DOCSLIB.ORG

Chapter 2 the Scribes of the Governor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Chapter 2 the Scribes of the Governor 9 CHAPTER 2 THE SCRIBES OF THE GOVERNOR The most extensive previous examination of the 1840 documents associated with the Treaty of Waitangi was that of Ruth Ross, who gave a generally accurate account of the genesis of the Treaty in English and in Māori (see Introduction, footnote 1). She pointed out that the identification of handwriting of officials is seldom straightforward, particularly as clerks often prepared documents for the signatures of their superiors; it is often the case that one person prepared a text, but a more junior person made the copies. To guard against unproven ascriptions, I have examined with particular care a wide range of the surviving original public documents located in the series of New Zealand Governor's papers and despatches at Archives New Zealand (Archives Group G), in the New Zealand Colonial Secretary's papers (Archives Group IA), in the New Zealand Governor's inward despatches to the Colonial Office, to the New Zealand Lieutenant­Governor's despatches to the Governor of New South Wales, and to the NSW Colonial Secretary as well as the latter's despatches to the Colonial Office, (most of which are now at the Public Record Office, London). Also examined were other despatches from Hobson to Gipps which are still in New South Wales. 1 Some privately owned authentic documents have also been examined, to assist in confirming the identity of the various scribes. Public papers at the Alexander Turnbull Library, the Auckland Central City Library and the Auckland Museum Library have also been examined. It is helpful to review, at this point, the sets of Hobson's despatches. In theory, one set was sent to Gipps and followed by a duplicate in a second vessel, while another was sent direct to London for the Secretary of State, Normanby, also with a duplicate in a second vessel. Hobson reported direct to Gipps, but he also had authority to refer matters to the Colonial Office directly. But this arrangement was not always followed and the 'duplicates' do not always reflect the content of the 'originals'. Not all letters or despatches by Hobson to Gipps were forwarded on to Normanby, particularly those dealing with minor administrative matters. The critical despatches sent to Gipps in the vessel Samuel Winter on 8 February (40/8, dated 5 and 6 February, enclosing a text of the Treaty in English), were subsequently forwarded from Gipps to Normanby on 19 February, and were printed. The copy supplied to the printer, probably, was not kept after the printing.2 The 'duplicate' despatch dated 17 February (with rather different contents, 7 letters with 5 enclosures) was sent in 1 State Records New South Wales, series CGS 905 "Main series of letters received, 1841, New Zealand 1840­ 41". 2 In the GBPP series of Colonial office papers, printed texts often substitute for the originals. 10 RJP/NZACL CAHIER SPECIAL the vessel Martha on 20 February and received on 14 March.3 This is still in Sydney, but it is incomplete, lacking both 40/6 and 40/8 and their four enclosures, despite the listing of these in the 'list of copies transmitted herewith'. 4 Their whereabouts is unknown, but they may have been sent on to London. The extant copy of 40/8 at PRO CO 209/7, 7­12, 13­15 – on the basis of the dating – would appear to be part of the Martha copy of the despatch, rather than that sent in the Samuel Winter. The absence of the authenticating attestation of Henry Williams in the despatch sent on the Samuel Winter – printed in GBPP 1840 (560) – suggests that it was not present in the manuscript sent by that ship. Some of this material (transcript copies of Hobson to Gipps 40/6 and 40/8) survives elsewhere, within the duplicate despatch 40/1 sent to Normanby, in the Achilles on 16 February, (Archives New Zealand G 30 /1 pp. 5­31).5 But this material presents other anomalies. 40/1 from Hobson to Normanby is a three­page letter in Freeman's hand with Hobson's signature but the scribe who prepared the three enclosures with it is less certain. Enclosure 1 is a transcript of Hobson to Gipps 40/6, dated 4 February, enclosure 2 is a copy of Hobson to Gipps 40/8 dated 5 February and enclosure 3 is a copy of Hobson to Gipps 40/13, dated 17 February, this last of which was not sent in either the Samuel Winter or the Martha. Hobson to Normanby 40/2, also dated 17 February, is in Freeman's hand with Hobson's signature, and comprises a long letter without enclosures "Reporting progress made in the acquisition of sovereignty". 6 Most alarmingly the English 'official' text of the Treaty of Waitangi as given in the printed Samuel Winter despatch (GBPP 1840 (560) p. 10) and the extant manuscript written by Freeman (PRO 209/7, 7­12,13­14) are very different from that in the 'duplicate' in the Achilles despatch to Normanby. The scribe has, in fact, copied the wrong document, using a draft of the Treaty of Waitangi rather than the official text, as was intended (see Appendix, document 4). Freeman, who was responsible for the documents, and may personally have prepared all of them, appears not to have noticed the error. 3 The Samuel Winter and the Martha despatches include 40/5, 40/6, 40/7, 40/8, 40/9, 40/10 and 40/11, but one of the lists of contents ("Enclosures herewith") attributes two enclosures to 40/6 and three enclosures to 40/7 while the other "List of copies of letters transmitted herewith" attributes three enclosures to 40/6 and two enclosures to 40/7. The "List" attributes one enclosure to 40/8, while the other indicates no enclosures in 40/8. There was in fact one enclosure in 40/8, this being the authenticated fair copy of the Treaty in English, now at PRO CO 209/7, 13­15 and which is presumably the Martha copy. Despatches 40/12 to 40/15 were all sent on the Martha on 20 February. The next batch of despatches (40/16­40/18) were sent in the Herald after 10 March. 4 State Records, New South Wales, Colonial Secretary CGS 905, Main series of letters received, 1841, New Zealand 1840­41, [4/2540]. 5 Letter 40/6 is also missing from this series but it and the two printed proclamations that had accompanied it are in PRO CO 209/7, 23­24. 6 Archives New Zealand G 30 / 1, 40­55. ENGLISH DRAFTS OF THE TREATY OF WAITANGI 11 William Hobson's handwriting is large, untidy, and is easily recognised. He did not usually write his own despatches, having been equipped with clerks for that purpose (principally James Stuart Freeman, the Chief Clerk and private secretary). Hobson was particularly reliant upon his scribes because, on 1 March 1840, only a month after taking office, he was disabled by a stroke which left him temporarily unable to write. While he gradually recovered, he was still suffering the effects of the stroke at the end of the year.7 The sickbed diary and other documents, such as signatures and drafts of letters, assist us to trace the progress of his recovery. The scribes and other officials in Hobson's party are considered in turn. I GEORGE COOPER Hobson had few officials in whom he had any confidence, but Cooper, the most senior official, was the worst of them. Hobson had asked for a rather extensive staff complement in a letter to Gipps (13 January 1840). He wanted 11 officials, 4 sergeants, 10 clerks, 12 mounted police and 30 mechanics, a total of 67.8 Instead he received just four officials; George Cooper as Treasurer, Felton Mathew as Surveyor General, Willoughby Shortland as Chief Magistrate and James Stuart Freeman as Chief Clerk. There was no provision for a Colonial Secretary, but Cooper was calling himself 'Acting Colonial Secretary' by 17 February. 9 After an acrimonious dispute with Hobson and Shortland, however, Cooper left the Bay of Islands on 11 March in the Herald (Capt. Nias) destined for Sydney – he was later forced to apologise to Hobson and Shortland, after they complained to Gipps.1 0 Cooper did not return to New Zealand until 28 June and so was effectively unable to have much influence on either the business of signature gathering for the Treaty of Waitangi or for the proclamation of sovereignty in late May. 11 Although he countersigned Hobson's proclamations of 7 Compare holograph documents nos 1 (30 January 1840), 3 (ca 13 May 1840), 7 (24 December 1840), all in ATL fMS­Papers­2227, and also his sickbed diary of April 1840, W. Hobson, "Diary kept by William Hobson while recovering from a paralytic stroke, with other family documents and letters to and from Maori chiefs" 1833­1934 ATL fMS­097, both in the Alexander Turnbull Library. 8 Archives New Zealand, G 36 1, pp 8­9. 9 An excellent example of Cooper's holograph and signature is found in his note to Hobson of 16 January 1840, when leaving Sydney "Treasurer respecting money to be shipped on board the Herald" (Archives New Zealand, IA 1 40/11). His counter signature appears on the original of two copies of Hobson's second proclamation of 30 January 1840. 10 G Gipps to W Hobson, 8 May 1840, in ATL­qMS­0843: On 4 April Hobson requested that Cooper be removed from his situation as Treasurer but Gipps "having severely animadverted on his breach of duty in quitting it without your permission" but had sent him back "from not having any competent person to supersede him or act in his place".
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • The Book of New Zealand Wine NZWG
    NEW ZEALAND WINE Resource Booklet nzwine.com 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 100% COMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE Tucked away in a remote corner of the globe is a place of glorious unspoiled landscapes, exotic flora and fauna, and SECTION 1: OVERVIEW 1 a culture renowned for its spirit of youthful innovation. History of Winemaking 1 New Zealand is a world of pure discovery, and nothing History of Winemaking Timeline 2 distills its essence more perfectly than a glass of New Zealand wine. Wine Production & Exports 3 New Zealand’s wine producing history extends back to Sustainability Policy 4 the founding of the nation in the 1800’s. But it was the New Zealand Wine Labelling Laws introduction to Marlborough’s astonishing Sauvignon & Export Certification 5 Blanc in the 1980’s that saw New Zealand wine receive Wine Closures 5 high acclaim and international recognition. And while Marlborough retains its status as one of the SECTION 2: REGIONS 6 world’s foremost wine producing regions, the quality of Wine Regions of New Zealand Map 7 wines from elsewhere in the country has also achieved Auckland & Northland 8 international acclaim. Waikato/ Bay of Plenty 10 Our commitment to quality has won New Zealand its reputation for premium wine. Gisborne 12 Hawke’s Bay 14 Wairarapa 16 We hope you find the materials of value to your personal and professional development. Nelson 18 Marlborough 20 Canterbury & Waipara Valley 22 Central Otago 24 RESOURCES AVAILABLE SECTION 3: WINES 26 NEW ZEALAND WINE RESOURCES Sauvignon Blanc 28 New Zealand Wine DVD Riesling 30 New Zealand Wine
    [Show full text]
  • Because of Ngapuhi's Atrocities, New Zealand Became a British Colony!
    Because of Ngapuhi’s Atrocities, New Zealand Became a British Colony! While Ngapuhi are stating they did not give up their sovereignty in 1840, they initiated Britain becoming involve in New Zealand when their 13 chiefs wrote to King George IV asking him to be their guardian and protector. When James Busby offered tangata maori sovereignty over all the islands of New Zealand in 1835 he could only attract 52 chiefs to sign the Declaration of Independence with over 500 agreeing to British Sovereignty by the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. While the Treaty of Waitangi confirmed British sovereignty over all the islands of New Zealand on the 21 May 1840, it was of little interest to Britain with no mention of the Treaty of Waitangi in the Royal Charters/Letters Patents of 1839 and 1840 or Lt. Governor Hobson’s two Proclamations read at Waitangi on the 30 January 1840. Our true Founding Documents and first Constitution. Why have governments and our academics overlooked these vital documents that made New Zealand into a British Colony under one flag and one law on the 3 May 1840 and have now hidden them amongst the 6 million other documents at Archives New Zealand? There were many wars between the tangata whenua, the original inhabitants of New Zealand and the tangata maori tribes who arrived in the 14th century and after the tangata whenua were driven into the hills and disappeared, the tangata maori tribes continued to fight for territories but no more so than when Hongi Hika returned from England after helping Dr Samuel Lees with his Maori to English dictionary.
    [Show full text]
  • Ulstermen and NZ Wines by D Twigg
    ULSTERMEN and NEW ZEALAND WINES Despite popular belief, wine has had a long, torturous, and fascinating history in New Zealand. Samuel Marsden, an Anglican missionary, made the first planting of grape vines at the Bay of Islands in 1819. Grapevines were a common sight in the early colonists’ gardens, and by the time of the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, the first recorded New Zealand wine was already bottled. The earliest known wine maker was a Scotsman, James Busby, appointed as the first British Resident in New Zealand. When the French explorer, Dumont d’Urville, visited Busby at Waitangi in 1840, he was given ‘a light white wine, very sparkling and delicious to taste.’ French priests and peasants, Hawkes Bay pastoralists, Croatian gum-diggers and others preserved the flame ignited by Busby, throughout the 19th century. The assaults of oidium, a powdery mildew, the vine-destroying phylloxera aphid and prohibitionist zealots together ensured that the early dreams of a flourishing antipodean wine industry failed. The 1920s and ‘30s saw gradual but unspectacular growth. The wine industry boomed during the Second World War when duties were imposed on imported wines. During the ‘50s and ‘60s expansion continued due to many legislative concessions including reductions in the maximum amounts of wine that could be sold by winemakers, approval for more retail outlets, and the licensing of restaurants to sell wine in 1960. In recent decades, most Kiwi wine drinkers have developed a taste for dry white wines such as sauvignon blanc, chardonnay, pinot-gris and these now dominate the industry’s output.
    [Show full text]
  • Brand Ideally Positioned to Become a Leader in the Premium Australian Segment, with a Focus on Off-Premise Opportunities
    The Mission To become a category leader within the premium Australian segment. THE OPPORTUNITY 1. Our new volume entry into the Australian category. 2. Compliment our existing supplier partners and complete PBI’s Southern Hemisphere solution. 3. A brand ideally positioned to become a leader in the premium Australian segment, with a focus on off-premise opportunities 4. Gives New World portfolio further credibility and additional potential within wholesalers. History of Australian Wine 1788 1854 1980s Vines first arrive The first wine exported to Aussie wine infiltrates other export in Australia. the United Kingdom. markets beyond Britain. 1828 The Hunter Valley Today becomes the first The Australian wine 1901 established industry exports $2.1 The Federation of commercial wine billion a year to the Australia established. region in Australia. international market. 1840 1990s-2000s By the 1840’s viticulture was established Intense, concentrated examples of by Italians in Riverina, Swiss in Victoria, Shiraz, Grenache, and red blends Dalmatians in Western Australia, and dominated the Australian fine wine Lutheran Germans in South Australia, story. particularly the Barossa and Clare Valleys. 1950s 1825 Aussie wine industry thrives & wine James Busby – widely regarded as consumption grows as European the “father” of Australian wine – immigrants bring new skills and becomes involved in viticulture. Later techniques. in 1831 he went to Europe and collected 650 varieties. Large Country with a Varied Climate • Climate varies due to the country’s size – land mass is almost equal to that of the US and considerably larger than Europe. • Victoria & South Australia experience winter-spring rainfall (June to November), a dry summer and an early autumn.
    [Show full text]
  • The French Alternative to the Treaty of Waitangi
    The French Alternative to the Treaty of Waitangi IN 1839 parallel situations were set up in France and Great Britain: each imperial power was studying ways of asserting its authority over Maori territory. In London, negotiations were afoot to send William Hobson to New Zealand to declare British sovereignty there after negotiating a cession of sovereignty from the Maori. That same year, a French whaling captain, Jean Francois Langlois, returned to France from New Zealand with a deed, written in French, which said that the Maori signatories had sold him Banks Peninsula. On the basis of this deed, some French businessmen and the French cabinet decided to try and race the British to the South Island and place 'Southern New Zealand' under French sovereignty. They would leave the North Island, with its large Maori population, to the British, while they, the French, would take over the almost empty South Island, along with Stewart Island and the Chathams. Hobson had extensive discussions about his task with Colonial Office officials and the Colonial Secretary. They were lobbied both by the New Zealand Company and mission- ary interests. Official British ideas evolved with time, but Hobson was given a great deal of personal discretion and was not given a model treaty. The actual texts of the Treaty of Waitangi were worked out in New Zealand by Hobson, his officials, James Busby and Bay of Islands' missionaries. In Paris, ideas evolved as well, as the project to colonize the South Island was discussed by the cabinet, by officials of various ministries but principally the Naval and Colonial Ministry and the Foreign Affairs Ministry, and by various businessmen, some of whom eventually became the directors of the Nanto-Bordelaise Company.1 There was missionary input, but it was negligible.
    [Show full text]
  • Discover Australian Wine – Regions and Varieties
    Wine Australia for Australian Wine Discover Australian Wine Regions and Varieties Discover Australian wine There’s nothing in the world like Australian wine because there’s nothing like the climate, soils and regions of Australia. We have some of the oldest geology and most complex soils in the world. The Australian wine community today is founded on the explorers of the past, who identified the optimal vineyard sites and the sophisticated winemaking techniques that make our fine wines so special. Australian winemaking and grapegrowing is constantly evolving. Our winemakers and viticulturists are curious, willing to experiment and to challenge convention to ensure that they craft authentic wines that are a true expression of place. From the iconic to the lesser known, our 65 wine regions each boast distinct characteristics that are expressed in wines made by talented winemakers attuned to their land. This brochure provides a snapshot of that regional diversity, and of the main wine styles for which Australia is renowned. Wine is the sum of its parts. There’s nothing like Australian wine because there’s nothing like the people and the places of Australia. We invite you to discover more about what makes Australian wine authentic, unique and exciting. Andreas Clark CEO Wine Australia Discover a snapshot of Explore eight of our our regions from page 4. wine styles from page 34. wineaustralia.com • WineAustralia • @Wine_Australia • WineAustralia • #AussieWine 10°S Darwin 15°S NORTHERN TERRITORY Indian Ocean 20°S QUEENSLAND WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    [Show full text]
  • Colony"?: Busby V White (1859)
    563 A COLLUSIVE SUIT TO "CONFOUND THE RIGHTS OF PROPERTY THROUGH THE LENGTH AND BREADTH OF THE COLONY"?: BUSBY V WHITE (1859) Ned Fletcher* and Rt Hon Dame Sian Elias** In Busby v White, James Busby sought to challenge the validity of the Land Claims Ordinance 1841 which treated his pre-Treaty of Waitangi land purchases as "null and void". He had campaigned against the New South Wales statute which preceded the Ordinance, and throughout the 1840s continued to argue against the legislation through political channels, while maintaining his claim to hold the lands under his "native title". By the 1850s holding by "native title" was increasingly precarious as the Government moved to acquire Busby's lands for the purposes of settlement. Busby was forced to law. His aim was to set up the validity of the legislation as a question of law which could be taken to the Privy Council for authoritative resolution. Busby v White was the second attempt to establish a platform for appeal. As in his earlier claim, Busby v McKenzie, the Supreme Court avoided a determination on the merits, thus thwarting Busby's strategy of appealing to London. Although no substantive decision was delivered, the extensive argument was fully reported in The Southern Cross newspaper, from which the Lost Cases Project has recovered it. Its interest today is in arguments which question the course set by R v Symonds (1847) on the nature of native property in New Zealand and the subsequent relegation of the Treaty of Waitangi to legal limbo in Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington (1877).
    [Show full text]
  • Te Tiriti O Waitangi TEXTS and TRANSLATIONS*
    Te Tiriti o Waitangi TEXTS AND TRANSLATIONS* IN SUBMISSIONS to the Parliamentary Committee on Fisheries in 1971, the New Zealand Maori Council pressed 'for the recognition and observance of the Treaty of Waitangi in relation to the protection of Maori rights to their traditional sources of shellfish and fishing beds', the council's secretary stating that 'the Treaty of Waitangi was quite explicit in its promises about Maori fishing rights'.1 More recently, the Social Credit League asked the four Maori Members of Parliament jointly to sponsor the introduction of a Bill which, 'if passed, would have the effect of ratifying non-retrospectively the land and citizenship provisions of the Treaty of Waitangi'.2 These are fairly typical examples of the sort of statement being made about the treaty by politicians, Maori organisations and other interested parties. The fact that the Treaty of Waitangi was an agreement in the Maori language is consistently ignored, the prime example of this being the schedule of the 1960 Waitangi Day Act. Headed 'The Treaty of W&itangi', and, according to a former Attorney General, 'included as a schedule to provide convenient access to its information',3 this agreement in the English language is neither a translation of the Treaty of Waitangi, nor is the Treaty of Waitangi a translation of this English text. The Treaty of Waitangi did not in fact say anything at all about fishing rights. The meaning of its land and citizenship provisions' is a matter for interpretation. James Edward FitzGerald remarked in a debate on the Treaty of Waitangi in the House of Representatives in 1865: 'if this docu- ment was signed in the Maori tongue, whatever the English trans lation might be had nothing to do with the question.' He went on to point out: 'Governor Hobson might have wished the Maoris to sign one thing, and they might have signed something totally differ- ent.
    [Show full text]
  • 10. Global Comparison
    rightsED | Bringing them home 10. Global comparison Note: This overview provides a background to the policies and practices that affected Indigenous people in New Zealand. It is not intended to be used as a comprehensive historical document. Aotearoa and the ‘Pakeha’ (White people) The Maori first settled Aotearoa around 500 years before the first Europeans visited the North Island. The Maori established unique cultural practices and systems of law, mainly across the North Island. After Tasman, the next European contact came in 1769 when Captain Cook came ashore, claiming the land for Britain. Despite Cook’s suggestions that New Zealand should be colonised, the country would not see mass settlement for another 75 years. European traders, whalers and missionaries were the main people to settle in New Zealand. A trade and whaling outpost was set up in the Bay of Islands, in a town called Kororareka, which soon grew with brothels and ‘grog shops’. Gradually, however, conflict flared up between Maori people and the settlers. The introduction of muskets had a significant impact on relations between Maori tribes. This included a series of inter-tribal wars, known as the Musket Wars. In response to this conflict and threats of French settlement, the British sent James Busby to New Zealand in 1833. As the ‘Official British Resident’, he attempted to establish stability and negotiate with Maori chiefs. He supported Maori independence and tried to unite the chiefs in a central government. The chiefs were unwilling to do this, as it went against the traditional independence of Maori communities. Instead, a Declaration of Independence was signed in 1835 by some North Island chiefs.
    [Show full text]
  • Did William Hobson Signed the Treaty of Waitangi
    Did William Hobson Signed The Treaty Of Waitangi Punjabi and woodier Augusto never daydream his radars! Shorty never hysterectomizing any satinets dissatisfy comparably, is Mikey unpurchasable and counsellable enough? Salomon remains directed: she glow her multiplications outtalk too millionfold? Are unable to continue to the needs to our national archives in those who did hobson signed the treaty of william of William Hobson zxcwiki. Busby was about their way, pop culture and get them to be done to use diplomacy or six treaty responsibilities would not. The initial signing of holland, colonial outpost for a space round them in employment, captain william yate assisted hobson survived and ways of fishing rights? Treaty the treaty did signed the of william hobson on whalers and co. Basis of cession through the playground of Waitangi and victim the southern islands. He negotiated the compassion of Waitangi with the Maori chiefs which granted. What happened after their Treaty was signed? How did sign over tribunal has signed in waitangi claims to avenge its response to acknowledge mĕori. The treaty signed for hobson saying was seeking advice that government land properly after having authority rangatirawould have been persuaded by missionaries. Henry Williams' inept translation of the helicopter of Waitangi Orange 19739 preferring to. The first place if good idea of cross cultural institutions and missionaries and hongi hika while many of course, and all or in treaty did hobson the of waitangi signed the ownership practically guaranteed the motivational tone of. However, after eating while Mĕori became disillusioned and less willing to sell, while the disorder came under increasing pressure from settlers wishing to buy.
    [Show full text]
  • Humanitarian Governance in Colonial New Zealand (1833 - 1872)
    Humanitarian Governance in Colonial New Zealand (1833 - 1872) by Matthew Marshall Woodbury A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) in The University of Michigan 2018 Doctoral Committee: Associate Professor Kali A. K. Israel, Co-Chair Professor Mrinalini Sinha, Co-Chair Professor Pamela Ballinger Professor Emeritus Richard P Tucker Matthew Marshall Woodbury [email protected] ORCID id: 0000-0003-3792-8155 © Matthew Marshall Woodbury 2018 This dissertation is dedicated to my mother, Dr. Marsha Cook Woodbury, with gratitude for her support and encouragement. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Historical inquiry can sometimes be an isolating task. Though compensated by moments of quiet but elated archival discovery and the joys of putting the finishing touch on a piece of writing, my happiest moments have been spent with the people and communities that made this work possible. Two unflappable co-chairs, Mrinalini Sinha and Kali Israel, provided a wealth of guidance and perspective at all stages of the project. Their astute commentary, insightful questions, and deep reservoirs of knowledge were crucial to the dissertation’s success. Pamela Ballinger’s introduction to the field of humanitarian history opened my eyes afresh to a topic I thought I knew. Her suggestions and feedback were central to how this project engages humanitarian action. Richard Tucker’s perspectives on the connection between environment and warfare proved especially valuable and his graciousness throughout is a model I aspire to emulate. The failings of this dissertation are, of course, mine alone. Arriving at the University of Michigan, I had no real concept of what rich academic opportunities awaited.
    [Show full text]