'WAI674 #L2 WAI632 #Al WAI632 MAORI, THE CROWN AND THE NORTHERN WAIROA DISTRICT - ATE ROROA PERSPECTIVE Garry Hooker MARCH 2000 I \ 1 LIST OF CONTENT PAGE Introduction 2 (" Section 1 - Maori Origins and Traditional History 6 Section 2 - Modern Tribes of the Northern Wairoa 61 Section 3 - Te Kopuru/Aratapu Block 75 Section 4 - Tikinui Block 109 Section 5 - Pouto 2 Block 125 Section 6 - Tokatoka and Whakahara Blocks 137 Appendix 1 -Ngati Whiu/Ngati Kawa Whakapapa 161 Bibliography ·165 Endnotes 171 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FACING ( Map of Muriwhenua to Maunganui Bluff migration trail 18 Map of Kaihu valley fighting by Haumoewarangi 23 Map of generalised Northern Wairoa tribal boundaries 66 Map of Parore's 1875 Northern Wairoa hegemony 69 Map of Northern Wairoa land blocks Pouto to Dargaville 70 Plan of Tinne's Kaihu estate 73 Ugar's 1842 sketch map of Te Kopuru block 88 1842 plan of Te Kopuru block boundaries 89 Reconstructed map of Te Kopuru block & the Makaka & Aratapu streams 90 1924 Official plan ofTe Kopuru block 95 Illustration of TOkatoka maunga 138 2 INTRODUCTION My name is Garry Hooker. By descent I am a member of the Te Roroa tribe which customarily holds mana whenua over the coastal strip from Hokianga South Head (Arai-te-uru) to the Northern Wairoa river and over land on both banks of that river. Historically, Te Roroa has stood alone and from time to time affiliated to each of the Nga Puhi and Ngati Whatua tribal confederations. I currently act as secretary for Te Roroa and claim manager ofWAI 38. My earlier background was in the fields of investments and trusts. Although I hold no formal qualifications in History, I have studied the oral histories, place names and whakapapa ofTai Tokerau for 30 years. Particularly, I have written for The Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, collaborated with the later A.W. Reed in his book Supplement to Place Names of New Zealand and undertaken Northern Wairoa research work for the Office of Treaty Settlements. In the Te Roroa claim WAI 38, where I was a claimant researcher and witness, I was acknowledged by the tribunal as Te Roroa's tribal historian. This report is a response to directions of the Waitangi Tribunal for me to complete a historical report encompassing: (a) A general Te Roroa perspective on Kaipara Maori traditional history and tribal relationships. (b) ATe Roroa response to evidence submitted in the tribunal's current Kaipara inquiry affecting Te Roroa customary and historic interests. (c) An analysis ofTe Roroa's customary interests at Te Kopuru/Aratapu and Tokatoka, and any relevant actions or inaction's of the Crown in respect thereto. Although touching on other 19th century areas by way of explanatory background, this report focuses on relationships between Maori and the Crown and amongst Maori themselves in the Northern Wairoa or North Kaipara region. For the purposes of this report, that region is defined as the 3 Northern Wairoa catchment from Tangiteroria to Pouto, but excluding the Kaihu and Mangakahia valleys which customarily were regarded as separate areas. As remarked upon by Wright 1996:61, from Pouto northwards customarily was known as the Wairoa, rather than the Kaipara, region. With local body reorganisation the place name Kaipara - which originally applied to the area around Helensville - was extended into the Northern Wairoa district. This report is divided into six sections viz: 1. Maori origins and traditional history. 2. Modern tribes of the Northern Wairoa district. 3. Te Kopuru/Aratapu block. 4. Tikinui block. 5. Pouto 2 block. 6. Tokatoka and Whakahara blocks. It is accompanied by a whakapapa (Appendix 1) of the Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa hapus ofTe Roroa whose oral history is so bound up with the region. The first section of this report briefly looks at the earliest known inhabitants of the Northern Wairoa and Hokianga districts i.e. the Ngai Tuputupuwhenua people and their successors Ngati Rangi. It is followed by an examination of traditional evidence relating to a probable mid 16th century land migration by tupuna of modern Kaipara tribes from Muriwhenua through Hokianga, Waipoua/Maunganui and Kaihu to South Kaipara - and the evolution of those tribes. That evidence, which indicates continuing processes of fusion and fission amongst the tribes, is fundamentally different to Pakeha concepts of groups such as Ngati Whatua tuturu as a static, monolithic entity, which has endured, unchanged for centuries. In the second section I attempt to provide an introduction to the origins, areas of influence and inter-tribal relationships of the modern Northern Wairoa tribes. In so doing, I not only have had recourse to mid 19th century descriptions by tupuna as to the groups they recognised as tribes, but have 4 accepted those descriptions when whakapapa clearly indicates that members of those groups do not constitute a single genealogical descent ramage from an eponymous tupuna. On that basis I have had no difficulty in accepting groups such as Te Uri 0 Hau - comprising Te Uri 0 Hau tuturu (descended ( from Hakiputatomuri), Ngai Tahu (a remnant of Ngai Tahuhu descended from Tahuhu-nui-o-rangi), Ngati Kura (descended from Kuramangotini of Ngati Awa) , Ngati Tahinga (from the Raglan tupuna Tahinga) and others - as an iwi. In simple terms, my approach has been that if a group does not constitute a single genealogical descent ramage (e.g. whanau or hapu), it must be a tribe (iwi). Although the second section relies upon a synthesis of evidence from various tribal sources, it does not pretend to be an exhaustive study of 19th century inter-tribal relationships, of which, no doubt, other witnesses will present evidence to this tribunal. In fact, all I have endeavoured to do is to provide snapshots of relationships at particular points of time. The third section addresses the oral history of the Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa hapus ofTe Roroa respecting Te Kopuru block, the block's subsequent ( confiscation by the Crown and the history of later Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa protest. Despite exhaustive research, I have unearthed no documentary evidence as to a Te Uri 0 Hau customary interest in the land. Neither, prior to 1917, have I discovered any evidence of Te Uri 0 Hau protest over the loss of Te Kopuru block. My evidence and accompanying whakapapa (for which see Appendix 1 hereof) do not support Mr. Stirling's view, as earlier given in evidence to this tribunal, that Te Uri 0 Hau held mana whenua to Te Kopuru block. The fourth section deals with the role of the Native Land Court, as a Crown agent, in defeating Ngati Whiu/Ngati Kawa customary interests in Tikinui block and in failing to protect Maori heritage e.g. the urupa Te Kuri 2 block, which was part of the original Tikinui block. ( 5 In the fifth section I focus upon evidence as to whether the Land Court hearing into relative beneficial interests of Pouto 2 block - which awarded non-resident owners such as Tiopira Kinaki of Te Roroa significantly reduced shareholdings, was a fair hearing. The sixth, and final, section examines the Whakahara and Tokatoka block purchases by the Crown, adequacy of consideration, the absence of provision for reserves and the protection of cultural heritage and the failure of the Crown to facilitate rights of repurchase as requested by Maori, including Te Roroa. In an endeavour to present a comprehensive account of the complexities and interlocking nature of both transactions, it unfortunately has not been possible to avoid traversing certain evidence already provided by other witnesses. This reports needs to be considered against the background provided by the research of Barry Rigby, Paul Hamer & Rose Daamen "Rangahaua Whanui District 1 Auckland" Report (1996); David Armstrong "Te Uri 0 Hau and the Crown 1860-1960' (WAI 271 A2); Bruce Stirling "The Lands ofTe Uri 0 Hau Te Wahapu 0 Kaipara" (WAI 271 A3-A5), Tony Walzl "Land Issues Within ( o the Otamatea Area 1839-1950" (WAI 674 A21); Moira Jackson "Desecration of Taonga by Andrea Reischek" (WA1674 A8) and Paul Thomas "The Crown and Maori in the Northern Wairoa 1840-1865" (1999) - all of which I have found to be most helpful. I acknowledge, with thanks and gratitude, commentary by Dr. Barry Rigby on an earlier draft of this document and the latitude afforded me in terms of its completion. Although this report has been discussed with kaumatua and kuia, responsibility for its contents - and any errors of fact and interpretation - remains solely with the author. He Whakatauki Te toto 0 te tangata, he kai, Te oranga 0 te tangata, he whenua. Food supplies the blood of man, His welfare depends on the land. 6 SECTION 1 MAORI ORIGINS AND TRADITIONAL HISTORY ( 1.1 Ngai Tuputupuwhenua or Te Tini 0 Kui or Te Kekehu As related by Paora Tuhaere and others: "My ancestor was Tumutumuwhenua. This man came from the interior of the earth. He was not of this world." 1 The autochthons Tuputupuwhenua, alias Tumutumuwhenua (literally, a sprout from the land) and his wife Hinekui undoubtedly are the earliest known ancestors associated with the Kaipara and Hokianga districts. The pair, whose descendants variously were referred to as Ngai Tuputupuwhenua or Te Tini 0 Kui or Te Kekehu are widely known throughout Polynesia and consequently probably need to be recognised as personifications of early forgotten tupuna rather than as actual people. 2 Known to both the Ngati Whatuaand Nga Puhi tribal confederations, ( Tuputupuwhenua is particularly associated with the Hokianga district during the lifetime of the tupuna Kupe. According to Aperahama Taonui, "Kupe was the man who arrived in this land. He came to seek Tuputupuwhenua.