143 4t I 20 - repository@digitalnz.org
Transcription
143 4t I 20 - repository@digitalnz.org
--. ~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 Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 3.17. ~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 Wai 143 Record of Inquiry Part I, 1.6. 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 Ms-copy-micro-0535-049, 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 Ms-copy-micro-0535-005, 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 noted as European land noted as European land 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 noted as European land confirmed by board noted as Crown & European land noted as European land noted as European land 150ct79 30Apr25 18Nov36 20Sep68 03Mar69 04Sep73 20Sep68 20Sep68 17Jul20 '3/821+1 5117 883 15Apr24 20Sep68 20Sep68 16Mar29 noted as European land 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 noted as European land 1914 noted as European land 1911 noted as European land 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 noted as European land 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 noted as European land noted as European land confirmed by court noted as European land noted as European land noted as European land part Ij1%7 noted as European land 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 noted as European land 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 noted as European land Public Works noted as European land Public \.Iorks confirmed by board whole block noted as European Public \.Iorks noted as European land noted as European land 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 noted as European land confirmed by board Maori Trustee as agent confirmed by board whole block noted as European confirmed by board whole block noted as European Maori Trustee as agent confirmed by court whoLe bLock ~oted as European confirmed by board Part .I/1967 Maori Trustee as agent Maori Trustee as agent 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 List of Supporting Documents 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 List of Supporting Documents 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