Historical Background to the Muriwhenu a Land Claim, 1865-1950
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Wai45 Muriwhenua Land Claim. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE MURIWHENU A LAND CLAIM, 1865-1950. - Evidence of Claudia Geiringer 27 April 1992. CONTENTS. Chapter. Page No. Maps and Diagrams. 2 Introduction. 3 Chapter One: The Socio-Economic Context, 1865-1920. 7 Chapter Two: Crown Purchase Operations in Murwiehnua after 1865. 38 Chapter Three: Operations of the Native Land Court, 1865-1909. 72 Chapter Four: The Resident Magistrate's System and the Native Schools System. 116 Chapter Five: Maori Land Administration, 1890-1930. 147 Chapter Six: Land Development Schemes in Muriwhenua. 183 Chapter Seven: Protest over Surplus Lands. 211 Conclusion. 230 Bibliography. 231 MAPS, GRAPHS AND ILLUSTRATIONS. Figure. Page No. 1. Crown Grants and Surplus Land 1865: Mangatete, Oruru, Mangonui. 9 2. Crown Purchases 1850-56: Mangatete, Oruru, Mangonui. 10 3. Maori Land in Muriwhenua at 1864. 11 4. Maori Population of Mangonui, 1874-1921. 18 5. Rise and Fall of New Zealand Kauri Gum Exports, 1850 to 1980. 21 6. Cost of Stores on the Aupouri Peninsula: 1898. 28 7. Crown Purchases in the West Coast Area, 1870-1900. 40 8. Crown Purchases during the 1870s under the Immigration 41 and Public Works Acts. 9. Crown Purchases in Muriwhenua, 1880-1910. 69 10. Extent of Title Fragmentation in Muriwhenua, 1908. 96 11. Native Reserves 1865. 109 12. Education for Assimilation: Trafalgar Day at the Farthest North 146 School, Hapua. 13. Parengarenga and Pakohu, Vested Lands. 153 2 INTRODUCTION. My name is Claudia Geiringer and I am a Wellington-based historian. I graduated from the University of Otago in March 1990 with BA honours in history (first class). I have been working on the Muriwhenua Land Claim since August of that year. The purpose of this study is to report on the administration and alienation of Maori land in Muriwhenua and the socio-economic progression of the Muriwhenua people from 1865 to the mid-twentieth century. It is general report, covering the whole Muriwhenua area over nearly one hundred years of its history, and is intended to provide the background to more specific investigations. The period divides into two distinct but overlapping phases. In the first phase, a phase of disintegration, the Native Land Court, Native Land Purchase Branch, and other Crown agencies presided over the continued alienation of Muriwhenua land to Crown and settlers, and the fragmentation of remaining Maori land holdings. During this period, Crown agents failed to address the many social and economic problems facing Muriwhenua Maori and concentrated instead on the alienation and individualisation of Maori land. This phase of disintegration began prior to 1865 and was largely finished by the 1920s. Nonetheless, some ofits features, for example fragmentation of title, continued long after. The fIrst four chapters of my report deal with this phase of disintegration. In Chapter One, I outline the socio-economic background to the claim from 1865-1920 and discuss the cycle of poverty, disease, debt and land alienation in which Muriwhenua Maori were trapped during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. While this socio economic context is essential to any analysis of Crown / Maori relations, the focus of this report is on the Crown and the actions of the Crown. In the next three chapters, I discuss the implementation and effects of government policy in Muriwhenua during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In Chapter Two, I examine the actions of Crown purchase agents in Muriwhenua and ask, to what .extent did they jeopardise the rights of the legitimate owners of Muriwhenua land? In this 3 respect, I examine to past reports article two of the Treaty of Waitangi imposed on the Crown: "fIrst to ensure that the Maori people in fact wished to sell; and secondly that each tribe maintained a suffIcient endowment for its foreseeable needs" 1. In Chapter 1bree, I analyse the operations of the Native Land Court system in Muriwhenua and examine its effect on Muriwhenua land with regard to title determination, land alienation and land administration. Again I ask the question, to what extent did the Native Land Court, as agent of the Crown, protect the rights of legitimate claimants to Muriwhenua land? Chapter Four deals with the actions and attitudes of other Crown agents who impacted on the lives of Muriwhenua Maori during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. While the chapter focusses specifIcally on fIrst, the Resident Magistrate's System and second, the Native Schools System, I also analyse the adequacy of the Crown's general response to the health and welfare issues effecting Muriwhenua during the period. Chapters Five and Six examine the second phase of Crown I Maori relations in Muriwhenua: the phase of reform. During this phase, which began in the 1890s, Crown agents were forced to confront the crippling problems of Maori land use and administration which they themselves had created. While these attempts involved at times considerable funding, they were hampered by the persistent ethic of individualisation and assimilation. In addition, these reforms focussed on the utilisation of remaining Maori land, and the Crown thus avoided confronting the most fundamental problem facing Muriwhenua Maori: lack of remaining Maori land. In Chapter Five I examine the administration of Muri whenua land from the 1890s and focus on the Crown's attempts to reverse the process of title fragmentation and multiple individual ownership. Chapter Six outlines the history of land development schemes in Muriwhenua under fIrst the Tokerau Maori Land Board, and then the Native Department Chapter Seven examines the history of protest and response over surplus lands in Muriwhenua during the entire period, 1865-1950. It focuses specifIcally on the history of protest over two blocks: Motuopao and Tangonge. 1 Ngai Tahu Report, Vol 2, pp. 238/239 [Wai 27]. 4 I originally intended this report to examine the history of the Muriwhenua Claim from 1865 to the present day. Although the later twentieth century has proved beyond the scope of this report, in my conclusion I do suggest some directions for further research. My report is based almost entirely on written evidence, and as such is subject to certain limitations. The most extensive written documentation of Crown I Maori relations over the period are the Crown's own records of its actions. I thus rely predominantly on the version of events supplied by Pakeha writers, usually Crown agents themselves. Although, during the twentieth century, the files increasingly contain letters from Muriwhenua Maori expressing their own point of view, I have been forced even in these instances to rely on official translations. By its very nature this evidence is thus one sided. The claimants no doubt have their own oral record of the issues discussed in this report, particularly for the latter period which is within living memory. Given the limitations of time and the enormous quantity of written evidence available, however, I have concentrated on written sources. This report should be considered in light of oral evidence yet to be presented. The other limitation to my evidence is that caused by changing geographical boundaries. The area for the Muriwhenua Claim, as defined in the 1988 Murlwhenua Fishing Report, stretches from Whangape harbour on the West coast to Mangonui harbour on the East Coast. Unfortunately most available sources do not use this region and it is virtually impossible to tailor statistics to this area. The administrative division that corresponds most closely to the area of the Muriwhenua Claim, that of Mangonui County, has a similar boundary in the West but goes further South to Whangaroa harbour in the East. To further complicate the situation, the boundaries of Mangonui County changed at least twice during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Other sources use different regions again. For instance the Mangonui Consolidation and Development schemes comprised both Mangonui and Whangaroa counties. In qualitative terms, these differing descriptions are not particularly significant The history of Muriwhenua has much in common with the history of surrounding areas such as Whangaroa and indeed with the whole of the Auckland peninsula. 5 On the other hand, changing geographical descriptions make any statistical comparisons over time difficult. There is very little that can be done about this problem. Where possible I have tried to make my statistics compatible. Elsewhere I have been content to make explicit the different land definitions that are being used. This study is, of course, preliminary. All my conclusions are drawn on the basis of the limited evidence I had before me and should not be regarded as definitive. The report is intended to open up rather than to preclude areas of further research. 6 CHAPTER ONE : THE SOCIO·ECONOMIC CONTEXT, 1865-1920. Introduction. For Muriwhenua Maori the period 1865-1920 was characterised by continued land loss, agricultural downturn, endemic disease, and increased dependence on the European gum economy. Maori were trapped into a cycle of poverty, ill health, gum digging, debt, and land alienation which disrupted and demoralised their communities and hindered any positive social or economic development This chapter attempts to provide the socio-economic context in which any understanding of Crown / Maori relations in Muriwhenua most be placed. The chapter examines the extent of land alienation in Muriwhenua during the nineteenth century and the difficulties Muriwhenua Maori experienced in utilising their remaining land. It then looks in some detail at the twin problems of disease and gum digging, and their disruptive effects on Maori. The chapter concludes with an examination of the problems faced in Muriwhenua after the collapse of the international gum industry in 1914. Land Alienation Prior to 1865. In order to understand the distinctive history of Maori in Muriwhenua during the late nineteenth century it is necessary to review the history of the preceding decades.