DOCSLIB.ORG

Sunday 20 July 2008 Waitangi, Northland

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sunday 20 July 2008 Waitangi, Northland PROGRAMME BACKGROUND Sunday 20 July 2008 Waitangi, Northland Waitangi is a township located in the Bay of Islands on the North Island of New Zealand. It is located close to the town of Paihia (of which it is now considered a part), 60 kilometres north of Whangarei. The name means weeping waters in Māori. Waitangi is best known for being the location where the Treaty of Waitangi was signed on February 6, 1840; however, it is also the place where the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand was signed five years prior, on October 28, 1835. This document was ratified by the British Crown the following year (1836). The Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) proper began on February 5, 1840 when a public meeting was held on the grounds in front of James Busby's residence. Lieutenant Governor Hobson read a proposed document to the 300 or so European and Maori who were in attendance and then provided the Maori chiefs an opportunity to speak. Initially, a large number of chiefs (including Te Kemara, Rewa, Moka 'Kainga-mataa' and others) spoke against accepting the Crown's proposition to rule over Aotearoa. However, later in the proceedings a few chiefs began to entertain this idea; amongst the more notable chiefs to support the Crown were Te Wharerahi, Pumuka, and the two Hokianga chiefs, Tamati Waka Nene and his brother Eruera Maihi Patuone). The proceedings were ended and were to recommence on February 7; however, a number of chiefs pressed to sign earlier. The Treaty of Waitangi was initially signed on February 6, 1840 in a marquee erected in the grounds of James Busby's house at Waitangi by representatives of the British Crown, the chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand, and other Māori tribal leaders, and subsequently by other Māori chiefs at other places in New Zealand. Not all of the chiefs chose to sign this document, with a number of chiefs either delaying or refusing to put pen to paper. In 2007, Sydney-based Maori academic, Brent Kerehona (Ngapuhi/Whakatohea/Tuhoe/Whanau-a-Apanui), claimed that uncertainty has arisen over whether Ngapuhi chief Moka 'Kainga-mataa' actually signed; despite his name appearing on this document. A close inspection of the Treaty document itself shows no evidence of a signature or 'mark' next to Moka's name (which is written as 'Te Tohu o Moka'). Kerehona elaborates by inferring that it is clear by the accounts of Colenso (1890)[1] that not only did Moka clearly express his concerns about the Treaty's effects whilst at the meeting on February 5, but that the discussion that he had with the Reverend Charles Baker combined with Moka's final comment should be taken into account. The introduction of the Treaty effectively revoked the Declaration of Independence; making New Zealand a British colony, and the Treaty is generally considered the founding document of New Zealand as a nation. Waitangi Day is the annual celebration of the signing, and is New Zealand's national holiday. In preparation for New Zealand Centenary in 1940 the Treaty house at Waitangi was restored in the 1930s, and the Meeting House Te Whare Runanga was built beside it, sparking the first emergence of the Treaty into Pākehā attention since the 19th century. ----------------------- The Treaty of Waitangi (Māori: Tiriti o Waitangi) is a treaty first signed on February 6, 1840, by representatives of the British Crown, and various Māori chiefs from the northern North Island of New Zealand. The Treaty established a British governor in New Zealand, recognised Māori ownership of their lands and other properties, and gave Māori the rights of British subjects. However the English and Māori language versions of the Treaty differ significantly, and so there is no consensus as to exactly what was agreed to. From the British point of view, the Treaty gave Britain sovereignty over New Zealand, and the Governor the right to run the country; Māori seem to have had a range of understandings, many of which conflicted with the British understanding. After the initial signing at Waitangi, copies of the Treaty were taken around New Zealand and over the following months many other chiefs signed. Until the 1970s, the Treaty was generally ignored by both the courts and parliament, although it was usually depicted in New Zealand historiography as a generous and benevolent act on the part of the Crown. From at least the 1860s, Māori looked to the Treaty, with little success, for rights and remedies for land loss and unequal treatment by the state. From the late 1960s, Māori began drawing attention to breaches of the Treaty, and subsequent histories have emphasised problems with its translation. In 1975 the Waitangi Tribunal was established as a permanent commission of inquiry tasked with researching breaches of the Treaty by the Crown or its agents, and suggesting means of redress. Today it is generally considered the founding document of New Zealand as a nation; despite this, the Treaty is often the subject of heated debate. Many Māori feel that the Crown did not keep its side of the bargain, and have presented evidence of this before sittings of the Tribunal, despite a contrary view from some in the non-Māori population that Māori pay too much attention to the Treaty and use it to claim 'special privileges'. The Crown is not obliged to give effect to the recommendations of the Tribunal, but nonetheless in many instances has accepted that it breached the Treaty and its principles. Settlements to date have consisted of millions of dollars in money and assets, as well as apologies. The signing of the Treaty The Treaty of Waitangi was instituted by the British Government on the advice of officials in the Colonial Office, prompted by concerns over lawlessness, Maori tribal wars and the prospect of formal colonisation of New Zealand by a private firm, the New Zealand Company. Historian Claudia Orange claims that the Colonial Office had initially planned a Maori New Zealand in which European settlers would be accommodated, but by 1839 had shifted to "a settler New Zealand in which a place had to be kept for Maori."[1] Naval officer Captain William Hobson, who had earlier spent time in New Zealand, was dispatched from London in August 1839 with instructions to take the constitutional steps needed to establish a British colony. He was instructed to negotiate a voluntary transfer of sovereignty from Maori to the British Crown. This was necessary, as the House of Commons ruled that as the Declaration of Independence of New Zealand had been ratified in 1836, any move by the British Crown to annex New Zealand would be unlawful.[2] He was sworn in as Lieutenant- Governor in Sydney and arrived in the Bay of Islands on January 29, 1840. The following day (January 30, 1840), Hobson attended the Christ Church at Kororareka (Russell); where he publicly read a number of proclamations. The first was in relation to the extension of the boundaries of New South Wales to include the islands of New Zealand. The second was in relation to Hobson's own appointment as Lieutenant-Governor. The third was in relation to land transactions (notably the issue of pre-emption).[3] Without a draft document prepared by lawyers or Colonial Office officials, Hobson was forced to write his own treaty with the help of his secretary, James Freeman, and British Resident James Busby, neither of whom was a lawyer. (Busby had previously drafted the Declaration of the Independence of New Zealand which had been signed by a few Māori chiefs in 1835, and which was ratified by the Crown the following year.) The entire treaty was prepared in four days.[1] Realising that a treaty in English could be neither understood, debated or agreed to by Maori, Hobson instructed missionary Henry Williams and his son Edward to translate the document into Maori and this was done overnight on February 4. On February 5, copies of the treaty in both languages were put before a gathering of northern chiefs inside a large marquee on the lawn in front of Busby’s house at Waitangi. Hobson read the treaty aloud in English and Williams read his Maori version. Maori speakers debated the treaty for five hours, during which time chiefs Te Kemara, Rewa, Moka 'Kainga-mataa' and a number of others opposed the Treaty; whilst chiefs such as Pumuka, Te Wharerahi, Tamati Waka Nene and his brother Eruera Maihi Patuone suggested that they were accepting of the Crown. Afterwards, the chiefs then moved to a river flat below Busby’s house and lawn and continued deliberations late into the night. Although Hobson had planned for the signing to occur on February 7; the following morning 45 of them were ready to sign and so, Hobson hastily arranged for this to occur.[4] Hobson headed the British signatories. Of the 40 or so Māori chiefs, the Ngapuhi rangatira Hone Heke was the first to sign the treaty. To enhance the authority of the treaty eight further copies were made and sent around the country to gather additional signatures: Treaty of Waitangi About 50 meetings were held from February to September 1840 to discuss and sign the copies, and a further 500 signatures were added to the treaty. A number of chiefs and some tribal groups refused to sign, including Tuhoe, Te Arawa and Ngāti Tuwharetoa. Recently (2007) Maori academic Brent Kerehona, suggested that despite historians, both past and present, claiming that the chief Moka 'Kainga-mataa' signed the Treaty at Waitangi on February 6; he did not do so, refusing out of protest.[5] Some were not given the opportunity to sign.[6] Nonetheless, on 21 May 1840, Governor Hobson proclaimed sovereignty over the whole country, and New Zealand was constituted as a colony separate from New South Wales on 16 November 1840.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Kaihu Valley and the Ripiro West Coast to South Hokianga
    ~ 1 ~ KAIHU THE DISTRICT NORTH RIPIRO WEST COAST SOUTH HOKIANGA HISTORY AND LEGEND REFERENCE JOURNAL FOUR EARLY CHARACTERS PART ONE 1700-1900 THOSE WHO STAYED AND THOSE WHO PASSED THROUGH Much has been written by past historians about the past and current commercial aspects of the Kaipara, Kaihu Valley and the Hokianga districts based mostly about the mighty Kauri tree for its timber and gum but it would appear there has not been a lot recorded about the “Characters” who made up these districts. I hope to, through the following pages make a small contribution to the remembrance of some of those main characters and so if by chance I miss out on anybody that should have been noted then I do apologise to the reader. I AM FROM ALL THOSE WHO HAVE COME BEFORE AND THOSE STILL TO COME THEY ARE ME AND I AM THEM ~ 2 ~ CHAPTERS CHAPTER 1 THE EARLY CHARACTERS NAME YEAR PLACE PAGE Toa 1700 Waipoua 5 Eruera Patuone 1769 Northland 14 Te Waenga 1800 South Hokianga 17 Pokaia 1805 North Kaipara West coast to Hokianga 30 Murupaenga 1806 South Hokianga – Ripiro Coast 32 Kawiti Te Ruki 1807 Ahikiwi – Ripiro Coast 35 Hongi Hika 1807 North Kaipara West coast to Hokianga 40 Taoho 1807 Kaipara – Kaihu Valley 44 Te Kaha-Te Kairua 1808 Ripiro Coast 48 Joseph Clarke 1820 Ripiro Coast 49 Samuel Marsden 1820 Ripiro Coast 53 John Kent 1820 South Hokianga 56 Jack John Marmon 1820 North Kaipara West coast to Hokianga 58 Parore Te Awha 1821 North Kaipara West coast to Hokianga 64 John Martin 1827 South Hokianga 75 Moetara 1830 South Hokianga - Waipoua 115 Joel Polack
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Dwelling & Onsite Wastewater Disposal 18 Deeming
    Brett Sheldon Proposed Dwelling & Onsite Wastewater Disposal 18 Deeming Road, Okiato Williams & King, Kerikeri1 2 July 2020 1 Williams & King - a Division of Survey & Planning Solutions (2010) Ltd Surveyors, Planners, Resource Managers - Kerikeri and Kaitaia PO Box 937 Kerikeri Phone (09) 407 6030 Email: [email protected] 1.0 Overview The Applicants, Brett Sheldon and Fleur Aspen, propose a new dwelling at 18 Deeming Road, Okiato, in the Coastal Residential Zone. The new dwelling will be located within twenty metres of a vegetated area on the downslope side of the subject site. Clearance of indigenous vegetation is required to prepare the building site. Wastewater will be treated and disposed on site, and the proposed system requires a discharge consent and land use consent due to the site constraints (size and position in relation to the coastal marine area). The application site is zoned Coastal Residential in the District Plan. This application has been assessed as being a discretionary activity overall. 2.0 Description of Proposal Proposed Dwelling A new single bedroom dwelling is proposed, with the majority of the indoor area comprising a single level, and an internal staircase accessing a lower deck area and stairs accessing a higher car port via a covered deck. The floor area of the dwelling comprising the stair well and level 2 building area amounts to 101.6m². Deck areas amount to 84.6m² (note that the lower level deck is situated below the level 2 building). The carport will be 22.4m² and is accessed by a new driveway beyond the vehicle access to the existing shed.
    [Show full text]
  • Becoming Quite Colonial: the Archaeology of the Ruapekapeka Campaign
    Becoming Quite Colonial: The Archaeology of the Ruapekapeka Campaign A Research Strategy Jonathan Carpenter Version 1.3 26 July 2012 2 – Ruapekapeka Campaign Archaeological Project. Research Strategy Version 1.2 Revision Date Comments 0.9 28 October Forwarded to ANU for PhD application. 2012 1.0 7 May 2012 Forwarded to the RPMT for consultation. 1.1 21 June 2012 Added cover page, and frontispiece with revisions and contents; expanded Section 3.0 Implementation including developing stages of investigation, Section 5.0 Research Outputs, Section 6.0 Personnel; added appendix for site records. Forwarded to DOC for permit application. 1.2 19 July 2012 Expanded Section 3.0 including stages of investigation and references for battlefield archaeology. Forwarded to HPT for authority application. 1.3 26 July 2012 Revised Section 1.0 and 2.0; added material from British camps report. Cover Image: Ruapekapeka, 1846. NZ. Painting by John Williams, 58th Regiment. File ref.: C:\Users\Jono\Documents\PhD\Research_Strategies\20120621_Research Strategy_V1.2.docx 3 – Ruapekapeka Campaign Archaeological Project. Research Strategy Version 1.2 Contents_Toc330562475 Research Strategy ................................................................................................................................... 1 Figures ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Tables .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Destination Choice of Heritage Attractions in New
    Spoiled for choice! Which sites shall we visit? : Destination Choice of Heritage Attractions In New Zealand’s Bay of Islands Takeyuki Morita A thesis submitted to Auckland University of Technology In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree Of Master of International Tourism Management (MITM) 2014 FACULTY OF CULTURE AND SOCIETY SCHOOL OF HOSPITALITY AND TOURISM Supervisor: DR CHARLES JOHNSTON Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. ii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iii Attestation of Authorship ............................................................................................................... iv Ethics Approval .............................................................................................................................. v Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... vi Abbreviations .............................................................................................................................. viii Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Story of the Treaty Part 1 (Pdf
    THE STORY OF THE TREATY Introduction This is the story of our founding document, the Treaty agreement contained within it. At the outset it of Waitangi. It tells of the events leading up to the should be noted that, while the steps leading to the Treaty at a time when Mäori, far outnumbering Treaty are well known and have been thoroughly Päkehä, controlled New Zealand. It describes the studied, historians do differ in what they see as the The Treaty of Waitangi is New Zealand’s founding document. Over 500 Mäori chiefs and essential bargain that was struck between Mäori main developments and trends. Some historians, for representatives of the British Crown signed the Treaty in 1840. Like all treaties it is an exchange and the British Crown and what both sides hoped example, emphasise the humanitarian beliefs of the of promises; the promises that were exchanged in 1840 were the basis on which the British to obtain by agreeing to it. However, it does not tell 1830s; others draw attention to the more coercive Crown acquired New Zealand. The Treaty of Waitangi agreed the terms on which New Zealand the full story of what has happened since the signing aspects of British policy or take a middle course would become a British colony. of the Treaty in 1840: of the pain and loss suffered of arguing that while British governments were by Mäori when the Treaty came to be ignored concerned about Mäori, they were equally concerned This is one of a series of booklets on the Treaty of Waitangi which are drawn from the Treaty of by successive settler-dominated governments in about protecting the interests of Britain and British Waitangi Information Programme’s website www.treatyofwaitangi.govt.nz.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Experience: the Twaty of Waitangi
    New Zealand Experience: The Twaty Of Waitangi Alan Ward The main point The main point I wish to advance in this paper is that no matter how finely worded a treaty might be, it will not be effective unless there is a broad political consensus to make it effective. Professor Brij La1 has shown in his paper that despite the meticulous care and widespread consulta- tion that underlay the making of the 1997 Fijian constitution, it was abro- gated by force by sections of Fijian society who were not fundamentally in sympathy with it. Much the same can be argued in respect of the Treaty of Waitangi in New Zealand. When proposals for a treaty with the Aboriginal people began to be mooted in the 1970s it was commonly argued in Australia (as indeed it still is) that the situation of Maori in New Zealand was markedly better than that of Aborigines in Australia, because Maori had the benefit of a treaty their chiefs signed with the British in 1840, the Treaty of Waitangi. In contrast, many New Zealanders, including many Maori, were quite cynical, in the light of their experience, about what a treaty might achieve for Aborigines. As recently as 1983, the New Zealand Maori Council, the senior Maori representative body, established (like ATSIC) under an act of parliament, stated as follows: "In the treatment and handling of Maori claims the Treaty of Waitangi has been sadly denigrated. Unlike many other countries where treaties and the facts of prior occupation have been regarded by the Courts as proper sources of domestic law resulting in a body of court laws on treaty and indigenous rights, the New Zealand courts have consistently denied that the Treaty fo Waitangi forms part of our domestic law or that such sources of law could exist.
    [Show full text]
  • 615 Different Kinds of Grasses Which Are Springing up in His Area and in Asking Us If These Indicated That the World Is Ending
    “Company” in Kopiago 615 different kinds of grasses which are springing up in his area and in asking us if these indicated that the world is ending. Apparently long-standing ideas are also subject to continuous re-working, so that revised versions of rumours turn up over time. What is of further interest is the way in which these existing symbols co-exist, and even blend, with the new theme of development through the arrival of the company. Such an arrival would indeed mean the end of one world, geographically and economically, and the start of a new one. In seeing the company as the only desired form of development the people are essentially reflecting the paucity of other development opportunities open to them. From the 1960s onwards government patrol officers regularly put in recommendations that agricultural development on a small-holder basis be made the cornerstone for local economic progress. Yet few results have emerged over time. Coffee is grown in Aluni but not tended or often picked, largely because there is no practical way to sell it. There is a severe lack of introduced vegetables which could be used for sale. There is a chronic rate of anthrax and pneumonia in the pig population which is not counteracted by DPI injections. Further, the Christian churches do not seem to have taken the place of indigenous crisis cults to provide a means of combating ill health and environmental decline by ritual intercession with the deity. The people are thus left without much recourse against adversity and little that is tangible and material to point to by way of their own development, although almost all men below the age of 35 years have been out to other places in Papua New Guinea and are able to judge how marginal their own area is by comparison.
    [Show full text]
  • First Years at Hokianga 1827 – 1836
    First Years at Hokianga 1827-1836 by Rev.C.H.Laws FIRST YEARS AT HOKIANGA 1827 – 1836 In a previous brochure, entitled "Toil and Adversity at Whangaroa," the story of the Methodist Mission to New Zealand is told from its initiation in 1823 to its disruption and the enforced flight of the missionaries in 1827. After a brief stay with members of the Anglican Mission at the Bay of Islands the Methodist party sailed for Sydney in the whaler "Sisters" on January 28th, 1827, arriving at their destination on February 9th. It consisted of Nathaniel Turner and Mrs. Turner, with their three children, John Hobbs, James Stack and Mr. and Mrs. Luke Wade, and they took with them a Maori girl and two native lads. William White had left Whangaroa for England on September 19th, 1825, and at the time of the flight had not returned. The catastrophe to the Mission was complete. The buildings had been burned to the ground, the live stock killed; books and records destroyed, and the property of the Mission now consisted only of a few articles in store in Sydney which had not been forwarded to New Zealand. Wesley Historical Society (NZ) Publication #4(2) 1943 Page 1 First Years at Hokianga 1827-1836 by Rev.C.H.Laws Chapter I The departure of the Mission party for Sydney is seen, as we look back upon it, to have been the right course. Sydney was their headquarters, they were a large party and could not expect to stay indefinitely with their Anglican friends, and it could not be foreseen when they would be able to re-establish the work.
    [Show full text]
  • Directions to the Duke of Marlborough Hotel
    Directions to The Duke of Marlborough Hotel BY CAR Aprox 3.5 hours north of Auckland The Duke of Marlborough Hotel is a lovely drive through some of the most scenic parts of New Zealand. Take your time and discover some of the other things that Northland has to offer. If you have your own transport there are two main ways to get to Russell, depending on how much time you have and your sense of adventure. THE HIGHWAY The most direct route is to take State Highway 1 from Auckland to Cape Reinga. About 45 minutes north of Whangarei at Kawakawa take SH11 to Opua, Paihia and Russell (via vehicle ferry). Although the road is windy, it is fully sealed and well signposted. At the top of the hill leading to Opua, turn right and head down to the vehicle ferry which operates a continuous service during the day and a reduced service until 10:00pm. Bookings are not required and you pay on board. Car Ferry Facts First ferry Leaves Okiato 06:40am (mainland side), Leaves Opua 06:50am (Russell side) Last ferry leaves: Okiato 2200 (mainland side) , Leave Opua 2150 (Russell side) Travel time: 10mins Tickets: Purchased on board - cash and eftpos/visa available On the other side (called Okiato) keep following the main road for approximately 7km to Russell. You will find us right on the water front in Russell Village. You can enter our carpark from York Street or from The Strand. Feel free to park your car, come and check in and someone can come and help with your luggage.
    [Show full text]
  • Workingpaper
    working paper The Evolution of New Zealand as a Nation: Significant events and legislation 1770–2010 May 2010 Sustainable Future Institute Working Paper 2010/03 Authors Wendy McGuinness, Miriam White and Perrine Gilkison Working papers to Report 7: Exploring Shared M āori Goals: Working towards a National Sustainable Development Strategy and Report 8: Effective M āori Representation in Parliament: Working towards a National Sustainable Development Strategy Prepared by The Sustainable Future Institute, as part of Project 2058 Disclaimer The Sustainable Future Institute has used reasonable care in collecting and presenting the information provided in this publication. However, the Institute makes no representation or endorsement that this resource will be relevant or appropriate for its readers’ purposes and does not guarantee the accuracy of the information at any particular time for any particular purpose. The Institute is not liable for any adverse consequences, whether they be direct or indirect, arising from reliance on the content of this publication. Where this publication contains links to any website or other source, such links are provided solely for information purposes and the Institute is not liable for the content of such website or other source. Published Copyright © Sustainable Future Institute Limited, May 2010 ISBN 978-1-877473-55-5 (PDF) About the Authors Wendy McGuinness is the founder and chief executive of the Sustainable Future Institute. Originally from the King Country, Wendy completed her secondary schooling at Hamilton Girls’ High School and Edgewater College. She then went on to study at Manukau Technical Institute (gaining an NZCC), Auckland University (BCom) and Otago University (MBA), as well as completing additional environmental papers at Massey University.
    [Show full text]
  • Processes of Pakeha Change in Response To
    http://waikato.researchgateway.ac.nz/ Research Commons at the University of Waikato Copyright Statement: The digital copy of this thesis is protected by the Copyright Act 1994 (New Zealand). The thesis may be consulted by you, provided you comply with the provisions of the Act and the following conditions of use: Any use you make of these documents or images must be for research or private study purposes only, and you may not make them available to any other person. Authors control the copyright of their thesis. You will recognise the author’s right to be identified as the author of the thesis, and due acknowledgement will be made to the author where appropriate. You will obtain the author’s permission before publishing any material from the thesis. PROCESSES OF PAKEHA CHANGE IN RESPONSE TO THE TREATY OF WAITANGI A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Waikato by Ingrid Huygens 2007 DEDICATION To my father the labourer‐philosopher who pondered these things as he drove his tractor i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My most respectful and loving acknowledgments to my peer study group of Mitzi and Ray Nairn, Rose Black and Tim McCreanor. Their combined experience spanned a depth and breadth of Pakeha Treaty work that framed my research project. Their academic, emotional and practical support during times of ill-health and scant resources made this thesis possible. To my colleagues, the Treaty and decolonisation educators who shared with me their reflections, their dreams and their ways of working. It was a privilege to visit each group in their home area, and my year of travelling around the country will always stand out as one of warmth, colour and generosity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Doctrine of Discovery in the United States and New Zealand Robert J
    Volume 111 | Issue 3 Article 11 April 2009 An Indigenous Lens into Comparative Law: The Doctrine of Discovery in the United States and New Zealand Robert J. Miller Lewis & Clark Law School Jacinta Ruru Faculty of Law, University of Otago, New Zealand Follow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation Robert J. Miller & Jacinta Ruru, An Indigenous Lens into Comparative Law: The Doctrine of Discovery in the United States and New Zealand, 111 W. Va. L. Rev. (2009). Available at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wvlr/vol111/iss3/11 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the WVU College of Law at The Research Repository @ WVU. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Virginia Law Review by an authorized editor of The Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Miller and Ruru: An Indigenous Lens into Comparative Law: The Doctrine of Discover AN INDIGENOUS LENS INTO COMPARATIVE LAW: THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY IN THE UNITED STATES AND NEW ZEALAND Robert J. Miller* JacintaRuru** 1. THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY ........................................................... 852 A. England and Discovery.......................................................... 854 B. The Elements of Discovery .................................................... 856 H. THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY IN UNITED STATES LAW ................... 858 A. The Colonial Law of Discovery ............................................. 858 B. The State Law of Discovery ................................................... 861 C. United States Law and Discovery to 1823 ............................. 864 D. Discovery and Manifest Destiny ............................................ 871 III. THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY IN NEW ZEALAND LAW .................... 876 A. Claiming Sovereignty: 1840 .................................................. 878 B. Sym onds 1847 .......................................................................
    [Show full text]