumene lived at for a time.
Gathered at Heriko on 25 February
were many Maori "from every part" and a party of emissaries of
the Maori King from the Waikato, who were there to "advocate his
cause".
Taylor's sermon for that day referred to the original
barbarous state of Maori as heathen, and their present peaceful
state as Christian. Taylor wrote that after his service some of
the king's deputies "attacked" him, claiming that:
whilst we tried to raise their eyes to heaven the pakehas
(
came behind and stole their land from under them, that they
got their names to show the Queen how they had been tamed
and then the Queen sent governors and officers to take
possession of the country; that England was now grasping
all the world and fighting in every place with the natives
who resisted and that God was with them. 21
. ::.. ' :.~:
The next day Taylor went to see the mill nearby.
away,
the
flag
of
While he was
the Maori King had been erected,
and an
enclosure constructed for speakers. The speakers, according to
Taylor, were "very vehement". Taylor responded by summoning his
teactlers, and rang the bell "which quite::~}i,;i.sconcerted his Maori
majesty's orators".
Taylor estimated
present.
In his journal he wrote:
2,.Oqt
of his teachers were
i,;"
I addressed them on their duties and on the importance of
attending to them.
Then I alluded to their great faults
and at this time especially of their allowing this king
movement to engross their minds instead of God. 22
19
Qms-1994 p 159.
20
Qms-1994 pp 130-13l.
21
Qms-1994 pp 159-160.
22
Ibid.
5
.,':"
On 27 February Taylor again held service at Heriko.
He also had
"Bible class" during which there was "much noise and confusion"
and the Kingitanga "quite upset the usual peace and quietness
which reigns on such occasions".
Taylor also refused one· of the
Waikato Maori who wanted to receive the sacrament on the grounds
that he did not know him.
The Waikato party left that day for
Ihupuku, another settlement on the Waitotara block.
On 28 February, Taylor left Heriko and discovered as he travelled
that:
the very means used by these Waikato natives to pupuru Te
Whenua were those to make the owners sell in their grand
meeting calling upon the Waitotara natives to give up their
lands to the king.
According to Taylor, some Ngatiruanui who had "a kind of a claim"
to Waitotara said they would give it to the king.
Taylor wrote:
This so offended the real· owners that although previously
they had no intention of selling it they exclaimed, who are
you who presume to dictate to us what we shall do with our
lands?
:-.")
The
()
"real
owners",
to
prove
that
theft I would
not
listen
Ngatiruanui, determined to sell the larld! to the queen.
to
Taylor
believed they were "earnest" to do so, and a fortnight later he
wrote and told McLean as much.
"small
district"
between
He sai<;l that the "owners" of a
Kaiiwi
and
the
Waitotara
were
considering selling because they were "disgusted" with attempts
by Ngatiruanui to "pupuru" that land to the Maori King. 23
Taylor thought that McLean would be able to obtain the
~attotara
block at this time, and told him that the principal owner was
Hare Tipene of Nukumaru and Hoani Rawenata of Putiki also had an
23 Ms-copy-micro-0535-093A, Mc Lean papers folder 600, Taylor
to McLean, 14 March 1859, Alexander Turnbull Library.
. . -'",,
, ,
." ··t
6
interest in the block. Taylor wrote that Crown acquisition of
the Waitotara block would be:
highly important as assisting to break up the Maori league
& likewise give the
Ngatiruanui bounds.
European
a
footing
within
the
However, Taylor considered that the acquisition of the block
would require "great care" on the part of the government, and
would only be successful if McLean called Hare Tipene to him.
In April 1859, the proposed transfer of ·.the. !'1aitotara. blqqk: to·.
.
.
the Crown·· was discussed by a number of groups ·apparently ~ot
Maorf. living.
to· ·the north
on the· block itself.
.
.
.
. of
Waitotara decided to· send tworepresehtatives ·to . "watch .the
.resident
.
proceedings
,.>::,:.>
land commissioner". 24
Another
group from Wellington who were on their way to Waitara also
stopped at Waitotara where the impending transaction was
discussed.
In this group were Wiremu Tako and Henari, the son
of Te Puni.
of Mr .Maclean the
According to Taylor r
they opposed the sale of
<
Waitotara and were all in favour of the Kingitanga.
In fact,
they said all Maori between Putiki and Rangitikei had "joined the
king" except Putiki and Rangitikei.
1.4
The First Instalment
}
....
..;
Despite opposition from some quarters, a "first insfB-Iment of
£500 was paid by McLean for Waitotara on 11 May 1'59. 25
This
tl
payment
is
Purchases.
26
recorded
in
an
1860
return
of
Native
Land
The receipt for the instalment read:
~ Qms-1994 p 170.
25 H H Turton Maori Deeds of Land Purchases in the North
Island of New Zealand 1878 vol 2, Provinces of wellington,
Taranaki, Hawke'sBay, enclosure in Deed No. 78 pp 238-241.
26
AJHR 1860 Cl.
}
..: ....
7
.We· are.t6- receive the balance for the land when the survey
is completed,
and the following boundaries have. been marked
. . .'.
.
off;. Kai-Iwi,. thence inland as far as Waitotara.
Our
,
.
having .received the money is a guarantee of the cession of
this land to the Government of New Zealand. 27
Note that the actual southern boundary of the Wai totara block was
the Okehu stream, north of Kaiiwi.
The land between the Okehu
stream and Kaiiwi was later withdrawn from the proposed sale.
Also l
guarantee of cession was taken from a group of people who
the government·. had not confirmed' to be the
'rightful'
owners.
No mention.
·appe~rs·to. have been made at this stage I
. , . ·o.f .reserves
....
at least not' inwrit{ng.
H'are .Tipene, ·.·who· TaylQr had earlier described. ·as .the . "chief
owner" signed the receipt, but his name does not appear on the
actual deed of 1863.
'.. '. ..
The name Hoani Rawenata, who Taylor said
also had an interest in Waitotara,
document. 28
does not appear on either
McLean, who was at the time Chief Land Purchase Commissioner I
reported the payment of the instalment to the Colonial Treasurer
on 25 May 1859.
McLean said he:
found i t necessary to make this adva'r;tce with some degree of
promptitude I
and before survey,
a.-s great exertions were
being made by the Ngatiruanui Natives to resist the sale l
and have the land handed over to Potatau (RDB 16:6145).29
The deposit was recorded in an 1860 statement of expenditure of
the
sum
of
£180 1000
allocated out of
II
Turton pp 238-241.
28
Ibid.
29 AJHR 1863 E15 No. 1.
the
£500,000
loan
for
.
8
acquisition of Maori land. 30
"~
....
The area' of the block: was. then· . :i.:.
estimated at 40,000 acres, although the area eventually acquired
would be much smaller.
Despite a government policy of caution in land dealings, and a
general Maoripolicy to withhold land from sale, a deposit was
paid on the Waitotara block.
Certainly the "real owners" were
determined to sell, in an effort to assert their mana over the
land.
However, was this sufficeint for the government to presume
that Waitotara could be purchased without opposition?
1.5'
External" Boundaries Surveyed.·
McLean·employed Samuel Deighton 1;:0 act as an interpreter and to
as'sist Mr Porter, the Proviilc'ial Goverruilen.t Surveyor ,'who was
surveying the external boundaries of the block.
Deighton had
acquired a knowledge of Maori after his arrival in Aotearoa early
in 1840.
For a time he had been clerk and interpreter for the
Resident Magistrate at Wanganui.
He served in the Colonial
Defence Force and became a captain in the Militia. 31
specific
instructions
to
Deighton
located by research for this
and
report,
Porter
McLean's
have not
been
and it is possible the
original instructions were given verbally while McLean was in
Wanganui .
.f
In July 1859 Deighton reported that the inland boundary line had
been completed, and that Porter would soon commence surveying the
coast.
Deighton also said that Maori were waiting impatiently
for McLean to return to the district to complete the transaction.
Deighton had to contend with "a great deal of troubles from the
incessant squabbles & jealousies of the different small tribes
of the Nga rauru's".
He. wrote that he had encountered "a great
deal more difficulty" than McLean had anticipated.
30
Th9-m~ority
AJHR 1860 Cl P 6.
31 G H Scholefield Dictionary of New Zealand Biography vol
I Wellington, 1840 p 199.
::.
.
...
.. :'
9
;,','
of the Maori involved wanted to run the boundary line from Okiore
to Wainui.: According to Deighton, this would give the Crown "a
very small" block of land with
"hardly any bush".
However
Deighton held out for the "upper boundary" knowing that McLean
had stipulated it at the meeting that had earlier been held at
Wanganui about the transaction.
Deighton said he didn't know
whether or not he had exceeded his instructions by pressing for
the upper boundary, but that he hoped McLean would be satisfied
with the action he had taken.
Deighton also notified McLean of
the possibility of acquiring a number of other blocks in the
vicinity of Wanganui~ and on the other side of the·Waitotara. 32
Without McLean's instructions, it is difficult'
.to establish
.
'.
~.
whether or not Deighton's gathering of infqrmlltiori" about other
potentialacquisitiQns.· were. within his lnst;i::'uctions.
The impatience of Maori referred to by Deighton, was perhaps
expressed by Pehimana Hamarama and others in a letter to McLean
l~"::':
d~ted 12 September 1859. 33
They wanted McLean to come and
complete the transaction because Ngatiruanui wanted to hand the
land over to the Maori king ("tango i taua wenua hei hoatutanga
kia Potatau").
In October 1859, Deighton was able to report to McLean that the
Waitotara survey had been completed. 34
.
'He; said that he had made
several trips from Wanganui to Waitotara:-- /to see how the survey
was progressing and to assist Porter.
Maori were getting
"~
impatient"
ffe also told McLean that
with Mc Lean s
I
delay and
wanted the final payment and the transaction concluded.
also hinted that if the block was not settled soon,
"come to nothing".
They
it would
Perhaps as an incentive to McLean, Deighton
said that in his opinion,
if the Waitotara block was settled
32 Ms-copy-micro-0535-049 McLean papers folder 243,-De±ghton
to McLean, Jul 1859.
33 Ms-micro-0535-106, Mc Lean papers folder 683B,
Hamarama and others to McLean, 12 Sep 1859.
34
Ms-copy-micro-0535-049,
Deighton to McLean, 20 Oct 1859.
McLean
papers
Pehimana
folder
243,
~..
.,:.:
10
soon, the "Patea Block" could be purchased if the goverrunent·;·:~o
desired.
Although the external boundaries of the
surveyed,
Waitot~ra
it appears the reserves had not been
block--had been
"laid off"
.35
Deighton said he had "purposely abstained" from the matter of
reserves because he had never received any instructions
from
Mc Lean to "do anything with them" and because he thought McLean
wanted to deal with the reserves himself.
However, Deighton was
happy to settle the reserves immediately if McLean let him know
what to·do.
In
December .185:9., Deighton was ready: to· layoff the reserves. 36
That mo~th he als.o re:ported ·to· McLean ~hat Aperahama' 'said' Ha;re
(Tipene) and Te Kepa had noauthQrity:to deal with the land, and
that" it must be done at a Cortunittee when all are l?resent
It.
This
apparently confirmed what Deighton already considered the case.
However, Deighton cautioned McLean not to mention this to Hare
Tipene and Te Kepa as it would cause "more ill feeling between
them of which there is too much already".
In this particular
letter, Deighton also mentioned the fact that he and Porter had
been
"obliged to make a
few presents to some of the chiefs"
amounting to about £4 or £5 during the time they were surveying,.
.
",,::.';
.. ,
-""')
Clearly the acquisition of Waitotara was,;.fiaught with difficulty,
due in particular to conflict between the interested tribes and
factions (pro and anti Kingitanga).
However, there was no legal
way of solving disputes between Maori, or even between Maori and
the Crown, until the passage of the Native Lands Act 1862. 37
was
apparently left
up
to
Deighton,
under
instruction
It
from
McLean, to settle such disputes, preferably in a way that secured
the land to the Crown.
35
Ibid, Deighton to McLean, 24 Nov 1859.
36
Ibid, Deighton to McLean, 15 Dec 1859.
37 M P K Sorrenson The Purchase of Maori Lands 1865-1892 (MA
Thesis) Auckland University, 1955 p 12 cited in Hippolite p 30.
."
.~-
11
1.6
In
...• :
Reserves Surveyed
February
1860 McLean was
informed that
Mr
Stewart,.· the
Assistant Surveyor, had commenced surveying the reserves in the
Waitotara Block.~
written
to
In the meantime, the Provincial Englneer had
Featherston
to
discuss
his
exploration
of
the
Waitotara and Kaiiwi district with regard to the building of
roads and continuation of the trunk line. 39
On 1 February 1860,
Deighton wrote to McLean that he had spent the previous week or
so at Waitotara with Stewart (RDB 16:6146)
the reserves being asked for were
anticipated.
.40
He regretted that
"much larger"
than he had
However, Deighton wrote that he could' "manage them .
all" except for ~ereka~u o~ ~~ak~:' wh~ch was ~o ') ~~t:rav~.~antiy
l.arge"· that h~ felt he had .. to refer :it to McLean •. -~ _~.(......,
(
"
'.s"'~' -!~~'. ,t;-.'/~. :b.L ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ~ .
Deighton then went on to describe the Perekamu reserve which, he
wrote, had about five miles of river frontage.
Deighton had told
Maori that they could have reserves where their pa were located
but he "could not think of letting them have the whole block".
!;;;;:.
He said that they were "very stubborn" about the matter and that
a letter to them from McLean would "do a great deal of good".
Deighton explained to the Perekamu Maori that he was acting under
McLean's instructions and whatever he did would be sanctioned by
He told McLean that he would~l~~ve the question. of the
McLean.
J
.
Perekamu reserve open until he heard ff.~~ him and that in the
}
meantime he would begin the other reserV~s.
Deighton also told McLean that unfortunately,
mischief"
had
been
done
by
some
"foolish
"a great deal of
meddling
people"
informing Maori that they would only receive £500, in addition
to the initial deposit. He asked McLean to refer to the matter
in the letter he would write "to disabuse them of the idea".
38
AJHR 1861 Cl No. 61 pp 288-9.
39
WP3
1860/2, Provincial Engineer to Featherston,
1860.
40
AJHR 1863 EIS No. 2 P 2.
4 Jan
. . '.'
l i ,,' ',' '1*-~
~
.:'
".:~
.....
..
12
The Assistant Native Secretary informed Deighton on 20 March 1860 '
that his letter had been referred to McLean (ROB 16:6146).41 ,A
reply to Deighton's letter from McLean has not been discovered.
Therefore, McLean' s
instructions regarding reserves ,:~if there
were any, are not known.
It is possible that further action on
the Waitotara block was suspended before any instructions could
issue.
Whatever may have been the case, what can be determined
is what reserves were eventually made on the ground.
These are
discussed later.
Stewart described the land to be acquired at Waitotara and the
proposed reserves in a letter t~' ))~.i<jh:ton qat~d. :i8 ... April 1860
(RDB 16;6147).42
In total, the reserves contained 7,301 acres
and .2. roods: of land
"mostly of., a valuable' q:uality" .. , The lari.q
. ..
south of the Okehu ,stre'am had been withdrawn from. the' sale
leaving 24,900 acres available for acquisition by the Crown.
that,
Of
7,500 acres were described by Stewart as "sand hills of
little value, they being nearly barren, with patches of scrub and
toetoe, &c., only here and there".
That left 17,400 acres, the
value of which, according to Stewart, was ;'much lessened" due to
the reserves breaking up its continuity.
Of that area more than
half was:
open fern land of a good descriptiqn, the remainder being
bush land,
the timber upon which//{s not of much value,
"
"
there being little of it fit for s~wing.
A note is required here about the land south of the Okehu stream
that had been withdrawn from the sale.
The original receipt
infers that the land the Crown would acquire lay between Kaiiwi
and Waitotara.
Stewart's description of the land refers to the
land between Kaiiwi and Okehu being withheld from the sale.
In
May 1862, two letters were written to Featherston rega£ding the
land at Kaiiwi.
Aropeta Tamuku, Hoani Parao and "all the people
41 Ibid No. 3 p 2.
42 Ibid enclosure in No.4 pp 3.
"
13
.',
..
residing at Kaiiwi" wrote that they" ."did not wish any money to
be paid for Kaiiwi". 43
Pehimana Manakore,' on the other hand
wrote that he wanted to receive payment for his land at Kaiiwi
"reaching
to Waitotara". 44
'Manakore also
intimated·~·that
he'
belonged to the Government and· would assist Featherston in the
purchase of land.
When Deighton forwarded Stewart's statement to Mclean, he wrote
that the Waitotara Maori had held a meeting and wanted the
Waitotara block to be paid for by the acre
(RDB 16: 6146-7).45
Deighton had informed them that he was not sure that
agree, but that·he. wou~d ~~ke their.re~~~t. known.
McLea~
would
Deighton also
described Maori a.ffairs in the .dl.strlct. with regard to the Maori.
attitude·to the wa~ in Taranaki.
He w~ot~ that. Waito~ara Mao~i
·consid~red the Europ·eans to· be hostile to them,' -ahd in· an attempt·
to rld Maori of that impression, said he had induced them to go
,to Wanganui as often as possible so that they could see for
themselves that "nothing wrong was in contemplation amongst any
of the friendly disposed natives".
Maori
about
Parewanui,
Rangitikei,
on
the
other
hand,
were
described as "gulled and frightened" by reports that barracks
were being built in other parts of the country and soldiers were
being sent to outlying districts.
,;
i.
Gener~~ly, however, Deighton
considered that Maori in the Whanganui d~~trict felt that there
was no need to fear an outbreak of war there so long as the war
was about Waitara and against Wiremu Kingi and the Ngatiruanui
and did not merge with the king movement.
Deighton did not know
if Serancke, the District Commissioner for Wellington, agreed
with him, although he felt his information was reliable because
he had in the past been constantly in communication with Maori
43 MA-MLP W 1 Land Purchase Commissioner's Letterbelolf.. 18621866 P 3, Aropeta Tamuku & Hoani Parao to Featherston, 28 May
1862.
44
MA-MLP W P 3, Pehimana Manakore to Featherston, 12 May
45
AJHR 1863 EIS No. 4 pp 2-3.
1862.
14
and, in his own opinion, Maori had faith in him.
Having given this opinion to McLean, Deighton went on to describe
settlers enroling into a Volunteer Corps and his
Militia were to be called out.
belief.~hat
the
Deighton himself aneicipated
being appointed an officer and thought that it would be a good
platform from which to explain the enrolments in a way that would
allay any fears Maori might have "as these affairs are always
exaggerated".
He explained the situation to Hare Tipene, who,
he said, appeared "very much pleased with it".
He continued:
0"£ course ·,1 shall take every opportunity of being with the
. natives ~ and endeavour to keep everything upon as frie;;ndly
a
foqting as possible,. and I
think. more good is done. in . "
this· way than . by catllng "formal "meetings. and. stating "your
opinions at them, as they are more inclined to listen to a
little quiet talk and will reason with you better than when
they are excited.
:.-;.;
By a letter from Deighton to Mc Lean in June 1860 asking to be
paid, it would seem Deighton considered the matter of surveying
to be concluded, although the "Waitotara business" had not turned
out
"quite as
fortunately"
as it could have. 46
transaction had still not been completed
informed Deighton, by direction of the
action would be taken regarding
~n
However,
the
November when McLean
G~~ernor,
that no further
"the pending negotiations at
Waitotara, during the present unsettled state of the district"
(RDB 16:6148)
1.7
.47
Limbo: Suspension of the Transaction
Land purchase operations on the West Cqast were stopped in 1860,
and the suspension of the Waitotara acquisition was in_line with
46
Deighton to McLean, 21 Jun 1860·.
47
AJHR 1863 EI5 No. 5 P 4.
McLean
papers
folder
243,
........
!
'~...:t.wr..l"UJ.Nn..,..,.h·o!~.h;rititQU£tUO:U!W..H.hl.t!iLW.~l)I'''D'y''n.A..!',,"'"
NU
..b .l;'.,nl."LX.I:1.!~
~'Hl.FxS>">£l.(~'b..U.~··'.n.U
' . . . . _.... ..'.:.l??i . · ..
. -.'.
;".
". .'
" .'" ,. :,.'..
· ... l·
:::.:~~!>
. ."·,;~t~;;,t·,A'
',.
:';.'
15,
that general poli~li~:::<'i:.~'serancke,'. the District : ,Commissioner ' for
Wellington Province/:believed that money for land was being used
to finance 'the war in Taranaki, and that the generally unsettled
state of things was not conducive to acquiring land.··~Serancke
himself had had a difficult time since taking up his auties in'
'1858. Maori preferred McLean to Serancke, and conflict between
,
.
tribes and between Kingitanga supporters and willing sellers
complicated negotiations for land even more. 48
However,
even
'"
negotiations
for
waitotara
suspended,
correspondence about the block continued. In June 1861, ~aylor
wrote.
to "McLe?t~
that Hare Tipene had been enquiring into the
..:"
.
comple:tion 'of .the Waitotara purchase. Taylor wrote:
,
'.
,'r:
with
,this of course' will ,be at· once attended' to .- it is of'· the
utmost importance & will be one grand· means of detaching
Hare Tipene & his hapu from the Ngatiruanui confederation. 49
Even
if
Tay10r
thought
the
transaction would
be
concluded
immediately, he was apparently wrong.
At the end of July he
wrote that he was "sorry" to find McLean had "no intention of
visiting the Wanganui relative to the Waitotara block". so
It
is
not
clear
what
Taylor
confederation" nor why it was so
from it.
meant"by
/.
importa~y to
the
"Ngatiruanui
detach Hare Tipene
It could be interpreted as "-a need to conclusively
extract Hare Tipene from the influence of the Kingitanga or socalled
'rebels'.
However,
when
asked
by
McLean
for
his
impression of the attitude of Maori in the Wanganui district,
Taylor described Hare Tipene as a chief who "remained firm" to
the government (ROB 15: 5542-3) .51
48
Luiten Whanganui ki Porirua p 32.
49 Ms-copy-micro-0535-093A, McLean papers folder 600, Taylor
to McLean, 12 June 1861.
so Ibid, Taylor to McLean,
51
31 Jul 1861.
AJHR 1861 E7 No. 13 pp 29-30.
.'.~
16
The Ngarauru or Waitotara Maori, according to Taylor's report of
September
supported
1861, were "divided in
Ngatiruanui
and
some
Government" .
supported
In
the
Taylor' s
their sentiments".
Some
supported
the
"British
opinion,
government was
the
Penehamini,
head
of
those
who
"a promising young
chief", who seemed to use all his influence in favour of the
government.
'petition'
Taylor referred again to Waitotara and Hare Tipene' s
to have the transaction completed,
Ngatiruanui from interfering".
"to hinder the
Taylor wrote "it appears highly
important that his request should have immediate attention given
to it".
'!-"
In this letter to the Native Secreta'ry,.· Taylor does !l<?·t. give -any
specific
detai'l
Ngatiruanui r
Waitotara.
regarding
those
Maori
who
"sided"
with
nor what effect that had on the propos'ed sale of
However, Taylor did describe a large runanga held at
Kanihinihi on 2 September 1861, which was attended by "nearly all
the Wanganui Chiefs,
\;..... ,:
Waikatos".
or not
and Tararoa and some few Waitotaras and
The purpose of the runanga was to determine whether
individual chiefs who had land
"outside the European
block" could exercise their rights over that land independent of
the Kingitanga.
The determination made was in favour of the
individual land owners.
It had been previously intended to raise
the Kingi tanga flag, but, according to·, Tay,lor , this was not done.
Tay lor ,
who opened the runanga,
urged..; those present,
and he
estimated there were a thousand r to take any grievances they had
to
Sir George Grey because they were
familiar with him and
because" he had now been returned as their governor.
they agreed to do this r
welcome.
Taylor was
Taylor felt
as well as to send Grey a
letter of
"much surprised at the very quiet
moderate tone of all the speakers".
and
It was. evident, he wrote,
that "they all view Sir G. Grey's reappointment as a .goad sign
and omen of peace".
Pehimana Manakore is another who wrote urging the completion of
the transaction.
On 14 March 1862, he wrote to the governor from
'-"
'0-
··-··----~-- ........ ~ ................................. ----"--~~~ ... I~~U.u,.,...:u.l...u... ... ' ................ U.o...1...l'o.1~""'''''-''''
'.
. :.:;
,
.....
17
':' .'-'.
Pakaraka hoping that the governor would visit him
land so that the land
could be
.. .
andP~Y"forthe·:··,
"made . over
to, the Queen".
52
.
. .;
.
,
Manakore also wrote to inform the governor of the Ngatiruanuiand
Taranaki "scheme
to prevent roads being made on their "land, .and
fI ,
.
to stop the mail and white men passing through.
Manakore also
complained that they refused to return goods they had stolen
"during the disturbance".
Of Aperahama Taimaparea, Manakore wrote that his "evil is great
tI ,
that" he had turned to the Kingitanga and positioned himself at
the mouth of Waitotara to stop the mail from passing through to
"raranaki. MaI).a"kore "~r6te '''you must deal a~ yo"u" may"think p~op~r
: with this man". "Th~" Ap"eraha~a re~e~~ed to he:i:'e", "is likei to be:
y
the" f?ame Aperahama who had earlier told Deighton that JIare Tipene .
and Te Kepa had "no right to deal with the land.
Also,.if
Aperahama"Taimaparea and Aperahama Parea are one and the same
person, then, like Hare Tipene, he signed the receipt for the
£500 deposit, but not the actual deed transacted in 1863. 53 (See
section 1.9 for a description of the signatories).
Manakore closed his letter with a mention to the Governor that
Browne and McLean had promised him a cutter which he had not yet
received.
He asked if he could have it so that he could carry
his wheat to town.
Manakore s letter doe's; not reveal whether the
I
cutter was intended as a gift, or in ret~'~h for land or money or
something else.
Later in the year, .LM'anakore confirmed his
allegiance to the government and registered his willingness to
assist Featherston in his land purchase operations. 54
Even with negotiations for Waitotara on hold, and the transaction
incomplete, the reserves were included in a return laid before
52
WP 3 1862/223,
Pehimana Manakore to Governor,
14 Mar
1862.
53
Turton pp 238-241.
54 MA-MLP W 1 1866 P 3, Pehimana Manakore to Featherston, 12
May 1862.
.j'-
...
18
parliament in 1862. 55
The return identified reserves for Maori
"which have been made in Cessions of Te.rritory tothe crown"(~wn
emphasis). Eight reserves are deemed to be made and the area· for
each is given.
It is important to note.that the date of the
Waitotara transaction is given by the return as 26 November 1858.
McLean had been instructed to provide this return in November
1861,
for the purpose of identifying "every promise or
engagement" made by the government to Maori so that Crown grants
could issue.
completed, it
difficulties".
By February 1862 that return had not been
having been attended to with "no ordinary
Henry Sewell, who prepared the return, observed
that most of the Maori deeds·were incomplete.
1.8
Transaction Resumed 1862
In 1862, with the appointment of Isaac Earl Featherston MD as
land
(,.
purchase
commissioner
for
Wellington
Province,
the
acquisition of Waitotara was resumed. Featherston had travelled
to Aotearoa in 1840 as surgeon-superintendent on board a New
Zealand Company ship. 56
When the Constitutional Association was
formed he took a leading public role in settler affairs, and was
elected Superintendent of the Wellington Province in 1853.
He
was also a member of parliament from 1853 to 1870, representing
Wanganui and Rangitikei and then wellingt.jn City.
He . appears to
have held these positions concurrently w~~le also in the position
.'1' t
of land purchase commissioner.
Authority to purchase land was
vested in Featherston by McLean under the land purchase division
of the Native Department. 57
F.eatherston was a strong critic of the government· s handling of
the Waitara affair. He feared government policies that promoted
55
AJHR 1862 E10.
56
Scholefield Dictionary Vol I pp 242-3.
57
A Ward A Show of Justice: racial amalgamation in
nineteenth century New Zealand Auckland 1973, reprinted 1983 p
131.
::;
.. :..•.
,
.......
....
. '.:.
.
19
' •...,.
~:.
..,' <. '..... .
..'
.'
......,' ... , ; .....
'
war due to their dlsturbingeffect on race relations, and would
intervene personally' whenever trouble loomed. • He used his stand
over the affair as evidence of his even-handedness and became
known for his diplomacy.
'Following his appointment., as
land
purchase commissioner for the Wellington province, he aiso became
known as a skilled negotiator in the acquisition of Maori land.
His most notable success was his role in negotiations for the
Rangitikei block which lasted seven years. 58
Featherston appointed Deighton as interpreter and clerk in the
land purchase department. 59
Featherston explained to Deighton
'that in 'addition to his ~rdinary duties. he would be required to
!
(
go to any part of'the province'where land was 'offered for sale
to explain the land purchase commissioner's "views & intentions"
to
Maori.
Deighton
would
also
"to
a
responsible for conducting negotiations.
certain
extent"
be
Featherston also wrote
that Deighton' s appointment was of "so delicate
&
important a
nature" that it would only be temporary, until Deighton proved
\;,;t;::
his competence in the position.
If Deighton decided to accept
the position, he was told he would then have to await further
instructions.
However, whether he accepted or not, Deighton was
asked to address copies of notices of Featherston's appointment
as land purchase commissioner to:
I
the most influential Chiefs of the ' wanganui,
r
Patea
&
Waitotara,
Rangitikei districts, especially the Chiefs with
whom negotiations for the purchase of the Waitotara Block
have commenced. w
Deighton was
further asked to keep a
list of the chiefs he
addressed but not to take any further action until he had heard
Department of Internal Affairs The Dictionaq o.f New
Zealand Biography, Volume One 1769-1869 Wellington, 1990 pp 119121.
58
59
MA-MLP W 1 pp 19-21, Featherston to Deighton, 5 & 12 May
1862.
W MA-MLP W 1
P 19, Featherston to Deighton, 5 May 1862.
20
from Featherston.
On
12
May
1862,
Featherston acknowledged that
Deighton
had
accepted the appointment of interpreter and clerk, and sent him
further instructions.
acquisition
Those instructions were mostly about the
Waitotara. 61
of
Because
Deighton
had
been
previously involved, Featherston had no doubt that he was "fully
acquainted with the obstacles" which had so far obstructed the
completion of the Waitotara purchase.
While Featherston did not
say what he considered those obstacles to be, he was probably
referring to the conflict amongst Maori interested in the block,
and the general move in the Wellington province to suspend land
purchase operations due to the unsettled state of the district.
Featherston's understanding of the situation was that Maori were
now anxious to have the transaction completed with the "least
possible delay".
i:;(":"
If that was so, Deighton was instructed to
immediately put himself in "communication with the principal
owners of the block". He was to determine whether or not they
agreed to the purchase price offered by McLean,
reserves proposed to be made for them.
the terms,
and to the
If Featherston approved
he would propose that the purchase be completed.
Deighton was not to start any communication with those concerned
unless he was satisfied that they were ""r,eally
anxious to sell"
.
and willing to limit the reserves to
"i~asonable
dimensions".
Featherston did not consider the block wbrth purchasing if Maori
insisted in claiming the reserves that they had been asking for
two years previously when Featherston had visited the district.
Deighton
was
under
strict
instructions
not,
under
any
circumstances, to ask Maori to sell, "but simply respond to any
invitation they may make to the Govt to purchase".
When Deighton
ascertained the terms Maoriproposed, he was not to commit the
government to those terms.
He was required simply to admit that
those terms would be laid before the government.
61
Ibid pp 20-21, Featherston to Deighton l
If Deighton did
12 May 1862.
21
not consider it advisable to open any negotiations with Maori,
he was instructed to go to Wellington. However, if he did think
terms acceptable to the government would be offered, he could go
ahead and open negotiations for completion of the purchase.
Featherston stressed again that:
there must be no anxiety evinced on the part of the Govt to
purchase the Block.
The natives in this as in all other
cases, must simply be told that the. Govt are willing to
purchase any lands they are anxious to sell, provided the
terms of purchase can·be satisfactorily arranged.
Featherston did not say what effect his instructions had on·the
original agreement Maori had entered into with McLean.
Featherston wrote that the government would only respond to
offers by Maori to sell and only if they were "really anxious"
to sell and, at Waitotara, willing to restrict their reserves.
If
\.::.'
that was
so,
could a
desire to withdraw from a
sale be
accepted, especially if the terms of the sale were unacceptable
to government? Also, what degree of consideration was given to
any party opposed to a particular sale, especially where those
who were "really anxious" to sell were anxious because there was
opposition?
.:-.; .. ~~./
When Deighton replied to Featherston' s i,ri~'tructions, he offered
his recollection of the acquisition of
~~itotara
identifying the "obstacles" he was aware of. 62
as a means of
He described the
Maori as "very anxious to sell" when negotiations for Waitotara
were first opened by McLean.
When he and Porter were dispatched
to survey the boundary he had been under the impression that the
transaction was to be completed at once. Some delay had occurred
before Deighton was instructed to survey the reserves. He found,
by
then,
that Maori
were
"differently disposed
having:-. been
influenced a great deal by the King party from other parts as
well as from Waitotara".
62
They were less willing to come to terms
WP 3 1862/272, Deighton to Featherston, 15 May 1862.
22
and had formed "absurd ideas as to the v.alue of the land".
they had resolved to have
'.'very large reserves".
Also,
Deighton ' s
remonstrations had little effect, and his understanding of the
situation was that if the transaction had been concluded earlier,
there would have been no problem.
However, Deighton said he was bound by instructions to survey the
reserves
while at the same
time doing the best he could to
"restrict them as much as possible".
Even though he told Maori
that he did not think the government would buy a block Uso cut
. up with large Reserves", they would not change their minds ~
When
Deightonreported to McLean that the reserves were surveyed,
McLean expressed his satisfaction and "nothing more occurred for
a long time".
Maori
When Deighton again reported to McLean that the
wanted
the
transaction concluded,
McLean replied that
negotiations for the block had been suspended due to the then
"unsettled state of the country".
outbreak of war at Taranaki.
This was a reference to the
Deighton communicated McLean' s
response to the Waitotara Maori and "the affair dropped for a
long time".
clerk,
By the time Deighton was appointed interpreter and
however,
it
had
been
revived.
Waitotara
Maori
had
"repeatedly" asked Deighton about the matter.
Deighton's opinion of the acquisition':w"as that
"the .. purchase
might be concluded" but without first speli'¥ing with the "leading"
chiefs he could not say whether or not· 'the reserves would be
reduced in size.
Deighton was expecting a visit from some of the
Wai totara Maori and he hoped to learn from them their views about
the Waitotara acquisition.
He wrote that in keeping with his
instructions from Featherston he would be "particularly careful"
not
to
commit
the
government
in
any
way.
With
regard
to
Featherston s reference to an offer of money and certain reserves
I
proposed by McLean, Deighton said he was not aware of that fact
although McLean may well have discussed the matter with the
Waitotara Maori himself.
On 19 May 1862 Deighton was instructed to tell Pehimana and "the
23
other chiefs"
that Featherston was
prepared to complete the
Waitotara acquisition as soon as the reserves and the amount of
the purchase money were agreed on. 63
This instruction was made
in response to a letter Featherston had received from·Pehimana
Manakore
asking for the Wai totara purchase to be completed.
Featherston also asked Deighton to send him a tracing of the
block showing the reserves and to get Maori to understand that
"unless the Reserves are very considerably reduced - it will not
be worthwhile to buy the Block".
Pehimana had written to Featherston from Pakaraka on 12
indicat~d
M~y
and
his willin~ness to assi~t in the purchase of land by:
the government. 64
He also asked to be paid for his land at
Kaiiwi "reaching to Waitotara".
Others, however, later wrote to
Featherston to say that they "were not willing" to let McLean
have their land. 65
Aropeta Tamuku,
Hoani Parao and
"all the
people residing at Kaiiwi" warned Featherston to be careful and
not to give money for the land at Kaiiwi because the boundary was
.".
at Okehu.
Deighton
wrote
to
Featherston
on
24
proceeding to Waitotara the next day.M
May
that
he
would
be
On 29 May he reported
back to Featherston and sent a tracing of the Waitotara block. 67
He also wrote that he had passed on Feathe~ston's views about the
completion of the Waitotara acquisition,/t;.o Pehimana.
Pehimana
"and his tribe" were described by Deight:.'on as "most anxious" to
have the acquisition concluded.
However a "small party" headed
by Te Kepa, the son of one of the "principal chiefs", was in an
63
64
MA-MLP W 1 P 21, Featherston to Deighton, 19 May 1862.
Ibid 1 P 3,
Pehimana Manakore to Featherston,
12 May
1862.
65 Ibid P 3, Aropeta Tamuku and others to Featherston, 28
May 1862.
66
WP 3 1862/296, Deighton to Featherston, 24 May 1862.
67 WP 3 1862/306, Deighton to Featherston, 29 May 1862.
tracing referred to in the letter is no longer enclosed.
The
··-·-···---·-----·---.·· ...................I"'o..6"~~b~iil~~
. ::
..
24
"undecided state". Pehimana asked Deighton to postpone visiting . <:>'
that party for a few days. This Pehimana asked because he was ..
. ,:."
wai ting for some of his own party away' at wanganui to arrive.'
...
,\
Pehimana wanted to have "as many as he could fit, on his siCle,
in case of any opposition on the part to Te Kepa".
Deighton acceded to Pehimana's request to postpone visiting Te
Kepa because Pehimana was an owner in the "large Reserve in the
middle of the Block".
Deighton hoped that through Pehimana' s
influence he could get that reserve considerably contained.
However I he said he would still bear in mind Featherston s
instructions and if there was any unwillingness to come to terms
f
he would depart immediately for Wellington.
It seems that
manipulation of a situation by a Crown agent is happening in two
ways here. Firstly, he is modifying his schedule so that one of
the willing sellers can gather support around him. Secondly, he
is acceding to the wishes of a willing seller so that he can
later take advantage of the influence of that willing seller .
.:.'
Having visited the various settlements in the district, Deighton
wrote again to Featherston on 12 June 1862 to report on his
"communication" with Maori at Waitotara. 68
He wrote that he
found "the general feeling" was in favour of selling the land,
that the Waitotara Maori were "anxious"t? have settlers among
them as soon as possible" and were "very'" well disposed towards
r
Europeans".
However, they also had the
value of the land.
letter,
he
"tn~st
absurd" idea of the
Deighton told them that, due to Pehimana's
had been sent by Featherston to
decision in the matter.
ascertain
their
At the same time, he made it clear that
the reserves had to be reduced in area.
The decision the Waitotara Maori reached was that:
the reserves must remain as they are at present marked off,
and the price for the remainder of the Block is to' be
68
WP 3 62/338, Deighton to Featherston, 12 June 1862.
'.'"
25
£8000. 69
Deighton told them that he could not discuss the matter further
until he had heard from Featherston, and that he was "quite sure"
Featherston would not agree to their terms.
Nonetheless he
promised to put the matter to Featherston on their behalf, and
to inform them of Featherston's response.
After the meeting,
Deighton said he was told "privately" by Pehimana and others that
the £8000 mentioned was "nonsense", but because the £500 deposit,
had been divided and spent already, the owners of the two large
reserves receiving a large portion of ,the money, that the land
"must" be' sold and the reserves reduced. It ,was never expected
that such a sum would be obtained, but £8000 was mentioned to see
what
offer would be
made
by
the
government.
Deighton
was
"convinced" that the Maori would come to terms if "a reasonable
sum was offered and a little time given to think it over".
He
felt even more convinced of this if the government appeared to
be indifferent about the matter.
'.,""
Four days after Deighton reported all this,' Featherston suspended
all further negotiations for the purchase of the Waitotara block
and requested Deighton to proceed to Wellington. 70
Featherston
wrote that he could not ascertain whether, once the reserves and
sandhills were deducted, there would -be--' 9'0re than 20,0,0,0 acres
of "moderately available land".
, I'
He felt ('that when McLean paid
the original deposit of £500 he must havti 'thought that the block
contained three or four times that area.
Featherston considered
that besides being "excessive" the reserves were "likely to give
rise to all sorts of disputes".
Further, Featherston wrote:
The
excessive
instalment
already given upon th.is -petty
block has no doubt given rise to the exaggerated notion of
69
70
Ibid.
MA-MLP-W 1 pp 22-3, Featherston to Deighton, 16 Jun 1862.
,
26
....
'
the value that the natives at present entertain. To make
any offer for the block as at present disposed would be
most unwise.
Featherston instructed Deighton to
"quietly intimate-If
to the
Waitotara Maori that at the time the deposit was paid, the
government was "deceived".
With regard to the extent of the
block and the extent of the reserves, Deighton was to inform them
that the government
"scarcely consider the Block worth
purchasing". If the purchase was not completed, the £500 deposit
would have to be refunded. At the same time Deighton had to let
them know that the government would reopen negotiations at any
time if the area of the block was enlarged; the reserves reduced,
and a "reasonable" sum asked.
It seems Featherston was taki'ng
some of Deighton's advice as he wanted Maori to understand that
the government was "wholly indifferent" to the purchase of the
block as it presently stood.
~iiii':;':(:
There
was
a
certain
amount
instructions to Deighton.
of
innuendo
in
Featherston' s
While Featherston deemed it "most
expedient" to follow this course of action, he told Deighton to
only follow it if he thought it "calculated to produce the effect
intended".
Featherston
wrote
he
didn't
issue
"positive
instructions" but simply gave Deighton ..lIhi:t;lts" which· he could act
upon or not as he saw fit. Under no circlfinstances, however was
Deighton to make an offer for the bi.J.~ck.
It seems that
Featherston was asking Deighton to read between the lines, and
that whatever action Deighton considered appropriate was okay as
long as it did not include making an offer for the block.
These
somewhat cryptic instructions may be interpreted to mean that,
because he did not have positive instructions, Deighton alone
became culpable for his actions and not his superiors.
The "effect intended" would appear to refer to a change of heart
from the Waitotara Maori with regard to the cession of the land
to the government,
as Deighton had earlier antiCipated would
happen if the situation was managed in the right way.
It seems
;','
27
.:.......... .
....,.
:.~
'"
....
tfia"t""ll'eatherston I s suspension of negotiations was an attempt to
bluff the Waitotara Maori into changing their attitude toward the
cession
of
Waitotara
to
the
Crown,
and
agreeing
to
the
transaction
was
government's terms for the block.
The
option
for
Maori
to
withdraw
from
the
immediately closed off by the requirement that the deposit be
repaiql., which hung like a bribe over the negotiations.
" '.~.. ::: ~,,:"~~~~Tt2:~~
deposit,
.. .....
...
:,'
by McLean' s
own admission,
That
was only paid to thwart
:~
attempts to bring the land under the umbrella of the Maori king.
If the government really was feeling indifferent to the whole
matter,
could
it
not
have
withdrawn
gracefully
transaction instead of offering ultimatums?
from
the
If the block was not
worth purchasing as it stood, why pursue the purchase?
On the
one hand Featherston was advising caution in negotiations, only
respond to offers, and do not lead the negotiations, but on the
other hand he wants the waitotara to be purchased.
In his reply to Featherston, Deighton made some comments about
the extent of the Waitotara block and its "boundaries. 71
He said
the reserves would not have been so large if Mc Lean had completed
the purchase immediately.
As it stood, the block included m9re
land than McLean had originally expected.
According to Deighton
this was because he had not "given in '~"f~i the Maori when he was
sent"
out on the survey.
If he had, the" r'inland boundary would
have been about a mile or more lower down' than it was currently.
As
for
the
land between the Okehu stream and the
"Wanganui
boundary" (Kaiiwi), which was intended to be included according
to the receipt for the deposit,
Deighton was sure it could not
be purchased until the "principal owner" died.
Deighton thought
that McLean had been aware of that "from the first".
Featherston's instructions to induce the Maori to
As for
enLar~e
the
external boundaries of the block, Deighton wrote that the land
adjacent to the northern boundary was "heavily timbered & very
71
WP 3 62/350, Deighton to Featherston, 19 Jun 1862.
......
28
hilly & broken". Deighton suggested, therefore, that he not ask
for the boundaries to be extended. Rather, he wanted to tell the
Waitotara
Maori
that
"they must
reduce
the
price,
and
the
reserves" and that the government would then "endeavour to come
to terms" otherwise the £500 had to be returned.
Deighton said
he
had
heard that
if
the government
~id
not.
conclude the transaction, the block would be handed over to the
Kingitanga. 72
This concurs with information previously conveyed
to Featherston in a letter from Richard Woon, interpreter in the
Wanganui district and later Resident Magistrate of the wa~ganui
River. 73 Woon had written on behalf of Hare Tipene who wanted
to know if it was true that unless the reserves were reduced, the
£500 deposit had to be returned and the land kept.
According to
Woon's information, the statement had been made by peighton to
Pehimana and other Maori at Pakaraka.
It seemed to Woon that
Hare Tipene, who had been "very active" in getting other Maori
to consent to the sale was annoyed that he had not been consulted
about the matter.
This reflects Deighton's opinion that Hare
Tipene did not have authority to deal with the land.
Hare Tipene
had stated that if what he had heard was true, the land would
"never again be offered for purchase and will go to the king".
Woon wrote that if Featherston furnished him with the correct
information about the matter, he would .11l~e sure it. was passed
on to Hare Tipene.
Two weeks later, Woon wrote again asking Featherston for a
reply. 74
In the meantime, Hare Tipene had written to Woon and
Major Durie about his runanga which he had assembled on 4
July.75
The runanga had decided to take the land out of the
government's hands and to keep the £500 as well.
Hare Tipene
72 WP 3 62/350, Deighton to Featherston, 19 Jun 1862.73 WP 3 62/405, Woon to Featherston, 3 Jul 1862.
74 WP 3 62/394, Woon to Featherston, 17 Jul 1862.
75 MA-MLP W 1 P 13, Hare Tipene to Major Durie & R Woon, no
date, sometime between 4 and 22 Jul 1862.
..
. "
29
wrote that it was not his doing but government's for returning
the land, that his wish was "not for the money but to be on
friendly terms". Having seen that letter, Featherston wrote to
Hare Tipene himself. 76 He wrote that what the runanga.intended
was wrong and that if they kept the money the land had to be
given, or if they kept the land the money had to be returned.
Featherston further wrote that the purchase had not been
concluded because of the large reserves being asked for and the
price for the balance of the block being so high.
Three days after Featherston had written to Hare Tipe~e! Woon
sent Featherston another letter. It was written by the· Waitotara
"chiefs" to the "chiefs'" up the Wanganui river expressing their
determination to withhold·Waitotara from the sale and keep the
£500 deposit also. 77
Woon had received that letter from "the
chief Dawson" who had intercepted it. According to Woon, Dawson
and Pehi had "replied to the effect that they do not approve".
,~..:.;.
Featherston told Woon that the Waitotara Maori must be made to
understand that while the government was willing to buy any land
they wanted to
sell,
reserves
be
"must
the
asking price and the size of the
reasonable".
In
the
Waitotara
block,
Featherston claimed, the reserves comprised so much of the good
land, a quarter of it, that they would "ma:t;:erially interfere with
the occupation by the settlers of the r~~'ainder".
Featherston
also considered the first instalment pai~'by McLean as so large,
relative to the block, that it was not expedient to name the
price government was willing to give, espec~ally because
Featherston
believed
that
al together preposterous". 78
Maori
were
"expecting
an
amount
Apparently he thought this despite
being informed of the "private" conversation Deighton had had
with Pehimana and others.
76
Ibid P 13, Featherston to Hare Tipene, 22 Jul 1862.
77
WP 3 62/405, Woon to Featherston, 25 Jul 1862.
78
MA-MLP W 1 P 23, Featherston to Woon, 28 Jul 1862.
:.:
30
By August 1862, Reverend Richard Taylor felt inclined to offer
his opinion on the matter. Taylor wrote to Featherston:
You must pardon me if I find fault with you for-delaying
the completion of the [Waitotara] purchase. 79
Taylor considered that the reason the purchase had been delayed
was that Maori had consented to sell only "the worst part of the
district".
Taylor pointed out however, that "as owners they have
the right to dispose of what they like".
He thought that if the
government accepted the portion Maori were willing to
se~l,
it
would "not only break the land league" but soon Maori'could be
./; ) .. ' induced to "part' with the remainder". Taylor clarified that' "of
course the money now given will be in proportion to the land
given up".
Another reason Taylor gave for completing the
purchase was that otherwise it would give Maori reason to
conclude that the government has not fulfilled its part of the
agreement.
The Wai totara Maori had been advised by "a grand
runanga" of the Kingitanga, held at Whareroa, to keep the land
and the' money.
Taylor feared that that was exactly what they
would do if the government didn't take some immediate action.
He felt that a visit by Featherston could "easily" settle the
matter, and that it should not be done by a deputy.
~
)
Featherston did apparently organise to meet with the Maori in the
Whanganui and Waitotara districts.
lIowever, when Deighton
informed them of the proposed visit by Featherston, several of
the
Whanganui
and
Waitotara
Maori
asked
Deighton
to
tell
Featherston that he ought to postpone his visit until after or
at the same time as the Governor's visit. w
Maori had a
"great deal of business"
Deighton wrote that
they wanted to discuss
besides the "the Waitotara affair". and they wanted a "general
opinion of the meeting on the subject". Deighton also sa.id. that
79
WP 3 62/425, Taylor to Featherston, 17 Aug 1862.
80 WP 3 62/451, Deighton to Featherston, date unclear but
about September 1862.
31
"they" were "all very indignant" at Hare Tipene and were
determined that Waitotara would be sold, but they first of all
wanted to have their other affairs discussed. Deighton thought
it was "better to let them have their own way"· so that
Featherston couldn't then be blamed if it all came to· "nothing
after all".
Some legal issues may be raised here. On 11 May 1859, when the
receipt for the first instalment was signed, the Crown and those
who signed entered into an agreement regarding the cession of a
piece of land to the government. It was a very broad agreement,~
~
~
agr~ement~
without specific terms, which may be described as an
to negotiate, and was perhaps no more binding than that.
The~'
boundaries of the block were not properly identified let alone
surveyed. They were merely described as ItKaiiwi, thence inland
as far as Waitotara It.
The terms of the agreement were given
substance after the fact, when the external boundaries and the
reserves were surveyed.
':.:"
However, even with Maori urging that the transaction be
completed, government on hindsight insisted that the reserves be
reduced, the asking price be reduced, and the external boundaries
extended.
This seems to constitute a major alteration to the
terms of the original agreement, asmodi·f~ed by the surveys. As
it was the Crown who wanted to make thc;t"~"alteration, could it
fairly ask for the deposit to be repaid?· The Crown had entered
into an agreement and then urged for it to be changed to suit its
own purposes.
The other party to the agreement, on the other
hand,
was willing to let the agreement proceed as originally
agreed to.
The ultimatum laid down by the government, that is
keep the land and return the money or keep the money and sell the
land, was a means of inducing Maori into agreeing to the new
terms. The government knew that Maori were not in a poaition to
return the money. The government believed that if it held out
for long enough, Maori would eventually succumb and agree to the
new terms.
32
This report has alluded to the Kingitanga and the way that its
philosophies influenced the attitudes of some Maori toward the
cession of Waitotara to the Crown.
There is an implication· that
Maori who supported the Kingitanga opposed the cession, 'and Maori
who opposed the Kingitanga supported the cession.
There is a
further implication that .the acquisition of Waitotara by the
Crown would be a means of undermining the Kingitanga, which was
considered by Pakeha as an anti-land selling lobby.
John White
gave a picture of the location of "friendly" and "King" Maori in
a
map he enclosed with his
Magistrate of Whanganui. 81
first general report as Resident
According to the map,
there were
parties of both "friendly" and "King" Maori at each of the Okehu,
Pakaraka and Nukumaru settlements.
The map gives the impression
that "friendly" Maori and "King" Maori both lived together.
Also in this report, White suggested that a courthouse be erected
at
Pakaraka.
The people who White had spoken to there had
identified themselves as "friendly".
\;;;;.;;'
White considered it was
important to occupy Pakaraka as an outpost "between the European
population of Whanganui and the disaffected Ngatiruanui Hapus".
Besides being able to administer justice to friendly Maori, a
courthouse at Pakaraka could be used as a means
information
with
respect
to
the
intended
"of obtaining
actions
unfriendly Natives in the Ngatiruanui cou~try".
of
the
The court would
be in a position to gain the confidence of' ,"unfriendly" Maori "as
far as is compatible with justice to those who joined in the
Taranaki War, and now standing aloof from the government".
White also described an aukati
"or toll gate"
that had been
erected on the Waitotara, about three miles from Pakaraka.
While
he was in the district, a fine of £1 was imposed on a "friendly"
Maori.
When the fine was paid, he was allowed to pass.
said the
"young chief" Rio had pulled the aukati down -three
times, as much to
81
White
MA 24/22, White to Native Minister, 28 Nov1862.
33
show his loyalty to the crown as to gratify his illwill
towards the keepers of this gate, who oppose Rio and his
party in the final sale of the Waitotara Block of land to
the government. 82
Differences had earlier come to a head when Rio and Pehimana,
"friendly" chiefs of Pakaraka, claimed that Kingitanga Maori of
Ngatiruanui, Ngarauru and Waitotara itself had threatened to
drive them off to Whanganui. 83
Rio. and Pehimana consequently
requested a supply of arms and ammunition to protect themselves.
It is interesting to note that even though the transacti?n had
not been concluded, Pehimana and Rio referred to the land,
including Pakaraka where they were living, as "the Queen's land"
(te whenua 0 te Kuini). This may mean the land belonged to progovernment Maori as opposed to Kingitanga supporters, rather than
meaning the land had ceded to the Queen.
\>;~,.:,;
Aukati continued to be a feature of life in the Waitotara
district and to assist in defining rebel and friendly Maori. In
February 1863, a group of women who had been to a tangi at
Waitotara were "imprisoned" by Aperahama and fined £1.17s and a
greens tone earring before they were allowed to leave.
Amongst
this group of women were the wives of Mete Kingi and Aperaniko,
who were both assessors.
They,
and:.·o1:her husbands of these
./
women, retaliated by imprisoning certain/:'Waitotara Maori.
",
A few
"
days later Mete Kingi also imprisoned two Waikato chiefs.
On
both occasions White facilitated the release of these prisoners.
However, he said that the two Waikato chiefs should not have been
surprised at being imprisoned because Aperahama's act of fining
the women was
movement" . 84
82
caused
by
"their
own
folly
in
the
Waikato
Ibid.
83 Ms-papers-0075-019, John White papers folder 19, White to
Attorney General, 29 Oct 1862, and attachments, Alexander
Turnbull Library.
84 JC-WG 4, Resident Magistrate's outward letterbook 1862-4
pp 27-31, White to Mantell, 18 Feb 1863.
......
.."
34
Disagreement between Maori hampered the conclusion .of the
Waitotaraacquisition. For example, Featherston wrote to McLean
on 5 March 1863 reporting that there was a quarrel between the
Putiki and Waitotara Maori which could jeopardise the completion
of the Waitotara purchase. 85 A letter written by Hoani Wiremu
Hipango, Hori Kingi te Anaua and Te Mawae during the month before
the Waitotara acquisition was finally completed, indicates that
some Maori considered Governor BroW-ne responsible· for that
particular "evil" (the Waitotara question). 86
Browne, of
course, had been governor at the time the initial deposit was
paid by McLean. Another letter written the same month reported
that a runanga had been held at Maenene to discuss the aukati and
the question of Waitotara. 87
The content of that letter is
contradictory. Piripi, Rio and Rimiteriu wrote that it was not
agreed that "that evil should cease and good alone should stand".
On the other hand, they wrote that "respecting the land it was
satisfactorily concluded". White's explanation was that Rio had
succeeded in putting an end to the aukati and that was why he
cons idered the question of Wai totara "settled". 88
»:
It may be argued that conflict between Maori in the Waitotara
district was not just about the Waitotara block, but that it was
a dynamic characteristic of relations between Maori at the time.
It
would
appear
'friendly'
(
)
Kingitanga.
that
factions,
Maori
or
were· div1ged
supporters
These divisions may have
much earlier period of history.
~~d
e~~~
into
'rebel'
opposers
of
and
the
had their roots in a
Friendly Maori were keen to know
if they could expect government assistance if they were attacked
by rebels.
White said that if friendly Maori were attacked, the
85
McLean
Featherston to McLean, 5 Mar 1863.
papers
folder
266,
86 JC-WG 4 pp 115-117, Hipango and others to Governor Grey
(translation) undated but probably early June 1863.
87
Ibid 4 pp 117-8 Piripi,
(translation) 9 Jun 1863.
88
Rio
and
Rimiteriu
Ibid pp 113-114, White to Mantell, 10 Jun 1863.
to White
· ..... .
....
35
.....,
~.'
government would offer protection in the form of putting an end
to such an attack, and any war that may develop.
However, White
cautioned friendly Maori not to:
-
push their old feuds to an extreme, but submit them to the
Magistrates
for
settlement:
account· countenance
subjects" . 75
1.9
war
the Government would on no
between
the
Queen's
Maori
Acquisition Concluded
In September 1862, Featherston requested £2000 to "complete the
purchase of the Waitotara block" (RDB 16:6148)
.76
The necessary
advance was ordered to be paid that same month.
The deed for
Waitotara was finally executed on 4 July 1863.
77
It referred to
the advance of £500 paid on 11 May 1859, described the boundaries
of the block and reserves made and acknowledged receipt of £2000
in return for the land.
with the deed.
The receipt for the £500 was enclosed
Note that the original deed has not been located.
It is not at the Department of SurVey and Land Information which
is where, under normal circumstances, it ought to. be.
Therefore
Turton's copy of the deed has been relied on for this report.
There
is
Wellington,
another
copy
of
in
book
entitled
a
Wellington, 1849-1872.
the
deed
at
Copies:
National
of
Deeds
Archives,
of
Sale,
78
It is not known how the final payment of £2000 was arrived at.
The final purchase price was not mentioned in 1859 in the receipt
for the deposit, and was not mentioned in correspondence between
1859 and 1863 studied for this report.
In 1865, H C Field, a
local settler, wrote that the total paid for Waitotara was £500
1872.
75
Ibid pp 27-31, White to Mantell, 18 Feb 1863.
76
AJHR 1863 EIS No. 6 p 4.
77
Turton pp 238-241.
78
MA-MLP 6/2, Copies of Deeds of Sale, Wellington,
1849-
36
more than what was originally agreed on (RDB 19:7410)
additional
amount
was
paid,
according
Featherston wished to hasten the purchase.
total
sum of £2500 was
to
Field,
.79
This
because
Featherston said the
agreed to in March 1863
"after many
meetings" (RDB 19:7368).00
There are 14 signatures or marks on the receipt and 32 on the
deed. 81
Those who signed the deed were different to those who
had signed the receipt four years earlier.
names
Only four of the
on the deed are the same as or resemble names on the
receipt.
In particular, Hare Tipene and Aperahama Parea who had
signed the original receipt, at which time they were regarded as
"chiefs", did not sign the deed.
By the time the deed was signed
it seems that Piripi Raikauhata and Rio Haeaterangi were being
dealt with as the principal chiefs.
It may be worth noting that
Pehimana Manakore signed neither the receipt nor the deed.
h~d
He
come to be regarded as a chief that ought to be consulted,
and had identified himself as supportive of the government.
quest~on
The
to be raised here is not who had the right to sell the
Waitotara block, but did the Crown have sufficient support to
conclude the transaction without prejudice to some groups?
The deed
identifies
seven reserves,
the names
of
those who
surveyed each reserve, and the area--of'"ec;wh reserve.
There is
an eighth reserve drawn on the map that' ,accompanies the deed,
although it is not numbered as the othefreserves are.
This is
Kaipo pa, probably the area Rio and Piripi bought back from the
Crown using some of the purchase money (see below).
Even after
the Crown's acquisition of Waitotara and the making of these
reserves, the alienation of land from Maori in this district has
continued,
and
the
matter
has
been
raised
by
the
Ngarauru
79 AJHR 1866 Al Despatches from Secy of State, enclosure in
No. 14 p 32.
80 AJHR
~nclosure in
1866 Al Despatches from Gov to the Secy of State,
No.41 p 97.
~ Turton pp 238-241.
"'"
.
37
claimants. Reserves made in the Waitotara block are dealt 'with .,:,'
separately in chapter 3 of this report.
A month after the deed was signed, Featherston wrote that he was
"happy" to inform the Colonial Secretary that the purchase of the
Waitotara block had been concluded (RDB 16:6148).82 The final
instalment of £2000 was paid to Piripi Raikauhata and Rio
Haeaterangi "the two chiefs authorized by the sellers to receive
and distribute it". The payment of the money was acknowledged
by their signing of a receipt included with the deed. 83
According to Featherston,
at the meeting at which
16:6148) .84
All but "two
announcement by Rio and
there were some fifty people p~esent
the final instalment was paid (RDB
or three" responded favourably to an
Piripi that the money would not be
touched "until they knew what had become of their friends who had
gone to Taranaki".
It was not £2000 that Rio and Piripi eventually banked, but
£1900.
Featherston accompanied Rio and Piripi to the bank
~nd
paid the £2000 there.
They immediate"ly refunded £100 to
Featherston, for 200 acres that Featherston had agreed they could
purchase.
else,
for
This matter seems not to have been identified anywhere
example
in
the
deed
or
previous
official
correspondence. Nonetheless, Rio andPiripi deposited £1900 for
a definite period of three months, althd~gh they told the bank
manager that the money would more likely remain deposited for six
,
i
months.
Featherston noted that there were some who deemed it "impolitic"
to pay such large sums of money to Maori because it would just
be spent on their war effort.
However, he felt that the fact
that the money had been deposited at the bank for a fixed term
spoke "volumes" and was "worth any number of official...reports"
82 AJHR 1863 EIS No. 7 P 4.
~
Turton pp 238-241.
84 AJHR 1863 E1S No. 7 P 4.
'.. ':
38
regarding the state of Maori "feeling" in the Waitotara district.
The settlers themselves had "cordially acknowledged" that the
acquisition of the Waitotara block had added "very materially to
the security of the Settlement".
In
December
1863,
Charles
Broughton
gave
his
opinion
to
Featherston about the motivation for waiting a while before
distributing the money. 85
According to Broughton, Rio and
Piripi believed that if they waited, the "King party" would by
then be "entirely subdued".
That would leave the kingites free
to support opposition to any claims made by Hare Tipe:r:e and
party, leaving all the purchase money for Piripi and Rio and
their parties. Two things are suggested here. One is that there
was internal conflict over the purchase money and interests in
the block.
The other is that some of those interested in
Waitotara were not present at the meeting. This is a reasonable
suggestion considering the acquisition was concluded during a
{:
time of war. It is interesting to note that Broughton identifies
Rio s mother as married to Hare Tipene.
I
Broughton also informed Featherston of the' death of Wikitoria,
previously identified as the principal owner of Kaiiwi, the area
south of the Okehu stream.
This area was ultimately excluded
from the Waitotara purchase, largely due to the lack of support
from Wikitoria to sell.
Since her deat~, Maori had been in to
see him regarding the sale of this land~
1.10 General Themes
Some general themes may be developed from the detail of the
Waitotara transaction which has been described in the preceding
sections of this report.
The Waitotara block had twice been
included in a general policy developed by Maori to withhold-Maori
land from sale.
To a large extent the fact that Waitotara could
be considered available for purchase by the Crown was due to
M
WP 3 1863/574, Broughton to Featherston, 31 Dec 1863
, ,.'. ". ,,::,~:'i;~~~:~~~:~ "'~">'.~ .:~ ~,~ ~:.':..~.) .;'.
;'
..
:
I
»•..'. :... •••
-.-
39
conflict between supporters and opposers of that policy or
kaupapa from which the Kingitanga developed.~ McLean himself
admited to paying a £500 deposit because Ngatiruanui had
threatened to resist the sale and place the land under the mana
of the Maori King. 87 The question ought to be asked, could the
Crown claim to have fairly acquired land that was so disputed by
Maori, even if a cohesive group of willing sellers existed?
The trouble arising from internal squabbles and disputes
continued as Deighton and Porter set about surveying the
Waitotara block in 1859. 88
Also, willing sellers pressed to
have the transaction completed.
There seems to be a lack of
written instruction from McLean throughout this period, which
would have been typical of his "carelessness" in detailed
supervision. 89
It is not as if McLean was deliberately
obstructing the conclusion of the transaction, but it seems he
was just not saying one way or the other how to proceed. In the
end negotiations for the block were suspended in 1860. 90
When negotiations resumed in 1862, the iaentification of Maori
as either
'rebel' Maori, which term included Kingitanga
supporters, or loyal Maori affected the way in which Featherston
was able to negotiate with different groups.
Negotiating with
f
rebels was not possible, because Featherfton could not be seen
to be giving them money, and because many/ were away at war. This
<,', J
effectively excluded rebel Maori, regardless of their interest,
from consideration in the Waitotara transaction, and left
Featherston to negotiate only with the willing sellers.
By
comparison, in the purchase of the Rangitikei-Manawatu block
Featherston had to negotiate with all competing groups, and this
. 86
See pp 2-6.
87
See p 7.
88
See pp 8-10.
89
Ward p 94.
90
See p 14.
-~ ;:.
._------
-----
40
was largely because all competing groups were present on the
ground. 91 The fact is, that when negotiations for the Waitotara
resumed in 1862 and concluded in 1863, there was war in Taranaki.
This aspect ought to be carefully considered.
Could -the Crown
fairly negotiate a land transaction in which many of the people
interested were at war?
The fact that this transaction takes
place in a war zone during a period of war, where people who have
interests in the block are at war with the purchaser ought to be
a primary consideration, and perhaps reflects the political
nature of the acquisition. While war is not to the forefront of
this report, it is a theme common to this and nearly all other
aspects of the Taranaki claims .
.(
)
~.'
91
Luiten pp 40-59.
..
Chapter 2
The Fallout
2.1
Maori Response to the Transaction
In July 1863, Ngarauru and Ngatiruanui had begun to return from
the war to their settlements about Pate a and Waitotara. "White
.. reported that about 340 Ngarauru had. arrived at settlements on
the north side of the Waitotara. 92
They ·asked the Maori
assessors of Pakaraka if they could meet at Te Ihupuku pa "to
talk over matters".
White told the assessors that they were "not
to hold any communication whatever with the rebel natives".
(;<~:.::;;
Instead, they were to keep White informed of every movement of
the so-called rebels.
If any of those who had raised arms
against the government now wanted to al'ly themselves
to the
government, White said they would have to give their arms up at
once
and the government would give
"their case"
some
consideration at a future time. Hare Tipene was apparently not
among those who had returned. 93
He and others had remained
behind to await the return of the military from Tataraimaka.
Those that had returned were described· by Rio, a warden, and
Piripi, an assessor, as "the returned King people".
About the same time White reported the return of Ngarauru and
Ngatiruanui to their homes, he also reported that letters had
been written about Waitotara. 94
Basically the letters desired
that the Pakeha "wait until the dark days are over".
92
(
White
JC-WG 4 pp 152-3, White to Agent of the General Govt.
93 Ibid P 153, Te Meihana and Rihari at Tataraimaka to
various Maori at Pakaraka and Te Ahu, 9 Jul 1863.
94
Ibid P 163, White to Mantell, 25 Jul 1863.
42
described those letters as "of minor importance", even though
Aperahama
Taimaparea
had
warned
Hori
Kingi
against
Pakeha
occupation of the Waitotara block, threatening to kill anyone who
was located there.
This perhaps foreshadowed things to come.
Soon White reported to Mantell an incident where Maori assessors
at Waitotara would not perform their duty in a case between two
Kingitanga supporters. 95
Two Maori assessors had asked White to
guide them in this particular case.
those concerned resided
White told them that as
"within the boundaries of Government
land" (the Waitotara block), it was ,up tOo the i',Queen' s Assessors"
to,'try
the case.'
,However,' the, assessors
a'llqwed :the
kirigites
to
.'.
. ' .'.
'.
.......
.
.
./
',.
'.
'deal with the matter ' themselves and at the request of Wirihana~
~'mounted
,policeman, thekingites declined
Whit~
at all.
fined the
~o
act in the matter
M~or~ ass~ssors'concerned
one'month's
salary each because they had' faiied to "uphold the dignity of the
Crown" in their district.
In the same letter in which White reported this incident, he also
reported the intention of Pehi to occupy Waitotara by cultivating
part of it.
show".
White wrote "how far this is true his actions will
It is not certain that Pehi did cultivate part of the
block, but he certainly stopped there for a while on his way
through to Taranaki.%
,/
,,'
'\
J
In August White reported that
Waitotara
11
,
(
"some of' the Ngarauru tribe at
had confiscated three cows belonging to a Mr Davis. 97
They refused to give up the cows unless Davis paid for the grass
the cows had eaten on the Waitotara block.
the cows were still impounded by Maori. 98
Almost a month later,
When the cows were
finally given up, they had been branded T.W.
"in honour of the
95
Ibid 4 pp 166-8, White to Mantell, 29 Jul 1863.
96
Ibid pp 180-1, White to Mantell, 17 Aug 1863.
97
Ibid pp 180-1, White to Mantell, 17 Aug 1863.
98
Ibid P 206/ White to General Govt Agent, 14 Sep 1863.
43
"mana"
of the
[Maori]
King". 99
White demanded a
fine
to be
paid, and accused those responsible for the branding of larceny.
Their
response was that rather than
an act of
larceny,
the
purpose of branding was to ensure that no dispute arose regarding
the identity of the cows.
A similar incident arose about a year
later when Hone Hirau demanded that Mr Hogg, the engineer on the
roadmaking, paid for the "grass and sticks" used to build his
house on the Wai totara block. 100
2.2
j1',
The Road to Waitotara Leads to War
Withl:il a year bf the, Wa.i"t;:otara ': purchase: l:?eiI!g, conc;luded, :the
state' of affairs: in the district, had become' con'si:derabl:y in~re'
volatile. ' In particular, war was ge'!=-ting close'r to; Waitotara".
By 1864,' word was 0ut that a road ,would be formed through the
Waitotara block.
Many Maori feared the road was being built to
At the beginning of 1864,
facilitate the government war effort.
Ngatiruanui and Ngarauru Maori who had participated in the war
I,,:'::;'"
at Taranaki were returning to their homes about Wai totara.
In
particular, some had established themselves at a pa at Weraroa,
inland
of
Perekama. 1m
These
so-called
government to settle their "claims".
not
prepared to
do
this. 102
1864,
in May
in,theb~ttle
!
that battle the Pai Marire, or Hauhau,
I'
wanted
the
However, the government was
Then,
adherents fought Wanganui kupapa
rebels
m6yed
Pai Marire
of Moutoa.
After
to Weraroa Pa, and
fortified and occupied it with their leader, Te Ua Haumene. 103
Throughout
this
period,
conflict
between
friendly
and
rebel
Maori, or supporters and opposers of the Kingitanga, continued
to underlie relations between Maori, and between Maori and the
99
Ibid 4 pp 214-5, White to Mantell r 1 Oct 1863.
100 JC-WG 5, Resident Magistrates s outward letterbook, 18645 P 137, White to Hogg, 24 Aug 1864.
I
101
JC-WG 4 P 316, Piripi to White, 29 Jan 1864.
102
WP 6/4, Outwards Correspondence 1862-4 pp 301-2,
Featherston to Broughton and Featherston to White, 15 Feb 1864.
103
Volkerling pp 59-61.
44
Crown. These four aspects - the road, the returned reb.els ", the
location of Te Ua and his followers at Weraroa, and continued
internal conflict among Maori - all contributed to intensifying
an already delicate wartime situation.
I
Also in 1864, the Waitotara block was thrown open for sale. On
14 September r Featherston notified the sale by proclamation and
stated that selection would take place at Wellington on 17
October
(RDB
19:7370) .104
The
sale
proceeded
despite
allegations by settlers' in the district that the sale had been
arranged wit,hout ,consideration for· some of the provisions, of the
'la~d 'r~gulations,' 'of. 1855: 1q5
The sale realised, £5259. in, b~sh:
and 1'980 a:~re~ "w~~th·· o:f military' la'ridorders, for, a· total of·
,
,'1
'
12',4'75 acres (·RDB 19:7371).106
Before the end of January 1864, Rimiteriu Huai from Pakaraka Pa
wrote to Te Paraone at Manutahi with his concerns about the
building of a road through the block, especially if it passed by
Pakaraka. 107
Rimiteriu feared that the road would bring evil
and death, as it would be used by the Pakeha to facilitate their
war effort.
Hare Tipene and Pehimana also wanted to stop the
road from proceeding.
They threatened to kill those on the
roadmaking party if the road went as far as Nukumaru and
Pakaraka. 108
Warnings
and complairii75
against
the
road
proceeding gained momentum throughout 4~gust and September of
:
1864, with White receiving messages frdm a son of Hare Tipene,
"
104 AJHR 1866 A1, sub-enclosure 1 to enclosure in No. 41.
105 WP 3 1864/946, James Speed to Featherston, no date.
106 AJHR 1866 A1, sub-enclosure 2 to enclosure in No. 41.
107 JC-WG 4
P 315, translation of a letter from Rimiteriu
Huai to Te Paraone, 29 Jan 1864.
108 Ibid P 329, Horima Katene to White, no date but about 1318 Feb 1864.
45
Te
Ua,
and
Utiku
of
Nukumaru. 109
Besides
saying
that
the
Europeans building the road ought to return, Te Ua wanted to know
what the object of
the road was.
The situation in Waitotara continued to intensify.
in April,
White reported that Herioro and other Kingitanga supporters were
erecting a Kingitanga flag near Pakaraka,
a
"friendly"
settlement.
According
assessor,
the purpose of erecting the
outbreak"
in
the
Wai totara
which was considered
to
White's
flag was to
district. 110
In
June
source,
an
"cause an
1864,
the
Captain 9f the 57th Regiment at the Albuera Redoubt complained
that Rio, desc?=ibed. as an "influential" Maori; had be~n vi~·iti~g.
Wanganui at a ·fr~qU.ency of at least oI).ce- a week, accompanied-· by up ~o seventeen mounted Maori each time. 111
-
After each visit,
-
they would leave Whanganui "well-loaded with new blankets, rugs,
shirts &c".
Because Rio's people "numbered only 32 souls", Clark
said it stood to reason that the goods were being used to supply
so-called rebels, enabling them to take to the bush and oppose
the occupation of the Waitotara Block.
In White's opinion, the
government had no power to stop government Maori from obtaining
those goods. 112
The sentry at Albuera redoubt appear to have
taken matters into their own hands when they took rum from one
of Rio's shopping parties.
!
In September, Rio, Maka, Peina and Hoani,/~-G.ggested to White that
/
Maori be employed to accompany the
of road.
113
perst;~
"laying off the line"
They considered that the European roadmakers should
follow behind the Maori because of the proximity of the road to
109 JC-WG 5 pp 155, 159-60, 177-8, White to Colonial Secy,
Featherston and Govt Agent, 20 Aug 1864; Te Ua to Rio, Broughton
and White, 24 Aug 1864; and White to Featherston, 29 Sep 1864.
1864.
110
JC-WG 4 pp 354-5, White to Govt Agent, 26 Apr ..l.86.4.
111
WP 3 1864j502a, Clark to Govt Agent, 6 Jun 1864.
112
JC-WG 5 pp 83-87, white to Featherston, 23 Jun 1864.
113
Ibid pp 177-8, Rio, Maka, Peina & Hoani to White, 27 Sep
46
Maori settlements, and because the thoughts of the Kingitanga
Maori were not known.
Instead, White took this letter as
gentle hint for the Road party to be on their guard".
that
Rio
and other assessors
"a
The fact
had previously declined to be
employed on the road but were now offering their serVices was
"perhaps worthy of notice".
As for those that threatened to stop
the road party, White "took little notice of them"
"not men
of
at
0
as they were
f any inf I uence" . 114· On the other hand, for a period
least
ten
days
at
the
end of
September/beginning of
October, White had two policemen accompany the road party .
.By ·3. November 1:864·, Charles, Br,blighton had a9:certained that'· the
Wera:roa Fa "was· on '(purchased 'land ~, but h~' c~uld· not tell whether
i t was ~n l~nd recently d~sposed of at th~· Wellington sale. 115
Broug·hton 'described
Pehimana as
inclined to put any faith in".
had
"been for
a
someone
"not
at all
According to Broughton, Pehimana
long time past one of the most cunning and
obstinate supporters of the King &c".
::' .
he .was
Hare Tipene, Broughton
wrote, declined to move from Weraroa pa even though he had been
"strongly remonstrated with by Te Ua, Rio"& others".
According
to Broughton, Hare Tipene said although he did. not dispute the
sale of Waitotara, he intended Weraroa to remain a·s a ""putaki
wawai" (cause of fighting)".
...::.;.- .
. ... ' . 7,
On 9 November 1864, James Hogg the
provirtc~al
/' ·1
engineer, wrote to
Featherston that the road through Waitdtara was surveyed up to
the eastern boundary of the Nukumaru reserve, and was now being
formed. 116
Pehimana had insisted that the road should go no
further, and should not even go around Nukumaru reserve.
He did
not want the road to proceed unless Featherston first went to
Wai totara to explain everything about the roadmaking. 117
114
Ibid P 179, White to Colonial Secy, 5 Oct 1864.
115
WP 3 65/544, Broughton to Featherston, 3 Nov 1864.
116
WP 3 1864/901, Hogg to Featherston, 9 Nov 1864.
117
JC-WG 5 P 197, White to Logan, 9 Nov 1864.
The
.
47
day after Hogg wrote to Featherston, White wrote to the Colonial
Secretary to say that the road was stopped. 118
In
the
weeks
described
by
that
followed
White
as
regarding the road.
Hare
"chiefs",
Tipene
made
and
clear
Pehimana,
their
now
position
They did not want the road to be continued
beyond a place called Taurangaika, which was about three miles
from the Waitotara. 119
back to
Pehimana said he had sent the road party
prevent them from being killed by Maori. 120
meantime, the road was not allowed to continue. 121
In the
Also, there
were reports of numerous Kingitanga s.upporter·s in the district,
as ..wallas. TeUa.· an:d his followers .. 122'
By 16 December 1864, :construction of the road 'to Wai.totara. had
still not recommenced .. The 'Governor, Sir· George Grey, "instructed
Lieutenant-General Cameron to use two available regiments to
secure
"sufficient possession" of the land between the Patea
river and Wanganui so that the Waitotara road could be continued
"
....... .
(RDB
18: 6923)
Cameron was
.123
also
required
to
secure
for
settlement the land south of New Plymouth between the Tataraimaka
and Stoney rivers.
The "ultimate object
11
of Grey s instructions
I
to Cameron, was the:
construction
of
a
thoroughfare" "'1?etween
Wanganui, and the establishment of
,~;Llitary
',' )
Taranaki
and
settlements at
such points along that line as mayLbe found convenient.
The ministers of parliament concurred with Grey.
They wanted a
military road between Wanganui and Taranaki opened as soon as
118
Ibid pp 198-9, White to Colonial Secy, 10 Nov 1864.
119
Ibid pp 203-4, White to Colonial Secy, 24 Nov 1864.
120
Ibid 5 pp 201-3, Pehimana Te Tahua to Grey, 18 Nov 1864.
121
Ibid P 207, White to Parris, 28 Nov 1864.
1~
eg Ibid p 207, 221.
1n AJHR 1865 A4 No. 1.
48
possible, with one or two strong posts situated along the way to
ensure the road stayed open (ROB 18:6924).124
They considered
that New Plymouth should be strengthened by locating settlers
both north and south of the town, and that Whanganui should be
These things were
simil'arly strengthened towards Waitotara.
considered:
indispensable
to
the
permanent
safety of
Taranaki,
and
therefore to the general pacification of the country.
Historic;tns James Belich and .Richard .Hill share iinother op'inion t:tlat in· fa·ct, the pU:rpose :6f' rri~l·ita·:iycanipaignsin south .Taran·a~i '
), . .
~as···to-' e~f~rce Bi::i~ish so~ereignty
so
far
ex~sted· in
name .only
in
~n c;i.~ea
where sovereignty
(HII: 65-6) .125
As
far
as
the·
ministers were concerned r the "large majority" of Mao"ri in the
Taranaki district were:
amongst
:~.; ,,',
,.',.
the
most
population.
They
lawless
have
and
turbulent
committed
the
of
the
worst
native
and
most
unprovoked outrages on the settlers, and are now in a state
of open armed rebellion against Her Majesty's authority.
There can be no permanent peace until these natives are
reduced to
18 : 6924 ) . 126
submission
and
their
country
opened
(ROB
,/,
,
/:
:
Cameron wrote to Grey on 11 January 1865' 'reporting progress of
the troops north of Wanganui
1~ Ibid, enclosure in No.
(ROB 18: 6926) .127
They had been
5.
125 James Belich The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian
Interpretation of Racial Conflict Auckland, 1986 and Richard Hill
The History of Policing in New Zealand vol 2, The Colonial
Frontier Tamed: New Zealand Policing in Transition 1a67:l886,
cited in Wai 143 doc H11, Heather Bauchop The Wars and Iwi Losses
Taranaki 1860-70: A SummarYr unpublished report to the Waitangi
Tribunal, Wellington, 1992 pp 65-6.
126 AJHR 1865 A4, enclosure in No. 5.
127 Ibid No. 10.
49
camping at the Wenohanau stream, and had been making the road
from Wanganui suitable for use by carts.
Colonel Waddy had
scouted the country as far as Nukumaru, about two miles from
Weraroa, without encountering any rebels. Major Greaves reported
that the country was "very broken and difficult". Greaves also
said:
one thing is certain r and that is that the men who sold the
[Waitotara] block had no right to do so, and it is the old
Wai tara dodge for getting up a war r and the consequent
military expenditure at Wanganui.
Cameron· did· not
know
on' what ·authority·
Greaves
.
.
based· this
statement.
On 18 January 1865, White detailed some of the events of that
month for the Native Minister. 128 On 2 January r it was reported
that Maori from Patea south had assembled at Weraroa Pa and had
!:~::.,.~;
been strengthening it for the purpose of obstructing the progress
of the troops. By 10 JanuarYr it was understood that were about
400 men assembled at Weraroa "and vicinity".
This gathering
included men from Waikato and Tauranga.
Another estimate of
numbers at Weraroa was 755 whichr
people
from
Ngatiruanui. 129
Waikato r
besides Ngarauru r included
Ngatiraukaw')r
Tuwharetoa
and
/
!
l.,:
The Waikato men, it was said, had been restrained from murdering
some of the "friendly" Maori by Hare Tipene and Pehimana
Manakore. Also, Rimiteriu r previously an assessor, felt unable
to remain "friendly" because all his children were supporters of
the Kingitanga.
On 13 January it was reported that Rio had gone
out early the previous morning to round up his cattle, and had
not returned.
128
Three men had gone out to look for
him~
_By 16
MA 24/21, White to Native Minister, 18 Jan 1865.
129 Micro-ms-0079 r Broughton notebook r notes following entry
for 3 Jan 1865, Alexander Turnbull Library.
50
January, neither Rio nor the men who had gone out to look for him
had returned.
Another man who had gone from Peiatu to Maenene
to pick up some tools had also failed to return.
all
five
On 17 January,
of these men were reported to be held prisoner at
Weraroa Pa.
On 24 January 1865 1 Broughton wrote to Featherston from Nukumaru
camp.
He forwarded depositions of three Maori regarding the
death of Rio. 130
Broughton also wrote that White refused to
believe that Rio had been murdered" imagining 1 in the face of all
the evidence to the contrary that .. Rio has joined the rebels
.... ag~i~st . us if.
Broughton· hims~lf ··ha:d : n,b doubt. that· Rfo· ha'q been':'
)' .
murdered . He said ~hat Hori' ~iricji: 'and, 'th~" fri~ndly'" Ma:~r'i: ·als~ , .
believed Rio dead and had already had their tangi for ,him.
White
received confirmat·ion that Rio had been murdered (by Waikato) the
day after Broughton wrote this letter. 131
Cameron had heard about the "murder" of Rio on his arrival at
Wanganui on 20 January 1865 (RDB 18: 6927) .132
Cameron' s version
of the incident was that Rio had been "takEm and murdered by the
rebels" and Rio's entire "small hapu" at Pakaraka had been taken
prisoner.
Cameron later interpreted the murder of Rio as
a
punishment for the prominent part that Rio played in the sale of
the Waitotara Block without the authority/of all the owners (RDB
19:7382).133
H C
Field,
attributed the murder of
a
settleri~! the
Rio to sevetal
participation in the sale (RDB 19:7410).1~
district,
factors
later
besides his
He said the murder
was also due to Rio's acting as a spy at Waikato and again when
General Waddy reconnoitred Te Weraroa pa.
Cameron considered the
1~ WP 3 1865/19, Broughton to Featherston,
24 Jan 1865.
131 JC-WG 5 pp 243-4, White to Mantell, 26 Jan 18&.5.1~ AJHR 1865 A4 No.
16.
133 Ibid P 41 enclosure in No. 2, Cameron to Secy of State
for War l 7 Jul 1865.
134 AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Secy of State No. 14 P 32.
51
murder such an "unusual measure" that .:Lt indicated there were
valid grounds for Maori to oppose the sale of Waitotara.
He also
considered it "very unwise" for the government to take forcible
possession of Waitotara after Maori had "so strongly' protested
against it".
This was especially so given that the Waitotara
Maori had "always been a loyal tribe, and well disposed towards
the settlers".
While writing to Featherston on 24 January 1865, Broughton was
forced to interrupt his letter when the camp was encircled by
Maori who w,ere "pouring in a tremendous ·fire".
When
Br~ughton
. contit:lu.edhis·letter, he:wrote:.
afte+" a sha.rp struggle (the enemy got to within 40 yr of our
tents) of 11/2' hour the rebels have 'been beaten back into'
We have got 9 dead natives & 2 wounded & have
just brought in 10 dead & 15 wounded of our own. 135
the bush.
.:,......
On 25 January there was another attack.
said
10
dead
rebels
and
Brigadier-General Waddy
two wounded were
taken
into
camp,
although he thought their actual losses would have been greater
(ROB 11:3997).136
One of the wounded was the eldest son of a
"leading Chief" who said that 600 Maori had gone to attack the
military camp at Nukumaru.
./
.1
Cameron s version of the battle at Nukuma:-ru described the advance
t
by Maori as "the boldest attack they have yet ventured to make"
(ROB 18: 6928) .137
The Maori had been able to assemble near the
camp undetected, and penetrated to within 150 yards on the right
flank,
The
but were eventually "obliged to retire into the bush".
loss
Cameron
on the
felt
government
that
the Maori
side was
"considerable"
"must have
although
suffered still
more
-'-s'everely ,,·····even··thou·gh·the-·government··troops··did-not· pick'up"'more
1~ WP 3 1865/19, Broughton to Featherston,
1~ NZG 1865 No.
4 P 28.
137 AJHR 1865 A4 No. 19.
24 Jan 1865.
52
than eleven bodies, and two wounded.
One' of the wounded said
that the 'iattacking party was 600 s:trong".
in the pa,
With a garrison left
Cameron estimated the Maori were "in considerable
force on the Waitotara".
The battle at Nukumaru was preceded by a number of inter Maori
conflicts.
On 1 January 1865, White had reported that Henare
Tahau had allegedly attempted to murder a woman.
He had fled to
Waitotara and could not be apprehended because the police had
been
threatened
Waitotar~.n8
,
"
with
imprisonment
if
they
crossed
the
Nine days later.White' reported that rebel Maori
had, torn down awhite,'flag"flying at Maenene and 'had order~d the
people' 0 f Maenene to g~ to'''p~karak~. Th~ res'ponse,' f~om 'Mae~en~
was
to
request
arms' and
ammunition
from
White. 139
On
19
January, rebels fired twelve shots on Peiatu pa.andtlien retired."
The next day, the rebels reported that the whole of the people
of
l
i:.f ",,::
Peiatu and Pakaraka were missing.
Soldiers
sent
out
to
reconnoitre on 21 January found three Maori at Peiatu. Then on
24 January 1865, according to White, the road party was attacked.
The eight men that were reported missing were all
found
by
midnight with all their personal property taken from them.
In White's version of the battle at Nukumaru, which occurred on
the same day the road party was attacked,; the advanced military
party was fired
o~
as they were pitching their tents at Nukumaru.
White reported three men killed and one d£ficer wounded, who died
the next day.
When the advanced party was attacked again on 25
January,
White
reported
seven soldiers
killed
and
wounded,
and fourteen Maori killed and 2 wounded. 140
fourteen
A week
later, White wrote that 70 killed on the rebels side had been
acknowledged, and a "loss" of 160 on the government militia side,
138 JC-WG 5 pp 233-6, letter by White, recipient not clear,
18 Jan 1865.
139 Ibid pp 228-9, White to Waddy, 10 Jan 1865.
140 Ibid.
53
resul ting from the battle. 141
Following the battle at Nukumaru, Cameron built three redoubts
in the Waitotara-Patea district, left part of his force to hold
the position at Nukumaru, and on 5 February crossed the Waitotara
and continued north
(H11:80).142
In doing so,
he declined an
invitation to attack the Maori stronghold at Weraroa Pa.
This
was an action that Cameron was severely criticised for, although
he had maintained throughout the Taranaki campaign that he did
not have the force required to successfully attack Weraroa (RDB
18 : 6928) . 143
.
) .
Eventually"
.,
.
on Weraroa him'self .14~
Grey' moved
smal,l forGe, p'er,s~:mally directed" by, Grey, manag~d to capture a
Maori supply depot behind' Weraroa. ,', Many warriors had already
left
Weraroa
by
this
garrison evacuated.
time,
and
the
next
day
the
The number of people at Weraroa had been
steadily declining since the battle at Nukumaru.
i~,~:;;;;."
remaining
An estimated
436 were still resident at Weraroa at the beginning of February.
This number included Ngatiruanui and Ngaraui-u, Waikato, Taranaki,
"Ngatiawa' Waitara", Pipiriki and Kaiwhaiki Maori. 145
By April
1 this
number had reduced to 140 people, mostly Waikato who
themselves left by 12 April. 146
Almost simultaneously, peace
became the desire of some of those who:.-ha~·· (in legal terms) been
in rebellion.
under
Pehimana
About 220 rebels reporte'd'
to be at Areiahi Pa
I' ,
strongly
desired
peac~~" amongst Ngarauru and
Ngatiruanui, according to two spies sent to Weraroa by White. 147
141 Ibid P 250, White to Mantell, 2 Feb 1865.
142 Bauchop p 80.
143 eg AJHR 1865 A4 No. 19.
144 Belich p 207.
145 JC-WG 5 P 249, White to Waddy, 1 Feb 1865.
146 Ibid pp 402-3, 407-8, White to Native Minister, 1 and 12
Apr 1865.
1~ Ibid pp 402-3, White to Native Minister,
1 Apr 1865.
54
Pehimana te Tahua and Rimiteriu, who had each written that they
wished to negotiate peace,were later joined in their desire to
surrender by Hare Tipene and Aperahama. 148
According to Belich,
Weraroa had ceased to be strategically important months before
i t was captured by Grey.
Nonetheless, Grey publicised-what was
really an evacuation of Weraroa as a great victory. 149
2.3
Waitotara and the Cameron-Grey Dispute
The relationship between Grey and Cameron had become increasingly
hostile'over the years.
Throughout the early 1860s, Grey had
,d~liDera1:.ely" manipula'ted the I~perial" Gove+"nInent ,in m;:,de;r to'
',sec~re I~peri~l
troops' to
suppo;t'
'hi~ 'inilita~y pia~s',
included his plan to, invade the Waikato~ 150
which
Grey was able to
carry out this manipulat'ion by monopolising communication with
the
Imperial
Government
misinformation".
and
undertaking
a
"campaign
of
However, Cameron breached that monopoly in 1863
when he sent information to the Imperial Government that Grey had
been trying to suppress.
From this point on the relationship
between Cameron and Grey deteriorated
(H11: 70)
.151
Hostility
between the two was fuelled during the south Taranaki campaign,
as Cameron became more critical of the war, and at the same time
was subjected to severe criticism himself for moving so tardily
..
,;.
and failing to take Weraroa pa.
..' /
!~
l
Cameron had not been keen on the soutle Taranaki campaign that
Grey had instructed him to undertake.
Belich attributes his
cautious
and circumspect approach toward the campaign to his
previous
experience, of
the
war
in
the
Waikato. 152
Cameron
respected the capacity of Maori warfare, and did not think the
148
Ibid
149
Belich p 207.
150
Ibid pp 123-5.
151
Bauchop p 70.
152
Belich p 207.
P 405, White to Logan, 12 April 1865.
55
current campaign would achieve the decisive defeat of Maori that
Grey sought.
Cameron appeared bitter about the campaign.
He was
convinced that it had been wrong to take the war to Waitotara,
a
"hitherto quiet settlement"
the
war
as
gratification
"miserable",
of
the
(ROB 18: 6927) . 153
carried
Colony"
on
(ROB
for
He described
the
"profit
18: 6928) . 154
and
Early
in
February 1865 he tendered his resignation to the War Office.
He
did not leave New Zealand until August,
months previous
(H11:80, 84).155
While 'he' was
to
his
departure
and spent the three
commanding
from
Auckland
in the Waitotara di,strict, 'Cameron, said' he, ha,d
inqU:i;re'd into the purc'ha~e, of the W~itotara block., On ,28' January
1865, three days after the battle ,at Nukumaru, he wrote that he
had reason to believe the purchase was
than that of the Waitara block"
"a more iniquitous job
(RDB 18:6928) .156
He was not
surprised that Maori had opposed the roadmaking, and felt that
the home government ought to be told the "true history" of the
,.: ..
purchase.
full
These few remarks by Cameron soon developed into a
scale
hostilities.
paper
war,
further
fuelllng
the
Grey-Cameron
The debate that is about to be described, ought to
be considered in the context of that whole Grey-Cameron feud.
Almost five months elapsed before ,Grey'7esponded to Cameron 's
criticism that the Waitotara purchase had been an "iniquitous
job".
(RDB 19: 7383) .157
letter,
Grey wrote that Jo n receipt of Cameron 's
he immediately instructed his responsible advisors to
appoint a commission to inquire into the matter.
Grey 's advisqrs
'"
claimed they found no evidence that the purchase of Waitotara
1~ AJHR 1865 A4 No.
16.
154 Ibid No. 19 P 6, Cameron to Grey, 28 Jan 1865.155 Bauchop pp 80, 84.
156 AJHR 1865 A4 No. 19.
157 AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Secy of State pSI subenclosures to enclosure in No. 2, Grey to Cameron, 9 June 1865.
56
"was a job". Although they were keen to appoint an independent
commission to examine any complaints made about the Crown's
acquisition of Waitotara, no complaints had been discovered and
therefore they could not say what points a commission' ought to
enquire into. Grey wrote that he wanted "to do justice in this
matter" and to do his duty to the home government. He said he
did not want to withhold any information from the home government
and asked Cameron to explain the nature of the inquiries he had
made into the Waitotara purchase, his reasons for believing the
purchase to be an "iniquitous job", and to name the source of his
information.
Grey told Cameron that when he was in rece~pt of
these details, he would institute a full inquiry.
Cameron responded that it was not his duty to collect information
for Grey, that Grey had sufficient resources to gather all the
information he needed, and that he would therefore decline to
enter
into
19:7383) .158
....
"':
,
correspondence with Grey on the matter (RDB
On the other hand, Cameron told Grey that he would
explain his opinion of the Waitotara purchase to the imperial
government.
This Cameron did on 7 July i865, when he wrote to
the Secretary of State for War r relating what he understood the
facts to be (RDB 19:7382-3).159
In September, Secretary of
State, Edward Cardwell, referred Cameron's version of the events
to
Grey,
and
asked
Grey
to
-'
report'pn
the
matter
(RDB
/,.J l
19 : 7382 ) . 160
/'. ;
In Cameron' s version of the Waitotara purchase, the Maori vendors
tried
to
return
the
£500
deposit
and
withdraw
from
the
transaction following Deighton's complaints that the reserves
Maori wanted to retain were too large (ROB 19:7382).161
This
1~ Ibid, Cameron to GreYr 12 Jun 1865.
159 Ibid pp 4-5, enclosure in No. 2, Cameron to Secy of State
for War r 7 Jul 1865.
160 Ibid No. 2 P 4, Cardwell to Grey, 22 Sep 1865.
1~ Ibid P 4, enclosure in No. 2, Cameron to Secy of State
for War, 7 Jul 1865.
57
effer to, return the £500 was declined by the gevernment agent at
Whanganui.
Cameren further claimed that Feathersten cencluded
the transactien by entering into, a secend agreement with Rio"
which allewed the extent ef the reserves to, be reduced, "and which
did net have the censent ef seme ef these who, signed the first
agreement with McLean.
Cameren peinted eut that when Feathersten
finally cencluded the Waitetara transactien, war in Taranaki had
recommenced and the greater part of the Nerth Island was in a
state ef insurrection.
Regarding the on-sale of the land by the government,
Cameren
·claimed that "the land "was:
·hur;i:'iedly sold, without the usual notice by advertisement,
"
to a few
~peculators
"
"
in Wellington,
at
ten'~hillings
an
acre, - the sum realised being £1·3,000.
Even if what Cameron had written in this regard was true, Grey
said that he had "nothing to do with it" and that he had ne more
contrel
over
the
matter
than
Cameren 'had
(RDB
19: 7285)
.162
Further, any individual adversely affected by the sale precedure
could have taken the matter up in a court of law.
Cameron was not entirely correct in this claim.
In fact,
The bleck was
~".'.
net thrown open until more than a
'.
I
year~'fter
the purchase was
concluded, although it was amid allegatinri p that some of the 1855
':. ;
l~nd regulations had not been adhered .Ito. 163
The bulk of the
purchasers were resident at Wanganui, though several were frem
Wellington and even ene each frem Essex, England and Dunedin (RDB
19:7371)
.164
1980 acres were taken in military land orders and
ether forms of scrip, and the cash realised for the balance ef
the 12,475 acres sold was £5259.
162 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Gov to, Secy ef &ta4:e No.
13 pp 13-17.
163
WP 3 1864/946, James Speed to Featherston, no date.
164 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Gev to Secy of State p 100,
sub-enclosure 2 to enclosure in No. 41, schedule of purchasers
in the Waitotara block.
58
Cameron reported to the Secretary of State for War that Hare
Tipene
and
other
chiefs
had protested
against
the
sale
of
Waitotara at the time, and warned that they would use force to
oppose any attempt on the military's part'to occupy the reserved
land
(RDB
19: 7382) .165
According to
Cameron,
the
road
from
Whanganui to Waitotara was constructed because the government
anticipated opposition to the occupation of the Waitotara block.
The main object of the road was
operations
that
the
government
to
facilitate
expected
would
the military
be
required
following disputes about the purchase of Wai totara.
Cameron
wrote that Maori did not seriously oppose. the roadmaking until
it r.~ache.d:.'the .. :Poundary 0 f. "Hare Tlpene" s.: Res.~rVe " . ~ponwhi_ch: the ..
. '. Weraroa Pa had been built. 'This r~serVe 'was apparently one' which
had been arranged under the first Waito.tara ·purchase agreement
. with- Mc Lean in 1859.
At its border was ··.the Nukumaru settlement.
It was when the troops entered that settlement that the battle
at Nukumaru of 24 and 25 January 1865 occurred. 166
I!· .:.;:'
Grey denied that the government wanted to secure occupation of
the Waitotara block (ROB 19:7287).1~
His 'proof was in previous
correspondence with Cameron where he had stated that possession
of the block had "never entered into [his] calculations".
had made this statement in March 1865 (ROB 18: 6942) .168
Grey
However
it was clear from previous instructions" to Cameron that one of
the
main
goals
of
the
south Taranaki i'campaign was
military
occupation sufficient to give possession of all that district
between the Wanganui and Patea rivers so that the road through
165 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Secy of State pp 4-5,
enclosure in No. 2, Cameron to Secy of State for War, 7 July
1865.
166 If by this description Cameron meant that the Weraroa Pa
had been built on the Nukumaru reserve, he seems to hav~ been
mistaken.
The Fa was near Nukumaru reserve but not within it.
See the map on page ix at the beginning of this report.
167 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from the Gov to Secy of State
No. 13 pp 13-17.
168 AJHR 1865 A4 No. 55 pp 19-20.
59
Waitotara could be continued (RDB 18: 6923)
.169
Cameron's version of events concurred with a letter, written in
February by a
"distinguished officer" based at Cameron' s
Zealand headquarters (RDB 19:7291-2).170
New
The English press had
published an extract from that letter in May.
The Morning Star
newspaper vouched for the "genuineness of the communicat.ion, and
the
high character of the writer".
The writer claimed that
everyone, including Cameron, was "heartily sick" of the war, and
accused Grey of retaining the imperial troops in New Zealand for
the
purpo,se
9f
"seeking popularity among the
maintaining political" 'powei~
Colonists"
and
The 'writer 'we'rit (;in ,to" say :that
Cameron' had been ordered:, to cominenc~ '~perations "in "south 'raranaki
so that the Waitotara block could be occupied.
~lock,
The
i t w'a$
claimed, had been acquired from Mao:ri "who 'had not the smallest
title to the land".
wi th
them
because
Featherston had entered into an agreemerit
those
who
he
had
originally
arranged
to
purchase from wanted to withdraw from the deal when he refused
to set aside a particular area they wanted reserved.
The officer
wrote:
this is what we are here for,
from
the
to eject the lawful owners
land they did not wish to
sell;
and for
this
England is spilling her best blood!1~
Grey dismissed the remarks about Waitotara as "contrary to fact"
and designed to discredit himself and New Zealand's government
and settlers with the imperial government and the British public
(RDB
19: 7292)
.172
Also,
because
the
letter
used
language
similar to that used by Cameron, Grey regarded i t as proof that
1$
Ibl"d N
o. IP l .
170 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from the Gov to Secy of State
No. 14 pp 20-21, enclosures 1 and 2, extracts from the Morning
Star, 12 and 13 May 1865.
171
Ibid.
1n
Ibid No. 15 P 21.
60
Cameron
command
details
or two
had fully shared his views with officers under his
(RDB 19:7290).173
Cameron said he had been given the
of the Waitotara transaction while riding to Wanganui one
days after the battle at Nukumaru (RDB 19: 7382) .174
-
Grey, it seems, did not believe this.
He did not think this
explanation was consistent with either the published letter or
previous correspondence which indicated that Cameron himself, and
one of his officers also, had made inquiries into the transaction
(ROB
19:7285) .175
Cameron
did
not
name
his
informant,
but
described him as:
, : a Y~ry '~e,spe~·table ,set;.t'le'r
who had been a long time in the'
country~
and appeared well acquainted with the history of
the t~ansaction (ROB 19:738j).1M
Grey did not think that'Cameron had revealed the real source of
his information, and that the description of the informant was
so vague that he could not be identified (ROB 19: 7287) .177 Grey
:,::~.:
.... : ..
concluded that they were "all ashamed of what they had said and
done".
In any case, Grey said he had no specific claim before
him, and he had been advised by his ministers that nothing more
could be done.
Cameron's conclusion of the whole affair was that Grey had acted
)
/
strangely.
purchase.
Previously Grey had "severely condemned " the Waitara
In
Cameron's
opinion,
th~
Waitotara
block
was
similarly acquired and deserved attention equal to that Grey had
1n
Ibid No. 14 P 19.
174 AJHR 1866 AI,
enclosure in No. 2.
Despatches
from
Secy
of
State
p
4,
175 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Gov to Secy of 3tate No.
13 pp 13-17.
176 AJHR 1866 AI,
enclosure in No. 2.
177
Despatches
from
Secy
of
State
p
5r
AJHR 1866 AIr Despatches from Gov to Secy of State No.
13 pp 13-17.
61
given Waitara.
Rather than refer the matter to his responsible
advisors, Cameron felt that Grey ought to have inquired into the
matter immediately, especially because it directly affected the
prolongation of the war (RDB 19:7383).1n
When Grey was invited to respond to Cameron's allegations about
the Waitotara transaction, he found it difficult to contain his
outrage.
He was particularly concerned with the unfavourable way
in which he and his ministers had been portrayed by Cameron (RDB
19: 7284) .179 Grey also wrote that Cameron was "entirely unfit"
and
"eminently
disqualified"
from such a duty as !'laking
confide~tia·lc9.mmrinica,tions·to· .the )lOme gov~rnffi~.rit,.·:ari:i;I.· tha~·· '.
'.
: '.
'g'iving such a responsible duty to so incompetent a person coutd'
only serve to ensure Grey's ruin.
Grey
felt
he
had
little
chance
against
Cameron
making
"unfavourable confidential" reports to the home government, and
that he was limited constitutionally as to what action he could
..'.,';.:
take (RDB 19: 7286)
thankful
.180
He wrote that Cameron ought to have been
that he had instructed his
responsible advisors
to
inquire into the matter, and that Cameron was duty bound to refer
any
further
information
to
him.
Grey
considered
that
publications such as the letter published by the English press
served only to add weight to Cameron' s"aJlegations which would
.-'
I
otherwise have been viewed as " ludicrous'."!:
.I.,
Grey cited some of the constitutional changes he had instigated
as proof of his trying to safeguard against future difficulties
that
land
purchases
were
prone
to.
For example,
Grey
had
disestablished the Native Land Purchase Department and revoked
all commissions authorising land purchase on behalf of the Crown.
178 AJHR 1866 AI,
enclosure in No. 2.
Despatches
from Secy of State pp 4-5,
179 AJHR 1866 All Despatches from Gov of NZ to Secy of State
No. 13, Grey to Cardwell, 12 Dec 1865.
180
Ibid No. 13 pp 13-17.
62
He had also taken steps towards establishing a Native Land Court.
He believed he took "every precaution" in his power to "prevent
any difficulties with regard to land purchases taking place for
the future".
Grey said he was only ever aware of one grievance connected with
Waitotara.
That was a claim first made in April 1865 by Maori
living at Te Aro pa in Wellington that they were entitled to a
proportion of the purchase money (ROB 19: 7288-90) . 181
Grey does
not seem to have been aware that another claim to the purchase
money had been, tendered some six months earlier by members of
"Ngar~ur,(l' ~'esi.d~ng
bee'n
discovered:
a't:, Parawanu'i' .and Whanga'nui.; 182.. ',It has' not
how . either , of 'these
claims
were
resol'ved'.'
However, the fact that thos,e at Te Aro claimed an interest in the'
money and not· the land' was interpreted by Grey as, admission that"
the transaction itself was valid (ROB 19:7287).1~
Grey had further evidence of admission by Maori to the validity
of the Waitotara purchase.
The "principal Chiefs" at Weraroa pa
had admitted to Grey that the pa was built on government land and
that they had no rights there.
This admission was made to Grey
himself during a discussion at the pa in July.
He said it was
Te Ua who would not allow the pa to be given up.
Grey also sent
the Secretary of State a letter written 'by Pehimana te Tahua in
December 1865, in which Pehimana allied hf~self to the government
.
!
and denounced the actions of the tribe, p'articularly with regard
to two murders that had been committed.
Pehimana had indicated
his willingness to surrender and negotiate peace as early as
April, three months previous to Grey's advance on Weraroa.
Grey claimed that when Weraroa pa was "captured" several leading
chiefs amongst those taken prisoner were asked if they had any
1~ Ibid enclosure 2 in No.13 pp 17-19.
182 JC-WG 5 pp 196-7, various Maori to White, 27 Oct 1864.
183 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Gov to Secy of State No.
13 P 16.
63
complaints about the Waitotara purchase, and if the Weraroa pa
had been built in protest against the road being made through
that land. According to Grey, the response was that the pa had
been built by Waikato Maori and not the original owners of the
land. The purpose of the pa was to fight the Europeans, and if
Waikato had not come, no fighting would have taken place until
the road crossed the Waitotara.
Those who sold the land
participated in building
the
pa
so
that
they
would
not be
perceived to be abandoning the Kingitanga. Grey wrote that the
"Chiefs of the Waitotara Block" stated emphatically that the
J •
purchase was a straightforward one, and t~ey made ·the statement
·'··"upori tn.e spot, and'"w.:Lth arm9 .in .their
.harid~which
tl~ey: iritended
..
. . . . ,
'.
..
·Thi~· statement perhaps:ought to ·be·considered. in the
.
' .
'.,"
'''
context
of the desire
of certain chiefs 'to
effect a peace with
.
.
.
.
the· government,· a ·desire they had iridicated as early as .April.
'.
It has already been shown that Grey's advance on Weraroa was more
an evacuation than a capture, and most of those who had been
there
left
before
Grey
arrived
(see
pp
51-2).
Grey's
manipulation of information sent to the imperial government has
also been discussed.
He said he took 57 prisoners at Weraroa.
This miinber is less significant when previous reports of 400 to
775 people occupying the pa are considered (see p 47). Further,
Ngatiruanui and Ngarauru Maori who had/been away at war had
established themselves at Weraroa pa sino~'early 1864 (see p 41) .
This preceded the settlement of Te
Weraroa, when the pa was fortified,
Ua and his followers at
by about
three months.
Waikato, who Grey said built the pa, were not reported as present
at Te Weraroa until January 1865 (see p 47).
2.3.1 Field and Featherston Join In
Throughout the process of Grey and Cameron arguing
the~r-points
of view to the imperial government, others were drawn in to the
debate.
his
Field wrote to Cameron in September 1865, hoping that
letter would reach Cameron before Cameron wrote
to
the
64
imper ial
government
(ROB
19 : 7409 -11) • 184
Field
provided
a
history of the Waitotara purchase, so as to prevent any possible
mistakes that might be made when Cameron related the story to the
imperial government.
Although Field's
letter did not reach
Cameron in time, it nonetheless reached the Secretary for State,
and was published in 1866.
Cardwell described Field's letter as
"a full and specific account of the whole of the circumstances
attending the transaction".
He suggested that Grey use the
letter to guide his inquiries and assist in completing his report
on the matter.
However, it appears Grey did not receive Field's
lettei untii after he had .reported.to Cardwell.
l1nother
per·son· drawn ·.into
the
post-mo·rtem· debate
Wait·otara transaction was Featherston.
over
the
He wrote to Staffo~d in
·May l866· in response to the letters previously written by·Came~on
and Field (ROB 19:7368-70).1~
Featherston believed that Field
was the
from whom Cameron had received
"respectable settler"
information about the Waitotara purchase.
Both Featherston and
Field described events relative to the purchase that had not yet
been made public.
Neither of them stated on what authority their
descriptions were based, and research for this report has neither
confirmed nor denied the validity of their stories.
Field had lived among Ngarauru for at leal:jt six years before the
first instalment was paid for
11)
Waitotar~in
1859
(ROB 19:7409-
Field wrote that prior to the'" Waitotara transaction,
.186
Ngarauru
had
been
particularly
relationship with the settlers.
noted
for
their
friendly
They had not been party to the
Treaty of Waitangi, and had therefore retained their independence
and had never succumbed to British authority.
not new to Ngarauru.
184
Land sales were
McLean had been in correspondence with them
AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Secy of State No ....l.4-pp 31-
33.
1~ AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Gov to Secy of State No.
41 pp 97-100.
186 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Secy of State, enclosure
in No. 14 pp 31-33.
65
for several years about selling land.
According to Field, the
four principal chiefs of Ngarauru, who had no children, were in
favour of selling, but the majority of the tribe did not want to
sell to the Crown.
They felt that a better price was available
on the open market, and selling on the open market was preferable
to allowing the Crown to on-sell their land for much more than
it paid.
Field himself had been approached by Maori to buy land,
but had been prevented from doing so, as had the Wesleyan church,
by the Crown's right of pre-emption.
In the end,l it was the passage of the. Native Reserves Act 1856:'
that prompted'Maor.f ,tb' agree: .,to' selling' Waitotara. 181: "This act
"meant that"Maorl' who
lease them
Maori
'thr~u,gh
to
sell
own~d, r~s~rve~' Wit~i~ p'u~~hased"bioCkS c~uld"':,
Native Reserves Commissioners.
Wai totara',
according
What motivated
'to, Field"
was
,the
understanding that if they retained large portions of the best
land as reserves, and leased them, they could afford to accept
t~,.
the government's low price for the balance of the block.
1f~"'~
According to Field, the agreement to sell" Waitotara was struck
with
Mc Lean when he
Browne.
visited Wanganui
in
1858
with Governor'
Field wrote that the negotiation was conducted entirely
from the Rutland Hotel, that McLean did not visit the block, and
had only casually glimpsed the block wheu;he had passed down the
i
,)
west coast a few years before.
Consequen:~ly McLean developed an
incorrect impression of the size of the block, and did not expect
the reserves Ngarauru wanted to keep to be so large.
to
Featherston' s
version
investigated the title"
instalment,
of
events,
(RDB 19:7368).188
McLean
According
"thoroughly
He paid £500 as an
£100 to each of the five principal chief SI who in
turn distributed the money amongst their followers.
Featherston
said that the survey of the block was commenced immediately I and:
\.
187 Field incorrectly refers to legislation enacted in 1858.
That year an amendment to the 1856 act was made. It seems Field
in fact meant to refer to the 1856 act.
'
1M AJHR 1866 All Despatches from Gov to Secy of State No.
41 pp 97-100.
66
A reference to the final deed of purchase will show with
what care and accuracy this was done.
The final deed gives details of the surveyors and Maori who
assisted
them.
However,
Featherston
does
not
mention
the
difficulties that arose regarding reserves during 1862-3 which
are discussed in section 1.8 of this report.
According to Field, when McLean realised most of the best land
was taken up in reserves, he demanded they either be forsaken or
dec.reasedin size
(RDB 19:7410).189
Ngarauru declined.·to do
~this·:and·. offE!r~d instead to ··rE!turnthe £500.,Clepqslt.;
..
'ie~ain~d :i~ ·di~put~· fo~· s~me: time,' ~bout eighte~ri ·~on~·hs ~j!'i'eld
.
thought.
th~s
DuriIl:g
.
time, McI;.eaIl: would neither complete. the
purchase nor take back. the deposit.
When a deputation sent to
see McLean failed to reach a settlement,
Ngarauru decided to
return the deposit and cancel the agreement.
To strengthen their
decision,
:.':;'.
. The·.inatter
they
joined
the
Kingitanga.
Field
attributed
Ngarauru' s participation in the Waitara war to two things - the
fact
that
because
Ngarauru
the
and Te Atiawa were ·closely related,
disputes
with
the
government
over
and
Waitara
and
under
the
Waitotara were similar.
When
negotiations
for
Waitotara _were<-;re-opened,
I
direction of Featherston,
Ngarauru, FiE;lld
wrote, said that the
;: t
transaction had been complicated by the-:" war.
Because the land
had been made over to the Maori King, it had to remain that way
until the war was at an end.
However, if Featherston wished, he
could resurrect negotiations when peace was made.
Field,
According to
Featherston preferred to hasten the transaction and so
offered a sum of £500 additional to the purchase price of £1500
previously agreed to.
tempted by this.
Field said that Maori at Pakaraka were
He said they "owned little or none of j:h§.. block
except what was included in their own reserve".
This they wanted
to lease, and therefore they advocated the sale of the Waitotara
189 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches from Secy of State No. 14 pp 31-
3.
.. :
,67
block.
Featherston had a different perception of this episode.
Without
any reference to any offer to increase the purchase price, he
said that loyal Maori "called upon the Government to complete the
purchase" (RDB 19:7368).190
This caused a dispute between loyal
Maori and those who had joined the Kingitanga who, according to
Featherston, had become rebels.
The dispute was referred to the
Kingitanga, where a court was held.
Field later wrote that the
loyal Maori who Featherston referred to here were:
,
I
some
"
half
doz,eri".'....
Wangailrii"
natives',' ,who
.
"had
,
collate'ral
interest'
, grandmothers ~ 191
through
,
s'ome.. va,gue
1
wives
mothers"
... : .
or
At the Kingitanga court, Aperahama argued for the non-sellers,
and Rio for the sellers.
In the end, the court decided that the
Kingitanga would not retain the land.
Field and Featherston,
each !lad a differing opinion of how this decision was arrived at.
Field, who had described Rio as "a pushing', ambitious man of low
origin and no principle", said the court's decision was a liberal
one (RDB 19: 7410)
the
transaction
.192
He said the Kingitanga preferred to have
concluded,
rather
than
give
Pakeha
the
opportunity to say, even if falsely-,f;-til'-at Maori had repudiated
a bargain.
Featherston, on the other ;'hand,
claimed that the
court's final decision was:
that Aperahama hadn't a leg to stand oni that he and those
he represented had been consenting parties to the sale, and
had received an ample share of the
first
instalment of
£500; that the land had been fairly sold, belonged to the
AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Gov to Secy of -fit ate No.
41 pp 97-100.
190
191 H C Field papers, Field to Hall, 10 Aug 1866, Whanganui
Regional Museum.
192
pp 31-3.
AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from the Secy of State No. 14
6B
Queen, and must be handed over (RDB 19: 736 B) • 193
Featherston'said that Aperahama was also ordered to quit the
block and he "implicitly obeyed these orders".
At about the same
time Hare Tipene called a public meeting of the tribe, announced
his intention to go to war at Taranaki, and "formally renounced
his claims on the block".
Thus,
Featherston considered,
opposition was withdrawn, and the sale was able to proceed.
all
But
even if Hare Tipene had renounced his claims to Waitotara, he was
still considered when the final payment was made.
It was decided
to keep the money until Hare Tipene and others who were away at
war "had retur~ecr.
\ .
Als'o, the N'q:kumaru ~eserve was recqgnised. as
be.longing . to' Hare Tipene.
Field said that following the decision
ot
the Kingitanga court,
Featherston went to Waitotara and called on Ngarauru to obey the
Kingitanga
mandate,
19:7410).194
\.:"";;;.,
but
Ngarauru
refused
to
do
this
(RDB
Then, instead of leaving the matter in abeyance,
Featherston decided to negotiate with the Pakaraka Maori alone
for Waitotara.
Field said that Featherston was motivated by his
desire to take the credit for concluding a purchase that McLean
could not.
Further, Featherston was supported in his actions by
some of the Wanganui Maori who had "small collateral interests
in the land".
.-;:,... .....
Whereas Featherston said that all opposition to the sale had been
withdrawn,
Field
acknowledged Maori
"acted with great moderation".
opposition,
even
though
He said Maori told Featherston
that if he paid for the land, he could not have it.
Also, when
the block was inspected by settlers after it had been advertised
for sale, Nukumaru Maori warned them against the practice, and
told them "not to dream of purchasing".
Field considered Maori
were happy to watch and protest as the road was built.
It was
193 AJHR 1866 AI, Despatches trom Gov to Secy of State No.
41 pp 97-100.
194 AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Secy of State No. 14. pp
31-3.
69
only when the road reached the boundary of the Nukumaru reserve
that
i t was
stopped,
and it was
only when Cameron' s
crossed the boundary that they were attacked.
troops
Field described
the advance of the troops on Nukumaru as:
trespassing on land to which the Government could have no
possible shadow of a claim. 195
Conversely, Featherston said that rather than oppose the road,
Maori
(RDB
"voluntarily" allowed it to pass through their reserves
Featherston
19:7369).196
claimed
that· even
the
"arcn.
. rebel'" Hare"Tip~ne ··.·~ent word ·froin 'the warzori~ '"that no opp6~ition'
"
w~uld 'b~'· ~f'fer~d
to the road pa'ssing throu.gh·
Nukuma~u ..·
The' w~r ..
party that attacked the troops. at Nukumaru was ,. according' to
.
.
Featherston, just passing through and on the way to Taranaki and
not
from
Wai totara
at
all.
Further,
Te
Weraroa
constructed not to protest against the road,
had
been
but "solely and
expressly" to dispute the troops passage of the Waitotara.
Featherston
concluded
that
the
purchase
had
slightest degree been questioned" by Maori.
never
"in
the
There was not the
"slightest foundation" for Cameron's claims, which held "scarcely
a particle of truth".
"complain of
Secretary
of
accusations"
Finally, Featherston claimed the right to
the unfair and ungene:J;:'otisl course"
State,
that
without
first
is,
of
to
/
pul;)lish
all
<:.
J
~iving
taken by the
Cameron' s
"grave
Featherston
an
opportunity to respond.
Field's conclusion was that the Waitotara purchase was:
merely a sample of the affairs which have led to war.
has
its
or~gin
entirely
in
the
monstrous
system
It
of
195 Ibid.
196 AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Gov to Secy of State No.
41 pp 97-100.
70
Government land-purchase monopoly (ROB 19: 7410)
.197
Further, so long as provincial government relied on land purchase
from Maori as a form of revenue,
worked
to
get
lands
to
"all sorts of dodges will be
sell" .
Field
later
described
Featherston's version of events as:
one of the most remarkable cases of perversion of truth
that it is possible to conceive, and entirely misrepresents
nearly every circumstance. 198
2.4
·The ·Ca.se .. is Ctosed·
The
imper.ial
)
Waitotara.
government
.had
a
lot
to· consider
r~gardi.ng·
It had received often contradictory versions of the
transaction from Cameroni Grey, Field and Featherston, and had
a.lso
received copies of some,
original documents.
but not all,
of
the relevant
It is not known how the imperial government
sifted through the information before it, but more than a year
after Cameron first wrote to the Secretary of State for War, with
his
allegations about the Waitotara purchase,
closed.
the matter was
The Secretary of State informed Grey in August 1866 that
the imperial government would not be inquiring any further into
the matter (ROB 19:7521).199
He had::n6"j:..eason to believe the
sale had been conducted improperly, and ~'~ted that the imperial
iJ '
government had no control over the matter.
The Featherston and Field stories add new dimensions to the
Waitotara story.
Some of the events that they relate have not
been raised in the first part of this report.
This is because
contemporary written records of the events described have not
197
AJHR 1866 A1, Despatches from Secy of State No. 14. pp
31-3.
198 H C Field papers, Field to Hall, 10 Aug 1866, Whanganui
Regional Museum.
199
AJHR 1867 A1, Despatches from Secy of State No. 3 P 1.
71
been located.
The truth of the detail of some of the events
surrounding the Crown's acquisition of Waitotara may never be
known.
What is certain is that the transaction was fraught with
debate and dispute, which did not even end when the' imperial
government closed its enquiry into the matter.
Sir
John
Hall,
Featherston's
Premier,
actions
in
in
August
acquiring
1866,
the
In a ietter to
Field
Waitotara
denounced
block
and
virtually called him a liar for the way he had recalled events
surrounding the purchase. 200
Also in 1866, William Fox's book
The War in New Zealand was published. 201
In it, Fox rakes over
the Cameron-Grey dispute,',' and criticises Cameron and ,Fie~d for
their
correspondence
.
.
'.
'.
about, the
Waitotara ·transactidn.',
',As"
recentiy as 1984, :Fox ,"s crit,icism 'of Field motivated. a greatgrandson of Field to locate Fie+d' s opinion of the war;
This led
to the deposit of Field's August, 1866 letter to Hall in the
Whanganui Regional Museum.
The paper war over the Waitotara purchase that followed the south
,
"<~":
Taranaki campaign was really only one aspect of a much larger
feud.
Central to the
feud was Cameron' and Grey.
increasingly hostile toward each other.
They were
They argued about the
deployment of troops, how and why to conduct the war (if at all),
the
Waitotara
purchase,
Weraroa
Pa,
communication
imperial government and, no doubt,
many5()'~her
who came into contact with Grey and
came~bn
•
the feud.
in
the
~.
with
subjects.
the
Others
were also drawn into
I
Consider for example, Fox' s he~~ criticism of Cameron
south Taranaki campaign,
and the way
in which Field
supported (or provided) Cameron's view of the Waitotara purchase
(see above).
Perhaps the paper war that ensued is really only a reflection of
200 H C Field papers I Field to Hall, 10 Aug 1866, Whanganui
Regional Museum.
This letter did not get published with the
dearth of correspondence on the matter that was published in
1866, and it could not have reached the imperial government
before its inquiry was closed.
201
W Fox The War in New Zealand London, 1866.
,',
... ;.
,,'.
72
the
poor
relationship
that
Cameron
and
Grey
had.
Perhaps
Waitotara was just one of many items the two chose to debate just
because of their hatred for each other. Perhaps also, Waitotara
was
not
fully
investigated
because
of
the
difficulty
ascertaining right and wrong with Grey and Cameron
embroiled in their own feud.
If one thing is certain, it is that
Waitotara was a difficult purchase.
from the beginning.
of
so bitterly
It was fraught with conflict
There was conflict between Maori, between
Maori and the Crown or its agents, and between the Crown's agents
themselves.
One of the key questions requiring consideration in
terms of resolving the claim by Ngarauru to Waitotara, m~st be
did the ," Crown li~ve'"
'eno~gh ' .
suppo.~t
'"f~'oin all 'Mi:lOri intere"s'ted
in
. .
. . .
.
..
,.'
"the' Waitotara block to jus"ti(y proceed'ing 'with ,the purchase?
,::' ":"
:-
., ~i
,/ .I
/.
' .. .'.: ... _.._-..!.-._ .....
73
,
"-
Chapter 3
Reservations About Reserves
3.1
The Reserves on Paper
It has already been established that the reserves made within the
Waitotara block were a key aspect to negotiating the conclusion
of the Waitotara transaction. 202 However, the record regarding
these reserves
is l-imited.
The receipt recording the
first
instalment for the block does not mention reserves, and McLean's
specific instructions regarding those reserves are not known.
After
Featherston took
over
negotiations
for
the
block,
he
apparently met with,Maori on the ground on numerous occasions
(RDB 19:7368).203
These negotiations were either not recorded,
or any record of them has not survived to the present day.
Besides the deed of cession for Waitotara, there are two other
documents available to researcher,s which refer to the reserves
made in the block.
They are a letter written in 1860 by the
surveyor John Stewart, and a return .,gi.".Natfve reserves published
in 1862 (RDB 16:6147, 15:5676) .204
The eight reserves described
!.
by Stewart in his letter of 28 April 1860" !to Deighton are these:
Ihupuku
Kaipo
201:1:00
Perekamu
925:0:00
Auroa
137:0:00
Manene
58:1:00
~2
\
29:0:00
See section 1.8.
203 AJHR 1866 Al Despatches from Gov to the Secy of State,
enclosure in No.41 p 97.
204 AJHR 1863 E 15 enclosure to No. 4 P 3 and AJHR 1862 E10.
74
Nukumaru
1223:0:00
Piripi's reserve and Pakaraka 4348:0:00
Okehu
380:0:00
The
eight
reserves
described by
the
1862
return
o-f
Native
Reserves are these:
Auroa
Ohie
Kaipo
Ihupuku
Mainetie
.,
137:0:00
700:0:00
201:1:00
29:0:00,
58:1:00"
Nukumaru
Pakaraka
1223: 0 :'00
, 4348:0:00
Aratot-ara
\~".~::<:.:.
.
380:0:00
Perekamu and Ohie appear to be the same reserve, now known as Te
Karaka and bounded on the south by the Ohie stream.
The
difference in area between these two documents has not been
accounted for.
the deed.
Ihupuku is the reserve recorded as Maraetoa in
Okehu and Aratotara are the 'same reserve, now known
as Tukituki.
)
The text of the deed describes seven,reser.ves retained by Maori,
and identifies who surveyed each reserv'e. 205
H C Field later
claimed that the names of Maori who
as
having
assisted
the
surveyor
ar~'identified
were
"falsely
by the deed
inserted". 206
According to Field, those who actually assisted the surveyor and
erected boundary poles were men who eventually refused to sell
Waitotara to Featherston.
Field said he had this information on
the authority of those who actually assisted in setting up the
poles, although he felt his allegation could not be conclusively
proven unless the whole tribe could be questioned.
(
205
The-t~th
of
Turton pp 238-242.
206 H C Field papers, Whanganui Regional Museum, Field to
Hall, 10 Aug 1866.
75
this and other allegations made by Field may never be known, due
in large to the limited first hand record that is now available
to researchers.
An eighth reserve, Kaipo Pa, is outlined on the map accompanying
the deed but is not mentioned in the text of the deed.
numbered as the other seven are.
It. is not
It is likely that Kaipo was the
area that Piripi and Rio were allowed to buy back using part of
the purchase money (see below).
Because of this, and because
title derives from the Native Land Court, Kaipo has been dealt
with here tog~ther with the reservesmade.in the Waitotara block.
.
.
"
. -.
."
'
\'
.'.
. 3.,2
The R~serves go':1:0 the: Na1::i:ve 'Land Court
Eight reserves deemed to have been set apart from the'Waitotara
block were placed before the "Native Land Court for investigation
o!1 25 January 1867. 207
These cases were all dismissed' due to
want of jurisdiction on the part of the court.
The court was
satisfied that the reserves had in fact been confiscated in 1865
under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863, but stated that the
claimants could reapply to the court if the Crown abandoned its
claims to the reserves.
The Waitotara block had been included
in the Ngatiruanui coast block confiscated in September 1865 (RDB
11:4039-40)
.208
Had
the
court -invesbigated
title
to
the
Waitotara reserves before this date, the"'~ew Zealand Settlements
Act would not have applied because tit:te to the reserves would
then have derived from the Crown in the form of a Crown grant or
other certificate of title.
Before the court closed, the Crown Agent, Mr Atkinson, announced
that
the
government
intended
formally
abandoning this
land,
although not until the .cases had been dismissed by the court.
The purpose of the abandonment was to:
207 Repro 265, Whanganui Minute Book No. 1 pp 148-150.
A
reserve listed as Okauanga is thought to be the same as Maraetoa.
W8
NZG 5 Sep 1867 No. 35 pp 266-7.
76
admit the jurisdiction of the Native Land Court for the
purpose of deciding the question of ownership at a future
date. 209
The minutes do not reveal why the government would not formally
abandon the land until the court dismissed the cases.
However,
in January 1867 the land on which the Waitotara block is located
was
formally excluded from the confiscation
The
reserves
were
then
investigation of title.
in 1868.
able
to
pass
(RDB
through
the
12: 4174)
.210
court
for
Most of the reserves were investigated
discus'~ed
Each reserve, made is'
separately here, and
,t,ables, sUrn.nlarising, a.1ienati.oI:J, 6f land from those reserves foLlow., '
.
'.
,
.'
3.3
'.
....
":"
.
.
The Reserves on the Ground
3.3.1 Okehu
Okehu, now known as Tukituki, is the first reserve recorded on
". ,.'.~\'.;,;."
the deed of cession for Waitotara, said to be surveyed by Mr
Stewart assisted by Te Peina.
On 8 February 1888, the
cou~t
named nine people who it determined were beneficially entitled
to Tukituki. 211
acres.
acres.
land.
The deed estimates Okehu reserve to contain 380
On investigation by the court it was found to contain 374
372 acres 4.3 perches
(150.553'9/ha) remains as Maori
1 acre 3 roods 35.7 perches has ,:bren alienated for the
purpose of roading.
3.3.2 Pakaraka
The
second reserve named by the Wai totara deed is Pakaraka,
Pukengaio.
Part of the boundary was surveyed by Porter, assisted
in parts by Piripi "and others".
The rest of the boun,dary was
209 Repro 265, Whanganui Minute Book No. 1 pp 148-150.
A
reserve listed as Okauanga is thought to be the same as Maraetoa.
~o NZG 15 Mar 1867 No.15 p 112.
211
Binder 113, NLC order 8 Feb 1888.
77
surveyed by Stewart and Piripi "and others".
Piripi and Hare
erected the survey poles on one side, and Rihari and Motnarama
[sic] erected the poles on the south-east.
Formerly containing
a larger area, 4348 acres according to previous documentation,
the block was said to be reduced by Featherston to 3300 acres.
The reduction was made by Porter and Piripi by altering the lower
boundary line.
H C Field disputed some of this information.~2
He said that
the altered line had not been laid off at all, and that he had
conclusively ascertained this when approached by 'some 9f Ngarauru
'to, prepar:eq,
:plan: ' of . the p~karaka'
.:reserve, to .,accompap:y
"their
.
. . . . . .
.,
.
'appiic~tion 'to the Native' Land' Court.
that it· could
In fact:, Field ciaimed
easily proved that neither Porter nor any other
b~,
surveyor had been near Pakaraka reserve since '1859,
probably
since Stewart made the initial survey of the block.
When the Native Land Court investigated title to Pakaraka on 8
February
1868 ,
it
was
found
to
contain
3391
acres. 213
Ten
owners were named by the court to whom a certificate of title was
ordered to issue.
Pakaraka was found by the court to be a Native
reserve within the meaning of the Native Lands Act 1867.
In April 1890, after a court case
that~had
been in hearing since
February, Pakaraka was partitioned into ,Pakaraka 1 and Pakaraka
2.214
Since
then
smaller blocks.
it
has
been
partitioned
into
fifty
four
Fourteen of those partitions, or approximately
14.28% of the original area of Pakaraka reserve now remains as
Maori land.
212 H C Field papers, Whanganui Regional Museum, Field to
Hall, 10 Aug 1866.
213 Repro 265, Whanganui Minute Book I, p 224.
214 Whanganui Minute Book 17 pp 221-272, 273-291, 318-474.
78
3.3.3 Nukumaru
Nukumaru is the third reserve named by the deed for Waitotara.
According to the deed, Stewart was assisted in the survey of
Nukumaru by Hare and Himiona.
Also, the survey pole in Lake
Waikato was erected by Hetaraka.
The block was estimated to
contain 1223 acres.
The
Native Land Court investigated title to Nukumaru on 7
Feb~uary 1868 and determined that the 1244 acre block had been
reserved for the benefit of Maori in the deed of cession for
Wai totarc;t. 215. .-The:· court :. also named -1::~n' peopie-. to' whom. ·a·· _
.;
certifLcate bf title was to issue. _ Accordingly., ~ Crown grant
issued to those ten people on 8 July 1869, ~ntivested from 7
. February 1868. 216 Like the other reserves made in the Wai totara
block, title would have been determined subject to the ten-owner
rule.
;',.
Subject
to
the
legislation and
policy governing Maori
land
throughout history, Nukumaru has eventually been partitioned into
fifty blocks, thirteen of which are currently held under title
derived from the court.
These thirteen blocks total in area 116
acres 2 roods 27.7 perches, which represents approximately 9.5%
of the original Nukumaru reserve.
3.3.4 Maenene
Maenene is spelt Maneene in the deed.
surveyed by Stewart,
contained 58 acres.
It was said to have been
assisted by Piripi and Horoparera,
and
When investigated by the Native Land Court
in 1873, Maenene was found to contain 60 acres. 217
found to be a Native Reserve.
It was also
A certificate of title was ordered
to issue in the names of ten people, including three
215
WH 151 vol 8, NLC orders 10 Feb 1868.
216
WH 151 vol 8, copy of Crown grant.
217
WH 83, NLC orders, 25 June 1873.
migor~.
On
79
23 February 1889, Maenene was partitioned into two blocks of 54
acres and 6 acres respectively.218 By diverse transfers Maenene
1 and Maenene 2 blocks became alienated to Europeans, probably
by about 1911.
The nature of those alienations are not apparent
at the Maori Land Court, Whanganui, although some certificates
of title, referred to by the block order file, could be searched
for
more
information.
Those
titles
are:
3/103,
56/71
and
205/118.
3.3.5 Maraetoa
,,/
~ Mar9-eto~a i's the' fifth reserve r:ecotd~d ip. ..the ·Waitotara· de.ed·· of'
cession.
Estimated to contain 29 acres,' Maraetoa was. surveyed
by Mr' Stewart assisted by Pirimona and Hakaraia.
Maraetoa is not
recorded in the Maori Land Court index of Maori land blocks·, so
What is certain is that
there is no block order file for it.
Maraetoa is not currently Maori'land.
3.3.6 Te Karaka
Perekama, the sixth reserve identified by the deed for Waitotara,
is
now
known
in
the
Maori
Land
Court
as
Te
Karaka.
On
investigation by the court on 17 July 1867, title issued. to each
of three partitions of Te Karaka:
rre-;"-:Kci'~~ka A, Band C. 219
/~
/
/- ;
For each block the court named ten peopTe to whom a certificate
of
title was
to
issue,
provided a
completed within three months.
survey of the block was
A Crown grant for each of Te
Karaka A, Te Karaka Band Te Karaka C to the people named by the
court issued on 9 May 1870. 220 Each grant was antivested from
31 July 1867, and was subject to a restriction making the blocks
inalienable
by
sale,
lease
~8 WH 83, NLC orders,
exceeding
21
years,
or mortgage
23 Feb 1889.
219 WH 22, NLC orders 31 July 1867.
220 WH 22, W15/6, summary of grant registration.
of Crown grant. WH 24, copy of Crown grant.
WH 23, copy
8.0
without the consent of the Governor.
The court had estimated that Te Karaka A measured 218 acres.
However, it appears that on survey the block was actually found
to measure 187 acres 2 roods. Te Karaka B was estimated by the
court to contain 4.07 acres, but on survey was found to contain
386 acres.
On survey the Te Karaka C was found to contain 736
acres 2 roods and 8 perches.
This area had previously been
estimated by the court at 667 acres 2 roods.
Of the thirty
partitions that Te Karaka was eventually divided. into, eleven
remalnas Maori freehol9 land, containing approximately 28.68%
'.
. '.
.
.
.of· the origi~al area·or.2·97 . a:cres.·20.~8 perches.
.
3.3.7·Te Auroa
Te Auroa is listed as the seventh reserve in the deed of cession
for Wai totara. According to the survey made by Stewart, who was
assisted by Kereti and Tiritiu, Te Auroa contained 137 acres.
The Native Land Court investigated Te Auroa on 7 Feb 1868, and
confirmed that it had been reserved for the' benefit of Maori from
the Waitotara block.~1
Ten people were named by the court to
have their names entered on a certificate of title which was to
issue if a proper survey of the block was p+oduced within six
months of the court s order. The dOGument7l used for this section
I
of the report provide no explanation of//vrhy the court required
a survey, when it had supposedly been .l..:previously surveyed by
Stewart, Kereti and Tiritiu.
Following a
sitting of the court at Waitotara,
partitioned
into
three
blocks
by
orders
dated
Te Auroa was
5
November
222
1892.
The blocks became Te Auroa 1, 2 and 3 containing 67
acres 3 roods 1.0 perches, 17 acres 2 roods 38 perches and 41
acres 2 roods respectively.
Previous to this partition, the
following land had already been taken for road: 1 acre 2 roods
221
WH 2, NLC orders 19 Feb 1868.
222
WH 2, NLC orders 5 Nov 1892.
81
18 perches in Te Auroa 1;
1 acre 2 roods in Te Auroa 2, and 2
roods 28 perches in Te Auroa 3.
A further 6 perches was taken
from Te Auroa 1 for the purpose of a road in 1911. 223
the
original
Divisions
1,
Te
Auroa
2 and 3
"European Land". 224
reserve
now
remains
as
None of
Maori
Land.
are noted by the Maori Land ·Court as
However, the method of alienation has not
been discovered by research for this report.
3.3.8 Kaipo
As previously mentioned, Kaipo is not i~entifiedas a reserve in
'the .dE3~d .o:e 'ce's:sion' for. waitotara" b~t i~':dr~Wri' on ·the. ~a~ that
acc·c.=,m~a~.i·~·s . t'~e deed. It is likely, .~ltho~gh: i~' l~as' not . bee'~
conclusively proven, that .Kaipo is the block that Piripi and Rio
were able to buy back from the Crown using some·of the purchase
money (ROB 16:6148)
.225
Kaipo had been identified as a reserve
containing 201 acres 1 rood on two previous occasions in 1860 and
again in 1862 (see above).
A Crown Grant issued to Rio and Piripi fo·r Kaipo on 1 November
1876. The grant records Kaipo as containing 188 acres "exclusive
of Road". 226
Throughout history, Kaipo has been variouslypartitioned, eventually consisting of 35 discreet blocks, 15 of
which remain as Maori land.
Those fifteen lblocks contain a total
area of 34 acres 3 roods 29 perches or approximately 18.57% of
the original area of Kaipo block.
3.4
L
Maori Freehold Land Remaining in the Reserves
The blocks exciuded from the Waitotara transaction and reserved
to Maori became subject to the Native land legislation and the
223
WH 23, NLC order assessing compensation, 5 Jun 1912.
224
WH 2 , cover.
2~
AJHR 1863 E15 No. 7.
226
WH 39, Crown Grant No. 4525.
82
Native Land Court process.
Three of those reserves, Maenene,
Maraetoa and Auroa have been completely alienated from Maori
title.
Tukituki or the Okehu reserve is largely intact.
A
portion has been taken for road, and the balance remains in one
title.
The other four blocks - Pakaraka, Nukumaru, Te Karaka
(Perekama), and Kaipo have become subject to the often
complicated and confusing court process of partition. In effect,
the partition process causes blocks of land to be divided into
more and more blocks with increasingly smaller areas.
Only a
fraction of the original areas of these four blocks now remain
as Maori freehold land.
,'I
The following table'" shows :"how much Maori freehold" land remairis
out of the original Waitotara reserves.
The original "area "is as
defined by the Native Land Court rather than the deed of cession,
as this is the area that was entered on the title to each block.
The last column in the table shows the ratio of partitions
remaining
as
Maori
freehold
land
to
the
total
number
of
partitions made in each block.
Table Showing Maori Freehold Land Remaining in Wai totara Reserves
Block
Tukituki (Okehu)
original
area
374:0:00
remaining ML
",
partitions
ML/total
:.. ........ 'i
372;: p: 04.3
1/1
/"
Pakaraka
3391:0:00
48;4:1:22.66
14/54
Nukumaru
1224:0:00
116:2:27.7
13/50
Maenene
60:0:00
nil
0/2
Maraetoa
29:0:00
nil
0/1
Perekama (Te Karaka)
1310:0:08
Auroa
137:0:00
Kaipo
188:0:00
TOTAL
6713:0:08
297:0:20.8
nil
34:3:29
1305:0:24.46
11/30
0/3
15/35
r:r4 /1::79
83
3.5
Partition and Alienation: Pakaraka, Nukumaru, Te Karakaand
Kaipo
The continued alienation of Maori land in the Waitotara district
into the present time has been raised as a key issue for the
claimants
Ngarauru
Tribunal.
in
evidence
given
before
the
Waitangi
Certainly, the alienation of land from the Waitotara
reserves has continued into recent times.
Those alienations have
not been researched in detail for this report, the focus of which
has
been on the Crown's
itself.
acquisition of
the Waitotara block
However, the following ~ables ident,ify, what p'ort;.~ons of,
t,~e 'Pcikaraka, Nlikumaru, Te Karaka',and Kciipo" p{:lvebeen aliepat,ed.,
."
. - ' ..
'.
These four' reserves hav~ been most .. affected by ,the partition
process of the court, and, the majority of 'those partitions have
'now been alienated from'Maori title.
~hese
tables have been constructed entirely from documents held
by the Whanganui Maori Land Court,' and are therefore limited to
that extent.
Current binders, block order files and a few title
notices are the only items that have been consulted.
For several
blocks the detail one might expect to find on the block order
files
has
not
been
located.
In
those
cases
notes
in
the
'superseded' column of the relevant record sheet and/or notes
made on court orders and land transfer-:s'eflrches have been relied
...
on.
"
:.
.L;'
Besides identifying blocks that have been alienated and blocks
that
remain
as
Maori
freehold
land,
these
tables
identify
commonly used methods of alienation and note further references
which may assist if these blocks are ever investigated in detail.
The further references given have been copied directly from the
Maori Land Cour.t documents used to construct these tables.
are
mostly
alienation
file
references.
Alienation- for
They
the
purpose of this section of the report, refers to the alienation
of title to Maori land from the Maori Land Court, rather than
alienation of land from Maori ownership.
This means that some
land, which may now be classified as general land, may still be
'.:
... ' ..',,',-'...:. ............ '- .- .... ; . -
...
'.-": '.--~-:...~--~ ~";.'.
,"
84
in Maori ownership.
For example, land which has become general
land by virtue of the Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1967 Part I.
3.5.1
Table showing alienation of land from Pakaraka Reserve
Area
Partition
pt 1A1
1B
1C
101
pt 102
pt 102
103
1E
1F1
1F2A
1F~B
'
1I2A
)t 1I3,
p1'113
114
115A1
115B
115C
1150
pt 116
pt 116
117
118
1K1
1K2
1K3A
1K3B
1L1
1L2
1L3
2A
2B1A1
2B1A2A
2B1A2B
pt 2B2
pt 2B2
,I't 2B2
2B3
2B4
2C
20
2E
2F
a:r:p
3:0:00
166:0:26
55:1:38
145:0:03
23:0:00
62:1:22
95:1:30
413:0:00
40:0:00
174:1:00
18:,3::00
' 4:,:1 :27
1 :2:00.3
' 4:3:28.6'
26:1:03.33
5:1 :24
35:2:15
20:1:38
39:2:25
51:3:26
26:1:23.3
20:3:34.66
1:0:00
15:0:15
13: 1 :22
11:0:06
22:0:15
399:3:00
199:1:32
198:0:28
73:3:04
0:2:00
3:0:00
6:2:00
10:1 :05.5
10:0:26.25
35:2:23.5
25:0:30
20:0:03
63:2:37
90:2:23
51:0:13
80:0:16
Consideration
£
120
Kethod of Alienation
confirmed by court & Pt 1/1967
noted as European land
European, previously leased
Part 1/1967
noted as European
European, previously leased
200ct34
Further References
4858
sec 4/1895
1920
20Sep68
1905,
sec 4/1895, sec 14/1903
sec 4/1895, sec 14/1903
"
'$5000
141 :17s .6d
10
1557.05s
629
576.16s.6d
1150
noted as .sold
noted as Eiiropean·· , '
Part; XIX/1953, :. '
' Publ ic, Works Act :1908
confirmed by court
Part 1/1967
Part 1/1967 ,
Part 1/1967.
Part 1/1967
Part 1/1967
confirmed by board
whole block noted as European
confirmed by board
Part 1/1967
Part 1/1967
Part 1/1967
confirmed by board
noted as Crown & European land
150ct79
30Apr25
18Nov36
20Sep68
03Mar69
04Sep73
20Sep68
20Sep68
17Jul20
'3/821+1
5117
883
15Apr24
20Sep68
20Sep68
16Mar29
confirmed by the court
21Apr66
Part 1/1967
20Sep68
..
.,
noted as European lanq,
confirmed by board
./ 170ec42
confirmed by court
/ 06Jul44
whole block noted as Europeanl,', !
Part 1/1967
\l.i 20Sep68
noted a5 European
sale executed by Maori Trustee 25Aug65
1914
1911
20Sep68
1361
3223
WH(aln)5/313, 3/1561
~~"
.e
433.12s .1d
529.08s.8d
7900
Current Kaori Land in Pakaraka Block
pt 1A1
1A2A
pt 1A2B
1A2B1
1A2B2
1A283
1G
1H
111
112B
112c
pt 113
115A2
2B1B
Date
16:2:32
142:0:00
0:1:16
0:2:00
0:2:00
208:2:09.8
3:0:03
3:0:03
3:0:00
12:1:20.22
17:2:28.88
30:1:31.76
16:0:33
30:0:05
3/4938/2
3/4938/3
WH(aln)5/197-200, 4/5526
85
~.5.2
Partition
pt 1A
1A1A
1A1B
1A3
1A4
1A5
pt 1A6
1A6A
1A6B
181A1
pt 1B1A2
pt 1B1A2
181A3
1B1B
1B1c1
.pt 1B101
pt 1B101' .
pt .. 1B101
\,
18102
C.
1B1E1
1B1E2
pt 1B1E2
181F1
1B1F2A
181F2B
1B2A1
1B2B1
1B2B2
1B283
1B3A
..... 1B3B1
~~ .. :..:
.,t 1B381
1B3B2
1B3B3A
1B383B
pt 1B3B3B
pt 1B3C1
pt 183C1
pt 1B3C1
pt 1S3C1
1B3~~1
1B5
2
,
'. ,~."
;'
1A2
1A7A
1A7B
1B1c2
1B2A2A
1B2A2B
Table showing alienation of land from Nukumaru Reserve
Area
a:r:p
Consideration
£
56:0:00
0:2:00
23:1 :25
55:0:35
18:2:35 227
11:1:34
10:0:00
14:2:00
58:2:35
17:3:35
5:1:07
12:2:23
7:1:20
47:3:30
0:1:00
0:0:32.
0:0:05.9
92:0:3Q.1
54:0:16'
10:2:12.5
22:1:00 228
(11:2:27)
26:1:30
44:0:08
26:1:30
9:2:21
34:2:20
23:2:20
44:2:18
49:0:34
12:0:32
2:0:06
14:0:36
12:0:00
45:0:12 230
(18:0:36)
0:0:07.5
0:0:03.8
21:3:14.5
0:3:36.2
36:3:30
130
400
1250
186
264
15
1
. 2398
700
1015
1476.7s.6d
1220.7s
203.8s
see 1B3B3A 229
2185.8s.4d
10450
1640.4s.2d
1
1448
1
172:0:00
noted as sold
part 1/1967
part 1/1967
part 1/1967
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
alienated by sole owner
part 1/1967
determined to be General land
confirmed by board
noted as sold
confirmed by board
determined to be General land
part 1/1967
confirmed by board
taken for road .
determined to.be General lilOd
confirmed 'by board
confirmed by court
part Ij1%7
confirmed by board
noted as sold, European land
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
through Maori Trustee
confirmed by court
taken for road
dedicated as public road
noted as sold
part 1/1967
confirmed by court
widening the state highway
CUrrent Haori Land in Nukumaru
13:1:30
28:2:23
16:0:00
11:0:12.7
3:1 :19
16:3:31
1B2A3A
1B2A3B
1BA/1BB/1BC
1BO
1BE
1BF
1BG
Date
Method of Alienation
03Har69
03Har69
20Sep68
23Feb26
190ec28
28Apr66
20Sep68
23Nov84
21 Nov24
pre 1924
27Nov24
23Nov84
20Sep68
31Hay26
23Nov84
27Nov24'
18Sep53
Further References
1671
2757
Tar(aln) 5/367, 3/69r)4/2
details not discovered
1017
12/118
details not discovered
1854
NZG 1949 p 18323/1854.
1032 .
CT 651/40
3/1194/2
CT 293/17.1
CT 289/254
20Sep68
21Sep24 .
010ct36
220ct57
18Jul62
1956-58
1956-58
20Har73
1953/1957
1018
CT 292/90
5219
3/4390/3
3/4390/4, WH(aln) 4/157
3/5917/2-4
3/5917/2-5
CT 03/675
3/4771/2 & 4
3/5155
20Sep68
220ct35
119Apr50
..~l
"
5064, 5093
CT 255/6, CT 304/203
~.
0:1:00
16:0:29
0:2:03
4:3:00
1:0:23
1:3:39
1:3:29
227
This area is noted as 17: 3: 00 on the confirmation notice.
228
This area is out of the total shown above of 22:1:00.
229
This is the total paid for Nukumaru lB3B2 and lB3B3A.
230
This is out of the total area shown above of 45:0:04.
231
Not listed at MLC r possibly meant to be lBG.
. -'
..
'."'
.. ...
'-~.'
~~.,
.;.---.-~
.. ".
86
1.5.3
Table showing alienation of land from Te Karaka Reserve
Area
a:r:p
Partition
pt
pt
pt
pt
pt
'~2B2C
-:It 8283
,dt 828-3
8283
pt 82C
pt 82C
pt c1
pt C2A
C2A
pt C28
C2B
pt C2C
, 'lt C2e
~!,;,,;~·:t C2e
. pt e20
e201
e202
e203
£.
Further References
Method of ALienation
29:2:24
16:1:16
24:2:10
22:1:12
13:0:00
4:3:28.6
6:2:11 3/7
10:3:20
1:0:20
24:0:00
1050
308
1596.11.3
1333
357.10.0
£27.10s pac
180.14.3
£27.10s pac
£27.10s pac
965
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
Haori Trustee as agent
confirmed by board
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by court
confirmed by board
24Apr30
13Aug30
C2Aug66
03Sep30
07Nov34
14Nov34
19Jun35
05Aug35
08Aug37
10Apr35
0:3:36
5:2:20
20:0:00
20:0:00
0;0:30
12:2:28
nil
not found
422
409
nil
'6:i:10'
.nil
100
Public \.Iorks
confirmed by court?
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
Public \.Iorks
part 1/1967
Public \.Iorks
confirmed by court
Part 1/1967
Public \.Iorks
MTrustee as agent/1953 act
05Jun12
15Jun60
070ct21
210ct21
05Jun12
05Nov68
D5Jun12
180ec44
05 Nov68
05Jun12
07Jul64
Public Works
Public Works
Public Works
Public \.Iorks
confirmed by board
Public \.Iorks
confirmed by board
OSJun12
05Jun12
A1A
A1B1
A1B2
A1C
A2A1
A2A3
A2A3
A2B
A2B
A2C
pt B1
81A
82A1 232
82A2
pt 8282
Consideration
21:0;03
22:2:23
0:2:20
'49:1:20·
nil
2000
2:3:05
nil
1:1:30
nil
54:1:03
3:0:06
nil
154:3:09
2;2:28
233
not defined
3465.11s.6d
balance from above
2:0:07
123:0:23
30: 1: 15
51:3:15
1166.09s.9d
3669
3632
WH(aln) 611-3, 4/5834
3724
4853
4854
5003
5004
5205
3633
3;7143
21/255
21/254
3/5812/2
WH aln 5/95, 4/5415
05Jun12
05Jun12
05Sep13
13/194
05Jun12
24Mar19
18/369, 2/113/20A
Current Haori land in Te Karaka
pt A1e
A2A2
A20
(pac
= per
1:3:38.8
11:2:00
5:0:00
818
81C
82A3
8281
8282A
82828
28:2:30
32:0:10
60:1;12
50:0:36
12:1 :33
24:3:25
e1A
e18
42:3:20
27:0:16
.l.!
acre)
232 Noted as B2A on confirmation notice, but seems based on
record sheet, ought to be B2Al.
233 Area alienated noted as three quarters of 206: 3: 22.
Total area for C2C is noted as 209:0:10 on record sheet.
87
l.S.4
Table showing alienation of land from Kaipo Block
Area
Partition
pt
pt
pt
pt
pt
pt
;
A1A
A5
B1A
B1B
B2
B3
B4A
B4B
B5A
B5B
B6
B6
B7A
B7A
B7B
B8A
B8A
B8B
B8C1
B8C2
B8D
B8E
B9A
Consideration
a:r:[!
0:0:11
1:2:24
6:2:39
13:0:15
12:2:30
28:1 :10
9:0:38
6:1 :14
3:0:02
9:2:01
1 :0:35
13:2:20
3:3:05 13/14
2:0:10 1/14
9:2:02
5:3:35
0:3:01
5:2:04.9
1:0:06.5'
3:0:19.3·
6:0:36.6
8:1 :23
1:2:06
£
161.04s.07d
315
320
768.12s.02d
274.11s.03d
111.15s.08d
720
75
173.19s.02d
$2220
298.08s.06d
240,
$ 713
$1380
209 .16s .10d
Date
Hethod of alienation
Part 1/1967
confirmed by court
Part I/1967, parts for road
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
Maori Trustee as agent
confirmed by board
confirmed by board
confirmed by court
whoLe bLock ~oted as European
confirmed by board
Part .I/1967
confirmed by board
Part I/1967
Further References
1954-58
11Dec69
1930-31
02Feb23
1920
1920-27
1964
08Sep30
130ct66
06Jun21
08Jun73
3/6002/2,'3/6002/3, 3/6002/3
TN 4002 .
3655, 3828
19/273
20/189
20/338, 2601
TN 1741
3585
4/5861, WH(aln)6/4
21/111
08Sep30
3587
16Jan73
16Jun54
4/6000
3/6016/2
010ct20:
16Jan73
16Jan73
Jun/Jul21
13Jul71
20Sep68,
4/7382
4/6148
20/451, 20/340, 1921/162
CUrrent Haori Land in KaiQQ block
A1B
A2
A3
A4
A6
A7
AB
A9
A10
A11
A12
A13
89B
B10A
8108
0:2:16
0:2:26
0:1 :33
0:2:04
0:1:22
0:1:02
0:1:11
0:0:36
0:1 :18
1:1:27
1 :2:00
0:0:24
13:3:25
5:3:33
8:0:32
."' ~",,:~
.~
}/
//
3.6
~.
/1 :-}
Potential Issues Arising Regardingilthe Waitotara Reserves
Although the key component of this report is the Crown's
acquisition of the Waitotara Block, some issues may be raised
here regarding the reserves made within the block. The narrative
and tables presented in the previous sections represent only a
cursory look at some key documents.
Still, there are some
general themes that emerge.
Those that will be discussed here
are: the nature of title issued to the reserves by the Native
Land Court
in the
first
place;
the
transformation of Maori
freehold title to European (now General) under the Maori Affairs
Amendment Act 1967 Part I;
and sales confirmed by the Aotea
88
District Maori Land Board or the Maori Land Court.
The way in which the Native Land Court determined title under the
Native
Land
Acts
of
1865
and
1867
has
previously
been
investigated by the Waitangi Tribunal with regard to Orakei.
By
1867 the court had four options available for awarding title.
According to the tribunal, they were:
( a)
To
award the whole
block to
not more
than
ten
as
absolute owners - section 23 Native Lands Act 1865.
(b)
To'divide the block into lots and award each allotment
to not 'more than ten -, ,section" 2.4 Native Lands Act
1865, or
(C)
To award the block to not more than
t~n,
as tribal
representatives, the names of each and every member of
the tribe being then recorded in a separate record of
the Court and the
title noting that
pursuant to the enabling section Lands Act 1867.
~',':':',:,
(d)
the grant was
section 17 Native
To award the block to a tribe, but since that applied
only to blocks
in excess of
5000
acres,
it has
no
application here [in the case of Orakei].n4
In Orakei, the tribunal found that by issuing title to a limited
/ 1
number of owners, the Crown failed to uphold tribal and communal
ownership of Maori land.
troubles
faced
by
the
This was the genesis of the subsequent
Ngati
Whatua
alienation of the tribe from its land.
provide for tribal ownership was a
of
Orakei,
in
terms
of
Further, the failure to
"conscious policy to break
down the tribal control the Treaty in fact guaranteed". 235
The case made for Orakei may also be made for the Waitotara
reserves.
The
claimants
themselves
have
stated_ that
234 Waitangi Tribunal Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the,
Orakei Claim (Wai 9) Wellington, 1987 pp 45-6.
235 Orakei p 211.
89
traditionally Ngarauru held land tribally I that there was no
private or individual ownership, but that there was a right to:
occupy, use or cultivate certain portions of the tribal
lands subject to the paramount right of the tribe (F1). 236
However, when the court investigated title to the Waitotara
reserves, ten or less owners were named for seven of the eight
reserves.
(It is not known how many were named for the eighth,
Maraetoa). Most of these reserves (five out of eight) had their
title determined in 1867 or 1868.
Option (d) above was not
available to the Waitotara reserves ( as none of them measured
\-
more than·. 5000
acres.·
The record used in researchlng these
reserves suggest that the court applied option (a) in all cases
except for Te Karaka( where it applied option (b). Like Orakei,
this imposed a limit on the number of
owner~(
and denied Maori
access to tribal ownership of land.
,.:;:.::.,)"
The way in which title was originally determined to the Waitotara
reserves is only the beginning of a long line of consequences of
Maori land legislation.
The tables show a large proportion of
the reserves were acquired by outside interests through the Maori
Land Court or the Aotea District Maori Land Board( from as early
as 1919 to as recently as 1984.
(
been investigated in detail.
None. of ,these alienations have
./
th~icursory
However
Land Court documents suggest a number
look at Maori
o~scenarios,
depending on
the Maori land purchase legislation and policy available at any
given point in history.
In some cases individual shares were
purchased either by the Crown or individuals.
eventually be alienated this way.
so
acquired
Sometimes
could
be
Whole blocks could
Alternatively, the interests
partitioned
out
of
the
the Maori Trustee acted as. agent
conducting
a
transfer
resolution
from
a
on
meeting
alienation to be executed.
behalf
of
of
the
owners
Often,
parent
for
owners.
was
block.
the owners I
...Moatly
required
for
a
an
the land was alienated to
236 Wai
143 doc Fl Evidence of Ngarauru Iwi Traditional
NgaRauru Resources, 14 Oct 1991, Te Ihupuku Marae, Waitotara.
90
persons already leasing the land.
Meetings of owners are known to have been problematic in the
past.
Although individual alienations have not been examined
here, previous research by Waitangi Tribunal Division staff has
raised numerous issues regarding the meeting of owners process
These issues vary from Maori
in other parts of the country.
being left landless as a result of such sales to deceased owners
and owners with addresses not known to the court not being
accounted for in the voting procedures. 237
\
:,.
)
There is another .method of alienation which warrants mention·
.
.
here .
That is the trarisformation of title from Maori freehold
land
to
General
(previously European)
land under
the Maori
Affairs Amendment Act 1967 Part I.
A large proportion of the
land in the Waitotara reserves has become General land in this
';,i:;: ..
way. Under the act, Maori freehold land for which there are four
or less owners may be automatically declared General land by the
court. While this does not necessarily mean that the land is no
longer in Maori ownership, it may be argued that it becomes
easier to alienate by losing the 'protection' of the court.
Certainly the land ceases to be identified as Maori land, and
perhaps loses that characteristic of being known as Maori land.
---.
.~..
f
./
could .../l?e written regarding
alienation of land from the Waitotara re~erves, with each block
A
completely
separate
report
)
being individually examined. That has not been the purpose of
this report. This report is primarily concerned with the actual
acquisition of the Waitotara block by the Crown.
Some basic
information regarding the reserves and the history of title to
them has been provided.
While it may be possible to make a case
237 See for example Wai 128 A1 sec, Rose Daamen Exploratory
Report on Claim Wai-128 made by Dame Whina Cooper on Behalf of
Te Rarawa ki Hokianga unpublished report commissioned by the
Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington, 1993 sec 3.4.7 and Suzanne Woodley
Report Commissioned by the waitangi Tribunal on Whangarae lC
unpublished report commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal,
Wellington,. August 1992 pp 5-22.
91
for every individual alienation from the reserves, the primary
purpose of this section of the report has been to indicate what
some of the key issues regarding these reserves are likely to be.
The map at the beginning of the report gives a good snapshot of
the land resource now left to Ngarauru of the Wai totara district.
-,
./
r
·
........
'-'-~'-----
.. - . ' ........... .
92
Bibliography
Books:
James
Belich,
The New Zealand Wars and the
Interpretation of Racial Conflict Auckland, 1986.
Victorian
Ruka Broughton, The Origins of Ngarauru Kiitahi.
William Fox, The War in New Zealand London, 1866.
J E Gorst,
The Maori King London, 1864.
Richard Hill The History of New Zealand Volume 2, the Colonial
Frontier Tamed: New Zealand Policing in Transition 1867-1886.
\
M J G Smart & A P Bates The Wanganui Story Wanganui, 1972.
Rex H Volkerling,
County.
From Sand to Papa:
a
history of Wanganui
Alan Ward A Show of Justice: racial 'amalgamation' in nineteenth
century New Zealand Auckland, 1983 reprint.
Reports of the Waitangi Tribunal:
Waitangi Tribunal Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the Orakei
Claim (Wai 9) Wellington, 1987.
Reports and Evidence from the Record of Documents for Wai 143:
Al (a) Ann Parsonson The Purchase of Maori::·:.Land in TaranakL 18391859 Revision of Report No. -f ~t, unpublished report
commissioned by the Waitangi Tribuna,l,
Christchurch, 1991.
"
/.
i,i
A15
Raupatu Document Bank Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington, 1990.
Fl
Evidence of Nga Rauru Iwi,
Marae, Waitotara.
Hll
Heather Bauchop The Wars and Iwi Losses in Taranaki'18601870 Wellington, June 1992.
14 October 1991, Te Ihupuku
Reports for Other Claims Commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal:
Rose Daamen Exploratory Report on Claim Wai-128 made by Dame
whina Cooper on Behalf of Te Rarawa ki Hokianga unpublished
report commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal, Wellington 1993.
Joy
Hippoli te
Wairoa ki Wairarapa:
an overview report
commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal unpublished, Wellington,
1991 (Doc A22).
93
Jane Luiten Whanganui ki Porirua: and exploratory report
commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal on early Crown purchases
unpublished, Wellington, 1992.
Suzanne Woodley Report Commissioned by the Waitangi Tr.ibunal on
Whangarae 1C unpublished, Wellington, 1992.
Official Publications:
Appendices to the Journals of the House of Representatives.
H H Turton Maori Deeds of Land Purchases in the North Island of
New Zealand vol 2, Provinces of Wellington, Taranaki, Hawke's
Bay, Wellington, 1878.
\,
Archives from National Archives, Wellington:
Maori Affairs (MA) series 1 and series 24.
Maori Affairs - Wanganui (MA-WANG) series 4.
Wellington Province (WP) series.
Justice-Wanganui (JC-WG) series 4 and 5.
:':'C"";~"
Mabri Land Court Minute Books.
Manuscripts from the Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington:
McLean Papers on microfilm, Ms-copy-micro-0535-.
John White Papers, Ms-papers-0075.
(
--
_:.~'_:
-... -
,I
Broughton notebook on microfilm, Micro-m~f0079.
Taylor Journal, Qms-1994.
Manuscripts from the Wanganui Regional Museum:
H C Field papers.
Waitotara Valley Records.
Records of the Maori Land Court, Wanganui:
Current binders and Block Order Files.
94
Volume One
page
Extracts from Official Publications
H H Turton Maori Deeds of Land Purchases in the North
Island of New Zealand, vol 2 Deed No. 78 pp 238-241.
1
AJHR 1860 Cl, Native Land Purchases pp 5-6.
7
AJHR 1861 Cl, Reports of the Land Purchase Department
pp 268-9, 288-9, 292.
11
Documents from National Archives, Wellington
WP 3 59/172:
Fox to Superintendent, 7 Apr 1859.
18
WP 3 60/2: Provincial Engineer to Superintendent,
4 Jan 1860.
27
WP 3 62/223: Fox to Superintendent, 23 Apr 1862
enclosing Pehimana Manakore to Governor, 14 Mar 1862.
32
WP 3 62/272:
Deighton to Featherston, 15 May 1862.
36
WP 3 62/296:
Deighton to Featherston, 24-May 1862.
40
WP 3 62/306:
Deighton to Featherston, 29 May 1862.
42
WP 3 62/338:
Deighton to Featherston, 12 Jun 1862.
45
WP 3 62/350:
Deighton to Featherstpn, ::.19:! Jun 1862.
48
./
(
\
WP 3 62/405:
Woon to Featherston r 3 Jut
WP 3 62/394:
Woon to Featherston r 17 Jul 1862.
56
WP 3 62/425:
Taylor to Featherston r 7 Aug 1862.
59
WP 3 62/451:
Deighton to Featherston r approx Sep 1862.
64
WP 3 63/574:
Broughton to Featherston, 31 Dec 1863.
67
WP 3 64/230:
Broughton to Featherston, 3 May 1864.
70
WP 3 64/349:
White to Colonial Secy, 10 Jun 1864.
72
,&
25 Jul 1862.
51
WP 3 64/363: Broughton to Featherston, 23 Jun 1864
enclosing Te Harawira Roau to Featherston and Broughton,
11 Jun 1864.
77
WP 3 64j502a: White to Featherston 4 & 23 Jul 1864 and
enclosures.
84
.....;,: .. ,:
.
:;-. '.' .
95
'-
WP 3 64/901:
Hogg to Featherston l 9 Nov 1864.
WP 3 64/946:
Speed to Featherston l 15 Oct 1864.
100
WP 3 65/19:
Broughton to Featherston, 24 Jan 1865.
103
WP 3 65/544:
Broughton to Featherston, 3 Nov 1864.
106
WP 3 66/656:
Stafford to Featherston, 2 Mar 1866.
109
96
MA 1 1860/114: Memo by McLean, 25 Sep 1869.
113
MA 24/21:
Wnite to McLean, 18 Jan 1865.
115
MA 24/22:
White to Native Minister, 28 Nov 1862.
123
MA-WANG 4/6: Diagram regarding tribes and boundaries of
Waitotara, 14 Apr 1872, no author.
134
Repro 265:
137
Whanganui Minute Book No. 1 pp 148-50 1 222-5.
Manuscripts from the Alexander Turnbull Libraryl Wellington
Ms-copy-micro-0535-049, McLean Papers folder 243,
Deighton to McLean, 1859-60.
145
Ms-copy-micro-0535-051 1 McLean Papers folder 266,
Featherston to McLean, 5 Mar 1863.
157
Ms-copy-micro-0535-093A, McLean Papers folder 600,
Taylor to McLean, 14 Mar 1859.
159
Ms-copy-micro-0535-106, McLean Papers folders 682A
and 683B, Aperahama Taimaperea to McL~an; 23 Mar 1858,
and Pehimana Hamarama to McLean, 12 Sep/1859.
164
Ms-copy-micro-0535-107, McLean Papers TIolder 683D,
Arepeta & Horima Katene (Kaiiwi), 10 Dec 1859.
169
Ms-copy-micro-0535-108, McLean Papers folder 687B,
runanga to McLean, 28 Mar 1863.
171
Ms-papers-0075-019, John White Papers, White to Attorney
General, 29 Oct 1862 and enclosures.
174
Ms-papers-0075-031b, John White Papers, letters in Maori
to White, 1864.
180
Micro-ms-0079, Charles Broughton notebook.
186
Qms-1994, Reverend Richard Taylor journal (typescript)
pp 55 8 1 107 - 8, 130-1, 159-161, 170 , 173.
188
96
"
Manuscripts from the Wanganui Regional Museum
H C Field Papers, Field to Hall, 10 Aug 1866, enclosed
in Wilkie to Kirk, 12 Aug 1984.
202
Waitotara Valley Records.
209
--
.'.~
J;., •.
.
~
97
Volume Two
Records of the Maori Land Court, Whanganui
(
Binder 113, Tukituki.
224
WH 201 vols 1-4A and binder 112, Pakaraka.
228
WH 151 vols 1-8 and binder 109, Nukumaru.
274
WH 83, Maenene.
340
WH 22 and binder 2, Te Karaka A.
347
WH 23 and binder 2, Te Karaka B.
362
WH 24 and binder 2, Te Karaka C.
377
WH 2, Te Auroa.
387
WH 39 and binder 9, Kaipo.
397
Documents not Copied
Some documents used have not been copied for inclusion with the
supporting documents. These are documents contained in the Raupatu
Document Bank or on the Record of Inquiry for Wai 143, and extracts
from bound letterbooks held by National Archives, Wellington, which
are not available for copying. Such items are listed below:
L
"
MA-MLP W 1, Letterbook of the Land2urcn,se Commissioner, 1862-66.
,. f
MA 4/72, General Maori Letterbook (outw~~ds) 1859-61.
J..J
MA 4/74, General Maori Letterbook (outwards) 1864-67.
MA 4/75, General Maori Letterbook (outwards) 1867-68.
MA-MLP 6/4, Copies of Deeds of Sale, Wellington, 1849-72.
WP 6/4, Wellington Province, Outwards letterbook, 1862-4.
\
JC-WG 4,
1863-4.
Resident Magistrate's Outwards Correspondence, Wanganui
JC-WG 5,
1864-5.
Resident Magistrate's Outwards Correspondence, Wanganui

143 4t I 20 - [email protected]

Transcription

Similar documents

9th March 2016 - St Teresa`s School

5th September 2013

In all the Polynesian cultures, barkcloth and female

A NONCONFORMIST

29 July 2015 - Rotorua Intermediate School

- New Plymouth Girls` High School

Fernweh

History of tattoos 2.o

Featherston Community Board Minutes 20 November 2012

Evolution of Engineering Solutions on the Development of Hard