WAI-33 DOCUMENT #A 28

PRELIMINARY REPORT

ON THE POUAKANI CLAIM (WAI-33).

BY P T HARMAN

RESEARCH OFFICER

WAITANGI TRIBUNAL STAFF

May 1989 2

ABBREVIATIONS

, AJHR Appendices to Journals of the House of Representatives

DoSLI Department of Survey and Land Information

MA MLP Maori Affairs Maori Land Purchase papers held at National Archives, Wellington.

M.P. McLean Papers held at Manuscript Section Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington

NLC Native Land Court

NZH New Zealand Herald

NZPD New Zealand Parliamentary Debates

WT Waikato Times 3

CONTENTS

PAGE

1.The Claim 6

1.1 The Claimants 7

1.1.1 Tribal, Hapu Relationships 7

1.2 The Claim Area 7

1.3 History of the Claim 8

2.Historical Account 10

2.1 Introduction 10

2.2 The Arrival of Tia 14

2.3 The Spreading of Arawa 17

2.4 First European Contacts 18

3. After The Wars, the Aukati and the Rohe Potae 24

3.1 Rohe Potae 24

3.1.2 The Breakup of the King Country 24

3.2 The Doors of Welcome Open 28 3.2.1 The Governor Grey Efforts 30

3.2.2 Rewi Nanga Maniapoto 31

3.2.3 Tawhiao - The King 33

3.2.4 William Henry Grace 34

3.2.5 John Bryce 34 3.2.6 Ballance 4 1

4. The Land Court 43

4.1 The Native Land Laws 43

4.2 The Native Lands Act 1886 46

4.3 The Native Land Court 48 4

5. Economic Change 53 5.1 Vogel's Ten Year Plan 53

5.2 The Growth of the Railway 53 5.3 Big City Investment 54

6 The Native Land Court Process 57 6.1 Tauponuiatia West Boundary 57 6.1.1 Events Surrounding the Land Court 57 Hearing (Taupo).

6.2 Tauponuiatia - Pouakani Subdivisions 60

6.3 The Taupo Nui A Tia West 62 Royal Commission

6.4 The 1891-1892 Native Land Court 6 8

6.5 Subsequent Partitions 71

7. The Land Purchases 72

7.1 Policy 72

7.2 WH Grace as Land Purchase Officer 72

7.3 WH Grace as Land Purchase Agent 73

7.4 Bringing into the Native Land Court 78

7.4.1 Laurence M Grace 78

7.4.2 John Edward Grace 81

7.4.3 WH Grace 82

7.5 The Final Purchases 88

8.Surveys 89

8.1 Taking of Lands for Survey Costs 89

9.Forests 90

9.1 Introduction 91 9.2 Pakeha Industry 91 5

9.3 The Industry and Pouakani Block 93

10.Farming 96 11. Additional Issues 99 12. Conclusions. 100 "

Bibliography 103

Figure 1 - Reduced copy of plan 5995E - doc A 23(c) 106 6

1.THE CLAIM

On 27 March 1987 the Tribunal received a claim (doc A l(a)) from ',Mr John Hanita Paki on behalf the Titiraupenga and Pouakani Trusts, concerning lands North West of Lake Taupo and known as the Pouakani Block. An amended claim (doc Al (b)) was filed on 27 October 1987. An Addendum to this was received by the Registrar on Friday 28 April 1989 and directed by the presiding officer Pouakani Tribunal, Judge R Russell to be filed as doc A 1 (c) • The Claimants' primary complaint is that the placing of Torrens land transfer boundaries and title on the Pouakani lands was never done in a satisfactory manner. It is alleged that the original boundaries were never properly defined and that the subsequent internal partitions were and still are uncertain. As a result, they claim, substantial areas of land and forest have been lost to them as present Maori land owners of the B 9B and C IB blocks. The Claimants are also concerned with the way the Crown acquired title to other blocks of the claimant area, specifically Pouakani 1 and Pouakani C 3 blocks, approximately one quarter of the Pouakani Block. They ask for an investigation into the activities of the Government Land Purchase Officer (Mr William Henry Grace) whom they claim was involved with the Native Land Court's investigations and purchases of Pouakani lands which were to the detriment of their ancestors detriment. WH Grace's wife and brother-law were to appear on the title as the owners of the Weraroa block of Pouakani lands ( Pouakani B7). It is alleged that he may have used his office to benefit not the sellers, nor the Crown, but his own family interests. A third complaint concerns the taking of land for survey costs. They claim that Pouakani I, a 20,000 acre sub-division, was awarded to the Crown in 1887 for the cost of surveys which they claim is an action in breach of the Treaty, and were never properly completed. Fourthly they call for the Crown to account for its 7 management of their forestry resources on Pouakani C1B2, one of their two remaining blocks. The Addendum has as its' main concern the loss of original Pouakani block lands adjacent to the Waikato River which were taken by the Public Works Act 1928 or as a ,consequence, of the hydroelectric power schemes became flooded. These actions and various Statutes have failed to acknowledge the Claimants interests in the Waikato as the original landowners.

1.1 THE CLAIMANTS Mr J Hanita Paki and the beneficial owners of Titiraupenga and Pouakani B9 B Trusts claim descent from those named members of the haapuu, who were awarded Native Land Court title to the Pouakani Block in the 1886-1887 Native Land Court judgment and re-affirmed though subject to the modifications made by the Court in its final judgment of 1891. It is this relationship that makes them beneficiaries of these two section 438 Maori Affairs Act 1953 Trusts.

1.1.1 TRIBAL, HAPU INTER-RELATIONSHIPS There is a need to hear from the Claimants of their relationship to the hapu Waerangi, Moe, Korotuohu, Ha, Hinekahu, Hinerakau, and their relationship with the Arawa and Tuwharetoa iwi.

1.2 THE CLAIM AREA - the Land Te Pouakani was a kainga where intermittent cultivation and residence occurred and lies close to the junction of the waipapa and Waikato rivers (Fig.1). Pou-a-kani was the named site for one of the RohePotae (King Country) boundary posts laid out in 1883, to mark the agreed limits of Tawhiao's authority. Amongst the first Maori Land Court subdivisions of Tauponui-a-tia West lands were the Pouakani, Maraeroa and Tihoi Blocks. Thus at 1887, the Hora'aruhe kite Pou-a-kani Block [expanse of fern root on the way to Pouakani] was perceived by the Native Land Court as a 122,000 acre block bounded in the north and the east by the Waikato river, in the south by the 8 Tihoi Block and in the west by a tribal boundary line determined as between the tribes Maniapoto and Tuwharetoa. It is this last boundary that is in dispute. The waters of the Waikato are retarded to some extent by ',several power dams that cross the river which constitutes the north-eastern boundary. These hydroelectric schemes meant that some of the original Pouakani lands are now flooded or covered in a dam construction. The land, even today, appears as very broken. The valleys and plateaux that once contained stands of totara, matai, miro, fields of fern, fields of tussock type grass, are mostly covered in grass farmlands or exotic forests. The land is dominated by forests of radiata pine. Tokoroa, the urban centre, lies just to the north of Pouakani Block. It was purpose-built to serve the massive Kinleith timber mill. In the south-west corner of Pouakani stands the Pureora State Forest, one of the last podocarp forests in the central North Island. Subsequent internal partitions have meant that today two blocks Pouakani B9 A (containing in part the Pureora State Forest) and B9 B (owned by the Claimant Trust) are the actual boundaries in dispute, though their boundaries are to a large extent dependent on the correctness of the Tauponuiatia West Boundary and the peripheral boundary of the original Pouakani Block.

1.3 HISTORY OF THE CLAIM There is little on the public record of a continuous line of protest or petition since the Native Land Court Hearings completed their investigation 97 years ago, though the Treaty issues that this claim raises were matters of debate, discussion, and petition from Maori throughout New Zealand's history (see Appendix B, doc A 27). There was a petition in 1960 laid before the House, in which Wirihana Peti and 16 others requested to be included on the list of owners for Pouakani B9. 1 The first application, challenging the Maori Trustee's right

1 AJHR, 1960, 13, p4 9 to control Pouakani B9 B was made by Mr J H Paki in 18 March 1981 (MI28/80), at the Rotorua High Court, Mr Justice Crieg presiding. Case was adjourned sine die until 1983, where Mr Justice Prichard found in favour of the Maori Trustee. Recently the Claimants ,exercising their perceived ownership rights have been in "- conflict with the Crown, having entered the Pureora State Forest, felling and removing about 30 large rimu. They were subsequently prosecuted by the Department Of Conservation (DOC) in the High Court for trespass, with their $600,000 bulldozer held by DOC as a surety of non-repetition, pending judgment. The proceedings to date have resulted in a preservation order. The Claimants have also made two applications to the Maori Land Court pursuant to sections 452 and 30 (1)(a) &(I)(i) of the Maori Affairs Act 1953 (doc A 7) asking for the NLC orders of 1891 and 1899 pertaining to the Tauponuiatia West Boundary as it affects Pouakani, be re-examined and that the Pouakani B9 A and B9 B boundaries be re-examined, their boundaries clearly defined, and their ownership be investigated. There was an Interim Report (doc A 6(b» on those applications made by His Honour Mr Justice Hingston and copies of this proceedings have been entered on the Record. There has been no final determination as the matter has been adjourned pending this Tribunal's examination of this claim. There exist records of complaints and dealings with the two neighbouring blocks (Tihoi and Maraeroa C) and a compilation prepared by DoSLI offices in Hamilton is entered on the Record of Documents as doc A 29. The Maraeroa C Block material is relevant as it determines the positioning of the Taupo-nui-a-tia West Boundary. 10

2. Historical Accounts

2.1 INTRODUCTION , It would be difficult in this account to attempt a " complete statement of the economic, social, and cultural events that had occurred prior to the years 1885-1899. This was the period when the Pouakani lands were brought within the Native Land Court (NLC) system and often became Crown-owned. However drawing on the writings of various historians, cited in the bibliography, and in this preliminary report I have attempted to construct a picture of the historical events preceeding and during this period. This is to give some form of historical context to the passage of the Pouakani lands from Maori land to land whose title was Crown guaranteed after investigation by the Native Land Court. The passing of the Tauponui-a-tia lands through the Native Land Court in the 1880s followed two decades of intense debate amongst the tribes of the central North Island concerning their relationship with the Crown and with the Pakeha world. The extension of the European frontier into the area in the 1850s had led directly to war in the following decade. Maori demands to retain mana over their land came into direct conflict with the European determination to ensure further lands for settlement and to impose British law on Maori tribes. Prior to the fighting, there was established a confederation tribes known as the Kingitanga movement. Under Potatau Te Wherowhero's leadership many of the tribes of the central North Island joined in a common determination to resist the alienation of their lands. While the wars led to the confiscation of large areas of Taranaki and Waikato lands, contracting the boundary of this confederation, the Kingitanga survived. The King's territory was again firmly defined and the aukati (border) marked the division between King and Queen. The result was stalemate. The cost and difficulty of carrying the war further into the interior prevented the 11 Government from suppressing the Kingitanga. So the Aukati effectively kept the Crown and Pakeha settlers out of the region. And for Maori similar reasons prevented using their remaining warrior strength to overcome their enemy. In the 1870s tension '''remained high, some Europeans who strayed across the aukati lost their lives, and armed militia patrolled the "frontier" (Vennell;1967). The tribes were still faced with the difficulty of deciding how to deal with the European world, a problem now vastly complicated by the added grievance of confiscation. Although the wars had brought large areas of Maori land into European hands and placed them under the Crown's sovereignty, there still remained a large area of the country from which Crown and Europeans were excluded. Between the end of the Waikato war in 1864 and the middle of the 1880s there was no formal peace. Both the Crown and the tribes came under increasing pressure to resolve the issue. While the Kingi tanga had survived, many of its Waikato supporters had lost land on the Queen's side of the aukati. Tawhiao and his Waikato kinsmen had had most of their lands confiscated and were in virtual exile in Ngati Maniapoto territory. While Tawhiao tried to maintain the line against the Native Land Court [NLC] , many allied tribes were being drawn into court. Ngati Haua went first, and as they brought land close to the aukati into the Court, Ngati Maniapoto came to see their own territory threatened. Ngati Tama too were bringing land into the Court on Maniapoto's southern boundary. Under such pressure the Kingite's authority was being undermined. His overall objective of preserving unity, retaining the mana over the land and gaining redress for confiscation was being lost. Individual tribes saw the threat to their own particular tribal interest as having a higher priority as the Land Court edged its way closer to their lands. For the Crown the need to negotiate some settlement and so gain access to the King country also became more pressing. In the 1870s, under the inspiration of Sir Julius Vogel, the country 12 began a period of rapid industrial expansion based on overseas borrowing. Vogel promised assisted immigration, roads and railways. The wars of the 1860s and the South Island gold rushes had left the North Island in a state of economic stagnation. · ... Central to the Government's plans for long term North Island prosperity was a main truck railway line between Auckland and Wellington. The most suitable route could only pass through the central North Island, through the King's territory. While the Native Land Court eroded the unity of the Kingitanga, the Crown began a process of courting the tribes, attempting to open the King Country up through a soft policy of persuasion, negotiation, lease or purchase. In 1882 the King was persuaded to visit Auckland: he was feted and treated like a visiting head of state (doc A 27, Appendix D). In 1883 Te Kooti was pardoned while in exile in the King Country. However the breakdown in negotiations in 1878 showed that the wars and the confiscations had left the Crown and the Kingitanga too far apart for easy solutions, despite the desire of both to accommodate each other and notwithstanding the passage of 14 years since the battle of Orakau. The Crown wanted to open up the country and see colonial law prevail. In return, it was prepared to offer a degree of self government, some recognition for the King and the return of some of the land confiscated. For Tawhiao, return of most if not all of the confiscated lands, recognition of the Kingitanga and continued Maori control over the King's domains were the only grounds on which settlement could take place. Other chiefs, especially those whose lands were at risk simply because they were still in Maori hands, required some guarantee that land could be protected from the alienation that often followed land court investigations. Rewi Maniapoto demanded some modification in the land court's jurisdiction in the King Country. In return he was prepared to break the Kingite ranks and see Ngati Maniapoto lands opened up for the railway. The Government's response was 13 legislation to restore preemption. Tribes allied to the Kingitanga felt increasingly a need to clearly identify their own lands, if only to prevent them being awarded to strangers. They did not want to lose their lands but ',faced with a clear dilemma. As long as their title to their tribal lands remained customary, other tribes could take disputed lands to the court and gain Crown title unless that ownership was challenged in court by the aggrieved party. On the other hand it was plain to see that land passing through the Court was often being sold directly into European hands. The Land Court was achieving what the wars had failed to do. In December 1883 Rewi Maniapoto, Wahanui and Taonui signed an agreement to have their external RohePotae boundaries surveyed. Ann Parsonson comments that this was the beginning of the end. For Ngati Maniapoto and Waikato alike it was a tragic decision. Maniapoto had sought the help of the government only to confirm their authority over their lands. They had succeeded instead in taking the first step towards their eventual transference to the pakeha. 2

Negotiations over the opening up of the King Country had concentrated on Waikato and Maniapoto, and on Tawhiao, Rewi, Wahanui and Taonui in particular. Tuwharetoa were on the periphery, although the railway was also destined to pass through their southern lands. The decision to bring the Tauponui-a-tia lands before the court followed that of Maniapoto, Haua and Tama. If Tuwharetoa were similarly motivated as Maniapoto in bringing their lands before the Court, then they too were looking for clear title, not preparing for sale. Further attention needs to be focused on Horonuku's application on the 31st October 1885

2 'Te Mana 0 te Kingitanga Maori', A Study of Waikato­ Ngati Maniapoto Relations during the struggle for the King Country, 1878-84, MA Thesis, The University of Canterbury, 1972, p149. 14 to the Native Land Court. 2.2 THE ARRIVAL OF TIA There is a general consensus evident from writers such as Te Rangi Hiroa, L G Kelly, J Te H Grace that the migratory

'~aka, te Arawa and Tainui, that arrived in Aotearoa in the 14th Century found their turanga already peopled (doc A 27, Appendix C, pI). Accounts, recorded in such texts as "Tuwharetoa", by J

Te H Grace and "Tainui 11 by L G Kelly, tell of the journey of Ngati Ohomairangi from Ra' iatea, Tahiti to Maketu and Kawhia, and these reflect a closeness between the Tainui, Arawa tribal confederations and both writers genealogical data place this event as happening around 1325 AD. Sir A P Ngata noted that Tainui and Arawa were single hulls of what may have commenced as a double-hulled ocean-going waka. Approximately 120 of the fittest were selected to voyage the great distance to Aotearoa. Ngatoroirangi, [sometimes alternatively written as Ngataroi Rangi] most learned tohunga, was selected as the spiritual leader. The canoe captains and navigators, Tamatekapua, Rei, Tia, were men of considerable mana and individual prowess. The Arawa peoples were originally settled on what is now widely called the Tourist Diamond of New Zealand but to Maaori then was known as Te Rohe Arawa. It was in an expedition southwards through the Kaingaroa districts that Tia brought his people to the Claim area. A rivalry, engendered by adultery, on board the canoe journey from Tahiti determined that Ngatoroirangi and Tia were competing vigorously to find a land base on which to establish their respective followers. Accounts differ as to which of the two arrived in the Taupo region first but what is agreed is that there were already three powerful hapu in and surrounding Taupo moana. The eldest was Ngati Hotu, considered by many to be the original occupants of the land. J Te H Grace writes that were a fair-skinned and flaxen-haired people. Other hapu were Ngati Ruakopiri (also fair-skinned) and the third of only two generations preceeding Tia was Ngati Kurapoto. Tia's entry into the Pouakani Claim area is recorded 15 in the Minute Book evidence, written on the basis of the oral presentations heard at that first Tauponuiatia Hearing, and also recounted in J TeH Graces' "Tuwharetoa". Grace's view of the claimant area gives a vision of how '..pouakani lands may of appeared in, the eyes of Tia and his followers who following their arduous journey from Ra' atea, Tahiti and then trekking due south inland from Maketu, Rotorua, through to Taupo and eventually to Titiraupenga (200 kms) • Shortly after leaving Rotorua, Tia and his party came to a village, situated on the gentle slopes of the flat-topped mountain range extending from the Hautere-Mamaku plateau. From that village they viewed the extremely picturesque tableland with its perpendicular cliffs [Horohoro Bluff] towering above the forest, which sloped away to the open ground along the banks of Pokaitu stream. They noted, standing at the extreme southern end of the plateau, a tall pillar of basaltic rock which many generations later was named Hinemoa in honour of a beautiful maiden and heroine of Te Arawa people. 3 Tia's journey had taken him south from Rotorua and after journeying through what is now known as the Horohoro plateau lands he crossed the Waikato at a place now known as Atiamuri named because here he was still following in footsteps of others, and on to Taupo moana. An altercation with Ngatoroirangi caused Tia and his followers to leave the lake and trek north to the seemingly unpopulated region of Titiraupenga. Warfare prowess and intermarriage with Ngati Kapungapunga [Kahopungpunga] established after four generations the paramountcy of Tia' s hapu. Ngati Kapungapunga/ Kahopungapunga (doc A 10; p222), sometimes referred to as either, and translates as a description of porous

3 Grace, pS9 16 soi14. It is an apt description for people living on the pumice lands that exist throughout Pouakani (doc A 27, Appx. C, pI8). On finding Maunga Titiraupenga unoccupied Tia settled his hapu: kainga, and cultivations were constructed. Under Tia's

'~hieftainship, it was to become his hapu's permanent home. Here as one account has it his bones were laid to rest while his skull and that of his strong supporter Maaka were used to scare away birds from cultivations, and for this reason Maunga Titiraupenga retains significant reverence for the Arawa confederation. Ngatoroirangi had secured Maunga Tauhara by sacred rite and his hapu were eventually to spread throughout Tauponuiatia and through a series of events was to evolve the name Tuwharetoa. On arrival in the "Hora Aruhe ki te Pouakani" lands Tia, with his portion of the crew, found the regions close to the Waikato river densely populated. There were fern-root eaters in abundance, Ngati Kapuungapunga and Ngati Hotu. That it was so densely populated around the bends of the Waikato and the tributaries on this land is hardly surprising as it name transliterates to an "expanse of fern-root on the way to Pouakani", indicating the availability of one of the principal staple foods of Aotearoa from 9th-18th century. The Waikato river itself was a means of transport, though not continuously navigable above Kirikiriroa. Tracks through the dense forests were subject to weather. Here was also ngaherehere, stands of trees that yielded bird, here was a resource which provided medicine, clothing, weaponry, building materials and yet there was room, albeit further inland from the Waikato, to take in the newly arrived, especially as they added strength to the existing numbers.

4 H Williams, Dictionary of Maori Language, 7th Edition. 17 2.3 THE SPREADING OF THE ARAWA - Establishment of Tuwharetoa Rohe It was the fourth generation from Tia and Ngatoroirangi that saw the rise of a man called Manaia. Son of Mawaketaupo, Manaia grew up in Kawerau and was soon leading taua " (war and hunting parties) south into Kaingaroa, against the Tuhoe and down to Taupo Moana. Eventually he was to gain such a fearsome reputation that Ngati Hotu knew that their mana was threatened. A romance between Manaia (who during the first meetings chose to call himself Tuwharetoa) and a Ngati Hotu taiperuru wahine ariki avoided much bloodshed and Manaia on taking over paramount control adopted permanently the Rohe named Tuwharetoa. FOV Acheson writes in " the Plume of the Arawa" a romantic account of this episode which to a large extent he gathered from oral accounts made tp him during his time as a Maori Land Court judge. Four generations of marriage alliances commenced with the marriage of Te Rangiita, a Taupo warrior-chief, to Waitapu, a high-born chieftainess of Ngati Raukawa. This ensured that Tuwharetoa tribal mana extended throughout Tauponuiatia and up into the Maungatautari district. By the seventeenth century Ngati Tuwharetoa were the paramount tribe from Tongariro Maunga to Mohaka in the east, Hurakia Maunga in the west and Rotorua-Kawerau in the north. Some 138 hapu were named in the Minute Book of the 1886-1887 Sittings as being hapu who took their land right through their ancestral and familial allegiances, under the paramountcy maintained by Tuwharetoa direct descendants. The paramount chieftainship remained with Ngati Whanaurangi, who later assumed the name of Ngati Te Rangiita, for four generations. It was then passed over by Te Whatupounamu, the ariki of that period, to Herea of Ngati Turumakina, a sub-tribe which was coming into prominence. Herea was the first to take the name of Te Heu Heu Tukino. This was the beginning of a paramount whanau line which continues through to the present day. 18 It was Te Heu Heu Horonuku who decided to make application to the Native Land Court in 1885 to have Tuwharetoa lands delineated by that Court and have the tribal boundaries clearly defined as against Pakeha, and against other tribes, Kingite and '..Non-Kingite. This above description I have extrapolated from the texts mentioned and Minute Books. Much more detailed and insightful information is recorded in the Maori Land Court Minute Books of those first Native Land Court sittings (docs A 10 - A 19) and many of the incidents referred to above are related by various persons there in a more in depth manner.

2.4 FIRST EUROPEAN CONTACTS Ernst Dieffenbach relates his impression of the lands lying between Maunga Tautari and Lake Taupo. The Waikato river ... as in the middle part of its course ... , is yet rendered difficult by rapids, and the country through which it flows is bad above Maunga-Tautari, being composed of a pumiceous or tufaceous gravel. 5 Iwakau Te Heu Heu [later took the name Horonuku] is recorded as having signed the Treaty of Waitangi but on his return to Taupo his brother the paramount chief Mananui made him send the blankets back 6. Though European traders were allowed?, the first Pakeha to settle and maintain contact with Tuwharetoa were Thomas Samuel Grace, his wife Agnes, and their then three children. Their experiences are revealed in his letters and journals published in the text "A Pioneer Missionary Among the Maoris 1850-1879,,8. Of immediate interest was his meeting with Governor Grey 11th July 1850, two days after his arrival to New Zealand,

5Dieffenbach:1843,p334

60range,p76

?Orange, p126

8 Brittan, 1928 19 where in relating Bishop Selwyn's recommendation that he establish a mission station in the Taupo district TS Grace records that even then Grey envisaged Ita high road through the 9 country lt . " It was to be five years before the Taupo station was become a reality and the Graces were to spend the intervening period journeying from Auckland to Tauranga, Whakatane, and Turanga, and establishing a Church Missionary Society station at Turanga. Early in his years of contact Thomas reveals that he perceived land sales to be detrimental to Maori well-being. In his Report of the Turanga District for the 1852 Year he writes; The offers made by the Government land agents for the purchase of Native lands, are the throwing of the apple of discord amongst them. Feverish excitement, discontent and quarrelling are the natural results. In a year or two all parties become tired of debating and gladly hand over their possessions to the Land Agent. Against this state of things no aboriginal race on earth can long stand10

On the 14th April 1855, TS Grace and family were to arrive at the north end of Lake Taupo. During the course of a previous visit in 1853 Pukawa had been selected by Mananui Te Heu Heu and TS Grace as site for the station11 . This was only achieved after delicate reconciliation of the two great chiefs Te Heuheu and Te Herekiekie12. TS Grace was present during the formative years of the Kingitanga and in a letter dated 24 March 1858 to Mr Venn, Secretary Church Missionary Society [CMS], he discusses the 1856 hui that was held at Pukawa to discuss the need for a Maori King.

9Brittan, p2

10Brittan, p18

11 ibid, p33

12 ibid, p35 20 It is I feel a perceptive contemporary analysis of the Kingite movement at its formation. He writes I refused to be present; but sent them a printed copy of the Treaty of Waitangi in Maori, and used all my influence . . t 13 " to crus h t h elr proJec .... and in the same letter he writes The object of the Meeting held at Pukawa Novr. 1856 was as follows:- Some time before we came to Taupo a handsome "Pataka" ... had been burned. Sir George Grey when on his visit to Taupo saw said Pataka and told Te Heuheu (no doubt in a jocuse way) that it was a sign of his "rangatiratanga". Consequently when the store-house was burned, Te HeuHeu at once built a much larger and finer one, and, having done so called upon all the tribes far and near to collect food with which to fill the new and handsome "Pataka". Te HeuHeu's subjects responded liberally to his call, and, when the storehouse was filled, a great meeting was held for the purpose of eating the food so collected. The Waikato Maoris and other tribes considered it fine opportunity to discuss their project of making a King. Such was the origin of this great meeting. It is rather singular that, while I have been accused to the Governor as the author of the meeting, and consequently , I suppose, of promoting the Maori King movement, I am, on the other hand, somewhat notorious amongst the Maoris for opposing their King movement. I have not been able to discover anything hostile to British rule in the minds of the Maoris who desire a King, but rather that, by having a King, they will be imitating us. They also appear to think that through the medium of a King they may be able to check the present lawless state of things and to promote peace. The idea of anything like a

13 ibid, pp75-77 21 rebellion, so far as I have seen, does not seem to have entered their minds, and they are not able to understand why such a step should give offence to us. I believe that many of the Chiefs have a sincere desire , to promote peace, but alas! While we continue our present policy of urging and tempting them to sell their lands, there is little hope of peace. We are at the bottom of all their quarrelling and fighting! ...... In this movement for a King one thing is most evident namely this that the Maoris feel the absolute need of protection! The constitution which has been given to the country, has placed the Maoris in a far worse position than they were, seeing they have no share in any way in the representation. Here in New Zealand we have about four-fifths of the population, British subjects and lords of the soil, and paying the greatest portion of the revenue, cut off from all share in the representation of the Country , either in person, or by proxy. Surely this is a strange state of things to exist. If a separate house were formed for Maori representatives, there can be little doubt but that, ... , the Maori Chiefs would be found quite able to take their full share in the representation. If we deny to them the right of British subjects, and thereby ourselves break the Treaty of Waitangi, we should not be astonished if they seek protection from themselves! " . 14

TS Grace and family remained in residence during the first years of the wars and he saw the primary cause of war as the

14see footnote 13 22 constant coercion upon Maori to sell their lands 15 and that strict adherence to the Treaty of Waitangi would have avoided bloodshed16 . The Tuwharetoa were in a state of armed neutrality throughout the wars and after the wars he writes , So far as I am able to judge the King party has gained strength. The Taranaki war has done all that was required to make this movement formidable. 1?

In his Report for the Year 1862 he records the death of Mananui Te Heuheu in October. He writes He was the sole remaining chief of the old school .... He was anxious to avoid war, but considered, if the Waikato were attacked by us he would be compelled to help them ... ,,18

In 1863 he followed the advice of Te Heuheu Iwakau to abandon the mission station and thereafter using Auckland and Tauranga as bases he was to make regular return visits to Taupo. All in all he could claim to be the only European to have maintained continuous contact with Tuwharetoa throughout this bitter period of race relations. On these three month duration treks he would take one or two of his sons. His journals and letters for this period reflect his concern that war had forever and irreparably changed for the worse their mode of life19 . Yet he persisted with his visits and was present at several Kingite hui meeting Rewi Maniapoto and Hauhau leaders2o. He was working always for a peaceful settlement and in his last annual report

15Brittan, p91

16Brittan, p94

1? same as footnote 16

18Brittan, ppl08-109

19Brittan, p250

20Bri ttan, pp264, 265,267 23 1878, he writes I feel, however, most anxious to attend the peace-making meeting, and, in the event of my not being able to do so, I hope to secure the services of my son in Nelson. His eldest brother, who is now the resident Government Officer " amongst the Kingites, will be there, and, as I have learned through him that we stand remarkably well with the Kingi tes, I pray God that we may be able to turn their opinion of us to good account for their spiritual' benefit .... 21

On the 30th April, 1879 Thomas Samuel Grace died and so ended an era of a Pakeha-Maori relationship.

21Brittan, p307 24 3.AFTER THE WARS - The Aukati & the Rohe Potae

3.1 ROHE POTAE The "Horaaruhe Pouakani land block", a phrase coined by Judges ',Brookfield and Scannell to fit into 1880s Native Land Court terminology, originally comprised some 122,300 acres and was itself part of an area known in 1886 as the Tauponuiatia West block (see Figure 1). That large block was itself part of Tuwharetoa's vast 3.5 million acre Taupo nui a Tia tribal domain. Since 1857 that domain was the Eastern side of a loose federation of five tribal groupings, (Ngati Raukawa, Ngati Hikairoa, Ngati Maniapoto, Waikato, Ngati Tuwharetoa); this region was as the Rohe Potae: the King Country. The first king, Potatau Te Whero, had very little real power to govern. Authority lay with each tribe's runanga with external affairs conducted by a Runanga ~ Ngaruwahia where any powerful chief could have a i voice22 and though this council had little force to back up its governance the King was a very strong focus for the growth of Maori nationality23. McLean, the then Native Secretary, wrote in 1860 that "the whole combination may gradually be broken up by prudent and discreet management ,,24 but Grey chose to invade Waikato,this meant war. The capture of Orakau Pa in April, 1864 and Wiremu Tamihana' s formal surrender in May, 1865 signalled the end to the wars but no formal terms of peace were drawn up. The Rohe Potae had shrunk in area but the isolation it maintained was to take 15 years for the Crown to break through.

3.1.2 THE BREAKUP OF THE KING COUNTRY The passing of the Taupo nui a Tia lands through the Land Court was a direct consequence of the eventual breakdown of the King

22Gorst, p2 7 3

23Gorst, p2 7 9

24AJHR , 1860, F.3, p126 25 Movement. Though a state of peace existed between the "Kingite" tribes and the colonists ,there remained after the 1860-65 wars a legacy of smouldering hatred, bitterness and suspicion. This ',was fuelled for Tainui tribes by the confiscation of much of Waikato 's fertile lands and by the land purchase policy expressed by Gore Browne in a speech given at Waitara on the 12 March 1859 where he said He would not permit anyone to interfere in the sale of land unless he owned part of it, and, on the other hand he would buy no man's land without his consent. 25

Ms W Robinson (The pacification of the Waikato) has discussed the impact of Donald McLean [Te Makarini], who as Native Minister from 1869-1876 created as a main pillar of Crown Native policy, a policy that enabled the appeasement of the Kingite tribes, from which Vogel's public works schemes could proceed. McLean, since the 1840s when he had been appointed Land Purchase Officer and since his appointment as Native Secretary in 1856-61, had acquired such a personal relationship with many of the Maori leaders. According to Rusden he was prone to assuming that none but himself could deal wisely with the Maori question 26. McLean's view of the means of amalgamating the Maori into the European way of life is epitomised in the following statement of his: Fundamental changes in the social organisation of any community, to be effected safely, must be introduced gradually. 27

25Gardener and McIntyre, p136

26 see Rusden, Vol II, pp41-50

27 AJHR, 1860, F.-3, p84 26 In 1869 as Native Minister he was in a position to effect his version of indirect rule, that is, using existing tribal institutions to civilise Maori. With this in mind he advocated an educational system that placed in each kainga a school and a ',teacher which would give ... the whole of the rising generation an opportunity to acquire habits of order and cleanliness and a knowledge of the English language without removing then far from their homes. 28 He was instrumental in the passage of the 1867 Maori Representation Act which saw the creation four Maori seats in Parliament. McLean stated that it was policy of government to employ Maori in public works construction in their regions and this meant of course that the chief became involved in routing decisions and that all the workers attained "industrial" skills29 . McLeans Papers [M. P. ], currently held at the Alexander Turnbull Library, reflect the very personal nature of his office. As Native Minister he was in regular correspondence with such personages as Rewi; he understood, that to Maori personal government was a real and understandable form of governance, abstract law-making was not. McLean recognised that with the withdrawal of Imperial troops in 1869 a change of tactics was needed to avoid repetitions of armed conflict. A policy of patience and respect for the Kingite's desire to be left alone was instituted by McLean~. This, coupled with the occasional gifts of ploughs, seed and horses was to have a desired effect in the long term of laying a foundation for the Kingite tribes which would break their federation and have them enter the Native Land Court process.

28McLeans Papers; 2/2/40, Letter to Mr Whitford in McLeans'writing, unsigned; cited in Robinson:pp27-28

29NZPD Vol.XII, p639, 23/8/1872

30M. P . 2/2/30, Memo laid before Cabinet by McLean, 16th Sept, 1870; cited in Robinson: p47 27 At first the Waikato chiefs forbade the presence of anything European in their district. This hatred was reinforced by the

Hauhau religious movement which TS Grace described: " Hauhauism is clearly an attempt, under the bitterest feelings occasioned by the war, to adapt Christianity to their changed circumstances, and to have their worship apart

from us. 31 It was hoped that the drive to prosper from trade with European settlement and acquire goods would slowly break down the barriers. McLean's policy of non-interference was demonstrated in three separate incidents. First his handling of Te Kooti who in July 1869 appeared in Te Kuiti32 possibly to forge an alliance with Tawhiao. At a hui that month such a proposal was put to the 33 Kingite tribes • A large quantity of munitions were found on four Maori34 who had bought them at Auckland. Waikato settlers feared an attack. Te Kooti with Te Heu Heu Iwakau, and Rewi set off for Taupo and McLean was forced, as Defence Minister, to order a force of colonists and friendlies to Taupo. On the 3 October Te Kooti and his Hauhau followers were defeated with 37 men killed (10-12 Tuwharetoa). Rewi and Te Heu Heu realised that Te Kooti's power was fallible. McLean received his first invitation to personally visit and on November 9th he met with Rewi, Manuhiri and other Waikato and Maniapoto chiefs at a kainga called Pahiko near Te Kuiti. The second incident, which tested McLean's Kingite policy, was the murder of Todd, a government surveyor, on November 29th

31 Bri ttan, p256

32 NZH , 27th July, 1869

33NZH , 2 August 1869, also, M.P., Typescript Vol.XXXI, Letter from Samuel Morgan to Dr Pollen, 2nd August, 1869; cited in Robinson, p53

34NZH , 28th July, 1869 28 187035 perhaps on orders from Tawhiao. The settlers called for war , McLean called formally for Tawhiao to hand over the 36 culpri t • While criticised for his weak response McLean did increase the constabulary in the Waikato to two hundred. In March \.1871 McLean was touring Waikato again and declined to visit Tawhiao. He did meet with Rewi and so hoped that ...... detaching one by one the various props of the King party, so as to leave it in an isolated and feeble

condi tion ... 37

3.2 THE DOORS OF WELCOME OPEN Many Kingi te chiefs began to feel that isolation behind the aukati meant no roads, telegraphs and therefore no trade. Communications were, when compared with other tribes, disparate. Manuhiri reopened his correspondence with McLean and he was invited by Rewi to meet with Tawhiao and Manuhiri. When McLean arrived in Alexandra he found the meeting postponed, but a later meeting on 13 June 1872 did occur at which McLean pointed out to the assembled chiefs (Tawhiao, Rewi absent) that if any tribe wished to be employed in constructing roads the Government would employ them and that the King party should not interfere in the affairs of other tribes~. That the people wished to trade is evident in the report of W Mair to the House in 1872 where he notes ... an increasing desire to cultivate for market and ... several hundred bushels of maize with numbers of pigs and some cattle were brought from the immediate vicinity of Te

35NZH , 29 NOv, 1870

36NZH , 31st Dec, 1870

37M. P ., 2/2/30 Confidential Memo. by McLean for the Premier and Ministers, 11th March, 1871; cited Robinson, p72

38M. P., 2/2/30, Memo. of Meeting by W Mair 29 Kuiti, and offered for sale in the various European settlements. 39 The Waikato Times reported that some Kingites were even working on railway construction at Mercer40 . Then on 24th April Mr -,Sullivan, another surveyor, was found dead on the Pukekura block near Cambridge. It was the result of an intra-hapu Ngati Haua dispute but the settlers wanted war. However Vogel's schemes meant that peace was the only affordable path. J Mackay was sent to get the murderer. Again Tawhiao and Manuhiri refused to give up the person concerned saying it was no murder but a killing caused by defiance of the King's law of not to sell or lease land to European41 . McLean did no more and did not visit the Maori King again until February 1875. This was the third incident in which the validity of McLean's non-interference policy was to be verified by the subsequent peaceful negotiations that were able to be held. The meeting took place on 3 February 1875 at Waitomo, Rewi and Manuhiri were absent. Tawhiao was consistent in his requests for the return of confiscated lands. McLean was equally consistent in denying this. Certain portions of Waipa and Waikato lands could be returned as well as a house at Kawhia (doc A 27, Appdx. B, pi). It was an important meeting as it was the first "friendly" negotiations. McLean had already acquired lands in the Waipa and Waikato district for the Kingites42 and it seems he fel t that his policy had a realistic and practical, acknowledging Tawhiao's real power, tribal power and the circumstances of the colonial development around him. He was to lose office in 1876 with the return of Sir George Grey as Governor. By the late 1870s some of the emotions caused by the Wars

39AJHR , 1872, Vol II, F No.3, p8

4DwT, 14th Sept, 1872

41 AJHR , 1873, Vol 3, G. -1, p22

42NZPD Vol. XIX, p530 30 had receded in the minds of tribal leaders, especially those whose tribe still retained most of their land. There was, with the passage of time, a weakening of the bonds of alliance that had held the Kingite confederation together.

3 . 2 . 1 THE ~VER:}too. c;R.EY) EFFORTS 0 ,: Amongst the first official steps taken by Governor Grey towards negotiation was a visit, in May 1878, to Tawhiao at Hikurangi. He went on to meet Rewi Manga Maniapoto privately for an hour and a half at a settler's house (Ross) near the Punui (doc A 27, Appendix D, ppl-7). This demonstrates the quandary that Maori and Crown alike found themselves in. That was how does a capitalist, national sovereign entity talk to a communal, diverse entity ? Since the 1850s Maori had been searching for a method of responding to the growing settler population and its attendant baggage, ie demand for more land for settlement, different ways of life, the new law. The King movement, Kingitanga, was at its most basic a model of English power structure constructed so that dialogue and process could be had. Tribal sovereignty could not deal with national sovereignty in addition to the challenges of learning the ways of a new individualistic culture. To the Crown, in the 1870s, there was the issue of whether to deal with tribes and or the King. For further information regarding Kingitanga see doc A 27, Appendix C, page 44. Earlier attempts made to meet had been rejected because Waikato were furious at having had their lands invaded, confiscated and further humiliated. At the 1878 hui Tawhiao had asserted his mana over all the Kingite lands. Grey offered the following terms in descending priority; firstly-to recognise Tawhiao' s supreme authority "within your district". secondly-Tawhiao alone would have the power to authorise 31 surveys, roads, and land transactions: this power the Government would recognise. thirdly- the King would receive LSOO a year towards the expenses of his government.

'~ fourthly - 500 acres of land at Ngaruwahia fifthly - the Government would build him a meeting house at Kawhia. sixthly - he would return all land on the western banks of the Waikato and Waipa rivers which remained unsold to Europeans. seventhly - in every Waikato township reserves would be set aside to be held on trust for Tawhiao's people.

The King's terms were cession. He demanded a vast tract, one which extended from the Mangatawhiri, his old boundary, down to Taupo and thence west to Mokau. This was to be his land, under his sole authority. He said the following words ... this is the day on which we shall settle .... I want to finish today ... 43(see also doc A 27, Appendix D, p2)

3.2.2 REWI MANGA MANIAPOTO In June, 1878, Grey met with Rewi and 200 followers who had journeyed and convened a hui a Waitara. Only Wiremu Kingi was absent here and it was related in the Waikato Times, 27 June 1878, (doc A 27, Appendix D, p18) that this was because he was sickened by the anglicisation of Waitara. Rewi laid down the kawa and kaupapa. To Rewi the troubles had started at Waitara it was natural to his people that any public attempt to reconcile should be made there. His demand was for the Government to give him Waitara. Ka hiahia au ka homai koe te Waitara Grey's reply: waitara is now given up to both of us. It belongs to us

43 AJHR, 1878, G.-3 r p20 32 two Rewi later revealed the intent of his words as being Give me back the evil, that we (Grey, Sheehan, and I) might plant the tree of peace upon it for both races. 44 There was no accord and Rewi opted to remain at Waitara for a year. Pressure from his own tribe and censure from the other Kingite tribes lead to Rewi's return to Rohe Maniapoto. To Maniapoto people, Rewi needed to consult with his people before any dealings with Grey and his Minister of Native Affairs Sheehan could occur. Taonui, who had been at Waitara with Rewi, supported Rewi and as a chief who controlled vast tracts of Maniapoto lands was an ally in Rewi' s strategy. Maniapoto people were alarmed and this was amply displayed when Sheehan tried in January 1879 to attend a large Kingite gathering. He was 45 forbidden to cross the border • An account of that hui was given in the Waikato Times, 9th January 1879. What was notable was Rewi 's organising of an alternate hui at Punui. Rewi' s discussion at that hui centred on the theme that any inter-tribal boundary disputes raised by Raukawa should be settled as regards Maniapoto by him their chief. On the 11 January 1879 the Waikato Times again reports Rewi as saying Let your acquaintance with me be straight forward, and mine will be the same with you. The content of his whaikorero was that he laid claim to authority, and possession of all those lands which he had originally handed over to the King. From Aotea to Pirongia it extended past Alexandra to Te Awamutu, then to Maungatautari, south to Taupo and West to White Cliffs. Within these boundaries, Rewi announced, he would make all the laws for Maori

44Extracted from letter Rewi/Taranaki Herald, published 11 August 1878

45WG Mair/Laura, 27 January 1879, Mair Family Papers 5, see also WG Mair Dairy, 9th January 1879 33 and Europeans alike. This was a clear rejection of Tawhiao's claim. It is evident that Rewi was wishing to end isolation, to allow European progress to occur. His aim in re-asserting his mana appears to be to allow "the RohePotae to be broken apart by the railway, thus supporting his way. Thus it is by March 1879 he is reported as saying ... if the surveyors should decided to run the line or lines over their gardens, or even through their houses, [they were] not to object .... because there was no treasure so valuable to great landowners of the island as railways. (WT, 13 March, 1879; doc A 27, Appx. D, p41) His tribal policy was naturally to secure his people's future by careful use of their resources. He had seen only too often the plight of tribes who had sold their lands. Manaiapoto would increase its wealth through a leasing, alienation, and/or a gifting of land for railways but would allow no other land sales to Pakeha.

3.2.3 TAWHIAO - THE KING Such then were Rewi's manoeverings Tawhiao can be see as following a different path. He had both his tribal and Kingite mana to maintain and develop. His preparations to deal with the Crown colonist government began in October 1878 but no meeting appeared possible until March 1879. Then Tawhiao proposed to convene a Grand Parliament46 where before all tribes he would reaffirm his sovereignty over the whole of the island. Grey and Sheehan never to received an invitation and though journeying from Auckland to Alexandra Grey received a definite rebuff in the form of a telegram signed by the King saying; If you are coming to me, I have not asked you, for I have finished with you at Hikurangi. There is nothing

4~T, 29 March and 5 April 1879 34 for you to do here47 Grey's greatest mistake had been in the building of the Raglan road which ran through the land promised to Tawhiao by Grey at that first Hikurangi meeting. , 3.2.4 WILLIAM HENRY GRACE - first appearance Interestingly Sheehan's new appointment as Native Land Agent arrived as these events were occurring and thus was snubbed. He was William Henry Grace and he was to become an integral figure in the later events that brought the Tuwharetoa lands before the Native Land Court system. Sheehan lost office in 1879 and until 1882 there was little official contact. WH Grace lost his appointment with Sheehan's removal. In 1880 he went into practice at Cambridge as a licensed interpreter and native land purchase agent (WT 1 April, 1880; doc A 27, Appendix D, p82).

3.2.5 JOHN BRYCE, HOANI PARAIHE On the Crown's behalf the conduct of negotiations for the surveying and construction of the Main Trunk line through the King country was primarily the responsibility of John Bryce who held office as Minister of Native Affairs from October 1879 until January 1881 and again from October 1881 till August 1884. In May 1879 after his first visit with Tawhiao at Hikurangi, Bryce had met with Rewi Manga Maniapoto in private meeting. There had been a lengthy conference between Kingite tribal representatives and Sir George Grey, Bryce, and Sheehan but negotiations as to the opening up of the King Country for roading, railway and settlement were a failure48 . When Bryce became Minister he initiated what he termed a policy of firm but friendly handling designed to win co-operation.

47Tawhiao/Grey, 1 May, AJHR, 1879, Session I, G.-2, p3

4~ZH, 1-14 May 1879 35 In 1882, Bryce the new Minister of Native Affairs, arrived in Auckland. Rewi at once invited him to Kihikihi, gave a dinner for him and discussed these new developments. For whatever reason Rewi announced before the evening had finished ',that he was prepared to see his tribal lands go through the 49 Native Land Court • A month later, after receiving Hitiri's description of the boundaries of the Tatua Block, Rewi asked William Grace to 50 fill in the application for a Court • The following week he wrote to the Chief Surveyor asking for a man to begin at once and, at the same time , he and Hitiri applied for a Court to be 51 held at Kihikihi for five blocks of land, including Tatua • On 28th March 1882 the notification of the Mokau Block Native Land Court application was promulgated. The opening up of lands to the Native Land Court process had begun (doc A 27, Appendix D, p67). Tawhiao's hui with Bryce in May that year was to a large extent undermined, as the Maniapoto had by formal agreement of Raukawa, Whanganui, and Tuwharetoa tribes determined that a boundary should be drawn around their total lands and that it be called "Rohe Potae". Thus the separation from the Waikato lands was made and Tawhiao's policy of non-cooperation was departed from. At this gathering held at Whatiwhatihoe in May 1882 that he would provide that Tawhiao should have the lands between Whatiwhatihoe and the Wairaka stream (see Reports of AJHR, 1882, G-4A, p11; doc A 27 Appendix B, p19). His refusal to acknowledge the Kingite power as paramount when in conflict with his tribal sovereignty and his insistence on it being of a ceremonial nature only all showed that Rewi was executing his plans. Within a week of that hui Rewi was writing to Mokau men

49NZH 23 Feb 1882

50WH Grace, Dairy, 20th March 1882

51 WH Grace/ Percy-Smith, 27 March 1882, WH Grace Letterbook, 1882, p219, and WH Grace, Dairy, 27 & 28 March 1882 36 instructing them all to attend the Court and to contest Ngati 52 Tama to the bitter end • By June 22 1882 the first Ngati Maniapoto lands were through the Court (doc A 27, Appendix D, p67) , the blocks being Mohau-Mohakatino, and Mohakatino-Paranihi. , On the 27th October 1882 Bryce journeyed to Alexandra. Tawhiao and a small group of chiefs were there to greet him. Tawhiao presented his proposals on the 30th October. He would not eject Europeans from his territory. They could stay but they would from now on be under his authority. All the townships as far as Mangatawhiri, Alexandra, Te Awamutu, Kihikihi, Ngaruwahia were his. In the Herald report of this meeting Tawhiao is recorded as saying; ... 1 ask you to leave me the administration of my own

land, and also the control of my own people ... 53 Bryce turned him down. In his speech Bryce urged the Kingites not to sell their lands. He promised that Government would return the bulk of confiscated lands west of Waipa and Waikato rivers. They would give a section of land at Kawhia to him and would press Maniapoto to give up a piece of their land and would make Tawhiao an assessor of the Native Land Court. Bryce's proposals were a measure of his incomprehension of Kingitanga. To Kingite followers Bryce's proposals were irrelevant. For two days the proposals were talked over. On November 4th Bryce received his reply, No. At the close of this historic meeting Bryce turned to Tawhiao and said Is there ... any further reply? The King lying on a mat at his feet , bowed his head, said Wahanui has taken it out of my hands and it now rests

52WH Grace/ [IC] Tole, 25th May 1882, WH Grace Letterbook 1882, p265, and WH Grace, Diary, 25th May 1882

53NZH , 31 October 1882 37 with him54 Ann Parsonson writes that these words were aimed not at Bryce but Wahanui by way of an oblique admission that he Tawhiao had not been able to conclude the sort of agreement that the

'~gati Maniapoto had wanted. Maniapoto had agreed at a concurrent hui to support Tawhiao as King and Wahanui had pleaded with Bryce to recognise Tawhiao's authority (doc A 27, Appendix D, p75). Tawhiao had failed to recover the Waikato for himself and his people, he had failed also to gain Government recognition of King mana over all lands within the aukati. Any resistance to European invasion and control was therefore only going to come from Maniapoto. The main trunk railway extension to Te Awamutu, 2 1/2 miles from the aukati line, had been opened since 1 July 1880, but there it had stopped. Settlers in Auckland were impatient at the Government's failure to continue the railway. Anxiety was growing as the debt incurred by Vogel and the high level of personal debt was hardly likely to be serviced as long as a unified railway remained a fiction. A unified railway would make Auckland the focal port for export and import especially as the invention of refrigeration offered huge profit. The colonial economy was in the North Island to this extent integrally tied up with completion of the main trunk line. WH Grace was thus moved to write to a "developer/entrepeneur", Mr J Jones that Bryce knows that if he does not manage to do something more than he has already done that ... his Govt. is bound to go out. 55 A major petition of Maniapoto, Tuwharetoa, Raukawa, and Wanganui tribes was laid before the House (26 June AJHR, 1883, J-1; doc A 27, Appendix B, p33) asking that their lands be

54NZH , 6 November 1882

55WH Grace/ J Jones, 19th February 1883, WH Grace Letterbook, p398 38 dealt with as regards ascertaining title other than through the Native Land Court process. The petition from Maniapoto signed by Wahanui, Taonui, Rewi was placed before the House. The prayer of the petition was for changes in the law with reference to the ',ascertainment of title to the land, the surveys, and the disposal of it56 . There was disagreement to Wahanui's plan from Raukawa and in October 1883 Wahanui is reported in the Waikato Times at 2 October as proposing a new petition connected with the surveying of land. Several hui were held at Kihikihi and on the 30th of November Bryce returned to Kihikihi where the Maniapoto chiefs were assembled to meet him. If they refused to cooperate Native Land Court hearings would be held in response to demands of other interested tribes and that would force Rewi and Tawhiao to actS7 . Resolutions were drafted up and agreed to. Firstly a survey of Rohe Potae was to be made of the five tribes' rohe. Secondly the survey was allowed to be carried out by the Government surveyors, the title to be investigated and the Crown Grant to be awarded to the owners. Thirdly all minor subdivision surveys within the block were to be halted and the trig survey to be conducted in such manner as not to affect title to the land. Fourthly that there was to be only one application for investigation of title to the land to be made. On the 1st December 1883 , Rewi, Wahanui and Taonui signed the application for the survey of their external boundaries. This was effective confirmation of tribal mana and the demise of Kingitanga as a physical cohesive body. The boundary was made public and parties were sent to stake carved posts at intervals along the boundary so that all would know. The reasons for this action seems to be that the tribes were aware of the effect of the Native land Court process

5~T, 19 June 1883, NZH 25 June 1883

57WT , 1 December 1883 39 on other tribes' lands. They wanted greater control over the manner in which settlement was to occur. Special legislation was requested and the Native Land Alienation Restriction Act, 1884 was Parliament's response (doc A 27, Appendix B, pl07). That '"Act prohibited dealings by Europeans in the King Country to prevent complications until the lands necessary for the northern Main Trunk line were acquired. This Act may be seen as a resumption by the Crown of its Article 2 preemptive Treaty right. This partial allowance of the European land process may be viewed as the cumulative result of a number of major pressures. First, and perhaps the most stressing were the Ngati Haua and Ngati Tama Native Land Court applications for the Maungatautari Blocks (1882) and Mokau-Mohakatino Blocks (1883) respectively. Secondly, Vogel's Main Trunk Railway construction, begun in 1876 was to be the major public work undertaken by New Zealand government until its completion in 1908. Vogel had borrowed twenty million pounds and if the economy was going to service and payoff debt, and yield profit, then a main trunk was required between the two commercial and urban centres. By 1878 the North Island had 1,053 miles of track laid, by 1885 1,497. The tracklines because of provincial lobbying consisted of several separate limbs. The immovability of the Aukati spelled potential economic ruination. It was evident then that Maniapoto were commencing to bring their isolation to an end. At a hui in Kawhia in late October 1884 Hone Te One declared himself in favour of opening up the country by road, railway and telegraph. Rewi and Bryce met at Te Awamutu a week later and Rewi assured Bryce that he favoured the construction of a railway from Te Awamutu to Wellington via Taupo. Bryce went on to a large gathering of all the Ngati Maniapoto chiefs and representative men, at Kihikihi. There, as was stated earlier, unanimous agreement was given to placing their lands before the Native Land Court. Resolutions were passed at a later meeting. According to Bryce's own report 40

58 to the House and contemporary newspaper articles , Bryce advised the tribes at those meetings to have their land titles investigated and their tribal boundaries defined by the Native Land Court (doc A 5 (i), p41). He so advised because some ',representatives had intimated to him that they felt the petition to Parliament was sufficient application to the Crown. Bryce advised that such a formal application be forwarded signed by Wahanui, Rewi, Taonui, Wharo, and Hopa Te Rangianini. Bryce had. carried into effect government strategy initiated by McLean in the years 1869-1876 and he was achieving that with local Maori co-operation. The Government would provide monies for surveys and the law would stop the land being brought up independently for Native Land Court adjudication. His policy and practice had gained the cooperation of four of the five Kingite tribes. This cooperation was aided by the governments passing of a Temperance Proclamation which forbad the sale of liquor in the King Country. This measure was one to which both cultures could appreciate but was later to cause controversy. The argument was raised that the liquor prohibition was part and parcel of a wider agreement between Crown and Kingite tribes as regards the lands (doc A 30). The 1884 colonial Government in 1884 was optimistic. In January Rewi had personally written to Bryce urging speedy construction of the railway. The Governor in his address opening of the House statedi- Explorations for railway purposes, and surveys for ascertainment of title, over large areas of the North Island hitherto but little known to Europeans, have been carried on with such slight interruption as to show that the isolation until lately maintained by some of the tribes no longer exists or is desired by them59

58NZH , 1 December 1883

59NZPD , Vol. 47, 5 June 1884, p2 41

In a later speech (12 June 1884) Mr Bryce could confidently assert;- Now surveys are going on throughout that country [Waikato] for the purpose of ascertaining the title to the land; trig stations are being erected everywhere, very slight interruptions unworthy of notice ; explorations are going on for the opening up of the country by roads and railways; as the House may decide: and I do think that such a state of affairs may without exaggeration, be said to be favourably compared with the state of affairs there five years ago 60 See also documents A 21 and A 22. Mr Bryce and his government lost office in August 1884 . 3.2.6 BALLANCE The Main Trunk scheme was reviewed during parliamentary debate on a motion of no confidence. Atkinson indicated to the House, that while Bryce may have felt that Maori had no room to believe other than that land was to be surveyed and brought with agreement by 1885 there was an impression in local Maaori mind that various benefits such as exemption from rates would occur also. Negotiations in late 1884 were carried out by the new Minister of Native Affairs, Mr Ballance, and in response to an inquiry made to his department as to whether compensation would be paid then or later for the land he replied that the Government intended paying for the land required for the railway, but the payment could not be made until the question of title had been ascertained61 . Leaving the aside the controversy as to the existence or not of any package deal the strategy of the Government as regards tribal lands in the King Country is clear: Government wanted the lands brought under the

60NZPD , Vol. 47, p125

61Maori Affairs Special File 61, Te KurukaangajBallance, 10 February 1885 42 Land Court process. Ballance went to meet Maniapoto at Kihikihi on Feb 4 & 5th , 1885 where the concerns and resolutions expressed to Bryce in November 1883 were rehashed again: 1) an external boundary was to be surveyed 2) leave us [kingite tribes] to sanction the making of the railway line. 3) that gold should not be worked by Europeans without our authority. 4) with regard to giving power to the Maori Committees to conduct matters for the Maori people. 5) that no liquor licenses should be granted within certain boundaries. 6) that the Native Land Court should not try any of our lands without our first sanctioning it, and that the Europeans should refrain from interfering with the Maori lands, but leave the Natives to manage them 62 themselves • Various concerns about the on-going consultation as to proposed route and rating, and the price to be paid for railway land acquired, were expressed. But Ballance's explaination that lands would not be rated until they were sold, leased or in actual cultivation and further that Government would pay a fair price (to be fixed by arbitration), satisfied those concerns. The only obstacle was, as Rewi put it, amongst the tribes 63 themselves •

62AHJR, 1 8 85, Vol II, G.-I, p14

63 AHJR, 1885, Vol II, G.-I, p24 43 4. THE LAND COURT 4.1 NATIVE LAND LAWS A Maori Land Court Judge, Smith N writes in his text "Native Custom Affecting Land" that the attitude of Maori to the ',concept of alienation of land was, in an opinion related to the time period 1862-1890, that: The Maori knew nothing of title held in severalty. On the contrary his rights of occupancy were vested in him subject to the paramount rights of the tribe to whom all lands occuppied by its members belonged. Lands owned by Maoris were held by them tribally and communally, subject to the customs and usages which prevailed amongst them before the advent of the pakeha. 64

4.1. 2 The wars begun in Waitara showed that by 1860 settler land hunger and colonial government were now in a position of strength to attack the tribal Maori. The rapidly increasing European population arising from such events as the discovery of gold in Gabriels Gully, Lawrence brought thousands of men scrambling in from the California spent fields. The Zulu and India-Kaffir wars had seen the Victorian Imperial Army well and truly bloodied and victorious. The Imperial troops were, at

Westminster I s bidding, prepared to defend the Empire elsewhere. It was in this climate of jingoistic fever , that settler avarice was emboldened by 18,000 troops imported at the bidding of a small colonial government. Because of distance from Britain this government ordered the troops as it saw fit, or rather as the leading politicians saw fit. The same politicians who ordered the troops were often the very men whose personal wealth was made in the profits gained from speculating in the sale and purchase of Maori lands~. The only problem was that

64Smith:1942r p6

65Belich: 1986 44 Maori would not succumb to those politicians' designs. In fact the actual wars had cost a great many European lives, and while by 1872 the Maori tribes were a spent military force they were not beaten and the Rohe Potae lands were forbidden to most

'~akeha. It was clear that if land was to peacefully pass from Maori hands into those of the rapidly increasing European population some tribunal was required to be established where the rights of Maori could first be ascertained, then determined, then transmuted into a legally recognisable English tenure, capable of transfer to Pakeha. What the gun would not get the pen would.

4.1.3 Chief draftperson, and judicial interpreter, of the Native Land Acts was Francis Dart Fenton, as his letter to the 1891 Native Land Law Commission evidences66 . It provided for the appointment of judges assisted by Maori assessors. Any Maori could claim over a parcel of land and the court then investigated ownership and awarded title, after the land had been surveyed. In 1862 the first Native Land Court Act was passed. This Act enabled the establishment of a Native Land Court which it was envisaged by its drafters, would function as a Tribunal where ... the rights of the former [Maori] could be ascertained and determined, and transmuted into a legally cognisable tenure, before being transferred to the latter. 67 In its Preamble the 1862 Act recited the Treaty of waitangi, the cession of the preemptive right and then goes onto read as follows ... it would greatly promote the peaceful settlement of the colony, and the advancement and civilization of the Natives, if their rights to lands when so ascertained defined and declared, were assimilated as nearly as

66Correspondence, AJHR, 1891, G.-I, p86

~Smith N: 1949, p6 45 possible to the ownership of land according to British law; ... The 1862 Act was administered in few cases due no doubt to the continuing wars and was replaced by the Native Lands Act ',1865 which became law on the 30 th October, 1865. Under Fenton's interpretation of this statute, the Native Land Courts in practice applied the Acts to mean that blocks, unsubdivided, would be awarded, up to ten owners only. This limitation meant that tribal domains would be broken up so as to get as many tribal members' names, in groupings of ten, on titles. While each native would gain Crown guaranteed title to land that was sufficient for all their needs, this method meant that a process of individual ownership was being imposed. Under this 1865 Act the reality was that the individual titled Maori became exposed to a " a horde of storekeepers, grog-sellers, surveyors, lawyers, land agents and money-lenders ,,68 This use of the statute meant, as was discussed by the Tribunal in the Orakei Report (see Orakeii Paragraph 4.7, pp32-35i doc A 27, Appendix C, p86), that section 17 which provided for some statutory recognition of a Tribal title was not used. Instead the ten owner practice resulted in pushing Maori into individual ownership and alienation. 4.1.4 This situation was to some extent remedied by the passage of the 1873 Native Land Act which provided for all tribal members to be entered on the certificate of title which was to be known henceforth as a Memorial of Ownership. Section 47 of that Act made all such members listed on the Memorial tenants-in-common. However if any listed owner wished to sell they could apply to the Court to have their interest evaluated and severed. The Native Land Court Act 1880 returned to the certificate of title system making all, named on the title, owners (section 25). There is listed on document A 8 paragraphs 3.4-3.11 a listing of all Statutes in force as at 1891.

6~ard: 1974, p185 46 In 1891 the Commission of Inquiry into Native Land Laws wrote that; So complete has the confusion both in law and practice become that lawyers ... testified ... that if the legislature had desired to create a state of confusion and anarchy in Native Land Titles it could not have hoped to have been more successful than it has been ... and In numerous instances frauds have been perpetrated successfully the most honest and straight forward dealing has not been sufficient to protect purchasers from loss and injury, while the Courts have been imposed upon and the true owners defrauded by conspiracy and perjury. (doc A 27, Appendix B, p37-106) However there is on the reading of the earlier East Coast Commission evidence that Rees as principal author of both Royal Commissions was presenting a confused picture so as to justify his own vast land dealings, but to a major extent this quote reflects the perceived view of Native Land legislation as at 1891. The 1891 Report provides much useful information about the development of Native land law, with Mr T MacKay's synopsis of each law that had been passed to date (p68) especially so.

4.2 THE NATIVE LANDS ACT 1886 The principal Act in operation was the Native Land Act 1886 (doc A 27, Appendix B, plIO) which established a regime that once the owners of the block had been ascertained by the Court, the order naming the Maori owners was to be forwarded to the Minister of Lands and a Certificate of Title issued by the Registrar pursuant to the Land Transfer Act. The claimants allege this was not done in the 1891 transactions which eventually affects the later created Pouakani B9. Section 20 of the 1886 NLC Act provided that; the Court after having ascertained and decided who are the Natives entitled shall make order declaring such 47 Natives to be the owners of the land or of parts thereof and of course in conformity with that requirement we see the owners and their entitlements listed to and annexed to the order. , By 1891 land was freely alienable to any party once title had been determined. So once the Native Land Court had made its decision the Owners could alienate it subject to limited restrictions of the Native Lands Frauds prevention legislation. If all the owners wished to sell they could and if only some were willing they could apply to the NLC for a partition order, pursuant to the Native Land Act, 1886. The 1894 Native Land Act returned to the principle of inalienability, but that did not apply if part-owners wanted to sell to the Crown. Of specific application to the Rohe Potae lands was the 1884 Restriction of Alienation Act which stated at s3; After the corning into operation of this Act, no person shall, either by himself or his agent, directly or indirectly, negotiate for, purchase or acquire, or contract or agree to purchase or acquire, from any native, or from any person on behalf of any such Native, any Native land within the territory described in the Schedule to this Act. The Schedule went on to layout that region known then as the Rohe Potae. To Kingite Maori this was a partial fulfilment of the agreement reached at major hui with firstly Governor Grey in 1878, with Sheehan as Minister of Native Affairs in 1879 and with Bryce (28th&29th October, 1882), and Tawhiao, Rewi Manga Maniapoto, Wahanui, Manuhiri [formerly known as Ngapora, Tawhiao's cousin] and other chiefs culminating in the petition presented to the House of Representatives on the 26th June 1883 (doc A 27, App B, p33). What that law meant was that the Crown, the Colonial government, was returning to itself full enjoyment of the pre-emptive right agreed under Article 2 of the Treaty as 48 regards the King Country area. Taonui's objection to the lands in Tauponuiatia West being adjudicated on by the NLC was that to do so was to breach this legislated agreement and this is perhaps a contributing reason as to why the government of the ',day so readily appointed a Royal Commission in 1889. That legislated agreement was amended by section 15 of the Native Land Court Act 1886 Amendment 1888 (doc A 27, Appx B, p130) which stated that not withstanding any orders or decisions related parts of "Rohe Potae" no part should be dealt with in any way before three years expired from the passing of this amendment (30th August 1888).

4.3 THE NATIVE LAND COURT

4.3.1 From its initial application 31st October 1885, until the Final Orders made by the Native Land Court in 1892, the Tauponuiatia lands demonstrated the overall complexity of two cultures trying to grapple with the fundamental problem of finding a satisfactory process of converting Maori land to Crown guaranteed title. For administrative ease the Native Land Court sittings from 14 Jan 1886 to 24 Sept 1887 divided the Tuwharetoa lands into large land blocks. All in all some three million acres were divided into some 138 blocks which varied in size and shape. The Hora Aruhe Kite Pouakani was to become a 122,350 acre block. No final signed and sealed Orders were to issue until 1891-1892. It needs to be remembered that the 1891 rehearing of this block meant that except for the 20,000 acre Pouakani 1 within this block nothing was finalised in Native Land Court terms and that it was the Orders issuing from the 1892 Sitting that constituted that Court's Final determination (doc A 20). Therefore everything that occurred before is only relevant in as much as it may contribute to evidencing the intent that may lie behind those 1892 Court Orders. As regards this claim it is still relevant to examine determinations, the evidence leading 49 to those determinations, made in the NLC from 1886-1892, and the 1889 Royal Commission.

4.3.2 Before proceeding with this examination it is helpful to ',recount some of the guiding principles and rules that were used by the NLC judges as they dealt with the applications laid before them. Document A 26 is a collection of opinions, dating from 1860-1890, of various persons many of whom are ex-Judge's Native Land Court, commenting on the Crown's actions to transmute Maori land to British style title. Messers B Layton and A Ward discuss and debate the alienation rights that Maori may have practised in periods of pre-European contact and subsequently (doc A 27, App C, pp56-69). Smith N. writes as basic rules for the Court that an application for investigation of title to customary land was required to be in writing, that except as provided in a certain circumstance the Court was not to proceed with investigation of the title to customary land until the land is surveyed and the Court has before it a plan approved by a competent authority. If the land has not been surveyed, the Court may proceed with the investigation of title upon a sketch plan approved by the Chief Surveyor and accepted the Court as sufficient for the purposes 69 of the investigation • Smith N cites the opinion of his Honour Chief Judge Seth-Smith given in the course of the Omahu Block judgement as to the principles relating to the degree of occupation required to support a right of ownership; .. . the first question that naturally arises is, who are the persons in possession at the present time? Where there are persons actually residing on the block they are undoubtedly in possession of those portions of the land on which their houses and other buildings are standing, and presumably in possession also of all such

69Smi th , p86 50 other portions as have been fenced in by them. Now possession is always prima facie evidence of ownership . If it is shown that the present possession is recent in its origin, the presumption arising from it is only a slight one and may be rebutted by comparatively slender evidence of ownership in other persons, but the presumption gathers strength as the evidence discloses a continuance of uninterrupted enjoyment .... Possession commenced before 1840, and continued without interruption to the present time, raises a presumption of so strong a character that it will require the clearest evidence to rebut it. It does not ... follow that ... persons entitled by virtue of their possession ... are exclusively entitled70 Smith N saw the building and maintenance of animal traps as involving labour that coupled with regular visits were sufficient to denote occupation in the sense "that there was an appropriation and user of the land by the relative tribe or hapu,,71. Asher and Naulls list five basic principles by which tribal rights to land were established, these being; take taunaha - discovery of land which was previously unoccupied, was taken over and subsequently used and occupied. take raupatu - land taken in conquest which was successfully occupied afterwards. take ahikaa - right by virtue of continued occupation and use. take tuupuna - right acquired by virtue of one's descent, established by accurate recital of one's genealogy or whakapapa. take tuku - right acquired by gift with the conditions that the person giving had the right to do so and it was done

70Seth-Smith CJ,189I, CJMB, Wellington District, Vol 2, p7I; cited in Smith N, pSI

71Smith N, p55 51 with tribal sanction and the gifted lands had to be occupied and used by the persons to whom the land was given72 . Retaining the land was best done by having the military strength to defend against all-comers and this meant that group ',unity was paramount over individual rights. The Minute Books of the Pouakani lands are an eloquent reflection of all of these above elements and to a great extent the Native Land Court provided the forum where all these elements were able to be evidenced. That these principles and rules were known to Judges Brookfield and Scannell there can be little doubt as all were expressed in a Report to the House of Representatives in 1880 (see "Opinions of Native Land Court Judges, AJHR, doc A 26 and doc A 24).

4.3.3 As outlined by Ann parsonson73 , Native Land Court sittings were to become a Maori institution where tribal elders could maintain tribal mana and in fact by being first to apply could assert the mana of one claim as against the later applicant. The Native Land Court Hearings were to become the focal point of Maori social life and often Court towns became scenes of great reunions with everyone camping near to the Courthouse. Oral history of one culture was transcribed to written form and the old kuia and kaumatua dominated these early hearings with recitations of waka journey to Aotearoa, of battles, marriages. Landmarks /tohu such as dwelling places, burial sites, mountains, ancient tracks, birding trees, were given in evidence. Parsonson writes (Oxford,p164) it was not unusual for chants and whakapapa recitations to be used to substantiate claims. As can be seen from the Pouakani Minute Books (docs. A 10-A 18) there was often conflicting, even straight out self-contradictory, accounts but this is hardly

72Asher & Naulls, pp5-6

73" The Pursui t 0 f Mana", Oxford His tory 0 f New Zealand, pp140-167 52 surprising given that fact that several hundred years of history was being discussed. These then are some of the dynamics that were occurring as the Pouakani lands were to corne before the Native Land Court.

, Of particular relevance in Parsonson I s article is her writing which concerns the Tuwharetoa application where she states And Taonui of Ngati Raukawa-Maniapoto flew into a rage when in .... Te Heuheu applied for a hearing of Maraeroa-Hurakia, a border district north-west of Lake Taupo, where the people were of both tribes, and were closely intermarried. It meant that the case would be heard in Taupo - foreign soil- that Te Heuheu would have the whiphand during the hearing. 74

740xford, p163 53 5. ECONOMIC TRANSITION One of the basic feature of 19th century New Zealand as a European-style economy was its dependence on the United Kingdom. The chief agents of the colonys' economic expansion were ',immigration, capital and technology(railways) from Great Britain and it was the wealth, both potential and existing of New Zealand land that would provide the raw material to be exploited. 5.1 VOGEL'S TEN YEAR PLAN As regards economics the late 1860s and early 1870s New Zealand was passing through a state of transition. Current capital stock and infrastructure were insufficient for growth, and New Zealand turned again to Britain as a generator of colonial development. No politician was better placed and prepared to exploit this situation than Julius Vogel, Colonial Treasurer in the Fox Ministry from June 1869. 5.1.1 W J Gardner writes that Vogel introduced New Zealander's to the extended use of state power, that his first round of borrowing in 1871-4 appeared to provide free railways and roads, that by its very success it stifled counsels of caution75 . In his financial statement to Parliament in 1870 Vogel had outlined a ten year programme with as its main development proposed increased immigration and increased public works76 . The lack of financial caution was shown when instead of a proposed L10m over ten years as authorised by the Loan Acts, about L20 m. was borrowed up to by 1880, at generally higher rates of interest77 . 5.2 THE GROWTH OF THE RAILWAY The Waikato Times, in June 6 1878, wrote The truth is, the prosperity of the colony will continue to advance pari passu with the opening up of

750xford, p7l

76NZPD , 1870, Vol. 7, pp95-1l8 77Stone R: 1967, Appx A 54 the country lands to profitable settlement. The Public Works scheme, so far as it has gone, has worked wonders in this respect. Railways have rendered land available for settlement, which, till they were constructed, were " hopelessly shut out from a market ... (doc A 27, App D,pI3) The financial statement given the next month further emphasises this connection between Public Works, and the need to open up the central North Island (doc A 27, Appx D, p25). The public railway map of 1880 showed 1,228 miles of open track, 1,143 miles having been added since 1873. This disjointed, incomplete skeleton reflected the unequal struggle between provincial interests of the 1870s78 . Most lines were in the richest provinces; the North Islands share was eight unconnected fragments. Railways promoted employment in their construction and to a lesser degree on the farmland they served. Their building and equipment accounted for over 45 percent of gross public capital formation in the period 1873-8079 . 5.3 BIG CITY INVESTMENT By the late 1870s NZ economy was saturated with debt. Mr R Stone, in his text "Makers of Fortune" reveals that the establishment of the Bank of New Zealand, principally by Thomas Russell, with support by such parliamentarians as Stafford, Vogel, Pollen, Whitaker, allowed that bank to become the Government's bank. It was permitted to borrow abroad, mainly from Scotland and England. The Queen Street capitalists therefore held a powerful grip on the development of North Island, New Zealand and all the peoples living here. The lands in the Upper Thames Valley, the Waikato, and Poverty Bay, were an investment speculation where large profits could be made. Stone R, notes from a search of deeds and land transfer records in Auckland and Hamilton that these people

78Stone R: 1967, Appx 2, pI

79Estimares from Downie I The Course and Character of Capital formation in New Zealand, 1871-1900, Tables 2 and 3, pp54-55 55 bought up abandoned military 50 acre allotments8o . Most of the land was to come from direct buying and leasing from Maori. The people that Stone notes as the main figures in these land buying moves were JC Firth, W Aitken, TRussell, F Whitaker; F \Larkworthy and J Fergusson (both absentee and the latter was the

first of three generations of New Zealand Governors); R & E Maclean, JB Whyte, EB Walker, T Morrin, and F Rich. A Mr J Farmer had, 1867, purchased 20,000 acres of confiscated swampland near Cambridge and within a year resold it for L5000, 250% profit. And the land trade was carried out by officers of the Waikato Militia regiments, such men as Major J Wilson, Major W Jackson, and Captain J Steele who became agents for the city speculators. Farming in Auckland province was not by 1880 a major economic growth81 , but the potential was recognised and the impact the main trunk route eventually to be chosen would be of immense financial profit to the land owners concerned. Aucklands' maritime trade in the SouthPacific82 would allow, with a completed railway, vast trade growth. The City of Glasgow Bank collapsed in October 1878 (doc A 27, Appx D, p32) and it was only a matter of time before ruthless calls on monies loaned had to be made. The Grey government came perilously near failing to meet its British interest payments in mid-1879, and compelled BNZ to help. The most spectacular and dangerous episode of the depression was the near collapse of the BNZ in 1887 it thus happened that it declared no dividend for that year. This was to be a major contributory factor in what was to be a Long Depression till 1895. If NZ was over-committed to Britain the reverse was also true, with the usual consequences for the lending country: Britain had the liveliest interest in the solvency of the colony,

~Stone R: 1973, p17

81Stone R; 1973, p20

82Stone;1973, p36 56 and would later respond readily to signs of improvement. A statement of the then Governor reflects this situation: Separation would be a simple method of settling all difficulties, were England merely a suzerain and not , also a mortgagee-But when we consider the enormous sums owed ... to British capitalists, I apprehend that Great

Britain cannot relax her hold on these Colonies .... 83 Nineteenth century housing, construction, public works materials show that New Zealand was a world built of wood and that wood came from local forests and were at first shipped and carted by bullock dray, then railed on rails that ran on sleepers taken from the same forests. Kauri in particular was ruthlessly exploited but without a doubt the timber industry was the largest manufacturing enterprise producing both for the domestic market and for export. In the last two decades of the nineteenth century the forests of central North Island were to become a sought after resource as the railways meant easy transport of large loadings of sawn timber.

83Sir WFD Jervois/ Baron Knutsford, 16 May 1888, CO 209/248, can be found in Gardener and McIntyre eds., Speeches and Documents in New Zealand's History 57 6. THE NATIVE LAND COURT PROCESS - The Involvement of the Grace Brothers, particularly William Henry, in the Passage of Pouakani Block through the Native Land Court 6.1 TAUPO NUl A TIA WEST BOUNDARY "The original 1886 Taupo nui a tia Court Sitting ran from 14 January 1886 to 24 Sept 1887. Adjourned in April 1886, it was resumed in January 1887, to allow the Supreme Court to hear a case brought by Taonui over alleged malpractice. The suit was dropped and the Hearing proceeded. The Judges were Messers Brookfield (presiding) and Scannell, with John E Grace as Court interpreter for that first 3 month sitting only. This Hearing determined, "in accordance with Maori custom and usage" the ownership of the various blocks of land comprised within the Tuwharetoa tribal domains. In so doing the Native Land Court determined the Tauponuiatia West Boundary as between Tuwharetoa, and Maniapoto, it subsequently further attempted to determine the Tauponuiatia-Pouakani Subdivision boundaries.

6.1.1 EVENTS SURROUNDING THE LAND COURT HEARING As recounted earlier during the years 1882 and 1883 representatives of the two tribes had met at hui and resolved with Whanganui, Raukawa, and Hikairo that all of the lands of four would, with a north-western portion of Tuwharetoa lands, become the Rohe Potae and that all of those lands would be surveyed and investigated as a whole. Yet on the 31st October, 1885, Tuwharetoa applied to the Native Land Court for investigation of title of their domain, meaning all their lands within and without the Rohe Potae. It is a question in itself why only part of Tuwharetoa was included in the Rohe Potae and WH Grace in his evidence to the 1889 Royal Commission is recorded as giving what may offer as an answer to that question; The same day Taonui arrived & on the 19th before the Court opened a meeting was held by the natives on the ground in front of the hotel, to greet Taonui, who asked 58 Te Heuheu [Tukino] to stop the Court. "Let us be all one people". That Maniapoto were trying to get laws passed to save the people & the land. Te HeuHeu refused saying Taonui had not consulted him when he made his Rohepotae , & as to laws to save the land & the people ----- "Your boundary splits me in two". Te Heuheu spoke with feeling. "What about the half of me that is left outside? Who is to save that part? No, I prefer my people to die together, as a whole." (doc A 5(i), pp 70-71). The hearing itself was held in the old court house which in those days was used as a schoolhouse. Chiefs from Te Arawa, Whanganui, certain sections of Raukawa, Maniapoto, Waikato, Kahangunu, attended and often camped nearby. J TeH Grace writes The hundreds of Maori people attending the sitting of the Court presented a scene of Maori life which is now seen no more when land claims are before the Courts. 84 The Minute Books of the 1886-1887 Sittings record in detail the eloquent histories of these people and their relationship to Tuwharetoa rohe. Accounts of past wars, migrations, events emerge that basically show that it was the strength of Tuwharetoa, Tia, Ngatoro i rangi that ensured Ngati Tuwharetoa the mana to self-determine that their tribes' lands should be dealt with as the tribe wished. It was the paramount chiefs duty to make a tribal determination. Te Heu Heu Horonuku was in 1885 sixty years of age. He had lived through the land wars and had in fact supported Ngati Maniapoto with whom he had lived for much of his childhood. Having assisted Waikato he consistently helped Te Kooti and thus he was to a degree regarded by the colonial government as a rebel and had been detained once. So again to an extent his application to the NLC is viewable as a means by which Te Heu Heu was securing a form of title against other iwi and colonial

84Grace: 1959, p408 59 maneoverings a form of title that was Crown guaranteed. Te Heu Heu Horonuku passed away and his son, Te Heu Heu Tukino II, conducted Tuwharetoa's case. Te Heu Heu Tukino was assisted by a Laurence Grace, son of Thomas and Agnes, and at \,that time a Member of the House of Representatives. The interpreter at the hearing is listed as Mr JE Grace and the Government Land Purchase Representative, Mr WH Grace. The amount of dialogue that occurred between Te Heu Heu, and the three Grace brothers involved can only be imagined but what scant documentation as there is, telegrams, dairies and letters, indicate that Te Heu Heu had the most up to date colonial political knowledge. The use of the latest technology. This in addition to his own mana and knowledge acquired through his upbringing as paramount ariki. WH Grace had also for five years previous been confidant and adviser to Rewi Manga Maniapoto, which suggests that at that time Te Heuheu Horonuku knew full well the consequences of his chosen course of action. His son would also benefit from this close familial contact. The West Boundary Judgement was delivered on 12/3/1886 and reads as follows Court said Judgement was by consent in favour of the hapus claimed for by TeHeuheu as under except Parerekawa which is struck out as having no claim - the boundary line commencing at Ketemaringi thence to Tauwharepurakau thence to Weraroa thence to Tahoro-Karewarewa thence in a straight line to Tapararoa- - Names to be furnished as soon as possible Certificates will issue accordingly on properly surveyed plans being deposited in Native Land Court Office Auckland-(p354, Taupo Minute Book No.4, doc A 10) A sketch plan was used by the Court and it does need to be established whether or not said sketch plan was approved by the Chief Surveyor of the time. 60 6.2 TAUPONUIATIA-POUAKANI SUBDIVISION; The minutes provide accounts of the Pouakani Block,its history, its peoples. The case for ascertainment of Pouakani Title began on the 18/2/1886 with Te Rangikarapiripia being the ',first witness sworn in. He produced a sketch plan and stated I reside at Ongaroto near Whakamaru - My hapus are N'Wairangi and N'Whiata of N'Raukawa is the parent tribe- I know Block shewn on Sketch Plan - I claim on behalf of myself N'Waerangi,-N'Moe N'Kurutuohu- I claim through ancestry-conquest and occupation- Boundaries commence at Pohuehue on Tatua west (west ) boundary - thence westward to Kai[au?]- thence westward again Ohungahunga - thence to Totetarata- thence to Waikino stream-thence to Mangakino thence to Kopaki­ thence to a point Te Kuretinangahuia - thence to TitiRaupenga - thence Pureora-thence northerly to Tikiwhenua - thence to Tapurarua - thence along Tauponuiatia boundary to Te Pouakani - thence to Waipapa stream where it joins the Waikato - thence along Waikato river in this direction [Taupo] - thence to join Waipapa South by Tatua west boundary thence along Tatua wets boundary to starting point. Judgment was delivered on the 22/2/1887) it reads The Claim to the Ownership of this Block of Land was made Rangikarapiripia on behalf of N'Waerangi - N'Moe and N'Korotuohu Counter-claims were set up by Hitiri Te Paerata on behalf of N'Kohera N'Moe, N'Waerangi N'Korotuohu and N'Parekawa By Hauraki Tongonui on behalf of N'Te Kohera and N'Waerangi. These Counter-claims were all ultimately joined in that by Hitiri te Paerata With the exception that the Counter-claim on behalf of N'Waerangi was alleged to be different from Rangi's claim on behalf of the hapu of the Same name- inasmuch 61 as it was intended for the descendants of Waerangi with his marriage with Parawhete - The counter-claims virtually intended the addition of N'Te Kohera and N'Parekawa to the hapus claimed for by Rangi Karapiripia , It was alleged on behalf of N'Te Kohera & N'ParaKawa that they were entitled by ancestry, conquest & occupation but in the opinion of the Court, the evidence brought forward in support of those claims was not sufficient to establish them - that of Hitiri Te Paerata was altogether contradictory to the evidence given by him at the hearing of the same Block last year. When no claim whatever was made by him on behalf of those hapus to the Ownership of this portion of Tauponuiatia West, nor did he succeed in the evidence at the present hearing to satisfy the Court that N'Kohera & N'Parekawa as hapus had any claim by occupation to participate in the Ownership. The evidence of Hauraki Tongonui on the same side is in the opinion of the Court altogether worthless, being contradictory of the evidence and his own and may be altogether dismissed from consideration The evidence of the Claimant Rangikarapiripia was also very contradictory & unsatisfactory, and would hardly be sufficient to establish his claim, had it been virtually denied, the parties on each side seem since the first hearing of Tauponuiatia West Block to have completely altered the nature of the claim by ancestry. However one fact is clear from the whole claims & evidence viz; that while the rights of N'Waerangi, N'Moe and N'Korotuohu are admitted without challenge those of N'Te Kohera & N'Farekawa are not, and in the opinion of the Court, their claims have not been established as Hapus although some hapus members nominally of these hapus who intermarried with the others have no doubt acquired rights by occupation, which cases can be settled 62 when the list of names are submitted - But as different hapus have been acknowledged to be virtually traceable from one viz: N'Waerangi the Court is of opinion that occupation is necessary if any proof , of ownership is required - The Judgement of the Court is that Pouakani Block estimated to contain 122,300 acres as shewn on the approved plan before the Court be awarded to N'Waerangi,

N'Moe & N'Korotuohu l and such members of N'Te Kohera & N'Parekawa hapus as have intermarried with these or the descendants of such intermarriages and have acquired rights by occupation, sd/ D Scannell sd/N. Poututara (Taupo Minute Book No 7, pp86-87;doc A 13) The Minutes of the Sitting that led up this judgment run for over 500 pages and indicate in intricate detail the sophisticated attempts made by both cultures to grapple with the concepts of communal possession, ownership, transferring that to individual Torrens Land title, meaning a land block which has surveyed limits, which would then be available for alienation or disposal by those peoples who had their name listed on the Certificate of Title. Maori concepts of boundary and land tenure had since the coming of the Pakeha undergone much change. Tohu/marks on the landscape, named birding-trees, food trees, streams with eel-weirs, were accepted as boundaries and even though they often were interlayered each hapu, iwi knew its mark. Then came the Pakeha surveyor who in attempting to mark on the ground a continuous line transcribed on the earth the process of change as one culture's norm was subsumed to those of another.

6.3 THE TAUPONUIATIA WEST ROYAL COMMISSION 1889 6.3.1 The Tauponuiatia West Boundary was the first European demarcation of these vast tribal boundaries carried out by the then Native Land Court process in the Rohe Potae. By 24 September 63 1887 a ninety day intermittent long sitting at Taupo had come to an end and a decision was passed as to the boundary between the tribal domains of the Tuwharetoa and the Maniapoto. ',6.3.2 This decision was disputed by Maniapoto who sent a petition to the House with the result that a Royal Commission ,,{as established in 1889 to examine the matter and determine the boundary to the mutual satisfaction of the two tribes. The boundary was the subject of further determination by the Native Land Court on August 4th 1891. There occurs in a copy in a paper supplied to the Native Affairs Select Committee by a Mr King. It reads as follows; Great complaints are made by the Chief Taonui and other influential natives of the dishonest proceedings of L.M. Grace MHR and John Grace in connection with the passing of lands through the Native Land Court recently held at Taupo. It is reported that there is a secret compact between the Govt. and LM Grace that he is to receive a large commission on all lands that his brother William (who has been appointed a Land purchase Commissioner) purchases for govt. in the King Country along the Main Trunk Line. The Chief Taonui asserts that the manner in which the Court at Taupo dealt with the lands that came before it was most disgraceful - neither of the presiding Judges had any knowledge of Maori customs and laws in regard to land tenure - One of the judges (Brookfield) does not understand the Maori language and the other, Major Scannell AI.C. (who was appointed at the express wish of L.M. Grace being an intimate of his) has but a slight knowledge of it - [page break] John Grace (whose wife is a member of the NgatiTuwharetoa Tribe and was therefore interested in the lands that were adjudicated upon) acted as interpreter to the court. Consequently Natives belonging to other Tribes who opposed the claims of NgatiTuwharetoa to certain block of land could 64 not obtain justice - It is alleged that both the judges were influenced by the Graces - -L M Graces wife is also a NgatiTuwharetoa, she is a daughter of Te HeuHeu the principal chief of that tribe. , Taonui has made a serious complaint to the Native Minister re the conduct of the Graces and of the unjust treatment he received from the Judges. He intends to write to Sir George Grey on the subject. The principal chiefs of the Maniapoto strongly object to WH Grace having anything to do with their lands as Land Purchase Commissioner on the ground that he was formerly employed by the Patetere Company and other Native Land Speculators and was implicated in some very dishonest transactions. It is a well known fact that when one of the Patetere Blocks known as Whakamaru was being passed through the Native Land Court W.H. Grace had his wife's name, who had no claim to the land - inserted in the memorial of ownership no less than four times consequently when he purchased the land for the Company he paid her for four interests. There are other complaints against him of a similar nature. Natives also complain that in Decr.j84 a block of land called Oreti at Taupo and within the boundary of the proclaimed King Country was passed through the court at the instigation of the Graces, and half the block was awarded to the halfcaste daughter of John Grace and made inalienable except to children of the late Revd T H Grace [T S?] Grace,

L. M. & William Grace being appointed Trustees. The real owners of .the portion so awarded were absent at the time attending a meeting at Whatiwhatihoe (Seeing that the land in question was within the district where private purchases are prohibited had the Court power to make such an order) . It is probable that the native owners will petition parliament re this matter. It is also reported that L.M. Grace, W Moon, Mitchell and 65 other Native Land Agents are treating secretly with natives for the purchase of [unreadable but perhaps-immense] areas of the best lands in the King Country for private speculators. W. F. Buckland purchased land in the Patetere

Block. you made a note of this ... 85 There is no acknowledged author to this Memo. but on the back it is signed "Fr Sept of 1888", there was also attached to it the following letter; Auckland June 19-86 Dear Sir I beg to transmit herewith a copy of a memorandum which has been handed to me for transmission to you from a reliable source. Probably during the progress of committee matters in connection with native lands the contents of the document may be of some use. Hope you are well much respect, Yours faithfully

Mr King. 86

6.3.3 As result of that type of complaint a Royal Commission was constituted to hear the determination of Judge Scannell and consider the full meaning of what was occurring. A reading of the Minute Books of evidence of that

Commission (doc A 5(i) & (ii)) shows that it was to a large degree a re-hearing of the 1886-1887 NLC hearing and events leading up to that tribal demarcation. The two main differences were that first this time Maniapoto representatives were accorded more time to present their case as compared to the treatment accorded Taonui, and second the Royal Commission sat at Otorahanga.

85 LM Grace, GNZ MSS 204(1), Auckland Public Library

86GNZ MSS 204(1): Letter KingjKCOB, Auckland ! ~

66 In its evidence to the Tauponuiatia Commission, the Maniapoto stated that they had placed fullest confidence in an earlier agreement and felt that in weight and authority it was equal to a treaty and they therefore allege the Crown in ',entertaining the Tuwharetoa application was breaching its solemn agreement (Minute Book Reference). An examination of this agreement was completed by Parliamentary historian A H l-lcClintock during a 1957 Commission to examine the Liquor Licence Prohibition which was proclaimed in the King Country from 1884-1925. McClintock concluded that the Crown had not contracted such an agreement and the Crown was not bound to just what Maniapoto alleged (doc A 30). At the meeting where Maniapoto alleged the Crown had accepted Kingite tribes' terms the boundary was made public and parties were sent to stake carved posts at intervals along the boundary so that all would know. The reasons for this action seems to be that the tribes were aware of the effect of the Native land Court process on other tribes' lands. They wanted greater control over the manner in which settlement was to occur. Special legislation was requested and granted, the Native Lands Alienation Restriction 1884. A subsequent rehearing of the Pouakani Block was applied for on December 9th 1890 and judgments were finalised at the end of this Court's sitting which lasted through until 1892. As a matter of law it is the 1892 Signed and Sealed Order of the Native Land Court which constitutes the document to which the Crown guarantee under the Land Act and the Treaty applies. The Royal Commission Report was delivered to the House on the 17th day of August 1889. The actual commission issued by Governor Onslow, dated 9th July 1889, asked for their to be an inquiry into the 1887 decision of the NLC and report on several matters namely whether the Tauponuiatia West boundary was correct, whether the chief Hitiri Paerata or his people had suffered any injustice with regard to his claim to the Pouakani Block and whether Karawhira Kapu was induced by a Government 67 Land Purchase Commissioner to forego claims of land because of promises he made to her, which had not been carried out. The Commissioners T M Haultain, Hanita Aweawe, responded with a yes to boundary and Karawhira Kapu concerns and a no to the issue ',concerning any prejudice to Hitiri Paerata. There were submissions by figures such as Judge Scannell, WH Grace, WM Cussen, John Ormsby, Taonui Hikaka, R Mainwaring, Papanui Tamahiki and their evidence as recorded in the two Minute books of evidence is a concise readable recount of that first NLC hearing and events surrounding that hearing. The Report and copies of the Minutes of Evidence and Exhibits are filed as Wai-33 Document A 5, in the Record of Documents for Wai 33. The Commissioners found in regard to the West Boundary that; that the portion of the boundary-line ... in dispute should be the red line from its junction with the Pungapunga Stream to Pakihi, which is the commencement of the range, and from thence along the Hurakia Range or watershed to Pureora, and from thence to Tapororoa, along the North-eastern boundary of the Maraeroa Block. This line would not include the settlement of Tahorakarewarewa, which Taonui claims, but which is on the Eastern slope, about two miles from the ridge an about ten miles from Lake Taupo. (doc A 5, p2) In his evidence to the Commission WH Grace is recorded as stating that on February 19th 1886 Pouakani was called on and that Hitiri had objected to Horaaruhe Pouakani being heard by itself but that all of Tauponuia tia West should be heard, North of Kuratau and Oruanui should be be heard as one block. That would include Maraeroa. The Court agreed to this request and on February 21, as regards Maraeroa, WH Grace is also recorded as saying All parties admitted that there was only the hapu called 'Karewa, the point in dispute being that Te Heuheu said 'Karewa claimed through Tuwharetoa, whilst 68 his opponents said 'Karewa claimed through Raukawa" (doc A 5(i), p75) The Maraeroa judgment was to go against Te Heu Heu and in favour of Te Paehua who was then the person to whom the Court ',looked for a list of names to enter on the Certificate of Title (doc A 5(i), p75). Interestingly on the 14 February 1887 when the list of names were compiled to hand into the Court Te Paehua included Te HeuHeu and others in the list. 6.3.4 Conclusion Messers Hanita Aweawe and H W Haultain interpreted the decision of Judge Scannell by considering that he had identified the necessity of sorting out where the Maraeroa Boundary lay before Pouakani -Taupo nui a Tia West could be finalised. Their evidence was to conclude that much of what the first Hearing had determined was correct in as much as it had determined that Hakanui had as fourth generation descendant of Tia maintained the survival of numerous large family groups. The Royal Commission reaffirmed the NLC boundary determination and can be seen substantially as confirming the process which had been undertaken to transmute indigenous land holding to a form able to be bought and sold according to British land transfer terms. The Royal Commission's findings as regards the West boundary were given legislative form by the enactment of section 29 Native Land Court Amendment Act 1889 (doc A 5(iv)).

6.4 THE 1891-1892 NATIVE LAND COURT 6.4.1 Given the findings of the Royal Commission the NLC was compelled to rehear Pouakani and on Tuesday December 9th 1890 the NLC sat at Otorahanga to hear an application from Werohia te Hiko and others. It was in effect a rehearing of argument as to which hapu had right to Pouakani and it was a Court that had all of the Minutes of Evidence from the first Hearing and the Royal Commission available to it. Counter-claims were accepted from Hitiri te Paerata, Makuini te Whakarehu, and Karawhira Kapu. 69 First judgement was delivered on 9th May 1891 (see pp195-209, 26 Waikato Minute Book 1891; doc A 16) and this judgment is the NLC determination as regards Werohia's application. The Court with Judge Puckey presiding, found; 1. That Te Kohera-Parekawa and Parawhete have no right but that Hitiri as a descendant of Wairangi has an undoubted right with his nearest of kin 2. That N'Upokoiti in so far as the claim for part of Tuaropaki is concerned has no right - but as regards the small piece said to be part of Wharepungapunga, the Court is in some doubt and would like to hear more evidence about it 3. That Karawhira Kapu and the persons represented by A.Patene in addition to the rights admitted also have rights under Ha. 4. That Te Paehua (on behalf of N'Maniapoto) has proved his right to the part claimed by him The Court therefore awards the land before the Court to N'Moe, N'Wairangi, N'Korotuohu, N'Rakau and N'Hinekahu and to N'Hai and to N'Maniapoto as represented by Te Paehua in respect of Taporaroa to Pureora ( 26 WMBK, pp208-209; doc A 16). It is the finding related to Te Paehua that the claimants have questioned. The acceptance of his Taporaora means that Maraeroa gained 2250 acres and Pouakani lost it. This boundary determination meant that the boundary of Pouakani B9 was affected. It is therefore pertinent to quote the boundaries claimed by Hitiri te Paerata; The boundaries of Pouakani Horaaruhe viz Te Pohuehue, thence South West Kaeaearua, Okurarenga, thence westerly Mahana te Ahi, Te Tarata, Matatu, Waikino, along Southern boundary of Tokaapiti, Opaki, Ngakuruatinongahuru, Te Moenga okapu, up to Titiraupenga, South of Te Kohatu, Te Rakaupiko, Puketoro, the Trig Station at Kureora [Pureora???] , 70 thence Northerly, Ohahau, Taporaroa, thence Easterly up Waikato river, Te Poupeke (peg of Whakamaru) thence peg

of TeRae 0 Tatua West. Southerly Tuhuatahi thence to beginning." (26 WMB 1890, p54; doc A 16). Judgment as to the names of persons entitled to be listed as owners was delivered on July 14th 1891 (see 27 WMB, pp121-125; doc A 17) and of specific interest to this claim is the Courts' finding as regards Makeriti Hinewai, wife of WH Grace. The Court said As to Makereti Hinewai and Marawa it does not seem to the Court that these persons have any right at all, as there has been no occupation for about five generations. (27 WMB 1891, p124; doc A 17). On August 4th 1891 The Court gave its judgment as to division of Pouakani. It first enunciated that only 95,000 acres was available for it to divide as 20,000 acres was not before the Court having been awarded to the Crown (Pouakani 1), 2250 acres already decided as part of Maraeroa and 5000 acres also decided as belonging to N'Rakau and N'Hinekahu (judgment, May 7, 1891, doc A 17, pp167-172) 1. 100 acres shall be laid off at Waipapa to include the settlement and burial grounds the persons to be named in the order to be selected by Werohia and failing this by the Court. 2. Reserves to be laid off to include the hot springs to be vested in such persons as may be decided on out of the three cases before the Court. 3. Tuaropaki bush to be divided 3/4 for N'Wairangi represented by Pepene 1/8 for Hitiri and others and 1/8 for Karawhira and others. 4. 3000 acres as shown on plan within Tirohanga at the South portion of the block including 1/8 bush for Hitiri and others, if any of Werohia's dead are included if possible each wahi tapu will form a separate order and be vested in such manner as she may indicate to the 71 Court. 5. In addition to the above the Court awards Hitiri 3000 acres as shown on the plan. 6. As to Waraki and others in addition to the portion , of Tuaropaki forest and an interest in the hot springs the Court awards 7,200 acres at Kaiwha also 13,000 acres beside it adjoining the Government block on the West side towards Whatapo. 7. The whole of the residue is awarded to N'Wairangi as represented by Pepene ( doc A 17, p171). The Court then went on to make Orders with scheduled lists of names agreed upon and boundary descriptions of subdivisions also given. When a surveyed plan was attached to this documentation a Signed and Sealed Order was made by the Court and a Certificate of Title issued and of special interest to this claim are the minuted boundary descriptions given for Pouakani B9 Band Pouakani C No1 & 2. That given for B9 reads as follows; Pouakani B No9 (or Pureora) Area 10,000 acres No restrictions Boundary commencing at Pureora trig station thence along the South-East boundary to the Kaiwha Block to the Mangatahoe stream and thence by a swinging line to the Maraeroa boundary thence South by that boundary to the point of commencement. ( 28 WMBK 1891;doc A 18, p11) 6.5 SUBSEQUENT PARTITIONS The 1899 Sitting whereby the NLC subdivided Pouakani B9 within the Pouakani block a partition into B9A, B9B; A search of the Waikato Minute Books has revealed no record of sitting at Kihikihi on the 24 July 1899 and what material as has been gained from Otorahanga Minute Book 36 gives lists of names for Pouakani C No1B, and B9 B (36 WMBK,1899,pp293-294,doc A 19). 72 7.LAND PURCHASE POLICY AND PRACTICE 7.1 POLICY The regime of land purchase practised by the Crown by the Native Land Acts of 1862, 1865, and 1873 was canvassed by the Tribunal ',in its Orakei Report and rather than repeat it I have included an extract of that Report in a compilation of all the articles and extracts which relate to the various topics raised (doc A 27 App. C, p86). The Native Land Acts had as its main function the placing of British land title on Maori customary land and had as direct consequences the destroying tribalism and the imposing of individual ownership. It was all in all an operation which reflects the difficulty of two ideologies clashing.

7.2 WH GRACE AS LAND PURCHASE OFFICER Mr WH Grace acted as the Government Land Purchase Officer in the periods 1878-1880, 1st Dec. 1885- 31st March 1888 and 1890- 31st March 1891. Comment from the 1889 Royal Commission report and evidence given as shown in the Minutes tend to discredit Mr Graces' practices, particularly the use of a bonus payment scheme.

7.2.1 The claimants claim that this dubiousness extends as Mr Grace also acted as Licensed Interpreter at the Native Land Court Sittings. This is not verified by the record, it seems that it was a Mr John Edward Grace who acted as the Courts' interpreter through only the first few weeks of the first Tauponuiatia West hearing (doc A 10, p34) and a Mr Davis at the 1891-1892 hearings. The claimants claim that his wife and brother-in-law each took a 50% shareholding in the subsequent partitioned Titles. This requires analysis of the list of names and the discussions recorded in the Minute Books. The actual signed and sealed Orders of 1892 and the eventual names included on the Titles which show this is to be so seem in conflict with the judgment as to names given . 7.2.2 WH Grace was one of four sons of Thomas and Agnes 73 Grace. The efforts of his missionary father as recounted earlier reveals a dichotomy of stance on the issue of Maori selling their land seemingly occurring in the first generation of the Grace family. The stance taken by his father had been to continually ',advise Tuwharetoa to retain their lands and not sell. Thomas had in fact been censured as traitorous by colonists eager to breakup the Kingite tribal confederacy and yet his sons were to be the very personnel instrumental in the bringing before the Native Land Court the lands of Rohe Tuwharetoa, Rohe Maniapoto. It is pertinent to query why it was that his sons were to be so instrumental in the process of changing native lands into Native Land Court titled land .

7.2.3 As mentioned earlier WH Grace under Mr J Sheehan I s administration of the Native Land Purchase Department had been appointed a Government Land Purchase Officer for the Upper Waikato. In a letter dated 2 February 1880 to the new Native Minister, J Bryce, William Grace objects to his services being dispensed with. He writes In the month of October 1877 I joined the Native Department of the Civil Service, and in or about August 1878 was appointed Native Agent at Upper Waikato, and afterwards, in addition to the above position acted as Government Land Purchase Agent in the District referred to. In consideration of the satisfactory services rendered by me, I was promised the appointment of Resident-Magistrate of Manganui, Hokianga and Bay of Islands ... he goes on to quote a telegram signed by Sheehan to back this promise up and writes further ... During the whole of my service no complaint of any description has been made against me ... (MA MLP 90/172; doc A 27, Appendix A, p5). 7.3 WH GRACE AS LAND PURCHASE AGENT He lost his position and went into business as private land purchase agent and licensed interpreter setting up offices with his brother Laurence at Cambridge and Tauranga (doc A 27, 74 Appendix D, p82). Their clients were Auckland businessmen who as land speculators wanted to continue the high level of returns that the Wars, the Thames goldrush, and Vogels' public works and immigration schemes had provided. WH Grace in the years 1880-1885 was able to influence Waikato and Maniapoto Chiefs. His Letterbooks reveal an immense amount of correspondence between WH Grace, and Tawhiao87 , Wetere Te Herenga88 , LM Grace89 . In a lengthy letter to the editor of the Observer dated February 4th WH Grace describes himself as "One Who has been behind the Scenes ,,90. Ann Parsonson moots that Rewi had been toying with the idea of seeking a Land Court hearing for some of Maniapoto lands. By December 1881 he had already begun to investigate the possibility of placing some of his own lands, and on this understanding had given a large block of Taupo land over to the management of one of his chiefs, Hi tiri te Paerata. Then in February 1882 Alexander MacDonald, a land agent recently engaged in buying Maori land for the Wellington-Manawatu Railway Company91 (doc A 27, Appendix D, p96), arrived in the Waikato and seems to have caused immediate friction among the Ngati Haua. His design appears to have been to question title to Puahue, Pukekura, and Maungatautari Blocks, some of these were Maniapoto claimed lands. Rewi got WH Grace to write to MacDonald as follows Kia Maketonere

Tumuaki 0 te Kooti Whenua Maori

Tena koe

87WH Grace Letterbook, 1880, p120

8BwH Grace Letterbook 1880, pp26, 211, 239, 310, 322, 369) 89WH Grace Letterbook 1880, p1

90WH Grace Letterbook 1882[ p13

91WT 11 March 1882 75 Kua tae mai tau waka utu me taku kupu atu ae ki a koe mo Maungatautari Ko taku kupu atu ki a koe, ko te kupu whiriwhiri mo taku tonu, me homai e koe kia WH Kereihi, mana e hari mai , ki au, mo runga i tenei mea kua whakaritea e au ko te Kereihi hei mangai moku ki kona ki Kemureti. He oi Na Rewi Maniapoto X taku tohu92 This letter dated 27 January 1883 and others93 reveal the closeness WH Grace maintained with Rewi as confidant, interpreter, and as the above letter indicates a pakeha to whom Rewi would assign his mana. Subsequent newsclippings show WH Grace was to be an interface between Maniapoto, Tawhiao and Mr Bryce (Paraihe) from 1880-1884. In a letter dated 10th April 1880 William writes his to brother, Laurence, concerning some land transactions, of a very "touchy" Whitaker, and Sheehan, who is ... "doing himself a lot of harm by not being truthful, for all that we must try and keep them sweet." and that ... Re Otira Block I believe Creagh knows all about it and I(p2) should therefore communicate with him and ascertain how he stands in regard [ ] the Block ...... You will have to be here during Native Land Court there will be a tremendous lot of work to do, and we ought to do

well. . .. I mentioned that Atiamuri Block to Fraser & Saunders & they seem to think it would suit splendidly, it appears they advertised in Sydney re buying Maori lands and they got 4 or 5 applications, I think we ought to do the same both down south and on the other side at any rate we would not lose much by doing so. When you are writing tell

92WH Grace Letterbook 1882, p376

93 Grace/Bryce, Letterbook 1882, p207 and Grace/Farrell, Letterbook 1882, p209 76 me how the law stands re Maori's [sic] selling or leasing land. Is it necessary that all the grantees should be parties to the transaction and in case all do not sell whether those not selling should be consenting parties. 94 His Letterbooks show that WH Grace was in contact most " of the principal land-buying speculators of Auckland. These very same men controlled the funds of the Bank of New Zealand, the large mercantile stores and thus by commodity and investment control guided the flow of money. These people formed landbuying companies and Laurence Grace and WH Grace were the men who competed to negotiate land purchases for them. A graphic picture of what he and his brother were doing is displayed in a letter to Laurence, dated 17th April 1880; Dear Laurence ... One of the young Walkers was here today and whilst conversing with Hewitt told him that his father had great confidence in you and I thinks that had they us to buy for them the Company that they could dispense easily with Sheehan and Whitaker adding that it was his fathers wish that Sheehan put Pukekura and [Puahoe]? Blocks into my hands to get title put right and maori difficulty

removed ... 95 It appears from other correspondence that WH Grace saw land­ dealing as a means of making money and acquiring for himself some land. He writes in a letter dated 4th September 1881, related to the benefits of forming a company to purchase Maori lands; G. Holdship Esq. Dear Sir ... both as a very profitable speculation, and also as means of solving the native question, and getting the country settled by a large European population thus

94WH Grace/LM Grace, Letterbook 1880, pI

~ WH Grace Letterbook 1880, p28 77 pushing the country ahead sooner than it otherwise would ... 96 He then suggests that some of the lands be cut up into small areas and sold on deferred payment system therefore give the ',poorer classes a chance and prevent howls re speculators monopoly. That it must be large and strong, have a few people with small means, and widespread, so that "no government will ever be got to legislate against its wishes". The Company should have good native agents and an inspector to insure they work quickly and they must have shares in it. Such a Company must be started before the next Parliament meets in order to prevent detrimental legislation and that its name must suit all parties in politics. WH Grace suggested "The New Zealand Native Land purchase and Settlement Company". Finally he suggests that when it is floated that a pamphlet should be issued. Eventually WH Grace sees a few men acting, was more efficient than a company, in buying good Maori lands in particular the King Country ... " is all that is left, which is really good land, and through which the trunkline of Railway is bound to go,,97. Letters written after this date show the behind the scenes expectations coming from the great November 1882 hui where Bryce and Tawhiao had met, were that the Kingite lands were to be opened up for settlement. They reflect the competition of other land buying agents (Messers Jackson and Walker) and show also WH Grace's practice of making advances to maori who were to gain Native Land Court defined interests. He writes on the 16th July 1883 To get hold on the natives owning lands in King country we must pay away something otherwise we will have no footing, and will not be known amongst the owners when the time comes

96 WH Grace Letterbook 1881, pp 165-167

97WH Grace/Browning, 18 September, Letterbook 1882, pp296- 298 78 for buying98 WH Grace continued in his private capacity until December 1st 1885 when he was appointed Land Purchase Officer for the Taupo district99 . It is at this junction that this narrative broadens ',to include some of the workings of Williams' brother Laurence Grace MHR which have also direct relevance on the bringing in of Taupo nui a Tia lands under the Native Land Court process.

7.4 THE BRINGING IN OF TAUPO NUl A TIA UNDER THE NATIVE LAND COURT;-the inter-related activities of the brothers Laurence, John, and William, Grace.

7.4.1 Laurence M Grace The Inward Letterbook Registry [ILR] lists the date, author and a brief subject-matter summary of letters to what was then the, Native Affairs Department. So it is letter number 85/356 is recorded as being a letter to the Native Affairs Secretary from a Mr LM Grace MHR, dated November 27th 1885, urging that a survey of Tuwharetoa tribal block should be commenced at once, and the 100 Natives apply for Mr Mitchell as their surveyor , followed by, another dated 3rd December 1885, asking for cause of delay in authorizing Mr Mitchell to proceed with survey of Tuwharetoa 101 Block • In letter to J Ballance, Native Minister, Laurence Grace M.H.R. writes Sir, Referring to our several conversations in Wellington during last session of Parliament in connection with the

9~H Grace/Grice, Letterbook 1883, p439

99MA MLP 85/324 copy of Executive Council Notice of Appointment

100MA MLP, Series 3, 85/356

101MA MLP Series 3, 85/363 79 settlement of the Taupo Country, at which you expressed your great desire to effect the following public objects viz 1st. The acquisition on behalf of the Crown of lands in the interior of the North Island, as near as possible to the Main Trunk Line of Railway now in the course of construction by the Government . ... 2nd. That the Ruapehu, Ngauruhoe, and Tongariro mountains and the principal Thermal Springs ) in the Taupo country be made inalienable reserves. 3rd. That every endeavour should be made to settle the Native tribes of Taupo permanently on portions of their tribal lands which can only be done by passing their lands through the Court and individualising their titles thereto as thoroughly as possible. 4th. That a Land Court be ordered to sit at Taupo to enable the Natives to give effect to these objects I wish to state that I am with yourself much interested in seeing these objects attained, and on my return to Taupo I took opportunities of repeating to the natives the above sentiments you had yourself and through your officers previously laid before them and pointed out the desirableness of [unreadable] .... the settlement of their la[torn] ... if possible at once ... an[torn] operation, and so avoi[torn] protracted delays and he[torn]g [hearing] expenses of numerous courts spread over a long term of years, and this could best be effected by submitting their whole tribal claim [p3] for investigation ...... Subsequently, with the object of following up the course above sketched out, the natives of Taupo had meetings, and on the 31st October last as you are aware, in the presence of one of your land purchase officers and in the presence of Major Scannell R M Taupo, they signed and sent in to the Native Land Court a claim for those of their lands which they claim for those of their lands which they claim under their ancestor Tuwharetoa, containing about two and half 80 millions of acres more or less, in the centre of the North Island, and called "Taupo nui-a-Tia" Block." ... (doc A 27, Appx A, p8) In the same letter he makes two of suggestions as to how the ',Crown could best effect purchase of some of Taupo nui a Tia lands basically through appointment of reliable and and experienced persons as agents working under control of the Land Purchase Department. He further outlines his concern for "bona fide" occupiers (doc A 27, Appx A, p12) of native lands, or purchasers, or lessees of native blocks within the Taupo nui a Tia block. And in a letter immediately following he listed some nine such bona fide settlers and amongst the names appears his brother John Grace, who had some 27, 000 acres in the Tahura and Tauhara blocks ( doc A 27, Appx A, p13). WH Grace is entered on the Inwards Letterbook Register102 as asking if Government will pay for subdivision surveys of Tauponuiatia block. Dated 5 February 1886 this letter was written during the course of the actual Hearing. The Graces were not the only persons concerned at such matters as two letters are

registered as having arrived, one from a Paranihi & others 103 and

the other from a Ngawai Hineuru and others 104. The first one, dated May 18 1886, occurs after the first Tauponuiatia Hearing has sat and been adjourned, expressing" disapproval at the cost of survey etc of their lands at Taupo and requesting that no special law may be made with respect to their lands within Tuwharetoa external boundary etc, etc". The second dated, April 23 1886,is recorded on the Register as requesting that advances made by private persons may not be allowed. There then appears three entries of correspondence in letter or memorandum form to the Native Affairs Department from the

102MA MLP Series 3, 86/56

103MA MLP 8 6 / 16 5

104MA MLP 86/166 81 Assistant-General, Lands & Survey Department, Auckland. He is first enquiring as to Taupo surveys and land purchases105 and is then asking if the existing arrangement as to payment for Taupo 106 surveys stands good • Just what the "existing arrangement as ".. to payment for Tauponuiatia surveys" was I am not able to definitely say at this stage but the statement minuted in evidence of Mr Mitchell indicates the existence of a written agreement. 7.4.2 JOHN EDWARD GRACE Arrives firstly to the Tauponuiataia proceedings as a partner to a Mr Henry Mitchell, both having contracted with Horonuku Te HeuHeu to carry out a private survey of Tuwharetoa lands for the purposes of allowing Te Heu Heu to make his application to the Native Land Court. A file of correspondence between the Surveyor-General and messers H Mitchell, JE Grace, for payment for their survey services (see doc A 27, Appendix A, pS9) reveals the integral involvement of these two persons in the passage of Tauponuiatia Block through the NLC. JE Grace is recorded in the Minute Book as being also that Courts interpreter at least in the first three month sitting (1886 Jan 14th - April 20th 1886). His partner Henry wrote a Report to the Native Minister , J Ballance saying The first object which engaged our attention was the amicable settlement of the external Boundary claimed by Tuwharetoa which had been gazetted for hearing by the Native Lands Court, at Tapuaeharuru, Taupo, on the 14th of January last. This boundary as gazetted we found caused considerable surprise and consternation in what is known as the "King Country" - and to the great Tribes whose land claims adjourn or were included therein. Letters and communications of a very urgent character came from Tawhiao and other chiefs of

105MA MLP 86/289

106MA MLP 86/364 82 the old King party appealing to Te HeuHeu to "close the doors of the coming Court" and prevent such a disastrous blow to their aims as the bringing the Tuwharetoa country hitherto regarded as their territory under the Jurisdiction , and operations of the law. To all these communications Te HeuHeu gave one reply - that the Court must open and proceed

with the adjudication of the lands on the date fixed -. (MA MLP 86/190; doc A 27, Appendix A, p29). 7.4.3 WH GRACE

Throughout 1887 WH Grace I s Reports to the Under-Secretary as part of his work as Land Purchase Officer (doc A 27 Appendix A, pp17, 22, 52). Four entries in the Inwards Letterbook Registry [ILR] are of interest at this point. The subject of these entries are firstly the forwarding of returns for lands acquired in the Taupo District, dated 18 October 1887, nearly one month after date of 107 final judgment was made by the NLC • The second lists the Government Survey Liens in the Taupo District108 , dated 15 November. The third entry records WH Grace as explaining settlement of certain survey liens on blocks within Tauponuiatia boundaries 109. This entry relates contemporaneously, to correspondence dated 4 November 1887, which Mr Cox has found in the Auckland Lands & Survey Archives and which he has attached in the Appendices section of his Report,(doc A 25, Appendix 2, pp37-42). The third110 and fourth111 entries relate to the survey progress of Mr Cussen, with Tuhua Maori noted as expected to halt his work. Thereafter follow two entries of correspondence from Tokaanu Maori (Paurini Karamu & others) protesting at the employment of Mr Cussen on the survey for Tokaanu, Waipapa and

107 MA MLP 87/317

108MA MLP 87/333

109 MA MLP 87/342

110 MA MLP 87/343

111MA MLP 87/344 83 Ohunga blocks. From the office of Hoani Taipua MHR also arrives

a letter dated 12 March 1888 r requesting that Taupo surveys be 112 stopped until next session r of parliament • Subsequent entries reveal on one hand another incidence of Maori protest to the ·,Tauponuiatia Rohe Potae lands being surveyed113 and on the other hand the desire of surveyors H Cussen and H Mitchell for completion of all Tauponuiatia surveys and payment for services 114 rendered • The final entry on the ILR index related to this series of correspondence is an entry related to a letter115 from

the Surveyor-General 1 Mr Percy-Smith r dated 21 September 1889 1 suggesting completion of Tauponuiatia surveys. The 1889 Tauponuiatia Royal Commission saw the credibility of Mr WH Grace as an issue (question 2E) and had as one of its terms of reference ...

that Mr Grace r the Government Land Purchase Agent r

improperly interfered in the Court r and actively and openly supported the parties opposing him and his people in the abovementioned claims (doc 5 (a)r p3) The "abovementioned claims" was a reference to the Commissions' having to investigate the boundary determined between Maniapoto and Tuwharetoa and the award of the Horaaruhe Pouakani block to certain hapu. The words "openly supported the parties opposing him " imply that WH Grace supported the Maniapoto claim of right of interest in the lands in dispute as a result of the Tuwharetoa-Maniapoto boundary determination.

Perhaps given his marital connectionr Makereti Hinewai his wife coming from Maniapoto r and WH Grace's previous five years of working with Rewi Manga. As a response the Commission found ;-

112MA MLP 88/57

113 MA MLP 88/83

114MA MLP 89/2

11S MA MLP 89/305 84 re 2E There is no doubt that Mr WH Grace, the Government Land Purchase Officer employed to negotiate with the Natives for the purchase of portions of the Tauponuiatia Block did assist in Court the party opposed to Hitiri by suggesting questions and giving them advice ; and, being himself interested in the Pouakani Block, through his wife (a Native or half-caste), and by reason of his having made large advances to the claimants, amounting to over L600, on his own responsibility, and further, by his desire to facilitate the sale to Government, it is more than probable that when out of Court he also aided and guided them in the course they should pursue: but the charges made against him by Hitiri and other witnesses of improper conduct were not corroborated by evidence, and we consider that they were mere suspicions, which have not been in any way substantiated. They accuse him of having interfered with the Interpreter in Court, of tampered with witnesses, and of having made TeHeuheu drunk to prevent his giving evidence; Hitiri even suggested, that very plainly, that it was through [WH] Grace's influence that Judge Brookfield was removed from the Bench, because he was not sufficiently subservient to his wishes. Mr Grace positively denied these charges, and showed that Hitiri and his party had been assisted by Mr F.A. Whitaker as counsel, and by Mr Moon and Captain Blake as their advisers, the latter said to be the ablest conductor of Native Land Court cases in the colony. Whether Mr Grace, a Government officer, should have mixed himself up in any way with matters in dispute between the Natives themselves may be a question for the Government to determine. (Doc A 5; pp3-4) The Royal Commission did find that Karawhira Kapu was induced to withdraw certain large claims in the Pouakani Block, which had been made on behalf of the Ngati Ha hapu, by promises 85 made to her by WH Grace in an agreement executed on 24th March 1887. This was later read by the 1891 Land Court and may have formed the basis of its reasoning to include N'Ha in ownership of a further 12,000 acre award. , WH Grace explained that he was empowered to make such discretionary payments under the head of "Contingencies", provided he did not exceed the price per acre authorised by the Government to be paid for the land; that he has on several occasions exercised this power; and those payments were never questioned by the Department. The Departments response to this given on the Native Departments' behest by a Mr P Sheridan, Chief Clerk and Accountant in the Native Land Purchase Branch. In a memorandum dated 28th August, 1889 Mr Sheridan writes ... No authority that I am aware of was ever issued to Mr Grace which would warrant his entering into such an agreement. The discretionary powers of a Land Purchase \ Officer, under which he claims to have acted, if any, are extremely limited, as the telegraph affords ready means of communication with headquarters in all cases of doubt or difficulty. I have read through the evidence taken before the Commission, and cannot find the statements by Mr Grace, as contained in the three last lines of the report. At all events, these statements are not correct. Mr Grace has never paid any bonuses as alleged. He states so himself in the telegraphic correspondence attached. I have satisfied myself by a perusal of his accounts. (doc A 5;G.-7A, pI) The Claimants further claim there is no evidence of payment being made for Pouakani B9A. The deed of sale and purchase does show on the face of the record payment of L1250, the agreement being signed by Judge Edgar as definition of the Crown's interest in Pouakani B9. In a letter (doc A 25, Appdx 2, pp37-42) to Mr Percy-Smith, Assistant Surveyor, William Grace writes concerning the costs of 86 the original surveys regarding a number of Tauponuiatia Blocks, and that payment was arranged by the owners making payment in land. I have laid out in tabular listing the blocks, their size, the cost of survey, and the amount of land taken for survey costs "or acquired by Crown purchase. BLOCKS: SIZE(acres): COST OF SURVEY: LANDS TAKEN (Pounds.Shillings.pence):ACQUIRED & renamed Rangatira: 10,600 L264.14s.11pd 1850 acres, Rangatira No.2 Kaimanawa: 79,800 L662.6.0 19,548 acres, No 1. Kairnanawa No.lA Taurangai 15669 L222.13.4 5,000 acres, Taupo No 2 Tauranga Taupo No2A Taurangai 8432 L148.9.2 4850 acres, Taupo No 3 Tauranga Taupo No 3A Kaimanawa: 53,360 Agreed that Crown pay survey costs No 2. 26,360 acres, sold to Crown, Kaimanawa No2A Kaimanawai 39,500 Agreed that Crown pay survey costs No 3. 18,786 acres sold to Crown Kaimanawa No3A Taurewa: 40,000 Agreed that Crown Pay survey costs 13629 acres sold to Crown, and 3971 acres added by the non-sellers as their share of survey costs. The Total, 17,600 vested in Crown, called Taurewa No 1. Rangipo: subdivided into Arranged that survey costs, L1932 North Block Nos 1-7, 16 shillings, 3 pence, be met Block Tongariro No2, by area being proportionately cut

& Ruapehu No2. off each subdivision thus;- Rangipo N No.1 233 acres, R.N. No. 1A 87

" N.No.2 3092 acres 1 R.N. No.2A N.No.3 2640 acres 1 R.N. No.3A

N.No.4 1162 acres l R.N .No. 4A

" N.No.5 1533 acres l R.N .No. SA , " N.No.6 8256 acres 1 R.N .No. 6A " N.No.7 1959 acres 1 R.N .No. 7A

Tuhua: 78500 acres 3 1/2p per acre 11824 acres l Hurakia minor triangulation Waihaha No.2 Waihaha costs

Hora-: 122 / 350 acres L1650 20 1 000 acres 1 aruhe Pouakani No.1 -Pouakani Block Tahori­ Native owners cut off and vested two

Kuri blocks 1 No3-3012 acres 1 and No4 -5000

acres 1 in the Crown l as survey payment.

The letter containing the above information is dated 4th

November 1887. WH Grace was still Land Purchase Officer l and the Native Land Court required surveys had cost Tuwharetoa iwi 85 / 000

acres and the hapu of Pouakani 20 1 000 acres. The Reports filed by WH Grace regarding his time as Land Purchase Officer Taupo District since 1st December 1885 display a highly efficient Land Purchase Officer who had steered three and half million acres of Maori land through the Native Land Court over a twenty month

period 1 with a total of some 36 weeks of actual sitting. Yet following complaints of the type recorded in previous

paragraphs 1 ie the Royal Commission of 1889 / his services were dispensed with as from mid-1888. In a memo to W Cussen dated 22- 10-89 William Grace signs off "Late Government Land Purchase

Officer l Taupo" (See doc A 25 1 Appdx 21 pp27 128). He was through, lobbying, to be re-employed as Assistant Land Purchase Officer to George Thomas Wilkinson (doc A 271 Appx A, p69). This position lasted until June 1891 followed by 3 month contract as Otorohanga Court Licensed Interpreter. Thereafter there is little mention 88 of any more land-dealings involving Mr WH Grace in any professional capacitYr though he appears as witness on several of the Deeds of Sale and Purchase (doc A 33 (c) ). The NZ Dictionary of Biography notes that at the time of his death WH "Grace is recorded as having L600 worth of real estate mainly in and around the Te Kuiti district. 7.5 THE FINAL PURCHASES - G T Wilkinson The Deeds of Sale and Purchase (doc A 33) effected after the 1891-1892 NLC Final Orders were made show that in the years 1892- 1899 considerable effort was made by G T Wilkinson to complete the process begun in December 1885. His report on land purchase operations in King CountrYr dated 13th April 1894 show that no Pouakani Block purchases were effected by that date on the

Crown's behalf (doc A 27 r Appx Ar p72). The Deeds indicate that

by 1899 some 65 r OOO acres of Pouakani Block had been bought by the Crown. 89 8. SURVEYS

8.1 The taking of land for survey costs was a decision taken by the Crown and given legislative authority by such sections 'as are compiled in doc A 32. A short history of lands and survey as a Crown department may assist in understanding why the Crown made that decision and Doc A 27 Appendix C, at page 95 being a compilation of National Archives introductory papers to its

Lands & Surveys Department holdings provides a concise brief history. 8.2 Specific to Pouakani is the information recorded at pages 318 - 341, 1887-1892, Taupo Minute Book 9, doc #A 15. At page 339, Mr Henry Mitchell is asked to produce the agreement for the price of survey. He produced an agreement dated Taupo, March 24th 1886, for a survey of the Tauponuiatia West Block, giving boundaries, and including the Tihoi block, at the rate of 3 1/2 pence per acre. This agreement was read out to the NLC then at February 6th 1892 and it seem clear that the natives signing this agreement understood that 3 1/2 pence per acre was to cover all survey costs. Appendix 2, of doc A 25, pages 37-42 sets out what lands were taken from Tauponuiatia as payment for surveys required for Native Land Court purposes, all in all some 95,000 acres was acquired by the Crown for payment of survey costs. These were the costs for the subdivisional block surveys. The internal subdivisions of Pouakani Block were to be surveyed and doc A 27, appendix A, page 80 shows that as at 1899, surveys were done for Pouakani blocks, A1, A2, A3, B6, B9, C1, C2, and D2 with Crown either paying the survey costs as part of its purchase price or there are no survey costs at all but purchase of a block. Page 84, doc A 27 Appendix A records that the Crown acquired Pouakani B9 A mostly by purchase (7,200 acres), as does the Deed (doc A 33(d)). An extra 140 acres added by way of payment from the non­ sellers for their share of the survey costs. 90 9. FORESTS 9.1 INTRODUCTION This chapter has been written to provide a backgrounding to the rise of a timber industry, the emergence of State control. My ',thanks go to a Dr M Roche, Department of Geography, Massey University, who provided most of the papers or a guide to sources which enabled the writing of this chapter to be completed in the limited time available. The comments of a Maori perspective are brief and require much more research. Differing stratum of Maori forestry ownership applied, depending on the group exercising the activity concerned. Thus for example when trees were to be axed for waka there had to be tohunga approval and overall direction or else death would result. The accounts recorded say of the building of the Tainui and Arawa combined ocean double-hull

vessel imply that the hulls were drawn from the same wao tapu 0 Tane, not necessarily an individual tree but the same stand, or genus.

9.1.1 NZ in 1840 was mor~ than 50% forested. By 1980 about 23% of the land area remained in indigenous forest with about 3% planted in exotic forest. The forests, as a resource, were from earliest European settlement days recognised as an important resource. Not only did the advent of the steel axe-head become at first a new avenue for the increase of mana, but their value as a trading commodity decreased as the number of axe-heads supplied was able to satisfy Maaori demand. Timber exported via Sydney was worth L10,OOO in 1826., by 1839 L95,173. The Royal Navy was quick to recognise the suitability of New Zealand timbers for spars, masts, and 116 planking • Admiralty interest led to the appointment of a Conservator of Kauri Forests in 1841.

116 Cruise; 1823 91 9.2 PAKEHA INDUSTRY Post-Treaty administrators introduced a licensing system as had been adopted in British North America. Quite simply, for a fee, exclusive rights to cut timber on a designated area could ',be acquired. Criticism about the shortcomings and abuse of the licensing system, wasteful and illegal cutting resulted in Premier Julius Vogel introducing, in 1876, a progressive New Zealand Forests Bill. The Bill provided for 3% of forest lands of each province to be set aside as State forests and Vogel presented these forest conservation proposals as a facet of his wider public works and development schemes. Provincial jealousies caused the Act to be passed in an amended and less effective form. A Captain I C Walker was appointed as Conservator of Forests in 1876. He made a lengthy inspection of the colony's forests and made a Report to

Parliament 117. Campbell-Walker' s report showed that the NZ timber industry made extensive use of steamsaws, tramways and that there was much wastage. The felling, removal, and conversion of tree to plank he felt was carried out in a most inexpeditious manner. His recommendations advocated that a State Department be organised to carry out all forestry matters and that private planting be encouraged so as to avoid the denudation and accompanying environmental damage. It was not until the 1880's that official attention was refocussed on forestry. A Lecoy, an ex French forester provided two papers to Parliament for consideration as to the viability of State forestry. It was not until the return of J Vogel to the political arena that state forestry as a concept was reconsidered. He commissioned Professor T Kirk to inspect forest resources and he was to be appointed Chief Conservator of Forests, becoming head of a newly created Forests and Agriculture Branch of the Lands Department. Little was done due to economic hard times.

117 AJHR, 18 7 7, C. - 3 92 A Timber conference was called by delegates of the timber industry in 1896 and addressed by Premier R Seddon. A reading of this report reveals that a developing export industry was considered and would be of definite profit for private and · ... public involvement. Committees were established to ensure industry standards were upgraded and possible state involvement in the planting of exotic afforestation were entertained. While annual returns of plantings made under the Forest Trees Planting Encouragement Act, 1874 and were printed in the AJHR it was not until reports started predicting the end to indigenous supplies that serious thought to a Forests Dept for re-afforestation and planting of exotics was contemplate~18. 1896 had seen the establishment of a Forests branch of the Lands Department and planting schemes were established. By 1909 in excess of 10,000 acres had been planted and by 1919 this had risen to 30,000 acres. In 1919 the Forestry branch became independent from the Lands Department largely as a result of the initiative of Sir F Bell, who subsequently became the minister responsible (Called the Commissioner of State Forests). In 1920 a Mr L M Ellis a young Canadian forestry graduate with public and private sector experience was appointed as Director of Forestry. His report 119 laid out a blue-print for the future of State forestry in New Zealand. This report led Government to enact the State Forests Act 1921, which gave legislative independence to a new State Forest Service and which had a specific part dealing with Maori forests, section 59. That section provided that assembled owners of native forest could by resolution transfer control to the State Forest Service. By 1925 large and expansive exotic planting was occurring following a 1921-1923 national inventory had revealed conclusively that indigenous forests could not meet future demands. By 1935 over 400,000 acres of exotic

118 AJHR 19 05, C. - 6, AJHR 19 0 9, C. - 4

119 AJHR 1921, C.-3A 93 forests had been planted by the state, most of it in the central North Island region. Since 1959-60 exotic timber production has dominated the market and a second planting boom was initiated in 1970's. , Management of remaining indigenous forests and State exotic has become a major issue since with a recent Government proposal to sell State Forests to private enterprise interests. The New Zealand Maori Council was able to obtain from the Full Bench of the Court of Appeal120 an injunction halting this proposed Govrnment policy the Court holding that such a move was in breach of the agreement reached by Maori and the Crown as a result of the New Zealand Maori Council State-owned Enterprise case121.

9.3 THE INDUSTRY AND THE POUAKANI BLOCK At the end of the 19th century a Mr Tudor Atkinson had managed to obtain leases and freeholds in the Tauponui nui atia West area. The Maaori blocks known as Tihoi, Pouakani, Whangamata, and Tatua he perceived as wonderful totara stands. A good proportion of these bushes was pure totara forest, some areas averaging over 50,000 feet of sawn timber to the acre. In 1900 he proceeded to form a company to work these bushes, but had difficulty in floating the company. He was so convinced of the value of the bush that he accepted ordinary shares for his land and his timber leases, and issued Preference shares at 7% for subscribed capital. The Taupo Totara Timber Co. Ltd. and the Wellington Industrial Development Co. Ltd. These Companies had identical directors and shareholders and the same capital. The directors were a Mr J E Fulton CE, Mr Walter Fell and Mr Tudor Atkinson. At that meeting in 1902 each showed an authorised capital of

1~ CA 54/87; 20.3.1989

121 [1987] 2 NZLR 641 94 L75,000, composed of 50,000 x L1 ordinary shares and 25,OOOx L1 preference shares. Of this share capital 36,639 ordinary shares had been allotted mainly to Mr Atkinson and partners in payment for their ',land and timber leases, and only L768 had been paid up on 6184 preference shares taken up. By 1903 paid up preference shares amounted to only L9115. T Atkinson persuaded and promoted his brain child and he managed to bring in more shareholders. To meet the capital outlay he had to borrow short term loans from shareholders and issue short-term debentures as against the Company's assets. The monies were necessary to build a wooden tramway running between Mokai, where the main mill was, and Putararu the nearest railways junction. A contract worth L32,500 was entered into for the task. TTT Ltd in conjunction with Wellington Industrial Development Co proposed to work leases in the Tihoi, Pouakani area. These leases were gazetted 14 November 1900 amounting to Tihoi 4170 acres and in Pouakani 2065 acres/21 year lease - L2/acre for totara and Matai and for every acre of good timber bush 12/5acre. In a special report of the 1908 Native Land Commission on an agreement by Ngati Tuwharetoa tribe and a company for Sale of Timber and Construction of Railway, dated 11th September, 1908 discloses that the Tongariro Timber Company entered into an agreement in 1906, which involved 134,000 acres and specifically a 40,160 acre acre block which the Coy estimated contained 35,000 feet/per acre. The Report further discloses that on 22nd January, 1908 an Order-in-Council issued which exempted certain portions of that large area from operation of sl17 Native Land Court Act 1894, so that the land could be sold for L1 per acre for the purposes of constructing a railway. These arrangements were sanctioned with modification by the Maniapoto-Tuwharetoa District Maori Land Board pursuant to s26 of the Maori Land Claims Adjustment and Laws Amendment Act 1907. 95 After examining the agreement messers Stout and Ngata concluded that it was in the interest of the Maori owners that the price to be paid compared with prices paid in similar districts is fair1ll. They further concluded after outlining the benefit of the scheme to Maori and Pakeha alike that If the Government is not prepared to give better terms than those offered by the Company to the Maoris, then no just reason can be raised against the owners entering into this agreement and doing their best with their timber and lands. They recommended that the Land Board be authorised by statute to enter into the agreement as agent for the Maori owners. 9.3.1 In 1954 Pouakani B9B timber cutting rights were negotiated and sold for what was then a record amount, L254,OOO. The claimants grievance is that there has never been a proper counting to the Trust of those monies. Secondly the timber taken from the disputed boundary areas has meant that the wrong owners were paid. The Claimants allege no record of any meeting of owners was ever held whereby a lease of timber rights could legitimately be negotiated specifically for Pouakani C1 B. There is a clear complaint in the claim (Doc A l(a), para. 11) that there has been timber removed from Pouakani CIA, C 1B without any proper accounting to the rightful owners. Entered on the Record of Documents is a compilation of papers related to the forestry concerns of the Claimants and it will be necessary for the Pouakani Tribunal to request from the Maori Trustee Office information regarding their management of the funds accrued to Pouakani Trust by virtue of the 1954 agreement ( doc A 31).

122 see Evidence before Native Affairs Committee, AJHR, 1908 96 10 FARMING 10.1 The purpose of this chapter is again of a backgrounding nature and further inquiry and research related to Maori Trustee administration of the Claimant's blocks is required. Farming in ·,the Pouakani lands did not occur in as a European style, dairy, sheep or cattle production until aerial top-dressing enabled vast tracts of the pumice lands to be fertilised enough to support stock in an economic unit ratio per acre. 10.2 Maori attitudes to farming were to a major extent shaped by the work of Sir Apirana Ngata LLB BA, both in his capacity as Secretary of Native Affairs and as co-commissioner in the 1908 Royal Commission into Native Lands and Native Land Tenure. From that latter capacity on which he worked with Stout the following quoted extract reflects the essence of the concern as regards farming and Maori. The Maoris are a communal people , and this system, which preserves a community of interest, but also allows and rewards individual exertion, may be the best means of creating a better industrial life amongst a communal people. This system of incorporation is new to our Dominion, and has not, so far as we know, been adopted in any part of the world in dealing with farming pursuits. It is a union of capital and labour, for the labour on the incorporated blocks is almost wholly supplied by the landowners or their relatives. In these days, when so many social experiments are being tried, this system merits consideration and careful watching. There is nothing we know of that could hinder it being adopted by Europeans. If ten,twenty, or thirty families of colonists were to obtain a block of land either by purchase or on perpetual lease, and to manage it as the Maoris manage these incorporated blocks, perhaps a higher village life might be led and true altruistic communities formed. For under this system labour is paid 97 at the current rates, and the holder of what may be called the "stock" or "capital" gets the profits; but, as the holders of the "stock" are also the workers, they reap directly not only the reward, but the profit of their labour. Further, the settlers would not live apart on separate farms, but their houses would be close to each other , and thus there would be a better social life than in many country districts. There would be closer social communication. The drawback to country life is often the want of a village or town life, the absence of social intercourse, and the lack of art, music, and literature that are common to most towns. How is country life to be made popular? How are the settlers to have all the privileges and pleasures of town life whilst they enjoy the great benefits of an open-air country life? This is one of the many social problems of today. There have been many communities started in country districts in other countries to enable their members to reap the advantages of such a. life. Most of them have been based on a community of goods as well as of life, and there has been less scope for individual effort or exertion than is open in individualistic communities, and even where such communities have had a strong religious sanction, few of them have existed for any great length of time . The communistic societies that have been started in the United States of America under various conditions have almost all been failures. One community, the Oneida Creek, lately abolished its communal system, and created its members into a co-operative or joint-stock company. Its members work and are paid for their labour. They have stores, &c., that supply their wants, and dividends are paid to the stockholders. Since this system has been inaugurated we understand the community has been fairly successful. 98 Perhaps the paragraph that follows is the finest expression of what AP Ngata and CJ Stout, two formidably able intellects considered together was the pathway for the Dominion's farming. It reads All over the civilised world a search is being made for some new social system. Who knows but that the goal of a higher social life may not be reached through some such system as the Maoris in this district [Waiapu] are trying? It is not for us to predict what the end of the experiment may be. It may be a step towards a more intelligent system of individualisation, not on the basis of the tribal, or hapu, or family subdivisions according to Native custom, but on a basis of the most fit receiving title to occupy portions of the communal land and farming thereon independently of communal restraint. It is significant that the younger generation on the new lands now being occupied favour leasing where the conditions do not admit of individualisation, whilst at the same time the village or kainga life is preserved. It is enough to say that in our opinion the system now in vogue should receive a full and fair trial, and that the Maoris should be helped to realise their aim - namely to have the best industrial methods and an educated people, whilst that communal life which allows close social intercourse should not be wholly destroyed. 10.3 Crown Agricultural Policy - It needs to be asked what was the Maori Affairs development practice with regard to the two Trust blocks, Titiraupenga and Pouakani B 9B and what was the status of these two blocks at the time of handover to the present day trustees. 10.4 What had the Maori Trustee done in establishing a grassing development programme while forestry farming on a massive scale was occurring all around these "pumiceferous" districts needs explanation. 99 11. ADDITIONAL ISSUES

By way of an Addendum filed in the Tribunal's office the Claimants claim prejudice in that lands of the original Pouakani ',Block were taken under the then Public Works Act 1928. This was done in the 1940' s for the hydro-electric schemes known as Whakamaru, Maraetai, and Waipapa. The result was that original Pouakani lands were submerged. The addendum further alleges that the Claimants have been deprived of their rightful interests to the bed of the Waikato River. I have attached, as introductory material, a photocopy of the Law Commission's comments on the issue of riverbed rights (see doc A 27, Appendix C, p70). There is currently a major Resource Management Law reform being pursued by the Crown and the issues of riverbed rights are the subject of study in the course of this review. 100 12. CONCLUSIONS

12.1 It is not my brief here to attempt any full description of the King Movement as a topic on its own. What these accounts all ',add up to in relation to the Pouakani Claim, the Tuwharetoa and Arawa confederation of iwi, and the present day descendants can only be be inferred from written documentation and printed, published materials, and then from listening to the present accounts requited at the Pouakani Hearings.

12.2 From Tuwharetoa the presence and relationship of the Grace family have resulted in documentation which gives substantial insight into these times. This is further emphasised by the weight attached to WH Grace and his preceeding relationship with Rewi. He was I submit, with his brothers, John and Laurence trying to do their best to carry the best wishes of their father Thomas but the world of the 1880,s was far far different than 10-30 years before. In many colonist minds they were Maori-wifed men at a time of growing pakeha racism with the vastly increased Pakeha population and the seemingly ever-quicker dying Maori. Looking at the record of Tuwharetoa lands taken for survey costs, 20,000 of the 80,000 acres came from Pouakani. In return the Crown had some vast acreages passed from Customary Maori land to Crown guaranteed the burden had fallen most heavily on the Pouakani Block. The brothers concern may have been for survival of a race that had died down to 40,000 from a possible 750,000 with 75 years of European contact.

12.3 The impact of the confiscation policy and the dynamics of a colonist government set on a strategy of land acquisition to facilitate a unified railway system were driving forces against which Maori were ineffective. This drive was propelled by the establishment of an investing group of bankers, and Queen Street lawyers. Faced with an indiginent communal people who were non-communicative and unified in their basic opposition to the 101 land hunger of Crown and settler their huge profit seeking ambitions were amounting to little.

12.4 Apart from the universal prejudice of individualisation ',of a communal title brought about by the Native Land Acts (as was found by the Tribunal in the Orakei Report) there seems every evidence of a determination effected by the most sophisticated means at hand. The system was trying to place one culture's land values and understanding upon another's so that "progress" could be made. There was in this case a large amount of effort by the Native Land Court and the government (the Crown) to placate and respect the concerns of both tribes. Their respective hapu located in this border region had to be given most of the Hearing time of both brackets of Native Land Court investigations so that no further dispute could ensue.

12.5 Against this background it can be seen that each of the tribes was steadily arriving at the decision that the time was at hand for them to preserve their tribal territories so that those whose lands were used for railway purposes could obtain

payment f and so that all others might know which lands were whose. It is not therefore remarkable that Te HeuHeu Horonuku should on behalf of the Tuwharetoa make the application to the Native Land Court in October 1885 for a demarcation of his tribes' territory, one that separated it from the King Country. What is outstandingly noticeable is that it was the first Native Land Court application that was entered in that Courts existence where all the tribal estates were to investigated at the same time. As outlined in para 7.3 the workings of the three Grace brothers, Lawrence, John, and William were related and what their intent was is for this Tribunal to make a finding on based on the material presented to it. Te HeuHeuwas a man who was leading over 153 hapu, and some those hapu independently could raise 150-200 fighting men. The death toll of N'Kohera at Orakau had 102 been costly to this band of hapuu who had rallied to TeHeuHeu's request. That there was inter-hapu rivalry, which could and often did result in fighting, did not detract from the acknowledged preference that belonged to hapu from which Te HeuHeu men took -,their leadership being recognised by the other 152 hapu as the paramount tribe taking direct lineage from both Ngatoroirangi and Tia, leading tipuna. The marriage of Te Heu Heu Tukino's daughter, Te Herekiekie, to Laurence Grace was a binding of all the qualities of Thomas Grace into his people.

12.6 The fact that Makereti and Manawa Hinewai appear on the deed of sale (doc A 33(c» after the 1892 judgment specifically excluded needs to further examined. It appears on the historical record that some fraud may have been committed.

It is for this Tribunal to examine these events and decide whether there has been prejudice, the amount of prejudice practised by the Crown, and rather importantly to whom. 103

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Acheson FOV, (1974) The plume of the Arawa, AH & AW Reed, Wellington, New Zealand.

Belich J, (1986) The New Zealand Wars and Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict, Auckland University Press, Auckland, New Zealand.

Brittan SJ (1928) A Pioneer Missionary Among Maoris 1850-

GF, CW, & 1879, Being Letters and Journals of Thomas Samuel AV Grace Eds. Grace, publd. GH Bennett & Co. Ltd., Pa1merston North, New Zealand.

Cruise RA (1823) Journal of Ten Months Residence in New Zealand, Republished 1957, Pegasus Press, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Dieffenbach E (1843) Travels in New Zealand, Vol. 1, London, Capper Press Reprint, 1974, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Fletcher HM (1980) Tales of Early Taupo, Times Commercial Printers, Hamilton, New Zealand.

Grace J TeH (1959) Tuwharetoa, AH & AW Reed, Wellington, New Zealand.

Hasman CY (1975) Mangakino in Perspective,publd. Waikato Hydro Welfare Association, New Zealand.

Kelly EM (1970) Summary of the Law Relating to Land Surveying in New Zealand (Excluding Local Acts and the Survey Regulations), 4th Edition, Bowman & Stewart Ltd., Wellington, New Zealand. 104

Kelly LG (1949) Tainui The Story of Hoturoa and his Descendants, The Polynesian Society (Inc.), Wellington, New Zealand.

Kerry-Nicholls JH (1884) The King Country, Capper Press Reprint, 1974, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Oliver WH (1981) The Oxford History Of New Zealand, The & BR Williams Clarendon Press, New Zealand. Editors

Orange C (1987) The Treaty of Waitangi, Allen & Unwin NZ Ltd, Wellington, New Zealand.

Smith N. (1942) Native Custom and Law Affecting Native Land, The Maori Purposes Fund Board, Wellington, New Zealand.

(1962) Maori Land Corporations, AH & AW Reed, Wellington, New Zealand.

Rusden GW (1895) History of New Zealand, Vol II., Melville, Mullen & Slade, London.

Stone RCJ (1973) Makers of Fortune, Auckland University Press, New Zealand.

(1967) Economic Development, 1870-1890, Heinemann Educational Books Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand. Vennell CW (1967) The Brown Frontier, AH & AW Reed, Wellington, New Zealand.

Ward A (1973) A Show of Justice, Auckland University Press, New Zealand. 105

THESES

Parsonson AR (1972) Te Mana 0 te Kingitanga Maori: A Study of Waikato-Maniapoto Relations during the struggle for the King Country, 1878-84, MA Thesis, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.

Robinson W (1949) The Pacification of the Waikato 1869-76: A Study of the Native Policy Of Sir Donald McLean, MA Thesis, University of New Zealand, New Zealand. Sorenson MPK (1955) The Purchase Of Maori Lands, 1865-1892, Auckland University College, Auckland, New Zealand.

UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS

The Dairy and Letterbooks of WH Grace; Copies of various letters and dairy entries were provided to the Research Officer, Mr PT Harman and the full set is available for viewing through arrangement with Tribunal's Offices. National Archives Materials where referenced in the text and not attached in the Appendices (doc A 27), can be found at National Archives Wellington and/or at the Manuscript section of the Alexander Turnbull Library. ','------',

' ..

I ~ ~\' .,.r-~· ..U1. ~ 1I .,.;.. '. \;\-.-~~'"~" ~~~\\~,~ (;~ ---

~ ", .

. ' -

~( C\:... r