W AI 674 '"I',Tln8
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
"~1 ! ~.'. t. ....~! ~ .' W AI 674 '"i',tlN8 . ::' .o:#.~:~-~,.. ..: W AI 721'~:,'?flA2 ' i I NGATI MAUKU AND I i , I II NGATI TAHINGA KI KAIPARA (WAI 721) , 1 I ) CLAIM REPORT I ) , I ! I Rose Daamen and Richard Nightingale October 2000 : ) I ! ! J ! I I I ( Table of Contents 1.p Introduction 1.1 Authors 1 1.2 Commissions 2 1.3 Statement of claim and claim issues 4 1.3.1 Representation 8 1.4 Key definitions 9 1.4.1 Area of claim 9 1.4.2 Terminology and style 10 1 { 2.0 Ngati Mauku, Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara and other Eastern Kaipara hapu f, 2.1 The 1901 Otioro & Te Topuni Native Land Court title investigation and its relevance to Oruawharo lands . 13 J 2.2 Who are Ngati Maulm and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara? 16 ( 2.2.1 Ngati Maulm and Ngati Tahinga 16 2.2.2 Te Uri-o-Hau . 19 2.2.3 Ngati Kauwae. 23 I 2.3 Hapu and iwi . 25 2.4 Hapu recognised as parties in the Otioro & Te Topuni title investigation and their interrelationships . 29 f 3.0 Ngati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara's right to Oruawharo land f 3.1 Original rights and hapu and iwi interaction prior to f Te Ika-a-Ranganui 37 3.1.1 Ngati Tahinga and Ngati Kauwae, hapu ofNgati Tahinga 37 3.1.2 Ngati Mauku, hapu ofTe Uri-o-Hau and Te Uri-o-Hau based on Mauku 42 3.2 The effect ofTe Ika-a-Ranganui, February 1825 49 3.3 Evidence of resettlement at Oruawharo prior to 1840 60 ( ~ V/ ! I I 3.4 The 1840 rule 61 3.4.1 N ga Puhi rights 62 3.4.2 Ngati Mauku and Ngati Kauwae ofNgati Tahinga and Te Uri-o-Hau 66 . 3.5 The Otioro & Te Topuni title investigation judgment 68' : 3.6 Conclusion 72 I \ 4.0 Alienation ofNgati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara lands 4.1 Introduction. 75 4.2 The Crown's 1860 pUrchase of the Oruawharo (south) block 75 4.2.1 Hawke's old land claim 75 \ I 4.2.2 The Crown's 1860 Oruawharo (south) block purchase 76 I 4.2.3 The Paraheke native reserve . 78 , I 4.3 Timber felling, William White's claim and indebtedness 85 I I 4.4 The Native Land Court title investigations, leases and sales. 89 I I 4.5 Lack of reserves and inalienability clauses 89 4.6 The Oruawharo papakainga 91 4.7 Stout-Ngata 93' 4.8 Wahi tapu and pa 93 4.9 Land taken under public works 97 5.0 Alienation ofOruawharo Lands Through Development Schemes 5:1 Introduction . 103 5.2 Early testing of the development schemes at Oruawharo 104 5.3 Te Uira Mahuta Hone Eruera - Nukuroa 2A3C2 116 5.3.1 Initial Crown response 116 5.3.2 The wait continues 123 5.3.3 Development begins 125 5.3.4 Financial difficulties 128 i . ! I 5.3.5 Farm work sliding 131 5.3.6 The struggle continues 133 5.3.7 Leaving the farm 134 5.3.8 Deciding on an occupier 139 5.3.9 Billy Edwards as occupier 142 5.3.10 Peter Cooper as occupier 148 Conclusion - will be the summary presented to the Tribunal ii List of Appendices ( 1 : Pa, kainga and urupa in the Oruawharo rohe . 161 2: Native Land Court title investigations and awards (1865-1904) 11 ... and alienation of the blocks (1865-1920s) at Oruawharo 167 \ 3: Oruawharo land taken for railway and roads . 185 I 4: General information on development schemes 191 'I 5: Areas ofOruawharo included in the 1930 gazettal of Kaipara 1 land to be brought under the development schemes . 197 :\ ) 6: Extracts on housing 199 I ( .-I ( I ( \ ( " . iii Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Authors This report is co-authored by Richard Nightingale and Rose Daamen. Ms Daamen scoped the work. l Mr Nightingale researched and drafted a report between November 1999 and June 2000. Ms Daamen then restructured the report and revised it. This report discusses the significance of Oruawharo lands - on the eastern margins of the Kaipara Harbour (see figure 1) - to Ngati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara, and outlines the alienation of those lands from Ngati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara from around 1840. Richard Nightingale is an historian who graduated from Victoria University with a BA (First Class Honours) in History in 1968. He has recently been awarded a Master of Philosophy in Social Policy at Massey University. His thesis, which was submitted in partial fulfilment of the degree, was entitled 'Lines In The Sand / Nga Maenga 0 Te One: The Native Land Comt in the Southern Kaipara / Kaipara Ki Te Tonga and Tamaki Malcaurau / Aucldand: A Reflexive Consideration' . 1 Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara and Ngati Mauku Scoping Report by Rose Daamen, August 1999 (Wai 721, AI). This condensed an earlier draft scoping report of March 1999. j I . I Mr Nightingale was involved in a research contract with the Waitangi Tribunal's ( Rangahaua Whanui project in 1996-97, the focus of which was the historic operations of the Native Land Court in Tai Tokerau and Auckland. His supervisor in that project was Dr Michael Belgrave of Massey University and formerly of the Waitangi Tribunal. The fmdings of this research were published in 1997 as Counting The Hectares: Quantifying Maori Land Loss in the Auckland District 1865-1908. Rose Daarnen is a member of the Waitangi Tribunal research staff. She has worked in this capacity since 1988. She has been involved in many of the Tribunal's inquiries and research projects, including a contribution to the Rangahaua Whanui Auckland District report, and is currently responsible for claims facilitation of the eighty-plus claims in Tai tokerau. Ms Daamen has a BA and Post-Graduate Diploma (standard First Class Honours) in Anthropology, from Auckland and Otago Universities respectively, and has completed the fIrst two years of an LLB (part time between 1990 and 1995) at Victoria University. ( 1.2 Commissions Ms Daarnen's initial commission was to assist Wai 721 claimants by providing a scoping report on: (a) Whether evidence already on the record of the Kaipara inquiry adequately describes Crown actions towards Ngati Tahinga in the Oruawharo area; (b) What evidence exists in the 1901 Otioro-Topuni Native Land Court title investigation regarding relationships between Ngati Tahinga and other groups 2 in the Oruawharo area; and (c) Other historical sources which may elucidate both Crown actions towards Ngati Tahinga, and Ngati Tahinga's relationships with other groups in the Oruawharo area. In an amended statement of claim, Wai 721 claimants clarified that they have Ngati Marum as well as Ngati Tahinga ancestry.2 Ms Daamen's scoping report reflected this clarification of their hapu. She found that (a) evidence already on the record did not adequately describe Crown actions towards Ngati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga in the Oruawharo area, and that (b) a wealth of complex material existed on the relationships 11 between Ngati Mauku, Ngati Tahinga and other groups in the Oruawharo area in the 1901 Otioro & Te Topuni Native Land Court title investigation minutes. She identified two key I ! I areas of research and suggested some additional historical sources which may elucidate those matters set out in (c) above. Following consultation with the claimants on the contents of the scoping report, the Tribunal commissioned Mr Nightingale to complete an historical report which would provide: (i) An account of the key claim area and the Kaipara land of special significance to Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara/Ngati Marum. (ii) An analysis of Crown alienations of tribal land within this area during the _____ nineieenth century. (iii) A description of twentieth-century alienations, ofNativelMaori Land 2 Claim 1.28(a) 3 Development Schemes, and of the health, education and demography of ( the Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara/Ngati Mauku community. Ms Daarnen's second commission was to revise and re-write Mr Nightingale's draft report. j I 1.3 Statement of claim and claim issues The Wai 721 claim is made by John Edwards, Thomas de Thierry and Benjamin de Thierry on behalf of themselves and of the uri (descendants) of the following tupuna: Matikikuha Parakai, Te Poari Totara, Eruera Te Area, Hone Matikikuha Eruera and his son Te Uira Mahuta Hone Eruera.3 These tupuna, with the exception of Te Uira, appear in the whakapapa on figures two to five. ( The claimants are members ofNgati Mauku and Ngati Tahinga ki Kaipara. They say that: • they have interests in a broad area of Kaipara lands ranging from the East to the West coast; • they have specific interests in the Oruawharo area, which is defined as the lands, rivers and estuaries lying within the geographic catchment of the Oruawharo River and its tributaries; . • they have been prejudicially affected in their occupation and use of this area by acts and omissions of the Crown; 3 Claim 1.28(a) 4 • the Crown has failed, following the proceedings ofthe Native Land Court from 1865- 1904, to protect actively their interests, in particular to ensure that their present and future needs were properly provided for; • the Crown has used inappropriate means to avoid paying compensation for lands taken for roads at Oruawharo and for the claimants' contribution to the cost of fencing the areas taken for such purposes; • the CroWn has failed, through the Kaipara development and consolidation schemes, to protect the claimants interests, in particular in the Nukuroa block and in the Oruawharo J&K block, and that this has resulted in further alienation from their lands; and I' ,i I.