All document (doc) references, unless otherwise stated, are Wai-38 document references.

AJHR Appendices to the Journals of the House of Representatives

ATL Alexander Turnbull Library

DOC Department of Conservation

DOSLI Department of Survey and Land Information, Wellington

DOSLIA Department of Survey and Land Information, Auckland

HKMB Hokianga Minute Book

MLC Maori Land Court, Whangarei

NA National Archives, Wellington

NAA National Archives, Auckland

NMB Northern Minute Book

NZG New Zealand Government Gazette CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 THE CLAIM 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 The Claim 1 1.3 This Report 2 1.4 The Land 3 2.0 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 6 3.0 EVENTS PRIOR TO 1887 8 3.1 The Wairau and Waimamaku Block Titles 8 3.2 The Negotiations 9 3.3 The Survey of Waimamaku 2 10 3.4 The Waimamaku 2 Court Hearing 13 3.5 The Waimamaku 2 Plans 14 3.6 The Sale of Waimamaku 2 16 3.7 The Southern Wairau Sale 16 4.0 EVENTS AFTER 1887 18 4.1 The Canterbury Settlement 18 4.2 Maori Protest 20 4.3 The Kohekohe Coffins 25 4.4 The Protest Continues 29 4.5 The Origins of the Other Coffins 32 4.6 The Next Generation 34 4.7 Recent Developments 38

5.0 OTHER RESERVES 39 5.1 Taraire 39 5.2 Te Moho 40 5.3 Te Ninihi 41 5.4 Kaiparaheka 41 5.5 Wairau wahitapu 42 5.6 Kukutaiapa 44

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 45

7.0 FOOTNOTES 47

FIGURE ONE: Sketch Map of Waimamaku 2 and Wairau Blocks as Shown on ML 3278A (Kensington's Plan) With Names of Adjacent Blocks 4 FIGURE TWO: Sketch Map Showing Waimamaku Wahitapu and Kaharau Based on Plan ML 3278 (Wilson'S Plan) 5

TABLE ONE: Schedules of Land Purchased 11 - 1 - 1. THE CLAIM

The Wai-38 Claim is concerned with a variety of land and resource management issues relating to the area between Waimamaku and Kaihu. This is the territory of Te Roroa. The Waimamaku aspect of the Claim, outlined in this report, arises from the Crown purchase of the Waimamaku 2 and Southern Wairau Blocks and the alleged failure to set apart land for Maori and subsequently protect wahitapu and the taonga contained there. The area involved consists of a number of land blocks including Waimamaku 1 and 2, Southern and Northern Wairau, Kahumaku, Te Waihanga, Te Pure and other smaller blocks. Historically several hapu have occupied this land and the Land Court recognised the rights of Ngatipou, Ngati Ue and Ngaitu as well as Te Roroa. Many Te Roroa have strong links with these and other Ngapuhi hapu as well as to Ngatiwhatua through Waipoua and Kaihu. When Waimamaku was sold to the Crown in 1875 the Maori allege that their elders pointed out the boundaries of an area called Kaharau which was to be reserved with the specific intention of protecting the wahitapu contained thereon. From 1887 when land at Waimamaku was first subdivided for Pakeha settlement the Maori have protested strongly that they never sold Kaharau and they have claimed ever since that this area of land was taken by the Crown. The Crown has in the past consistently denied the Maori claim, but has also usually agreed to reserve some of the wahitapu. For a variety of reasons this has not been achieved. Today there are several Maori Reserves and some wahitapu in Crown title in the Waimamaku valley but most of the areas where the wahitapu are situated are now in private ownership. Another aspect of the Waimamaku part of the Wai-38 claim is that insufficient land was reserved for Maori use by the Crown. Further particulars regarding this aspect of the claim have not been provided, consequently the issue has not been researched by Tribunal staff. Some information, however, has been collected regarding Maori land ownership within Waimamaku and it is envisaged that a document be compiled by Tribunal staff at a later date. 1.2 The Claim

The first notice of a Claim relating to Waimamaku was received by the Waitangi Tribunal in May 1989, adding to the original Te Roroa Claim received by the Tribunal on 10 November 1986 (doc A13:2-3). Grievances identified within the latest statement of claim regarding the Waimamaku area and related issues are as follows - 2 - 38. The failure to adequately protect urupa and other wahi tapu in the area in particular the places known as __ P :L!'H~kaWBkB_' Kob~k9h~ .. tl1\l:t:'ll),~\lk'l:l.!:~lEPCl, ParahekClc~fJ:1~ Moho, Wairau, Te Minihi. 39. The removal and the failure to return taonga taken from Wahi tapu and held in various collections, in particular the Spencer Collectioni 40. Generally, the Act, policies, practices and omissions of the Crown and its agents in effecting the loss of Te Roroa lands in the Maungamui [sic] area, and its failure to ensure that sufficient lands remain for the needs of the Te Roroa hapu of Waimamaku particulars of which will be provided in due course. It became apparent during this research that the primary historical issue at Waimamaku concerned Kaharau, an area of land of over 1,400 acres which was not reserved. The area included a number of tapu burial grounds as well as other places of past use (gardens, pa, kainga and so on). Carved coffins and human remains kept in burial caves there have been removed. The Claimants believe that a set of coffins known as the Spencer collection was stolen from this vicinity and sold to the Colonial Museum. Another set, removed more openly from Kaharau, was placed in Trusteeship of the Minister of Native Affairs and is held at the Auckland Museum and Institute. Recently the Trusteeship of the latter coffins was returned by the Minister to Hokianga tribes at Waimamaku and they are not ;' specifically included in the Claim. The Claim includes wahitapu both within and outside of Kaharaui those named within include Piwakawaka, Kohekohe (Muru), Kukutaiapa and Te Moho. Others named Paraheka (Kaiparaheka), Wairau Wahitapu and Te Ninihi are located outside Kaharau.

1.3 This Report This report gives a brief historical background to the Waimamaku aspects of the claim; the background to the land purchases including what is known about the negotiations, surveys, and the sales; the areas identified as wahitapu and their subsequent history and what is known about the history of taonga removal from the wahitapu. Emphasis is given to Kaharau. This is the fourth preliminary report by Waitangi Tribunal Staff on the Te Roroa Claim, Wai-38. The first report looked in detail at the 1876 sale of Waipoua and Maunganui and the subsequent events concerning the Maori Reserves of Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki (doc AI3). It also included a summary of the general history of the area and background to Government policy and its implementation of the time. A shorter report provided background and looked at the issues concerning land and resource management at the Taharoa Lakes (doc A9). The third report provided some historical and contemporary background to post-1876 Waipoua issues concerning land alienation and various related resource management issues (doc Bl). - 3 - As with the previous preliminary reports on the Wai-38 Claim this report has mainly drawn from official sources and is intended to show what official record there is about the craTm~·· Crown involvement at Waimamakunas beenIai:geIy·tfi.i:ougfi~ the Department of Lands and Survey, Maori Affairs, Maori Land Court and Legislative Department (who deal with petitions). Most of the records of these Departments are now held in National Archives in Wellington and Auckland. Other records are held by the Department of Land and Survey Information, in Auckland and Wellington, at the National Museum in Wellington, by the Maori Land Court in Whangarei and Department of Conservation at Kaikohe and Waipoua. The help of all these agencies is acknowledged. Many of the early documents, particularly correspondence, have not been located. A more exhaustive search may produce further evidence. This draft was researched and written by Michael Taylor under contract to the Waitangi Tribunal, assisted and edited by Rosemary Daamen, the Acting Research Officer for this claim. The report is chronological but has been divided into five major sections. This introduction provides some brief introduction to the Claim and to this report. The second section provides a brief historical introduction to Waimamaku. The third section details the transactions leading to the alienation of the land. The fourth details the protests over the loss of the land and outlines what is known about the removal of taonga and koiwi,and the final section briefly reviews what is known about other wahitapu in the Claim. Two sketch maps are also provided to show the block boundaries and to identify areas mentioned in the text (see figures 1 and 2).

1.4 The Land Waimamaku is a wide valley of farmed land enclosed by bush covered hills located just south of the Hokianga Harbour. It has a long Maori history as a place of value with its warm climate, fertile soil and abundant sea and bush resources. Old pa, kainga and wahitapu are still known and provide a visible reminder of the history of occupation. Archaeological records provide some indication of past places but as no intensive identification of sites by archaeologists has taken place most remain unrecorded (doc B18:97-100i Atwell, Puch and Lawn 1973). The land involved in the Claim consists of the Waimamaku, Kahumaku and the Wairau Blocks. Cut out from the Wairau block are two wahitapu: Te Waihanga, an old burial ground and pa (doc 03:124-5)1 and the Wairau Wahitapu which contains burial grounds. Another wahitapu, Te Pure, was cut out of Waimamaku 1 when it was first surveyed in 1870 (doc 03:122-4).2 This was a burial ground and old battlefield located at the mouth of the Waimamaku river, however within living memory the river has changed course, most of Te Pure has gone and the area is now tidal flats. Kahumaku, a block of land adjoining Waimamaku and North

PUKEHUIA PAKANAE BLOCKS MANAWAKAIAIA BLOCK NATIVE LAND BLOCK

WAIMAMAKU 2 BLOCK ",1-- 'd.,.". Rim 3-.-> WAIMAMAKU J

~ BLOCK ~'WAIRAU ? 'VAIMAMAKU 2 BLOCK ~ I~-'~ oS't- BLOCK I Co A q>oS' t- WAOKU No 1 BLOCK WAIPOUA BLOCK WAIRAU

Figure One: Sketch Map of Waimamaku 2 and Wairau Blocks as Shown on ML 3278A (Kensington's Plan) With Names of Adjacent Blocks --- WAIHAHAKU 2 BLOCK X KAIPARAHEKA -4_~\V~~. WAIHANGA I ~ TE MOHO __ \ WAIWHATAWHATA BLOCK "~__ -_J

X / KUKUTAIEPA KAHARAU WAIMAMAKU BLOCK KOHEKOHE X X PIWAKAWAKA

~ ~ -<¢.'Y.• {l' ".. __ J_f __ <1'<, U'1 WAIMAMAKU 2 BLOC~ ~v 1 °0~

., "'j!..l-• '\l'e"C____ ~./ , / ~~ WAIPOUA BLOCK WAlRAU

Figure Two: Sketch Map Showing Wairnarnaku Wahitapu and Kaharau Based on Plan ML 3278 (Wilson's Plan) - 6 - roughly equivalent to the area now called Wekaweka, was included in the Waimamaku 2 Block at the time of sale. When reading the primary sources confusion can arise over the block . ~naIfieS;-paftlctirar rY~WaimaDfakir,-as-D6tn-WaiIilanfa1flC151ocJCsf·are·-~~~···· sometimes just called 'Waimamaku'. In this report the original Waimamaku block is called Waimamaku 1 and the subsequent block Waimamaku 2. Kaharau includes the North Wairau Block as well as a portion of Waimamaku 2. These blocks are represented on a number of maps that provide important evidence on the Claim. An understanding of the changes on these maps is essential. They are listed below with the map number and name, the date of the map production and the name of the surveyor or map compiler. 3 ML 2012, Wairau Block, September 1870, J Campbell. ML 2014, Waimamaku Block, September, 1870, J Campbell. ML 3268, Sketch Map of Waimamaku 2, 11 June 1875, S P Smith ML 3278, Waimamaku 2, 14 July 1875, A and H Wilson. ML 3278A, Waimamaku 2, 21 December 1875, Kensington. ML 3435, Check Survey of Part of Waimamaku and Waipoua Block, 25 January 1876, SWeetman. SO 4703, Waimamaku Special Settlement, July 1887 J Baber. SO 4623, Plan of Sections 16 to 75, Block IX, Waoku District, Waimamaku Village Settlement, August 1887, J Philips The principle concern researched for this report is with the land called Kaharau. Today this forms part of the Waimamaku 2 and Northern Wairau blocks, because Kaharau was not set apart as a separate block. This is the basis of the claim.

2.0 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Hokianga was one of the early centres of European colonialisation in the north, although it was not as popular as the Bay of Islands. The early settlers exploited the timber (which in places grew right to the water's edge) and established missions. Pakeha and Maori were well described by many commentators including Edward Markham in New Zealand or Recollections of It after he visited Hokianga in 1834-5; in Maning's Old New Zealand; and more recently by Jack Lee in Hokianga. Numerous other accounts also exist but they contain little information specifically about Waimamaku (Davis 1974, Earle 1832, Irvine 1965, Polack 1838).1 - 7 - Prominent among the Maori described in these books, from whom some Te Roroa have descended, two stand out: Moetara and Te ... _.. _._ ...-Waianga..-Moetara ..wasthe.Chief.of .the.Ngatikorokoro., based_.at_..... Pakanae, and the leading Rangitira of the lower Hokianga in his time. He was at Te Ikaranginui on the Ngapuhi side (doc A4:433)2 and his brother Rangitira signed the Treaty of Waitangi. 3 Rangitira's son Hapakuku Moetara was a leading Te Roroa, claiming descent through his mother Te Hana (doc 03:80).4 Te Waianga was a tohunga and guardian of the harbour entrance. 5 His daughter MararaMahuhu became Tiopira Kinaki's wife and mother of Rewiri, Piipi, Aramaera and others. One of the earliest Pakeha records of Waimamaku was Polack's description of camping at the river mouth in the early l830s. On the first visit he stopped at some nikau huts to prepare a hangi where he described the rahui erected to protect the toheroa. On a second visit he camped with a party of Maori who were spearing and drying flounder of which they caught a large number (Polack 1974(1):68-73,238-239). The Wesleyans, whose mission station was at Pakanae, also had an early impact in Waimamaku, where a chapel was established in 1837. John Hobbs from the mission was a regular visitor to Waimamaku around the time of the signing of the Treaty, and his detailed diary entries recorded some of the life of the day (Williment 1985). Hobbs described the feuding between Te Whata of Ngaitu and other hapu at Waimamaku; Moetara built a fence to keep Te What a from fishing in his stream. 6 Shortly afterwards Hobbs received news that Te Whata's men were challenging Moetara's tribe with muskets. Hobbs' attempts at mediation between the hapu lead him to suggest that perhaps Te Whata could be given certain rights to the land but Moetara said no as he could not make such a grant without consulting his relatives who were away (Williment 1985:153-4). In the mid-1840s, within a few years of this incident, fighting broke out between Te Whata's people and Te Roroa over the woman, Marara Mahuhu, after which Ngaitu left the valley and went to their lands at Otaua (doc 03:100).7 Christianity remained a strong influence in the valley and an Anglican Church opened in 1876 with a resident Minister (McVeagh 1987:5). Epidemics of measles, influenza and whooping cough which swept the area in the 1860-70s caused a considerable drop in population and many settlements were abandonned (doc 03:122-4).8 Many young men and their families left the district for Kaipara and Whangaroa to obtain work in the kauri forests and mills. 9 An 1870 census gives figures for Waima describing the residents as Ngatipou with 100 in the hapu. 1o Hakaraia is given as the - 8 - chief. However, it is apparent that the person who took the census was confused, as the Waima hapu, Te Popoto, was named as ...... ~~-._. __ living_at .. Waimamaku.w_hex~~qp.Ng a t.ip..Qy.\i.Qulg ..bay.§.J,j..y~sl!:her~_!~._._ An 1878 census of Waimamaku gave the population as 66 Ngati Korokoro and 97 Te Roroa with 11 more Roroa resident at Waipoua. 11 In 1881 the school Inspector had visited the Waimamaku valley to evaluate the need for the school and reported There is every reason to believe that the Natives are permanently settled here; the land is so good that they can grow everything they require; they have easy access to the sea; there is abundance of water at all seasons; and firewood is very easily attainable. (doc D3:333-5)12 A Native School was opened at Waimamaku in January 1885 in response to need for education for the growing number of children at Waimamaku, Waipoua and Waiwhatawhata (doc D3:333-5).13 The community grew, and in 1885 all the Maori left Pakanae and other settlements to live in Waimamaku. 14 Yet these developments contrast with an official's report which stated that deaths through illness meant "in a few more years •.. their power as a source of trouble for the Government will be completely past". 1 5 The first European settlers arrived in valley in 1886, settling around Waiotemarama following encouragement from John Lundon the local Provincial Council Representative. The settlement was known as the Auckland Settlement and it was to be followed within two years by the Canterbury Settlement at Waimamaku, the land for which, at this stage, had not been surveyed (McVeagh 1987:5). Two histories are available that deal with recent, mainly Pakeha settlement at Waimamaku, the most recent being written to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Canterbury Settlement (White and Munro 1941; McVeagh 1987).

3.0 EVENTS PRIOR TO 1987 3.1 The Wairau and Waimamaku Block Titles The Land Court investigations for both the Waimamaku (1) and Wairau Blocks were heard and titles awarded by Judge Maning on the 10 October 1870 (doc 02:10-15; 16-22).1 The Court made the land inalienable, except by lease, for 21 years. The Certificate of Title to the Waimamaku (1) Block was issued to Tiopira Rehi (Tiopira Kinaki), Rangitira Moetara, Hakaraia te Manu, Te Rore Taoho, Ngakuru Pana, Heta te Haara, Taimona te Kohai, Honi Tuoro, Heta Kaikore and Mereana Ngapaki. A list of - 9 - 120 persons interested as owners was also registered as required by Section 17 of the 1867 Native Land Act (doc _~~ __ ~_ j)A"t£i)~~~"~_~J?la!L~" 20~iL wh!Qh_s~howe~cL.!=-h~ WailI!~aku Block as 2,650 acres, was produced in Court (doc 02:3).3 The plan showed the Te Pure Tapu Ground as a separate block as well as showing the area of Native Settlement, cultivations and the Church. The Certificate of Title to the Wairau Block was issued to Hapakuku Moetara, Rewiri Tiopira, Pene Kahi te Karama, Riwaiti, Kerihi Roto, Ngamiro Tinohi, Puka Heremaia, Te Aputahi and Kikihu Penetana with a list of 45 others who registered as owners (doc 02:10-15).4 The plan, ML 2012, defined the area as 2,539 acres and showed the separate blocks of Te Waihanga and Wairau Tapu Reserves, as well as cultivations adjacent to the Waihanga Reserve (doc 02:1-2).5 Few records of the applications or the court hearings have been located and consequently little is recorded about the reasons for the surveys other than what appears on the plans or titles or from evidence given in later hearings. Campbell surveyed both of the blocks as well as Waiwhatawhata and Koutu at Kawerua, about the same time. 6 At the time all the land surrounding these blocks was also Maori land and important wahitapu were either cut out or were left immediately outside the boundaries in at least three of the blocks surveyed. Both the Koutu and Wairau blocks were leased to others after the surveys; Wairau for a flax lease and Koutu for a store. 7 In

\ later hearings and correspondence the Maori owners strongly J maintained that the 1870 survey of the Wairau boundary was to define an area 'for a flax lease and wahitapu were deliberately cut out of the area to be leased. All of the Wairau Block was marked on ML 2012 as being under heavy flax but no further information concerning flax leases or milling at Waimamaku has been located. However, flax was well recognised as a valuable resource and there are some records of flax milling in other parts of Te Roroa territory (doc B12:174).8 In October 1873 Mr E T Brissenden, whom the Government had commissioned as a Land Purchase Agent, was sent north to acquire Maori land. He was accompanied by Mr C E Nelson, Interpreter and Assistant Land Purchase Agent. Colonel McDonnell was also acquiring land in the North for the Government for some of the same period. The background to the Government land purchase policy is addressed in the preliminary report on the Maunganui portion of the claim and is not discussed further here (doc A13).

3.2 The Negotiations In July 1874 Tiopira and Peneti Pana wrote to Chief Judge Fenton from Waipoua informing him that they were willing to "let the Government have this side" (west of the Waima mountains) when McDonnell came but because there was a dispute - 10 - over boundaries with Ngaitu or rather Wi Pou they asked that no money be paid until after the Land Court adjudicated on ownershipj doc A4: 400-4J. 1 This appears ,to, be the first ~~o f fer~ 'EoseTlt1ie'rana~ wnlcfi rilc luaea'walmama:Ku ~' Brissenden and Nelson negotiated the purchase of the Waimamaku, Wairau, Kahumaku and Raeroa blocks in October or September 1874 (doc A3:263-5).2 The former reported in November that the blocks were "secure by purchase", that he had paid deposits on account and that nearly all of the blocks were under survey. This was the first of a number of land purchase schedules provided by Brissenden and others, and these have been summarised in Table One (see page 11).3 McDonnell who was working with Brissenden also reported that he had been negotiating for Kahumaku (doc A3:129).4 Whether this area was the same as that as arranged by Brissenden is not known as there was some confusion over exactly what area Kahumaku was (doc D3: 89) .5 Some detail of the negotiations at Waimamaku can also be obtained from other records. In 1874 Maning wrote that at one of his Courts "a report came that a government land purchase agent had arrived at Waimamaku with lots of money and at once half the claimants shuttled off to see what they could do him out of to raise a spree". 6 This statement seems to refer to Brissenden's and Nelson's visit as they were working in the area at the time. In years to come the Maori maintained that Nelson arranged the sale and paid the deposit to the Waimamaku Maori (doc D3:325).7 Some time prior to the sale of Waimamaku, Hokianga Maori met to discuss questions of ownership and boundaries. A great meeting was held at Waima when Manawakaiaia was surveyed (doc 03:87, 101}.s Some of the discussion centred on a dispute between Ngatipou and Mohi Tawhai, a prominent Hokianga Chief, over Mohi's claim to Waimamaku. At what was presumably the same meeting, Ngati Ue and Ngaitu proposed that the Waimamaku block should be surveyed as a whole without divisions (doc 03:87).9 They wanted to include the adjacent blocks of Punakitere and Otaua in the survey as well but Tiopira and others would not agree (doc 03:87).10 However, they persisted with their proposal that Kahumaku sbould be included with Waimamaku and after the Waimamaku Maori got an advance payment, Ngaitu again urged that the blocks be joined. After a time Waimamaku Maori "agreed to include their land with ours" (doc D3 : 193) . 1 1

3.3 The Survey of Waimamaku 2 In September 1874 Brissenden met with S Percy Smith, the Deputy Inspector of Surveys, in the Auckland Survey Office, to make arrangements for the Hokianga surveys (doc A6:916).1 Smith had been delegated to work in the field in the North organ~s~ng

I " and overseeing the numerous surveys as well as ensuring their accuracy by undertaking the major triangulation work. His - 11 -

-~-- __ --'l'~_B!J]!: OREJ~ _____ ~ _____ ~~_~~cht_l:~~_QL~ilE_

BLOCK AGENT DATE AREA PRICE TOTAL NOTES SOURCE /ACRE /PRICE

Wairau Brissenden 3/11/74 3a

Waimamaku Brissenden 3/11/74 3a

Kahumaku Brissenden 3/11/74 3a Waimamaku Brissenden 30/12/74 1/1d L100.0.0 3b advance

Kahumaku Brissenden 30/12/74 1/6d L 65.0.0 3b advance

Kahumaku McDonnell 13/1/75 1/5d L 50.0.0 3c advance

Waimamaku Smith 12/6/75 15,000 3d

Kahumaku Smith 12/6/75 8,517 3d

Wairau Brissenden 24/6/75 1/6d under 3e survey

Waimamaku Brissenden 24/6/75 12,000 1/1d L733.6.6d title 3e secure

Kahumaku Brissenden 24/6/75 4,000 1/6d awaiting 3e court

Waimamaku Native 30/6/75 12,000 L733.6.6d 3f Minister

Waimamaku Reale 16/7/75 15,000 surveyed 3g

Kahumaku Reale 16/7/75 8,517 surveyed 3g

Waimamaku 10/1/76 27,200 L1203.6.6d purchased 3h /Kahumaku

See Section 3.2 Footnote (3) for sources - 12 - presence in the North and particularly in the Waimamaku area between September 1874 and June 1875, and the diaries and other records ,he left,provide~s!9!l-!ficant evidence on the claim. Smith wrote daily notes in a diary during the period he spent camped at Waimamaku, Wairau, Waipoua and Waikara (doc A6:913-941; 956-1008).2 He first visited Waimamaku in December 1874 when his brother Frank, who was one of the surveyors working under him, was camped there (doc A6:937).3 What Frank Smith was doing at Waimamaku was not recorded. He returned to the Waimamaku surveyor's camp again in January and proceeded to take readings from the major triangulation points in the vicinity (doc A6:964).4 Over the following weeks Percy Smith negotiated with local chiefs about block boundaries. He saw Hapakuku Moetara in relation to the survey of the Pakanae and Waimamaku Blocks (doc A6:964),5 interviewed Peneti and Hapakuku about the boundaries of Raeroa, Waimamaku and the Pakanae Blocks (doc A6:968),6 arranged with Te What a and Akatiki about the Waimamaku boundaries (doc A6:969)7 and then explained to Peneti the arrangements come to with Te Whata, to which Peneti agreed (doc A6:970).8 Although no details of these discussions were recorded it is apparent from the places named, the individuals involved and from evidence later provided in the Court hearings, that there was a disagreement over the rights to Waimamaku and Kahumaku amongst those who claimed ownership. This dispute apparently did not involve Kaharau. On6 February 1875 Smith noted the arrival of Dan Wilson from Whangarei to finish the survey of the Waimamaku (doc A6:968)9 and on the same day he gave Wilson the written permission to undertake the survey as was required by the 1873 Native Land Act (doc A6:891).10 On the 11 February Smith returned to the camp at Waimamaku where he met Wilson, whom he noted, was set to finish Waimamaku (doc A6:871, 970).11 Wilson's departure to Kawerua and Smith forwarding the vouchers for Waimamaku and Waipoua to the Inspector of Surveys on.the 16 February suggests the field work by Wilson was completed (doc A6:956, 971).12 The next day Smith connected the Waimamaku and Waipoua boundaries (doc A6:971).13 Applications for the title of Waimamaku 2 were lodged on 4 February 1875 by Tiopira Kinaki, Hapakuku Moetara and Te Rore Taoho as Te Roroa (doc 03:32)14 and on 5 February 1875 Te Whata, Nopera, Hone Tautahi, Komene Poakatahi and others lodged an application for the title of Kahumaku and Raeroa for Ngati Ue (doc 03:28).15 A hearing was scheduled for 14 March but did not proceed. Brissenden attributed this to the plans not being completed as a consequence of the serious illness of Percy Smith (doc A3:231-2).16 Some time before June 1875 Mr J W Preece was appointed Land Purchase Agent to supercede Brissenden. - 13 - Between 7 to 22 June Percy Smith was at Herds Point "Putting plans on Court rolls" and pertinent to this claim, on the 11 ______J_une_he_X"e~Q:rd~g .in_hJsgia.:t=y "1:_Q!!Ip~!~dp1-_aIl __ ? f __l'lCi !I1lC3.Illaku" ..... ( doc A6: 1004) .17 This was the original plan of the Waimamaku 2-~----·----~··- block, ML 3268, and although it was labelled as a sketch plan compiled from adjoining surveys, Smith as the Oeputy Inspector of Surveys signed it as approved "subject to a proper plan being finished" (doc 02:4).18 The Waimamaku 2 boundary, which excluded the Kaharau reserve, was marked in red over a black line. The Kaharau boundary shared part of the Waimamaku 2 boundary and where they were conjoint the boundary was marked in red drawn over a black dashed line (probably indicating that it still had to be defined by survey). The 1870 boundary of the Wairau Block was marked with a sketched black line indicating that the Wairau Block was to be superceded by the Kaharau Reserve and Waimamaku 2. The detail is important as it shows that although the 1873 Native Land Act (doc A3:1-13) required the survey of blocks to be completed before the Inspectorate of Surveys approval and before the Court heard a claim, the law was not adhered to for Waimamaku. 19

3.4 The Waimamaku 2 Court Hearing The Land Court met at the Herds Point Court from 31 May until 25 June 1875. Present were Judge A H Monro, Percy Smith, Brissenden, Preece and Nelson who did much of the translating for the Court. Most claimants were involved in several of the many cases which were heard at the three week long hearing. These obviously created a large amount of paper work with plans and memorials to complete. The Waimamaku hearing began on the 12 June 1875 (doc 03:75-109).1 The plan drawn and approved the day before by Percy Smith, ML 3268, was there. The Judge signed it as produced in Court on 19 June, the last day of the Waimamaku hearing. Tiopira, Peneti and Te Whata were minuted as stating that they knew the land shown on the map and considered that the boundaries were correct (doc 03:75-6; 78).2 Again the details are important as they show that the Court, the Maori, the Deputy Inspector of Surveys and other Crown Agents all agreed to the map produced by Smith which clearly showed the Kaharau Reserve as outside the Waimamaku 2 block. No discussion over the .Kaharau boundary was minuted by the Court and the "land marked Reserved" was mentioned only briefly by Hapakuku Moetara when describing where the fighting between Ngati Ue and Roroa took place. It seems probable that there was no dispute over the location of the reserve marked on the plan, other than that a proper plan was still to be prepared. As both the Court and Smith were bending the rules to allow the block to go through the Court with only a sketch plan of boundaries, it seems unlikely that the Court or Smith would have approved the plan if contention had existed over the sketched Kaharau boundary. - 14 - Evidence concerning the old inter-hapu rivalries between Te Roroa, Ngati Ue, Ngati Pou and Ngaitu dominated the whole of .... -_ .. ~_t.h~ ... J~9ur"t:.E.earing. The debate focused on the rights of ownership of·tnenaput·o ... Kahumaku·and···W a·imamaku.,.~and __the~ ..... dispute with Mohi Tawhai. Peneti gave evidence that he had pointed out the boundaries to the surveyors and that while he was getting the survey done he saw Te Whata and a dispute arose (doc 03:78-79).3 He added that the boundary between Kahumaku and Manawakaiaia was laid down by Arama, Karaka, Hakaraia and others. The area between Manawakaiaia and the Waimamaku River was also claimed by Hone Mohi Tawhai.

On 18 June 1875 the Court gave its finding, recogn~s~ng the claims to Waimamaku of all hapu and awarding the title to the descendents of Taitua, from whom Te Roroa claimed descent, and the brothers Tarahape and Te Whareumu, and Uetaoroa (doc 03:106).4 Initially the Maori could not agree which names should be on the Memorial (doc 03:108)5 but finally the Memorial of Ownership was issued in the names of Heta te Haara, Ngakuru Pana, Hone Mohi Tawhai, Te Whata and Hetoro Waipapa (doc 02:27; 03:109).6 Tiopira had withdrawn from the Court leaving Heta te Haara to take his place (doc 03:109).7 However dissatisfaction still remained after the hearing and Heta Te Haara, Ngakuru Pana and Te Whata applied for a subdivision of Waimamaku 2 and a hearing was scheduled for 27 January 1876 at Kaihu (doc 03:22).8 In July 1875 Preece reported that he had returned from the Hokianga and that the titles were completed except for some blocks which included the Waimamaku 2 block where the interests of two dissentients had yet to be defined but the transaction was as good as finished (doc A3:199-208).9 This report and the application for a subdivision confirm that there was dissatisfaction with the ruling of the Court. On the 12 June 1875 Smith wrote to Brissenden from Herds Point giving the areas of the blocks as Waimamaku about 15,000 acres and Kahumaku as 8,517 acres (doc A3:226-9).10 However, after the June hearing, when Brissenden reported that negotiations were completed and the title secure for Waimamaku and that Kahumaku still awaited a Court hearing he used his own estimates of area not Smith's figures, although they would seem to his advantage as they were larger and Brissenden received a commission for each acre that he purchased (doc A3:131-3).11 When compared, the variations in the block sizes and the records of the prices paid provide useful information which is summarised in Table One (see page 11).

3.5 The Waimamaku 2 Plans Wilson's plan of Waimamaku 2, ML 3278, was produced on 14 July 1875, a month after the court sitting, but it was never approved by the Inspector of Surveys (doc 02:5).1 There is no clear record of why the map was rejected. - 15 - The plan does however provide important information as to what boundaries Smith instructed Wilson to define. On Wilson's plan --Kaharau-was-outside__ Q_fth~Wp.i~Et:k::u~?J:)l_~ck as it was on Smith's ML 3268. The links along the Kaharau bolindarY-were- ---~------written on the plan and the boundary was marked in red, confirming that the boundary, marked as a dashed line on Smith's original plan, was surveyed by Wilson. The area of Kaharau on Wilson's plan was not identicial to that sketched on Smith's plan, with the boundary on Wilson's plan extending further up river, to near Te Moho. The Wairau block boundary was also shown but not in red nor were the links recorded indicating it was not the intended boundary. The area of Waimamaku 2 recorded on the plan was 24,500 acres. There are also a number of alterations on Wilson's plan but who made these notes or when is not known as no additional information has been found. The Wairau boundary was marked "Boundary altered by Court". Further annotations suggest that the Kaharau Reserve area was exchanged for the South Wairau block. Kaharau also has "Incorrect" written on it by a different hand. Judge Acheson reported in 1932 on the Waimamaku dispute and wrote in his report that Wilson's plan, ML 3278, had a note dated 22 July 1875 attached which stated "Memorial ordered, but could not be inscribed on Court Rolls because of imperfect plans" (doc 03:12-14).2 This note has not been relocated but Acheson's record confirms that the plan was the one originally intended to be entered on the memorial and also that there were problems with Wilson's plan. A survey lien of L162.10.8s was listed in October 1875 against Waimamaku 2 for the cost of Wilson's survey for plan ML 3278. 3 The area given was 27,200 acres, 2,700 acres more than marked on the plan. It is unclear why a lien was charged, as the plan was never completed, nor was it recognised by the Inspectorate of Surveys or Court, nor were the boundaries surveyed by Wilson used. Another plan of Waimamaku 2, ML 3278A, was compiled from adjoining surveys by Kensington at the Auckland Survey Office on 21 December 1875 (doc 02:6).4 This map was placed on both the Memorial of Ownership and the Deed of Sale. The map was signed as approved at the Office and it also bears the Seal of the Native Land Court but was not minuted by any Judge as having been produced in Court. Only the outside block boundaries were shown, using the Wairau boundary and as a consequence Kaharau was included in Waimamaku 2 block for the first time. This map was not the same as the one that had been originally accepted at the Court; nor could the plan have possibly shown the Kaharau boundary as it did not have any common boundaries with the adjoining blocks from which the plan was compiled. Placing this map on the deed was the act which Waimamaku Maori were later to claim was the "omission or error" by the Crown which lead to the loss of the reserves (doc 03:257-260) .5 - 16 - Kensington's map had another inscription "Placed on MemoJ;'ial of Ownership 12/4/76" with an illegible signature on it. This is _~_~_._.~imp_Qrt:.ant:~~i11~_th~~1~I!Lp.S_j. t.~s1!gg§E ts~ thC!.~~h~!fl.~p_~~~ .. _Ilo~ __. __ ~~. ______~ drawn on the Memorial of Ownership for Waimamaku 2 until more than 9 months after the hearing, nor was it on the Memorial at the time of the sale of the block to the Crown.

3.6 The Sale of Waimamaku 2 The Deed of Sale for Waimamaku 2 was issued on 10 January 1876 by the Resident Hokianga Magistrate von Sturmer and certified in February 1876 (doc D2:28-31).1 The area sold was given as 27,200 acres and the payment L1203.6.6d. All of the title holders signed the deed of sale. Hapakuku Moetara also signed as a witness. The plan attached to the deed was the same as Kensington's ML 3278A and was signed by von Sturmer and the vendors. The Kaharau boundary was not marked on the plan nor were any reserves stipulated in the deed. 2 On 25 January 1876 surveyor Sidney Weetman produced another Plan ML 3435, entitled Check Survey Qf ~ Qf Waimamaku and Waipoua Block (doc D2:7).3 This plan showed the Maori Reserves of Waimamaku, Kaharau and Waipoua. It showed the Kaharau Reserve as outside the Waimamaku 2 block. The Wairau block was marked as a dashed line which was not the intended survey boundary. Wairau South was shown as part of the Waimamaku 2 Block excluding the Wairau Wahitapu. It is not known who commissioned the surveyor why. At the January 1876 Kaihu Court sitting when the application for the subdivision of Waimamaku 2 came up Preece stated that the whole block had been purchased by the Crown since the application was made and the District Officer, Mr Kemp, successfully applied to have the case dismissed. 4 Later Preece wrote to the Native Minister that during January he had concluded the sale of Waimamakucontaining 27,200 acres and although some of the owners had refused to sell in June they eventually did so (doc A3:73-86).5 Over two months later Kensington's -compiled plan ML 3278A was placed on the Memorial of Ownership (doc D3:12-14)6 and in July Waimamaku 2, as shown on the same plan, was proclaimed as waste land of the Crown (doc D3:1-3).7

3.7 The Southern Wairau Sale The sale of the Wairau Block appears to have been negotiated at the same time as the Waimamaku and Kahumaku Blocks as when Brissenden reported the purchase of the latter two blocks he also reported that the Wairau Block had been purchased. That was in November 1874 (doc A3:263-5).1 Although the offer apparently related only to the southern portion of the block no record of an application to partition around this date has been found. - 17 - Smith, Wilson and Weetman all included South Wairau in the area marked on their plans as Waimamaku 2 and although the maps also ,,--,-~-~showed __ the __Wairau_ boung~:a :i.t_}'13!_~_J1Q1: 1:h~ iQtended boundary. As noted above, annotations added to Wilson's-ML--3278I;>1an--OI------Waimamaku 2 suggest that the Wairau boundary was altered by the Court, and that it was proposed to exchange the area of South Wairau for an area adjoining Northern Wairau where the burial caves were, thus forming the Kaharau Reserve. Following the June 1875 Waimamaku hearing Brissenden reported that the Wairau Block was under survey and that L66 had been advanced on the purchase price (doc A3:131-3).2 What exactly was under surveyor by whom is not known. The L66 advance payment apparently was used to pay the L66 lien for the original 1870 survey of Wairau by Campbell. 3 The Deed of Sale was signed on 9 November 1876 by Hapakuku Moetara, Rewiri Tiopira, Te Rore Taoho, Heta te Haara, and 51 others (doc 02:32-39)4 with additional signatures for Tane Pokaia (doc 03:110)5 and for Te Rore Taoho being obtained later (doc 02:32-39).6 The total amount paid for the 1,129 acres was L92.0.0d. Although the Deed was approved by Commissioner Haultain on 22 October 1877 under the Native Lands Frauds Prevention Act 1870 the sale did not proceed. The maps drawn on the copies of the Wairau South Deed are of interest as the details of the land shown outside of the block differ. One copy of the Deed showed the Wairau North-South boundary extending beyond the Wairau Block into Waimamaku 2. This was the Kaharau boundary and the area of Kaharau, north of the line, was marked as Native land. On the other copy of the Deed the whole Wairau block, divided into north and south, was marked and Waimamaku 2 was shown as Native land. A third larger scale map, also attached to the Deeds, showed only Southern Wairau, the area ceded to the Crown. In 1878 Tiopira and others applied to have the portion of the Wairau Block sold to the Government ascertained (doc 03:64).7 The application was heard by the Court on 28 January 1879 and following the subdivision of the block into north and south, the southern Wairau Block was ceded to the Crown under Section 107 of the 1813 Native Land Act (doc 03: 111-112} .,8 The 1870 plan ML 2012 was produced at the Court (doc D2:2).9 The District Officer, Mr W Webster, told Judge Munro. that the Government had paid for the survey of the whole of the block and it had been arranged that the owners would make a portion over to the Government in payment for the survey and for the money advanced. Rewiri Tiopira agreed with Webster's statement, adding that each owner had received about 9/- from Preece. Rewiri was recorded as saying the owners agreed to let the Government have the south block, as was marked on the map, but excluded the Wairau Wahitapu. The Maori retained the north end. Pene Kahi also said they all agreed but that the Maori owners would like - 18 - to have their interests in the North part defined at some future Court. Von Sturmer who was acting for the Crown asked ______~for the l_an<:L~9_b~_ye~J~e

4.0 EVENTS AFTER 1887 4.1 The Canterbury Settlement A system of group settlement onto small areas of land was devised during the years 1885 and 1886. The Member of the House of Representatives for the Bay of Islands, Mr Richard Hobbs, son of the Reverend John Hobbs, was a strong advocate of such settlements in the Hokianga. His enthusiasm attracted the attention of a small group of families in Christchurch who were seeking land. He told them I have my eye on one district not yet settled by Europeans. It is a beautiful valley of choice land near Hokianga Heads ... the name of this valley is Waimamaku, a native settlement of friendly Maoris ... (White and Munro 1941: 8-9) 1 One of the settlers later stated There will probably be plenty of work forming roads and building bridges. Kauri gum is obtainable in the immediate neighbourhood, and is purchased by a storekeeper on the beach. Wild cattle, ducks and some pigeons abound. The weather is warm. There was very little feed about, there having been no rain for three months. Notwithstanding this, the wheat crop of the Maoris looked remarkably well. There is abundance of water power available in the streams. The potato crops of the natives were a failure this season, owing to the lack of rain ... (ibid:23-24) The families applied for land under the Village Settlement Scheme and formed themselves into a Settlement Association. Hobbs wrote suggesting the Perpetual Lease System as an alternative means of obtaining land and this was adopted (ibid:9-10). Following an inspection and negotiations with Lands Officals it was agreed by the Minister of Lands, Mr Ballance, that every assistance would be given (ibid:14-22). - 19 - A survey which had been estimated to take two months was authorised, and the Surveyor-General offered to employ one of ·-~--~-~-~the-members-of~-the--As sociatioIL._as___ a_labo_ur_er__ on~_the~_s_urvey~._~ ______. George Spooner was elected. From the dates provided by White and Monro, most of the work by the surveyor, James Baber, must have been undertaken in February 1887, possibly extending into March (ibid:22-24). Baber described the land as good and stated that until his planned road was completed the settlers would have to use the sledge tracl,<: on the Maori land. Local Maori offered every assistance. Spooner returned from the north and reported to the settlers at a meeting in February 1887 and the Minutes record him as stating We arrived at the Waimamaku Valley via the East Coast on Friday. On the following morning the surveyor in charge called a meeting of the Maoris in the valley to arrange for a road from their settlement to the Government land. The result was that the Maoris made a present to the Government of land for a chain wide area, 3 3/4 miles long, and expressed their pleasure at the prospect of European settlers in their neighbourhood. Mr Spooner found that the greater portion of the level land is the property of the Maoris, and after consultation with the surveyor it was decided to layout a block of one thousand acres, mostly on the north bank of the Waimamaku Stream. The land is reported as good, rather heavily timbered, and somewhat broken ... (ibid:22-23) The survey was not quite finished when Spooner left, but he produced a rough map showing the sections, twenty one in number. The tracing of the block came to hand on April 19 and shortly afterwards twelve members balloted for the eighteen surveyed 50 acre sections (doc D2:9).2 None of the settlers selected land on the south side of the river (ie the river margins of Kaharau) although. two sections and Baber's road joining the Native sledge road to the settlement, had been surveyed on the block (ibid:25-27). Immediate preparations were made to go north and three men arrived at Oma'pere by sea on 11 May 1887. There were no wheeled vehicles in the district and their goods were taken to Waimamaku by bullock sledge and by canoe by George Hoani who told them that one of his brothers, Toenga, had been on the survey party (ibid:28-30). Later in May two families arrived at Omapere by sea and one family rented a large weatherboard house at Waimamaku belonging to Rewiri Tiopira, although this was "a new idea to the Maori" (ibid:32). Rewiri stipulated that the families must observe the Sabbath day, take no spirits into the house, and be careful of the windows. - 20 - The settlers reported that the Maori made the newcomers very welcome but knew how "to take advantage of opportunities and ~_._~ .. ~~_were_quiteable___ to t_ak~c.are of_. tbel!l~_§J.YE3§ .. __ ~I_( il:>J.g;JJL. .._ .. _. __ ._ _ ..__ .._~ __ ~_. __ _ The Association then applied for the survey of more sections,· Baber returned to do the work, and James Morrell, one of the settlers, agreed that half a dozen would meet the present demand (ibid:34). Mr Lowe, one of the family men, inspected his section, did not like it, and chose instead Section 1, Block XIII, a 43 acre flat on the south side of the river through which the road had been surveyed (ibid:34-5). Morrell discovered a group of eight or nine kauri trees on Section 2, Block XIII, each five to six feet in diameter and running up straight eighty to ninety feet to the first branch (ibid:35). Both these sections were within Kaharau, and Lowe was the first to take up a section on the disputed land. In Christchurch the Association elected new members and votes of thanks were passed, including to James Baber who was considered to have taken far more than purely an official interest in the settlement, and to Ballance, who had put L350 on the estimates for the Waimamaku roads as much of the work on the roads, was reserved for the Waimamaku settlers (ibid:37, 42). Following the survey of the original Waimamaku Village Homestead Special Settlement, more than sixty further sections were surveyed (doc D2:8).3 This survey included Section 16, Block IX, the area claimed as Taraire. Alfred Corfield and his family arrived in October and eventually settled on Section 2, Block XIII, the other surveyed Kaharau section. (White and Munro, 1941:43-5). By summer the settlers had cleared and planted land, the potato crop was yielding well, and they had an abundance of vegetables, plenty of wild beef and pork for shooting, pigeons and pheasant in the bush, and fish from the lower river •. Lowe was pleased with his section which he considered a splendid one with soil 2-10 feet deep and well drained. He considered his land by far the best (ibid:47). In March 1888 the main body of the settlers moved north and the Association was officially transferred from Christchurch to Waimamaku (ibid:52-6).

4.2 Maori Protest Maori protest over the taking of the land began soon after the surveyor arrived to begin partitioning the land for settlement early in 1887. Ngakuru Pana, one of the surviving title holders to Waimamaku 2, wished to stop the survey and caused trouble when Baber commenced work. It was only because the -' 21 - younger Maori did not wish to take extreme measures that there was no serious trouble (doc D3:6-11).1 Later that year .._ .. -... _T.iopira_.died. 2 . .__. In early March 1887 the Native Undersecretary, Mr T W Lewis, sent a telegram to a Wellington based Native Land Purchase Officer, Mr P Sheridan Assist. Surveyor-General has just mentioned to me a matter of importance which may create serious difficulty and I wish you to be good enough to let me have all information you have on the subject. The Waimamaku No.2 Block 27,200 acres has been proclaimed Waste Lands of the Crown and portion is about to be cut up for special settlement. The portion the natives say they reserved from sale and all plans but the final approved plan has the reserve marked on it. The area without the reserve is 24,500 acres - please look carefully into the papers to see whether there is foundation for statements of nature. (doc D3:387-8)3 Sheridan replied promptly telegramming to the Undersecretary the same day that the whole of the Waimamaku 2 block of 27,200 acres was Crown land and that not a single acre was reserved (doc D3: 385) .4 He noted Preece negotiated the purchase, the deed was in his handwriting and was exceptionally clear and that his report on the sale was very full, made no mention of any reserve and on the contrary, it entered into an explanation of the consideration money which showed that every acre was paid for. In fact, he wrote that the owners had received Ll15 in excess of the purchase money expressed in the deed as an old advance by Brissenden, of which Preece was not advised in time. He noted that at one time Preece was prepared to cut out some of the interests of nonsellers who afterwards came in and took their money. Sheridan concluded "Our title to the whole block cannot possibly be disputed.". Preece's report referred to by Sheridan has not been located. The statements in Sheridan's telegram formed the basis of the Crown's denial of the Maori claims for the years that followed. However the basis of some of the statements can be questioned. Although Preece may have concluded the final sale, it was Brissenden and Nelson who had negotiated the actual purchase with Waimamaku Maori. The proposal to "cut out" an area, that Sheridan referred to, pertained to the application to partition lodged after the title hearing for Waimamaku in June 1875 and hence was not concerned with Kaharau which at the time was believed to be outside the Waimamaku 2 block. The matter was brought before the Minister for Native Affairs, the Hon. Mr Mitchelson, by Hapakuku Moetara during 1888, possibly at Kaihu (doc D3:372-3).5 No further information about this meeting has been located but it was referred to in other memoranda. - 22 - During 1888 Ngakuru Pana went to Whangarei to see the Surveyor Wilson who said he would produce the plan and Ngakuru gave him L20 to produce it. The plan was not produced and later Ngakuru ············~·-·~visTted Wrlsoiiagalii·~~a-p·parentT:y~witnout resurtrdo·~····~·-·~-·····-·········~ D3:6-11) .6 Late in December 1888 the Minister of Lands, the Hon. G F Richardson, inspected the Waimamaku settlement accompanied by Hobbs and Mr G G Menzies, the local Public Works Road Inspector. White and Monro record how the Minister listened sympathetically to the needs of the settlers for roads as they were forced to use old Maori tracks (White and Munro 1941:64-5). Hapakuku and other Maori also met the Minister to explain that when Waimamaku 2 went to the Government it was subject to the reservation of certain burial places and that these had not been made. The Minister promised to refer their grievances to Native Minister Mitchelson for his consideration and reply. Following the visit Richardson wrote to Mitchelson outlining the grievance and asking whether this was a matter for the Native or Lands Department to attend to (doc D3:384).7 As with previous statements the Minister of Lands was advised by Sheridan that The statement made to you by the Natives does not appear to be correct. If there are any old graves on the block a few acres surrounding them could perhaps be reserved under the provisions of the Land Act without causing any inconvenience. ~he Natives should however be given to understand that the title of the land so reserved would remain vested in the Crown. They sometimes discover tha.t the 'tapu' has been removed from reserves obtained in this way and want to sell them. (doc D3:382)8 Sheridan was instructed that he should draft a reply (as above) and add that the Natives should indicate the positions of alleged wahitapu to the first Government surveyor doing settlement surveys there, and then the matter could be looked into (doc D3:382).9 On the 31 January 1889 Richardson approved the draft of a response to Hapakuku stating the above (doc D3:381).10 The Surveyor General was told to carry out the Minister's instructions but nothing was done for over six months (doc D3:383).11 Sheridan again told the Surveyor General to instruct the Chief Surveyor to ascertain which land would have to be reserved, referring to the Minister's letter.12 The Surveyor General asked the Chief Surveyor to provide a sketch map of the block showing the location of the wahitapu (doc 03:397).13 A note added to the bottom of this letter stated that no action had been taken owing to the large area of land said by the Maori to be tapu. The Chief Surveyor responded that he inferred that it was not a pressing matter and he would have it done when the opportunity offered without going to the expense of sending a surveyor especially for it (doc D3 : 396 ) . 1 4 - 23 - Hapakuku Moetara and Ihaka Pana replied to Richardson on 25 February 1889 informing him that they had seen his letter, that ~~-~~-.. ~ ... -the.-Go:v:ernment ..was-.wrong_and_ .. that~.they._.obje.c.ted_to_~the._~~ "Tikangas" of the Government mentioned (doc D3:375-380).15 They emphasised that the disputed area was never been sold and that there was a statement on the deed of sale to the effect that a certain portion was reserved for the Natives. Hapakuku Moetora wrote again to Mitchelson in August 1889 expressing his concerns and referring to their meeting at Kaihu in 1888 (doc D3:372-374).16 A minute by Sheridan attached to Hapakuku's August letter and addressed to Undersecretary Lewis repeated that the whole of this land was sold to the Crown and that the natives had been so informed (doc D3:371).17 Lewis suggested to the Native Minister that Hapakuku be furnished with a copy of the Minister's previous letter which Lewis stated had perhaps miscarried, a suggestion that the Minister approved (doc D3:371).18 Meanwhile the Canterbury Settlement continued to grow, and in December 1889 the settlers applied to buy kauri to build a new school. A map provided indicated the location of the timber was within Kaharau near the locality of the burial caves. The application was referred for the information of the Lands Board by Kensington (doc D3:442-4).19 On the 31 December 1887 the Kaipara Resident Magistrate forwarded to the Surveyor General a letter he had received from Ngakuru Pana (doc D3:440-1).2o Ngakuru was informed that the first surveyor working in the area would do the survey (doc 03:439-440) .21 Ngakuru Pana again wrote in August 1891 to the Native Minister stating that he had received a letter indicating that a surveyor had been authorised to survey his pieces of land Kakatitoke, Kohekohe and Kaharau but his desire was that Mr Daniel Wilson should be the surveyor for he had already been authorised to survey Waimamaku 2 (doc D3:393-5).22 A note on the bott.om of the translation of Ngakuru's letter said to send a copy to the Chief Surveyor and tell him that if Wilson was about to make any survey at Waimamaku he could layout the burial ground if the Maori pa.id the cost - and on condition that such res·erve or reserves did not exceed two or three acres each (doc D3t392-3).23 Later in 1891 a surveyor, Mr A B Wright, instructed a Mr C F Maxwell to ascertain where the burial ground boundaries were for survey. Maxwell replied on 13 November 1891 from the Survey Camp at Waimamaku: ... They refused to point out the localities. or allow them to be marked out in the manner indicated unless I consented to follow the original line of the Reserve as laid off they allege by Mr Wilson at the time when the block was purchased. This line they describe as - 24 - starting about 20 chains up the Waimamaku from the Te Moho Trig hill (which I understand is one of the burial places claimed) and running over the range to the South ..... --.-- .. -~------.-----and East ·of--·pIwaKawaka···· Mlnor Trig tnence---to a-··poTnt -. on------. the Waimamaku near the Settlement including approximately 1000 to 1200 acres also two Sections laid off by Mr Baber and now in the possession of the Canterbury Settlers. The Natives protested against Mr Baber's re-survey of the present boundary asserting that it was the line of the Flax Lease and they offered to point out the proper boundary ... (doc 03:391)24 After receiving Maxwell's letter Kensington informed the Surveyor General that the claim was preposterous and it was no use attempting to make the surveys (doc 03:390).25 Hapakuku Moetara and Peneti Pana wrote again to the Native Minister in January 1892 informing him that they did not agree to the survey of the tapu places as they wanted the whole block, formerly surveyed by Wilson, to be returned because they were sure the land was still theirs (doc 03:366-370).26 They added that when Preece and Nelson purchased the Waimamaku block a clause was inserted in the deed that a portion was to be reserved. Sheridan informed the Minister that the reservation of the tapus was a concession and the whole block had been paid for (doc 03:364).27 The Minister concurred adding that he could see no reason to depart from Richardson's letter (doc 03:362-364) .28 Ouring 1892 Rev. Wiki Te Paa, the resident Minister at Waimamaku, also questioned the Native Minister about the Waimamaku 2 sale (doc 03:365).29 In 1894 Hapakuku Moetara, Rewiri Tiopira and two others petitioned Parliament repeating earlier claims (doc 03:356-357; 360-361).30 The petition also stated that the main reason that Tiopira had the land surveyed was to enable the burial places to pe reserved, that the Crown Officers agreed and Wilson's survey of the land included all the burial places. Sheridan reported to the Native Affairs Committee considering the petition that the matter had been closely looked into, and that the whole of Waimarnaku was included in the sale, that the deed was exceptionally clear and that the natives had no claim whatever {doc 03:358}.31 The Committee's report on the petition recommended that the matter should be referred to a Royal Commission to be appointed by the Committee (doc 03:355)32 and the Report was referred to the Government by the House of Representatives (doc 03:354).33 In response to a concern of the Native Undersecretary Barron, that the instructions to reserve the graves had been overlooked (doc 03:352),34 Kensington informed the Surveyor General that there was no change in the situation (doc 03:351).35 He asked that Sheridan get Land Purchase Officer Maxwell to report upon the whole question after visiting the natives again and if - 25 - an agreement was reached survey could be made at once. Kensington's memorandum was referred to Sheridan who added a

------~----no_te_" ____ ~ ____ C"------"-- ____~ ______~~ ______"_~ __ "__ There is nothing to report upon. The sooner the land is disposed of the better. Mr Maxwell is not capable of dealing with questions of this kind. There is no going behind the deed of sale. (doc 03:351)36 On 7 August 1896 Rewiri Tiopira died37 and Hapakuku Moetara died on New Years Day 1902. 38

4.3 The Kohekohe Coffins In 1902 the issue of the wahitapu reached an explosive level, not because of the loss of the land but because Pakehas discovered burial caves on"Kaharau in which were hidden bones and mummified remains. Some of the remains were contained in elaborately carved coffins which were removed. Maori practice was to place the bones of their dead into the coffins after they had been cleaned following the hahunga ceremony. This was an exhumation ceremony in which a year after death the bones were retrieved from the ground or from a tree, where the deceased had been placed to decay. A second mourning ceremony was held to farewell the dead at which time the bones may have been viewed and then the bones were taken to a cave or other hiding place and then left undisturbed (see Father Servant, 1973; Polack, 1974). There are numerous caves on Kaharau and some of the names for these places are recorded: the two principle sets commonly known as Piwakawaka and Kohekohe (Kohikohi) or Horo. Other names given for burial grounds in the bush on Kaharau included Te Reapouto and Te ~caterere (doc 03:255-257; 266-267).1 The coffins from Kohekohe themselves are not within this claim, but their story has considerable relevance, and the land from which they came is central to the Waimamaku claim. The land, the caves and the objects once contained in them cannot be separated. In addition the events surrounding the removal of the Kohekohe coffins show plainly Maori, official and Pakeha attitudes of the time to each other, the coffins and the places they were contained in. In April 1902 Louis Morrell, the elder son of James Morrell, wrote to the Commissioner of crown Lands that an old Maori burial ground had been discovered in the cliffs about 4-3 miles south of the Canterbury Settlement on Crown Land (doc 03:420).2 He stated that caves there contained burials, some in coffins, of which he had removed two. He wrote that the Maoris had demanded that he give the carvings to them for burial in the local cemetery and he had promised he would but that he would like the Commissioner's opinion or instructions. 3 - 26 - Commissioner Muller telegrammed Morrell to hand the "Maori curios" to Menzies, the local Government Road Inspector,4 and he also wrote informing Morrell that he had made a mistake in ~-~--·~remov i~ng- the -1femsfrom Crown LancJ:aria--tliat~·l'fe-slfoul~d~·have~~-~-·-·~~···~~-~· reported his discovery.5 The Commissioner instructed Menzies to take charge of the carvings, remove them to Rawene, inspect the caves, take any steps he thought necessary to prevent the removal of anything else, and to warn the Natives and settlers not to interfere with the caves. 6 Menzies reported from his camp at Waiotemarama that he had taken possession of the two coffins and several small items from Morrell and that he had visited the caves and removed a further five coffins. He stated that the Natives had informed him that the relics did not belong to the local tribe but to Ngaitu who lived at Otaua. He added that the name of the Waimamaku tribe was Roroa which was also a section of the Ngapuhi tribe; also that the natives were very much excited and were not pleased at what they termed the desecration of their burial place (doc 03:496-499).7 The Undersecretary of Lands, now Kensington, informed Commissioner Muller that it seemed only right to inform the Maori claimants that as the coffins were in the caves before the Government bought the land it would not be fair to deprive them of them without their consent and that he should explain to those interested, that it was proposed to hand over the carvings to the Native Minister, the Hon. Mr Carroll, to place in a Museum and that they should allow this (doc 03:418).8 The matter was brought before Cabinet and about 12 May the Acting Prime Minister, Sir Joseph Ward, sent a telegram to Menzies telling him that a decision had been made to lodge the items in the Auckland Museum (doc 03:406).9 The Maori were informed by the Native Minister that the matter would be heard by Resident Magistrate Blomfield at Rawene on 14 May but Blomfield could not attend. Menzies, who was there, reported that the Maori who came stated that Sir Joseph Ward had no right to dispose of their property but the matter was left until the following week for the Magistrate's meeting. 1 0 A number of chiefs attended and gave evidence at the meeting on 21 May 1902 in Rawene and Blomfield provided a lengthy report (doc 03:315-328).11 The chiefs included Heremaia Kauere, of Ngaitu hapu who stated that he also belonged to Ngati Ue, Ngati te Ra and Ngati Pou which were the hapu who made the coffins. Blomfield recorded a number of points he made about the coffins. He said that they were made by Kohuru, a Ngaitu chief, a skilled carver who lived at Otaua. There were three sets of caves and the things referred to were taken from the Kohekohe cave which was used by Ngaitu, Ngati Ue, Ngatipou and Ngatipatu. This was the first occasion on which things in a wahitapu had been interferred with. His grandfather had died after transgressing the tapu of the lizard shaped coffin in the cave. - 27 - Blomfield also recorded Heremaia as stating that another cave, Piwakawaka, contained the ancestors of Hapakuku Moetara, Peneti ·~·~··------pana-and-T.iopira.--~When.the~-land_ .. had-beeiLput~_through_the_C.o.ur.:t._~ ___ ~~. __ about 25 years the wahitapu were not sold but Ngati Pou and Roroa were granted the land where the caves were, as they had remained in possession of the kainga. He tried to get it but they would not allow it. Ngakuru Pana also spoke, explaining that Ngatipou had two distinct ancestors who gave them the right to the cave. He emphasised that the wahitapu were not included in the land sold, and that they had only lately found out that this was not the case and they insisted that the things be given back. Many other chiefs also spoke. After much discussion the Maori agreed to sign a petition to the Native Minister asking him to act as Trustee and that the carvings were to be placed in the Auckland Museum where they would not be touched or removed but would remain undisturbed forever (doc 03:308).12 The petition was signed by Ngakuru Pana, Hoterene Wi POu, Heremaia Kauere, Pire Teira, Iehu Moetara, Karora Kahuitara, Horomona te Hika and Re te Taipapahia. The final clause of the petition stated "That your petitioners be regranted a portion of land including such wahi tapu which has been taken in mistake." Magistrate Blomfield reported on the Rawene meeting to the Native Minister that ... Feeling was very strong against the desecration of a 'wahitapu' and I feared at one time lest there should be serious trouble should the Crown persist in its determination to remove the sacred articles. The things were concealed in one of a series of caves formerly used as a 'wahitapu', in a cliff, in a place difficult of access, and which contained the bones of probably hundreds of the native ancestors. The natives, who to my mind, owned this wahi tapu, at once demanded the return of the articles ... The natives were unable to realise that these sacred articles should be taken from them, especially as a waka and several 'tiki' were actually receptacles of the bones of their ancestors, and they regarded the matter as an attempt to trample on their most sacred rites and traditions. Feeling was consequently very high, and had any attempt been made to remove the things, which were then partially packed and stored at Waimamaku, I am certain the natives would have used force ... (doc 03:315)13 He added that his first step had been to test their knowledge of the caves and their authenticity by obtaining from the natives, a list of the sacred things which had been left by their ancestors in the cave, and that the list he thus obtained had practically tallied with the articles discovered. His next step was to discover whether the natives were the owners of the - 28 - wahitapu and from the evidence taken he had no doubt that they were and that the wahitapu contained the bones of their ~----ancestors~.--Blom.f-ield--wrote--that-as-long--as-the_Crown __ insis.ted______~ on taking the coffins he considered it advisable to temporise with the natives, and to agree to concessions. Regarding the land he added that he thought the Crown might possibly set the wahitapu apart as they did contain the bones of their ancestors and that he had promised to ask that a portion of this Crown land containing the wahitapu be regranted to their hapu, especially if, as alleged, the wahitapu were included in the survey by mistake, or unknown to the natives. Menzies had told him that the land was of little value. He also wrote that his own feelings were with those who for the first time in their history were being forced to sacrifice their sacred traditions. However, not all the Pakeha shared Blomfield's sensitivities, and some were apparently willing to conceal the full truth from the Maori and from Blomfield, for when the latter wrote to Menzies on 2 June 1902 thanking him for the inventory of items packed to send to Auckland he added that ... l was very sorry to see that the list included a number of portions of human skeletons. When at Hokianga I had no idea that all these things had been taken by Morrell. They are of no use to a Museum and if the Natives ever know that they have been taken, there was bound to be trouble. Unless you have had direct instructions from headquarters to take these things, the best course is to instruct Morrell to get these back to the Wahi-tapu secretly and as quickly as possible. We must keep good faith with the Natives, and must not do more than we can help to infringe on their sacred customs and traditions, which have already been trampled upon ..• (doc 03:329)14 The Native Minister wrote to Ngakuru Pana, lehu Moetara, Wi Pou and Heremaia Kauere that they had made a wise decision to hand the carvings to him in Trust; that they would be placed in Auckland Museum; and that he would speak to the Government and ask them to give back the wahitapu to be a sacred place for the natives as a reserve forever (doc 03:311-313).15 A number of Maori, including Te Roroa from Waipoua, responded to the Minister's letters confirming that they had entrusted the coffins to his mana but they were concerned that the Minister should not allow any other arrangements beyond what had been agreed (doc 03:294-300; 305-306).16 Ngakuru also stated that he was taking action about the land. The Native Minister was strongly of the opinion that the wishes of the natives should be gratified and Undersecretary KenSington was asked to consider how the area in question could be excluded (doc 03:404).17 He wrote to Commissioner Muller - 29 - in September 1902 asking him how the wishes of the Maori could be met (doc 03:494).18 However at the end of September a __ ~~_~_~~fin.al __ no_t~ ~ oIL~Jl~~AlJ.~kJ.and_!:!J.~ __ ~~f)_ added yhJ.~t::.h __ ~ea~~__ ~ __.______"Position noted on map. The whole of this land has now been withdrawn on account of the Kauri" (doc 03:493).19 A month later it was noted that the Commissioner had not replied. Kensington responded: "Answer not required as yet - let it go away~" (doc 03:402) .20 In September 1902 Reupena Tuoro wrote to the Native Minister and to his M.P., Hone Heke, that he was one of the persons with rights to the coffins and he wished a further inquiry to be held as he was not aware of the first hearing (doc 03:284-5; 287).21 A month later Ngakuru also made application to have another hearing as he had not recited the geneologies of the ancestors at the earlier hearing because he was prevented from doing so by Blomfield (doc 03:282-3; 286).22 In response to these requests Blomfield informed the Undersecretary for Justice that he had been obliged to end Ngakuru's 'korero' in a friendly way but considered it quite unnecessary that Ngakuru give the genealogies (doc 03:279-280).23 Regarding Reupena's claim to the coffins, Blomfield stated that it was one that had been thought of lately. He concluded that it would never do to reopen the question of the coffins but that the question of the Crown Land claimed by the natives was quite another matter.

4.4 The Protest Continues

( In November 1902 Hesketh and Richmond, a firm of Auckland Solicitors, wrote to the Native Undersecretary on behalf of one of the original native owners of the Waimamaku block stating that an arrangement was made for 2,400 acres to be reserved as a 'tapu' containing the graves of their people and they now asked for the arrangement to be carried out (doc 03:290-292; 401).1 The Solicitors enclosed a map of the area claimed but this has not been 10cated.2 Hesketh and Richmond were informed that the Native Minister had directed that the matter receive consideration (doc 03:293)3 but when their letter was referred to the Lands oepartment, Undersecretary Kensington informed the Undersecretary of Justice that there was "nothing in it", again as the whole of Waimamaku 2 Block was included in the deed of sale (doc 03:288).4 He also noted that the 2,400 acres mentioned were doubtless at first intended to be retained by the vendors but afterwards they agreed to sell the whole block. In June 1904 Ngakuru Pana wrote stating that a surveyor was on their land near the timbermill and that they objected to their land being surveyed (doc 03:505).5 Mrs M A Bryers, a local resident, forwarded Ngakuru's letter to the Chief Surveyor noting that Ngakuru was protesting against any more of their land being cut up by the Government and that a mistake was being made in encroaching on the land which had been reserved - 30 - (doc 03:503-4).6 She stated that the land leased for flax was surveyed by Campbell, the reserve was surveyed by Wilson, ~,_~~_~~_~that~_the~~MaQri_had __ pr,.'ttc~s_t_ed~_ag{;tin~ t __ J:~{;lb_E:Ll;'---.9u t ting_J!P~tJl§! ir__ ~, ____ .. ~_~_.~ land and now more surveyors, Kelly & Monk, were there cutting more pieces out of it. Bryers (and others) claimed that the Reserve was shown on plan ML 2012B with the boundaries Kaharau, Katitoke, Mamaru and Piwakawaka; however the Oepartment of Survey and Lands Information in Auckland do not hold this map (doc 03:502).7 The Chief Surveyor responded that there was no reserve (doc 03:500) .8 In 1907 the matter came before a Commission of Inquiry, following the Native Affairs Committee recommendation on Hapakuku's 1894 petition (doc 03:7-11).9 Iehu Moetara, Wiremu Ngakuru and Charles Bryers gave evidence. Iehu explained that the boundaries of the land were first made externally, and subsequently a portion was cut off and set aside as a flax lease. Wiremu Ngakuru said Wilson had made the survey both for the reserve and the external boundaries; that they quite understood what area they were selling and he outlined the efforts of his father, Ngakuru Pana, to get Wilson to provide the plan. In addition he explained that it was only because the younger Maori had restrained Ngakuru that serious trouble had not occurred when Morrell removed the coffins, although he had caused trouble when Baber came to survey the land. Wiremu also told the Commission of other protest. A delegation of elders had been sent to Auckland and Ngakuru had visited Auckland himself to consult a lawyer Swanson; but no ·further details of these efforts have been located. Charles Bryers, a prominent Hokianga resident, submitted that the portion claimed contained sacred places and that the Maori would never have consented to sell them. He requested that the land containing the sacred places not be sold and occupied by Pakeha but be reserved and returned. He stated he had asked the Minister what he could do and the Minister had replied that he had better name a price for compensation. Bryers was also recorded as putting in as evidence the original of Wilson's plan of the Waimamaku survey to the Commission. The Commission's report did not contain any specific mention of Waimamaku but recommended favourable consideration be given for legislation so portions of surplus lands could be set aside for the natives after a Native Land Court inquiry. No subsequent action in relation to Waimamaku by the Commission has been traced (doc 03:6).10

The lack of progress resulted in Ngakuru Pana petitioning Parliament in 1907 (doc 03:157).11 He stated that it was understood that when the land was sold a reserve would be made for the sellers for their use and benefit. It was to include certain caves used as burial places, and was marked on an early plan (Wilson's) with an approximate area of 2,400 acres. They - 31 - were under the impression that the reserve was properly made, that the Crown had kept faith with them, and that they occupied "-~"---"--and~cul-t-ivated-po~tions.-"of.the ... land-.down.to__ the_year_.1.888 .. _. __ ~ ... _. ___ .. _ They were not aware that the whole of the land had been proclaimed Crown Land in 1876 nor that no portion had been reserved, until the surveyors came to cut up the land for settlement. In response Undersecretary Kensington repeated his former statements and added that the petition appeared to be on behalf of only one seller out of five and that the area claimed had been disposed of by the Crown (doc 03:158),12 yet the petition was referred to Government for favourable consideration, with a view to the making of provision for a reserve (doc 03:155-6).13 In July 1909 Mrs Bryers again wrote to the Native Minister Carroll. She explained that Ngakuru's face and hands had been badly burnt in a fire that destroyed his house, his farming implements and his grain (doc 03:152-3).14 Consequently he had asked her to inquire when the Government would give him compensation for the loss of the land. Ngakuru was over 70 years old and as his son, Wiremu, had recently been killed carting timber, he had to keep the widow, Erana Ngakuru and the children. The Native Undersecretary advised the Minister regarding the Bryers' letter that nothing had been done and that if further action was desired the matter should be referred to the Lands Oepartment (doc 03:151).15 On 6 Oecember 1909 Ngakuru again petitioned Parliament (doc 03:247-248).16 The Native Affairs Committee were provided with the same comments as before (doc 03:246)17 and in August the petition was referred for favourable consideration (doc 03:245).18 The record sheet attached to the petition was marked "Stand over" (doc 03:127)19 and no record of it being brought before Parliament has been found. In January 1911 Mrs Bryers wrote again stating that the matter had caused a great deal of dissatisfaction amongst the Natives and that the Government knew well they never bought all the land, and that this could be seen by the sum paid. She had heard from Kensington that the Government would not reopen the question, but she felt that the Natives had acted honestly but that the Government had hidden all the papers (doc 03:142-3) .20 Mrs Bryers continued to write to the Government on Ngakuru's behalf asking when the petition would be dealt with as the old man was weary from waiting to hear the result (doc 03:137, 141).21 She was advised by the Native Department that the matter would not be reopened as it was a matter for the Lands Department and she was then advised by Lands that the matter could not be reopened (doc 03:139-140).22 - 32 - 4.5 The Origins of Other Coffins The Waimamaku section of the Claim cites the removal of and -----~---fa.Tlure-toreturntao-nga-taken -- from-tIle-wahl tapu--aiicrhefd-In-----~-----~- various collections, particularly the Spencer collection. The Spencer collection is made up of seven Maori coffins, six of which are held in the National Museum in Wellington. The other, in the Otago Museum in Ounedin, was obtained by exchange. These coffins the claimants maintain were stolen from the Piwakawaka cave. It is clear from the evidence given about the loss of Kaharau and the removal of the chests from Kohekohe that there were other caves in the vicinity. Menzies had recorded their presence in his original report and marked their location on the plan (doc D3:496-499).1 He stated There is another rocky precipiece [sic] about one mile to the westward of the caves just mentioned above which is reported to contain Maori dead but so far this place has not been explored. The Commissioner forwarded Menzies' report and map to Wellington, noting that the map showed the location of other caves reported to exist (doc D3:412-417).2 As well as causing great disturbance amongst the Maori community the removal of the coffins from Waimamaku gained the attention of those interested in "Maori art", both for museums and private collections. The publication by Mr T F Cheeseman, the Oirector of the Auckland Museum, in 1906 of details of the Kohekohe coffins acquired by the Museum would have attracted considerable attention (doc 03:574-5; Cheeseman 1906). It is hardly surprising that in the years following the recovery of the Kohekohe coffins that the majority of those now held by Museums were acquired. In September 1907, Mr E Spencer, a dealer in Native antiquities who had a shop in Queen Street, Auckland, offered to sell seven Maori coffins to the Colonial Museum in Wellington for L235 (doc 03:572).3 Letters between him and the Oirector of the Museum, Mr A Hamilton, indicated that Spencer was selling the coffins on commission for the men who had found them (doc 03:544-573).4 To purchase the coffins, Hamilton had to obtain permission ·from Cabinet and he argued that because of the remarkable character of the coffins, and their undoubted antiquity, that it was extremely desirable that they should be secured for the national collection (doc 03:555).5 Permission for the purchase was gained in November (doc 03:545),6 however, first Hamilton was asked where the chests came from and he in turn asked Spencer (doc 03:568)7 who responded that he could not obtain their history (doc 03:546).8 The sale went ahead on 12 Oecember 1907 (doc 03:543).9 Hamilton's entry in the museum register is undated - 33 - but recorded the coffins as from "a cave, Hokianga" (doc D3:540).'0 After the purchase, in a letter marked "Private ..._.~. __ ~Q,]J.g.. CQn.f_ide.nt.iQ,l~'_lJami lJ::'Q1L~rQte~ an.Q... as_k~.~L.S.peng'§!J,:'__ .i.f .... b'§!~~GQ~uld_ ... ~ ... ~.. _. arrange to keep in touch with the men who had found the coffins as Hamilton wanted to find out where the cave was so that he could visit it to obtain the missing coffin lids (doc D3:548).11 Variations occur in the number of coffins belonging to the Spencer collection and allegedly removed from Piwakawaka. Although Spencer sold only seven coffins, in 1911 Hamilton wrote in an article entitled Notes on a Carved Burial Chest Found near Hokianga, New Zealand that the Colonial Museum had acquired eight chests from the same neighbourhood as those in the Auckland Museum from the Waimamaku district (doc D3:611-3; Hamilton 1911). His article, however, was about and was illustrated by the eighth coffin which was the best preserved and most graphic of the eight chests. According to Museum records it was purchased in 1906 from another dealer Dannefaerd (doc D3:548)12 i.e. it was not from the Spencer collection. The chests may also have been removed individually. There has been considerable confusion within the Museum administration with this eighth coffin which has at times been considered to be one of the Spencer collection (doc D3:542).'3 The most definitive study of bone chests by Fox in 1983 identified the Spencer collection coffins as originating from Piwakawaka (Fox 1983). Lady Fox wrote Another cave known as Piwakawaka is situated on the same side of the valley towards the lower end of the ridge ... Six or seven chests and many bones were removed from this cave some time after 1902; the bones, according to Mr W Naera, were then buried in the churchyard. The chests (Nos. 35-40) were acquired by E H Spencer, a collector, and subsequently were bought by the Dominion Museum at Wellington in 1906 (Hamilton 1911:110). Mrs Piibi [sic] Tiopira of Waimamaku who died aged 92 in 1915 [sic] remembered that some chests had been removed from this area without the authority of the Maori people (G G Hooker [great-grandson], pers. comm.) which supports Hamilton's account. (doc D3:582; Fox 1983:6)14 The Claimants have said that their elders knew about the disappearance of the chests but no definite official records of any complaints at the time have ben identified and it was not until relatively recently that Te Roroa knowledge of the whereabouts of the chests became apparent. Manos Nathan, a Te Roroa carver, has stated that he recognised the coffins of the Spencer collection from their form and style when he first viewed them in 1968.'5 - 34 - Suggestions also occur in the museum literature that other coffins now held in collections may be associated with those ~ .. _~._ .. _.tha.t__ c~ame _.fr9.m__ vlaJm.amaJ~Jl._ .. ~ ... .cJl~~"§~1ll..al1,_. in__ h_is~ art iG...l.§..9n_.the. ______~._._ Kohekohe coffins wrote that the first of the coffins which came under his notice were two obtained by an Auckland dealer some years before. They were precisely of the same pattern as those now in the museum; the better of the two was in Melbourne and Hamilton had purchased the other one for his own collection (doc D3:574; Cheeseman 1906:452). Fox also notes the similarity of the Melbourne chest to those from Kohekohe (FOX 1983:47) . Shortly after the Spencer collection was acquired a third set of coffins was found, reportedly from sand dunes, near Raglan (doc D3:613; Hamilton 1911:112). These were purchased by Turnbull for his private collection and later given to what is now the National Museum. Some doubt has been thrown onto the origins of these coffins, with the strongest suggestion by Mr H D Skinner in a review published in July 1918 of the 31 coffins of known provenance, including those from Waimamaku. Skinner wrote ... twenty-three are from the region north of the general line Whangarei-Hokianga; while the remaining six are stated, on the authority of a dealer, to have been found in the sand-hills at Raglan. The present writer, after examining the condition of the timber from which the chests are made, finds it impossible to believe that these examples were actually recovered from sand-hills. It seems possible that they were secured from some tribal caves near the others, and that the persons from whom the dealer acquired them were unwilling that their true hiding-place should be known to the rightful owners. In any case the distribution of the chests is very remarkable. Not a single example has been thus far recorded south of the Provincial District of Auckland ... (doc D3:615; Skinner 1918:98) Fox also regarded the sandhill origin of the Raglan coffins as dubious but suggested that it was possible that at least three of the chests were obtained from caves south of Raglan and near Kawhia (doc D3:592-3; Fox 1983:39-40). And Sid Mead, in his book The Art of .Maori, Carving, wrote that the two burial chests he illustrated which were thought to have come from Raglan were much more likely to be from Ngati Hine in the North and from Hokianga (Mead 1986).

4.6 The Next Generation Ngakuru Pana, the last of the original title holders of Waimamaku 2, had died on 8 July, 1914 and a new generation now took up the protest over the loss of wahitapu and land. 1 In 1925 Wiremu Ngakuru, Matene Naera, Hoane Iraia, Reupena Tuoro, and others petitioned Parliament to allow the Native Land Court - 35 - to be empowered to hold an inquiry into the question of the land (doc D3:251-252).2 The petition stated that there had . ····~···~·~·been··an·error·· ±n~·t-he~loGation·-o·f~··the·· boundary.. line .. and.apart~~_~~ .. ~ .... of the papakainga and their cemetries of Oturaru, Taraire, Kohikohi and Te Tereapouto were included in the Crown's portion. It concluded "In addition to this there are other matters" although what these were was not detailed. In response to a request for information the Native Secretary provided a copy of Kensington's report on the 1907 petition (doc D3:250).3 The petition, like the others, was referred to Government for consideration (doc D3:128-9)4 but on 22 November 1927 it was marked "No action" by the Native Minister (doc D3 : 127 ) . 5 A further petition was made for return of Kaharau containing several burial places known as Kohikohi, Te Reapouto, Te Akaterere, Oturaru (or Te Moho) and Te Taraire in 1930 by Matene Naera and 43 others of Te Roroa, Ngatipou and Ngaitu (doc D3:257-260).6 The petition repeated the old claim that when the flax was leased, the wahitapu land was purposely excluded from the lease. The Registrar of the Auckland Land Court provided a report to the Native Undersecretary but it is apparent that the Registar was confused about much of the detail of the petition (doc D3:209-210).7 The petition was referred to the Government for favourable consideration, with a recommendation that legislation be enacted providing for inquiry by the Native Land Court (doc D3:206),8 the order was passed by the House of Representatives (doc D3:207)9 and the necessary legislation was enacted (doc D3:205).10 An application was then lodged and the matter was referred to the Land Court for inquiry (doc D3:204).11 At Court Aperahama Reupena Tuoro appeared for the Maori and called Iehu Moetara who stated the Wairau South and Waimamaku 2 blocks were sold to the Crown but Waimamaku, Wairau North (Kaharau) and the Wairau Wahitapu remained Native Land (doc D3:118-9).12 After the sale, the land was surveyed with the boundaries so arranged that the wahitapu would be kept out of the sale. Judge Acheson found that the case was not in order for presentation and that the deeds and maps needed to be compared. The Judge concluded that if the wahitapu were included by mistake in the sale to the Crown other procedures were necessary to secure their return. He adjourned the hearing to Auckland for staff inquiry. On 4 July 1932 the claim returned to the Land Court before Acheson (doc D3:120-1).13 Aperahama Reupena Tuoro gave evidence that when the Waimamaku block was sold the wahitapu were not sold and that the maps clearly showed that. He stated that the reserved area did not belong to the Waimamaku block but was really part of the Wairau Block and was wrongly shown on the plan attached to the deed. Matene Naera supported these statements. The minutes record that the Court discussed the pOSition fully with the assembled natives who supported - 36 - Aperahama's statement and gave further information showing that the land as well as the burial places were claimed. During his inquiry Acheson examined plans ML 2012, 3268 and 3278 and in his report he concluded that it was quite clear that the chiefs thought they were selling the land shown on plan 3268 used at the original investigation of title in 1875 (doc D3:12-14).14 His final conclusions were that II/The Court holding this inquiry is of the opinion that the Native vendors, when signing the conveyance to the Crown on the 10th January, 1876, thought the 1,472-acre reserve (incuding the urupas) was excluded from the sale. The fact that the old records have been destroyed by fire makes it impossible for the Court to come to a more definite finding on this point. 12/The Court is sure that the urupas in question were , not intended to be sold to the Crown on the sale of the Waimamaku No. 2 Block. If included in the sale the inclusion would be due to a mistake in the Court plans for which the Native vendors were not to blame. He recommended that The Waimamaku Natives feel strongly on the whole matter, particularly on account of the desecration of ancient burial-places, which to them were clothed with more than usual sanctity. The Court therefore recommends that action be taken under section 472 of the Native Land Act, 1931, or under special legislation to return to the Natives the burial-grounds in question and possibly a portion of the old reserve if still vested in the Crown and unalienated. Chief Judge Jones forwarded Acheson's report to the Native Minister noting that most of the land had been disposed of and could not be recovered, although he stated that it might be possible to have part of Section 15, Block XIII, of the Waoku Survey District with the burial caves on it reserved (doc D3:12).15 He stated that the Maori would probably be adverse to paying compensation to the land holder and even if the Government paid they would take it as an admission entitling them to compensation for the larger reserve. He concluded that it was not a case in which he could recommend legislation. In response to the petitions and reports the Native Undersecretary filed a memorandum in November 1932 which stated ..• I am satisfied that the Natives have a real grievance and that at one time there was a proposal to cut out from the sale a piece of land ... as pointed out to Mr Maxwell and included most of the cemeteries referred to .•. As soon as the Block stated to be cut up for settlement in 1887 trouble occured ... In 1888 the Natives brought the matter before Mr Mitchelson and - 37 - later it came before Mr Richardson by letter from Hapakuku Moetara. He then stated the reserve was shown "-""""---"---"----"~--in_the __deed. ___This __ may--bJ:L~_~Rlaine(LJ::>y_ th~~C!.c::::t that ____ ~ ____ "__ _ Brissenden was buying through Nelson and paid over L100 on account of it. The dispute was settled and Preece seems to have brought on the approved plan. It seems that the Reserve spoken of includes part of Wairau North and that is why the area of only 1000 is in Waimamaku No.2, the balance being in the Northern portion of Wairau.( doc 03: 194) 16 The Judge's report was referred to the Government for consideration in March 1933 (doc 03:186-7)17 and the Minister marked it "No action" on account of the Chief Judge's recommendations (doc 03:185).18 When the Court sat at Opononi in May 1933 a large number of Maori were present and Acheson recorded that he explained the position regarding his report on the burial reserves and that the Chief Judge did not support his recommendations. The Minutes record that the Maori expressed their views but that the Court was unable to take any further action (doc 03 : 12 5a) .1 9 Following the Opononi Court sitting Aperahama Reupena wrote to the Court Registrar that he had been unable to attend and asking if they could be provided with a copy of the Chief Judge's decision regarding the Court's report. He added that Matene Naera had told him that Acheson had advised them to again petition Parliament, and once they had a copy of the report they would prepare another petition (doc 03:39-40).20 The Registrar replied that he was unable to supply a copy of the report but to write to the Government Printer (doc 03:38) .21 In 1934 Piipi Cummins and 67 others presented another petition to Parliament claiming that the 1,472 acres containing the burial places was never intended to be in the sale nor was Te Taraire which was outside the large block (doc 03:269-271).22 The petition stated The location of these various burial places was definitively pointed out by the elders of the tribes concerned prior to the sale. Plans were prepared by or under the authority of the Native department, which plans were inaccurate and did not show the reservation of 1,472 acres aforesaid or indicate the location of the said burial places. Your Petitioners are of the opinion that the plan annexed to the said deed of conveyance either was not so annexed when the elders of the tribes signed the said deed, or , if so annexed, was misleading in that, as no burial-places were shown thereon, the said elders believed they were excluded from the sale. - 38 - The petition was referred to the Government for consideration (doc D3:175-6).23 In April 1935 Acting Native Minister Masters wrote to Minister of Lands concerning the petitions but because of the report of the Chief Judge it was decided that no further action should taken over the petition by Matene Naera. However, the other petition by Piipi Cummins had been referred to the Government for consideration. The then Native Minister, the Hon. Sir Apirana Ngata, had intimated to the Native Affairs Committee that the reservation of burial caves and wahitapu would be taken up by him with the Minister of Lands and Masters asked if the Minister of Lands would be prepared to agree to an application under Section 472 of the Native Land Act 1931 in respect of the burial places (doc D3:430).24 The Minister of Lands response was that only one of the burial places, Kohekohe, was still Crown Land and it was held under an "Occupation with Right of Purchase" license by James Morrell and he refused to allow the caves and the area surrounding them to be set aside as a reserve (doc D3:421).25 The Commissioner of Crown Lands had written to Morrell in May 1935 requesting him to mark the approximate position of the caves on a map he had enclosed (doc D3:533).26 He asked if Morrell would agree to have the area reserved with an easement for access to the nearest road. He informed Morrell that no compensation would be payable and any act would be a gratuitous one to the natives concerned. Morrell replied that he declined to give away that part of the land that was formerly a Native Burial Reserve as the Maoris no longer entertained sentiments in regard to those things and the human bones had been removed and buried in the Maori cemetery and were not the ancestors of the Maoris living there now (doc D3:168).27 Native Minister Forbes wrote to Piipi Cummins in Maori that the Lands Department had informed him that only one of the burial places, Kohekohe, was still on Crown land, which was held by Morrell who had refused to allow a reserve to be made (doc D3:163-5).28 He concluded As the other burial places are not on Crown Land, it will be necessary for the Maoris to raise the money to pay the present owners of the land the value of the areas if they wish to recover the places and the amount of compensation to which Mr. Morrell would be entitled if the Kohikohi burial places were excluded from the area held by him under O.R.P. license.

4.7 Recent Developments. Following the 1930s petition the protest over Kaharau subsided and no records of continuing protest have been located although files still retained by Government Departments and State Owned Enterprises have not been extensively researched and it is - 39 - possible that any continuing efforts have been overlooked. It may be that after 50 years of protesting the claimants simply

\ The issue of the bone coffins and human remains, most notably those from Kohekohe held by the Auckland Museum, has been revived over the past few years. In response to a formal request to release the Kohekohe coffins and remains held there (doc 03:244),1 the Minister of Maori Affairs visited Whakamaharatanga Marae at Waimamaku on 22 November 1987 (doc 03:213-220).2 In his address the Minister stated that his visit was to begin the process of returning the mana of the trusteeship of these coffins to the Hokianga people and of establishing a Trust to administer them (doc 03:221-232).3 He outlined a proposal to transfer his responsibilities under the original trust to others chosen by Hokianga people and as an interim step he appointed three trustees to initiate the process. In his speech the Minister also highlighted that one of the conditions of the original Trust, the return of the wahitapu, was unfulfilled. He undertook to research the issue and if it was Crown land to recommend setting the area aside as a Maori Reservation. Later the human remains taken in 1902 from Kohekohe were returned and buried at Waimamaku. To date no formal steps have been taken to form the Trust required by the Minister.

5.0 OTHER RESERVES 5.1 Taraire Taraire is cited in the Claim as one of the wahitapu which the Crown failed to adequately protect and it was the subject of earlier claims and petitions. It has been claimed that about 60 acres were not sold (doc 03:12-14).1 Today it is farmland with two houses on it. The original Waimamaku 1 Block surveyed by Campbell in 1870 did not include Te Taraire and it remained in the Maori land surrounding the surveyed block. The change in the direction of the boundary which excluded Taraire suggests that it was delibrately left out of Waimamaku 1 but as noted above this was consistent with the exclusion of other wahitapu from other blocks surveyed about the same time. . However, the boundary was changed on map ML 3268, prepared by Percy Smith for the 1875 Court hearing, and Te Taraire was excluded from Waimamaku 2. Probably it was then meant to form part of the Waimamaku 1 Block. On Wilson's plan ML 3278 Taraire was also marked as outside of Waimamaku 2 and the links were recorded on the revised boundary showing that it was surveyed. - 40 - Like Kaharau, Te Taraire disappeared when Kensington substituted his compiled plan ML 3278A for Smith's sketch and ____ ._ .. __. __ .__ Wils.Q!!_'~ __ uncompleted plan. On both Kensington's compilation \ and on Weetman's cheClC-survey--Taralrewcis marlCea. as -- a partof------Waimamaku 2. Again as with Kaharau, the boundary of Te Taraire could not be identified from the boundaries of outside blocks defined in earlier surveys, nor from the original Waimamaku 1 plan, so it was not possible to include on maps compiled from outside surveys. When the land was surveyed most of Taraire was included in Section 16, Block IX, Waoku S 0 which had an area of 45.25 acres. The first settler, R W Young, occupied the section in 1887 but he suffered a number of setbacks with natural disasters and disputes with the Maori (doc 03:455-6; 461-2; 464-7).2 He fell behind in payments for the land and finally gave up in 1892 because he wrote that "The moiries and me cannot agree very well, every year they let their pigs into my cultivation and destroys all my crops. Under those circumstances it is best for me to give up my Section ". (doc 03: 455) 3 Young transferred his lease to Raymond Letts in 1892 (doc 03:445)4 and he sold it to Fred Ansen in 1898 (doc 03:481).~ The following year Letts was killed in the Boer War (White and Monro 1941:136-7). Some indication that the relationships with the Maori over the occupation of Te Taraire were no better for Ansen than they were for his predecessor was given in 1911 when Mrs Bryers wrote to a Member of Parliament. She stated that she had not heard how the Government was going to settle the "Ngakuru Affair" but that she was holding Ngakuru back from going onto Ansen's place to turn him off because Ngakuru had been waiting for years for the Government to settle the matter (doc 03:141) .6 The petitions presented in 1927 by Wiremu Ngakuru, in 1930 by Matene Naera and in 1932 by Piipi Cummins, all asked for the return of Taraire. The 1930 petition suggests that Te Taraire was the location of the first Wesleyan Church and several dead were buried there. If this is so the use could date from the 1830s.

5.2 Te Moho Te Moho is a bush covered rocky outcrop near the road at the foot of the hill that leads to Waipoua Forest. Originally it was one of the landmarks that defined Kaharau and its prominence made it suitable as the location of a trig station. It was recognised as an urupa. - 41 - ("', d Between 1983 and 1988 negotiations were held between the ~~i' Department of Lands and Survey and more recently the Department of Conservation to exchange Te Moho with the current title ··----~----IloIa.er-t6~creat:e a reserve as-tIle rock- was cons idered-suita15Ie------for a roadside picnic area. The area proposed to exchange for Te Moho was a nearby area of dry riverbed in Crown title. However, negotiations appear to be in abeyance (doc D3:336-40; 344-5) .1 This summer it is proposed to realign State Highway 12 to pass the foot of Te Moho, eliminating the present U-bend in the road.

5.3 Te Ninihi Te Ninihi is also named in the Claim but no information has been located.

5.4 Kaiparaheka Most of Kaiparaheka (or Paraheka) is located on the Waiotemarama Scenic Reserve which is administered by the Department of Conservation. The reserve is in bush, scrub and ginger and contains two pa, the archaeological features of which extend on to adjacent farms. The pa on the highpoint of the reserve is well preserved and a notable example of Maori fortification with extensive terracing and large ditches and banks among other features. Traditionally the pa was that of Te Whareumu (doc D3:94).1 The area was used as an urupa and has been regarded as tapu. 2 A ridge and pa was recorded as NZ Archaeological Association site N18/1 and named as Pahiakai by Mr D R Simmonds. 3 It is not clear from the site form whether this record includes the features on the high point but it appears to only record the small pa on the low ridge and which extends into an area of the reserve that is flat and leased for grazing (doc D3:346).4 The pa, which would have formed a notable landscape feature and handy survey point, was marked on the 1870 survey plan of Waimamaku 1 but was outside the No. 1 block. In 1875 it was included in all the surveys in Waimamaku 2, the area to be sold to the Crown. The current Scenic Reserve in Section 25, Block IX, Waoku S D was marked on the initial survey plan and in the surveyor's notebook as a reserve (doc D3:537-8).5 When an application was made to release the land for settlement (doc D3:444)6 Kensington responded that it was "not a reserve in the ordinary sense" but was "spare Crown Land" (doc D3:444)7 but by 1892 Section 25 was refused to settlers because Lands officials stated it was a reserve (doc D3:457).8 Claimants have suggested that some of the areas containing burials were excluded from the reserved area and originally the - 42 - area was larger. The area of the reserve was reduced to compensate the adjoining land owner for land taken for a road. In 1908 a letter from the local Crown Lands Ranger to the .~------... Commission -of~Crown Lana.s-·s'fa'fed·:-~------·-~-~··----~---·--··-~-"·

"I have to report that about two thirds of the above section is only fit for a Scenic Reserve ... and is one of the most suitable spots in the district for scenic purposes. The remaining third which is cut off by a stream is not necessary to reserve and I recommend that it ... be given to Mr Mitchell's compensation in full, for the road deviation through his section ... " (doc 03:521)9 Reupena Tuoro and others also applied for Section 25A around 1912 but was informed the land was not available (doc 03:515-518).10 A portion of Section 25 between the reserve and Mitchell's road was later surveyed off as Section 25A and given to Mitchell and is now in private ownership (doc 03:506-14).11 However, this area is not the area containing burials. Oamage occurred to outlying features of the pa in 1988 when a fenceline was cleared by bulldozing after an agreement was reached between the Department of Conservation and the landholder to refence the boundary.12 The presence of archaeological features was overlooked and an authority to modify the site from the Historic Places Trust was not applied for until after the damage had occurred.

5.5 Wairau Wahitapu The Wairau Wahitapu was initially cut out of the Wairau Block by Campbell in 1870 and is shown as separate on ML 2012. This was consistent with the Maori claim that the Wairau survey was for a flax lease and that wahitapu were excluded from the area defined. Today Wairau Wahitapu is an isolated area with poor access, surrounded by Waipoua Forest and areas of bush and scrub. As with the Kaharau and Taraire boundaries, the southern boundary of the Wairau Wahitapu varies between the different plans. Campbell's plan ML 2012 showed the southern boundary running very roughly parallel to the Wairau River but with a "dog-leg" bend in it which moved the direction of the boundary away from the river. The boundary and the river met again at the river mouth. On Smith's plan, ML 3268, the boundary changed, running straight to the river, meeting it several hundred metres upstream from the mouth, in a line which if extended would run down to Motuhuru, the traditional Waimamaku/Waipoua boundary - 43 - marker. Smith's boundary increases the area of the wahitapu Reserve slightly. Wilson's plan ML 3278 showed both of the boundaries, as on Smith's and Campbell's plans, but it was the line follow Ing-Smr£nis~boundary~tfiatwas . marRed as ~~theWairau---~~~~~~~ Wahitapu boundary. Weetman's 1876 boundary was also placed in the same position as Smith's and Wilson's. He did not show Campbell's line. Both Wilson and Weetman recorded the links on their boundaries indicating that the line was cut and surveyed as shown on their plans. As with Kaharau and Te Taraire, Kensington's compiled plan and the plan on the Memorial of Ownership and Deeds of Sale, showed the boundary as surveyed by Campbell. The boundaries shown on the maps suggest that at the time of survey of the Waimamaku 2 block a change of the southern boundary of the Wairau Wahitapu was negotiated by the Maori and recognised by at least Smith, the Deputy Inspector of Surveys. This line was then surveyed and drawn on subsequent maps but disappeared when the final map was compiled by Kensington from the old Wairau survey and from outside boundaries. Further support is given to the suggestion that the boundary was not where the Maori wanted it in 1897 when Reupena Tuoro and others applied for a sketch map of the block to be made to allow the title of the Wairau Wahitapu to be investigated (doc 03:527).1 Reupena provided a sketch of the wahitapu reserve which showed the southern boundary crossing the Wairau River and running to Motuhuru (doc 03:524-5).2 His written description on the survey application also gives Motuhuru as the boundary marker. These definitions were consistent with the boundaries marked by Smith and surveyed by Wilson and Weetman. Kensington (for the Chief Surveyor) informed Reupena that there already was a survey plan but he did not refer to the variation in boundaries (doc 03:523).3 However, in the application for the investigation of title by Reupena and others to the Court described the Wairau mouth as the point the boundaries ran to (doc 03:55).4 The application was dismissed by the Court. On 29 January 1902 Ngakuru Pana and Peneti Pana applied for an investigation of title of the Wairau Wahitapu (doc 03:53)5 and this was heard in June 1905 (doc 03:113-7).6 Awarua Maihi gave evidence that the descendants of Tarahape and Whareumu had been buried in the burial grounds on the block which he asked be cut out. Wairau Wahitapu 2 to be in favour of Awarua Maihi, Wiremu Ngakuru, Hori Moro and Hohaia Paniora and the Waipapa Wahitapu to be called Wairau Wahitapu 3 to be in favour of the same four persons. Both blocks were to be absolutely inalienable. The balance of the land to be called Wairau Wahitapu 1 to be in favour of the 17 persons named. - 44 - 5.6 Kukutaiapa Kukutaiapa (or Kukutaepa) which was originally included in the area of Kaharu was trad-i tionally tne pa of--Taranape\aoc-~--~~-~--- D3:94).1 It is recorded as archaeological site N18/4 as "two square banked areas" with defensive ditches and a series of rua kumara. 2 It is now on private land. - 45 - WAlMAMAKU BIBLIOGRAPHY

Published references reports. Atwell E G, G F Puch and R Lawn (1973) Archaeology of the Waipoua Region, Northland. Part 1: List of Sites from Hokianga South Head to Maunganui Bluff. ~ 19:93-96; doc B18. Cheeseman, T F (1906) Notes on certain Maori Carved Burial ,chests in the Auckland Museum, Transactions and Proceedings of the NZ Institute XXXIX:451-456. Colquhoun, D (1989) "The Waipoua-Maunganui Claim, A Preliminary Research Report on Aspects of the Claim re: Crown purchase of Waipoua and Maunganui Blocks in 1876: Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki: and other Maunganui Aspects of the Claim for the Waitangi Tribunal", Revised Version; doc A13. Davis, C 0 (1974 reprint of 1896 issue) The Life and Times of Patuone, the Celebrated Ngapuhi Chief, Capper Press, Christchurch. Earle, A (1832) A Narrative of a Residence in New Zealand, Longman, London. Fox, A (1983) Carved Maori Burial Chests - A Commentary and a Catalogue, Auckland Institute and Museum Bulletin No. 13. Hamilton, A (1911) Notes on a Carved Burial Chest Found near Hokianga, New Zealand in Dominion Museum Bulletin No. 3:110-112.

Irvine, J (1965) Historic Hokianga - An Introductory Guide Book.

McVeagh, J (1987) Waimamaku - a very special settlement. Mead, S (1986) The Art of Maori Carving, Reed Methuen, Auckland.

Polack, J S (1974 reprint of 1838 issue) New Zealand, being a Narrative of Travels and Adventures, Volumes 1 and 2, Capper Press, Christchurch. Servant C (1973) Customs and Habits of the New Zealanders 1838-42, A H & A W Reed, Wellington. Skinner, H D (1918) Maori Burial Chests, Man 18:97-8. Turton, H H (1883) An Epitome of Official Documents Relative to Native Affairs and Land Purchases in the North Island of New Zealand, Government Printer, Wellington. Waitangi Tribunal Staff (1989) "The Waipoua-Maunganui Claim. A Preliminary Report on Taharoa Aspects of the Claim for the Waitangi Tribunal", doc A9. - 46 - Waitangi Tribunal Staff (1989) "The Waipoua-Maunganui Claim. A Preliminary Report on Waipoua Aspects of the Claim for the Tribunal" doc B1.

White G, and A Munro (1941) Waimamaku - The Story of a Hokianga Settlement or Fifty Years in the Backblocks, the Unity Press, Auckland.

Williment, T M I (1985) John Hobbs 18QQ-1883, Wesleyan Missionary to the Ngapuhi Tribe of Northern New Zealand, Government Printer, Wellington.

) - 47 - FOOTNOTES

1.4 The Land

1 Waihanga Block Order file, MLC; Waihanga hearing, 28 November 1932, ppI38-9, HKMB 12, MLC.

2 Te Pure Block Order file, MLC; Te Pure hearing, 28 November 1932, ppI36-8, HKMB 12, MLC; 1 February 1953, p238 Kaikohe MB 7, MLC.

3 All held at DOSLIA.

2.0 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

1 Davis (1876:67-78) includes a biographical sketch of Moetara.

2 Evidence of Tiopira, Maunganui hearing, 27 January 1876, pISS, Kaipara MB 3, MLC.

3 Rangatira signed the Treaty as Moetara, his brother having died before 1840.

4 Evidence of Hapakuku Moetara, Waimamaku hearing, 12 June 1875, p192, NMB 2, MLC.

5 Also called Te Manene and sometimes spelt Te Waenga.

6 Williment (1985:xviii) says Moetara was Wiremu Kingi.

7 Evidence of Hori Karaka Tawiti, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 16 June 1875, p213, NMB 2, MLC; evidence of Te Whata, ibid., p188; evidence of Tiopira, ibid., p189; evidence of Hapakuku Moetara, ibid., pp192-3.

8 Von Sturmer to Native Undersecretary, 11 May 1878, AJHR 1878 G2 p2; evidence of Aperahama Tuoro, Te Puri Native Reserve hearing, 28 November 1932, p136, HKMB 12, MLC.

9 Von Sturmer to Native Undersecretary, 11 May 1878, AJHR 1878 G2 p2. 10 Return Giving the Names of the Tribes of the North Island etc: AJHR 1870 All. - 48 - 11 AJHR 1878 G2.

~~ __ "___ ""_" __ ~ ___~_~~12" ___~_~_ POP~~Q_~_Inspector General of Schools, 24 October 1881, Education file, E188771303 pt~-~---"--- 1, BAAZ 1001/685a, NAA. 13 Waimamaku Maori School 75th Jubilee 1885-1960 Souvenir Brochure; Pope to Inspector General of Schools, 24 October 1881, Education file, E1887/1303 pt.1, BAAA 1001/685a, NAA. 14 Von Sturmer to Webster, 27 April 1885, NZMS 754, Auckland Public Library. 15 ibid ..

3.0 EVENTS PRIOR TO 1887 3.1 The Wairau and Waimamaku Block Titles

1 Certificate of Title to the Waimamaku (1) Block, issued 26 July 1871, DOSLI; Certificate of Title to the Wairau Block, issued 9 February 1871, DOSLI.

2 Certificate of Title Waimamaku (1) ibid.; Block Order File No.3, Waimamaku (1), MLC.

3 Plan ML 2014, Waimamaku Block (1), J Campbell, September 1870, DOSLIA.

4 Certificate of Title to the Wairau Block, issued 9 February 1871, DOSLI.

5 Plan ML 2012, Wairau Block, J Campbell, September 1870, DOSLIA.

6 Plan ML 2013, Waiwhatawhata Block, J Campbell, September 1870, DOSLIA; Plan ML 2193, Koutu Block, J Campbell, December 1870, DOSLIA.

7 Koutu is located at the best boat landing on the Waipoua coast and therefore had value for the control of commerce in the gum fields along the coast.

8 e.g. Iehu Moetara told the Stout-Ngata Commission on 22 April 1908 that part of Waipoua 2Al had been leased for flax and that there was a flax mill there. Stout Ngata Commission Minute Book, North Auckland, p174, Maori Affairs file MA78/5 NA. - ~9 - 3.2 The Negotiations

~_~ ___ ~_~ ____ TiQQira--,!,aoh~o__ t~ F D Fenton, 27 July 1874, 22 October 1874, MLC- file--74/YS9-:r;-MLC-A A5-2---~'-'-- (Box 32), NAA.

2 Brissenden to Native Undersecretary, 3 November 1874, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA.

3 a Brissenden to Native Undersecretary, 3 November 1874, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA; doc A3:263-5. b Brissenden to Native Undersecretary, 30 December 1874, in Turton 1883 pC43-5; doc A3:124-6. c McDonnell to Major Green, 13 January 1875, Turton ibid pC46; doc A3:129. d S P Smith to Brissenden, 12 June 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA; doc A3:226-9; transcribed doc A3:134-5. e Brissenden to Native Minister, 24 June 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA; doc A3:131-133. f Inspector of Surveys Heale to Native Minister, 16 July 1875, AJHR 1875 C5 pl-2; doc A3:41-2. g Deed of Sale for Waimamaku 2,' Deed No. 862, 10 January 1876, DOSLI; doc D1:28-31.

4 McDonnell to Major Green, 13 January 1875, Turton 1883, pC46;

5 Evidence of Komene Poakatai, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 14 June 1875, p201, NMB 2, MLC. On Smith's plan, ML 3268, the areas marked as Waimamaku and Kahumaku overlap.

6 Maning to Webster, undated, Maning letters, Auckland Public Library.

7 Evidence of Heremaia Kanere in Report by Blomfield on Kohekohe Coffins, undated, attached to Blomfield to Native Minister, 30/5/1902, Justice Department file, J1902/718, NA.

8 Evidence of Hori Tawiti, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 16 June 1875, p214, NMB 2, MLC; evidence of Komene, Poakatahi, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 14 June 1875, p199, NMB 2, MLC.

9 Evidence of Komene Poakatahi, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 14 June 1875, p199, NMB 2, MLC. - 50 - 10 ibid ..

___ ~ __ ~ _____~~ ______1~1 ____ ~ __ ~ ___ Evidence of Hapakuku Moetara, Waimamaku 2 hear ing , 12 June 1875 , p19-3-;--NMB -2--;---MLC:---~-~-~-

3.3 The Survey of Waimamaku 2

1 S P Smith diary 1874, September - December 1874, 5 September 1874, Smith papers, ATL.

2 S P Smith diary 1874, September - December 1874, Smith papers, ATL; S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

3 S P Smith diary 1874, September - December 1874, 12 December 1874, Smith papers, ATL.

4 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 22 January 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

5 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 21 January 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

6 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 6 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

7 S P Smith- diary 1875, January - June 1875, 9 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL. ( 8 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 11 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

9 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 6 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

10 S P Smith letterbook, January - June 1875, Smith to Hand D Wilson, 6 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

11 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 11 February 1875 and 16 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

12 S P Smith diary, January - June 1875, 16 February 1875, Smith to the Inspector of Surveys, 16 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

13 S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 17 February 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

14 Applications for the title of Waimamaku (2), 4 February 1875, by Tiopira Kinaki, Hapakuku Moetara and Te Rore Taoho, copy on Block Order File, Waimamaku 2, MLC. - 51 - 15 Applications for the title of Kahumaku and Raeroa, 5 February 1875, by Te Whata, __~. __ ~_~ ____ ~ __ Noperac Hone Tautahi, Komene Poakatahi and others-, Block Order FIle~waTmamaKu-2~MLC-:------~

16 Brissenden to Native Minister, 24 March 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA. Percy Smith spent a week in bed with measles at the surveyor's camp at the mouth of the Waipoua River at the end of February 1875, S P Smith diary 1875, January - June 1875, 18 February 1875 to 8 March 1875, Smith Papers, ATL; doc AI3:972-7. 17 S P Smith diary, January - June 1875, 11 June 1875, Smith papers, ATL.

18 Sketch Plan of Waimamaku (2), ML 3268, 11 June 1875, S P Smith, DOSLIA.

19 The Native Land Act 1875.

3.4 The Waimamaku 2 Court Hearing

1 Native Land Court Minutes, Kahumaku/Waimamaku hearing, 12-19 June 1875, ppI87-202, 205-224, NMB 2, MLC.

2 Evidence of Te Whata, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 12 June 1875, ppI87-8, NMB 2, MLC; evidence of Tiopira Kinaki, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 12 June 1875, p188, NMB 2, MLC; evidence of Peneti, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 12 June 1875, p190, NMB 2, MLC.

3 Evidence of Peneti, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 12 June 1875, ppI90-l, NMB 2, MLC. Tiopira also was named as pointing out the south boundary of the Pakanae Block ie the North boundary of Waimamaku. Evidence of Hapakuku Moetara, Waimamaku 2 hearing, 12 June 1875, p193, NMB 2, MLC; doc D3:81.

4 Waimamaku 2 hearing, 17 June 1875, p221, NMB 2, MLC.

5 Evidence of Hapakuku Moetara, Waimamaku 2 Hearing, 18 June 1875, p223, NMB 2, MLC.

6 Waimamaku 2 hearing, 19 June 1875, p224, NMB 2, MLC; Memorial of Ownership, Waimamaku 2, 19 June 1875, DOSLI.

7 Waimamaku hearing, 19 June 1875, p224, NMB 2, MLC. - 52 - 8 Application for a subdivision of Waimamaku (2), 25 June 1875, Block Order File, MLC.

----~------~---~----9 ------~~--~--preece~to- the Native--M.1nlster~~- JuTy~--nr'r5-,-~~----­ Native Land Purchase file 75/278, MA-MLP 1, NA; also transcribed doc A3:135-6. 10 S P Smith to Brissenden, 12 June 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA; also transcribed doc A3:134-5. Like Brissenden's figures, Smith's area of "about 15,000 acres" for Waimamaku was an estimate as the Waimamaku plan had not been completed.

11 Brissenden to Native Minister, 24 June 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA; transcribed doc A3:48-50. 3.5 The Waimamaku 2 Plans

1 Plan of Waimamaku 2, ML 3278, 14 July 1875, A and H Wilson, DOSLIA.

2 Note written on ML 3278A, 7 April 1875, signed by W Brisdon, Report of Judge Acheson, The Native Land Court of New Zealand, Tokerau District. In the Matter of the Wairau North and Waimamaku Blocks; and in the Matter of Section 34 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1930 and an Inquiry into Petition No. 82 of 1930 of Matene and Others, Respecting Burial-Places on the Said Blocks, 5 August 1932, AJHR 1932 G6B.

3 Schedule of survey liens, Department of Lands and Survey file 140, BAAZ 1108/140, A350 (Box 4), NAA.

4 Waimamaku 2, ML 3278A, 21 December 1875, Kensington, DOSLIA.

5 Petition 1930 of Matena Naera and others, Legislative Department file 82/1930, Lel/1930/9 No. 82/1930, NA. 3.6 The Sale of Waimamaku 2

1 Deed of Sale for Waimamaku 2, Deed No. 862, 10 January 1876, DOSLI.

2 Judge Monro wrote letters dated 11 January 1876 and 14 January 1876 to the Northern District Land Court concerning Waimamaku 2 but these letters have not been located; - 53 - Record Book, Native Land Court Office, Northern District, MLC-A 9/1/, NAA.

-)------~-~------3--~---~-ML~pra:ri-3-4-J5-, -Cneck--Sutyey-C;ff--Part-Qf------~---~----­ Waimamaku and Waipoua Block, 25 January 1876, SWeetman, DOSLIA.

4 Evidence of Preece, Waimamaku 2 hearing at Kaiku Court, 31 January 1876, p193, Kaipara MB 2, MLC.

5 Preece to Native Minister, 1 June 1876, AJHR 1876 G5 pl-13; transcribed doc A3:136-7.

6 Note written on ML 3278A, 7 April 1875, signed by W Bridson, see Report of Judge Acheson, The Native Land Court of New Zealand, Tokerau District - in the Matter of the Wairau North and Waimamaku Blocks; and in the Matter of Section 34 of the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act, 1930 and an Inquiry into Petition No. 82 of 1930 of Matene Naera and Others, Respecting Burial Places on the Said Blocks, 5 August 1932, AJHR 1932 G6B.

7 NZG, 13 July 1876, pp483-5. 3.7 The Southern Wairau Sale

1 Brissenden to Native Undersecretary, 3 November 1874, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NA.

2 Brissenden to Native Minister, 24 June 1875, Native Land Purchase file 75/279, MA-MLP 1, NAi transcribed doc A3:48-50.

3 F E Maning, 10 October 1870, Wairau North Block Order File 3, MLCi Hokianga Local Register No. 1 p46, Wairau Block, MLC-A 1/3, NAA.

4 Wairau South Deed No. 1078, 9 November 1876 and 12 July 1877, DOSLI.

5 Pokaia signed 1 March 1877, Wairau hearing, 1 March 1877, pIll, NMB 1, MLC.

6 Te Rore signed 12 July 1877, Deed No. 1078, Wairau South, DOSLI. The additional signature from Te Rore was apparently required as he had succeeded to the interest of his children. ( - 54 - 7 Hokianga Local Register No.1, p46, Wairau Block, MLC-A 1/3, NAA; Judge Monro 28 "__ "_"~"_~_~_~"_" __" ___ ~"~ January 1875, Wairau North Block Order file - No. -3~ MLC":-rrhe originaT~apprication-fias -"~-----"""- not been located.

8 Wairau hearing, 28 January 1879, pp26-7, NMB 5, MLC.

9 Annotation by Judge Monro on ML 2012/Wairau, September 1870, J Campbell, DOSLIA. 10 Wairau North Certificate of Title, 28 January 1879, DOSLI. 11 NZG, 8 April 1880, p451.

4.0 EVENTS AFTER 1887 4.1 The Canterbury Settlement

1 Official files leading to the establishment of pakeha settlement at Waimamaku, and in particular the Canterbury Settlement, have not been located. This section draws from a detailed history of the settlement written by two of the original settlers to commemorate 50 years of the settlement. See White and Munro, 1941.

2 SO 4703, Waimamaku Special Settlement, July 1887, J Baber

3 SO 4623, Plan of Sections 16 to 75, Block IX, Waoku District, Waimamaku Village Settlement, J I Philips, August 1887, DOSLIA. 4.2 Maori Protest

1 Evidence of Wiremu Ngakuru, Minutes of Evidence to Commission of Inquiry with Report of Commission of Inquiry 1907, AJHR 1907 C18.

2 Evidence of Rewiri Tiopira, 28 March 1889, pl18, NMB 9, MLC; Tiopira died on 12 November 1887.

3 Telegram from Lewis to Sheridan, 8 March 1887, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS 1 25365, NAi The Assistant Surveyor General was Percy Smith.

4 Sheridan to the Native Undersecretary, 8 March 1887, copy on Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. - 55 - 5 Hapakuku Moetara to Mitchelson, 13 August 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file --"--~"---""-"-"-"-""---""-~~"_~ ___25"J65_,~"LS_1_~2_5"3 6 5,_l'I~_____ "~_~ __"~"~ __"~_"_"_""""_~ ___"~"_""~" , 6 Minutes of Evidence to Commission of Inquiry with Report of Commission of Inquiry 1907, AJHR 1907 C18.

7 Richardson to Mitchelson, 15 January 1889, extract on Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

8 Sheridan to Minister of Lands, 29 January 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

9 Richardson to Sheridan ibid. 10 Richardson to Hapakuku Moetara, 31 January 1889, draft copy attached to ibid. 11 Sheridan to Surveyor General 4 February 1889 and 5 August 1889, written on back corner of Sheridan to Minister of Lands, 29 January 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 12 ibid. 13 Surveyor General to Chief Surveyor, June 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 14 Chief Surveyor to Surveyor General, 2 July 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 15 Hapakuku Moetara and Ihaka Pana to Richardson, 25 February 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 16 Hapakuku Moetara and Ihaka Pana to Richardson, 13 August 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 17 Sheridan to Undersecretary Lewis, 29 August 1889 notes on Record sheet 89/263, 13 August 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA; Lewis to Minister, 6 September 1889, notes on Record sheet 89/263 dated 13 August 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. 18 Native Minister, 6 September 1889, note, ibid .• - 56 - 19 Road Inspector Menzies to Chief Surveyor and attached map, 11 December 1889, Department _ ~,_~~ __~ ___~~ ______~~~~of Lanc!§_ an~~~:r;yey fil~_ 202, BAAZ 1108/202 . (Box 8), NAA. --~-----,---,------.

20 Ngakuru Pana to Court 28 December 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 202, BAAZ 1108/202 (Box 8), NAA; Dargaville Resident Magistrate to Surveyor General, 31 December 1889, Department of Lands and Survey file 202, BAAZ 1108/202 (Box 8), NAA. 21 Percy Smith to Chief Surveyor, 13 January 1890, note on bottom of ibid.; Chief Surveyor to Ngakuru Pana, 27 January 1890, ibid ..

22 Ngakuru Pana to the Native Minister, 26 August 1891, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

23 Note by Percy Smith, 23 September 1891, on translation of ibid.; note by Lands Official to Chief Surveyor, 26 September 1891, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

24 Maxwell to Wright, 13 November 1891, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA; Wright to Chief Surveyor, 20 November 1891, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

25 Kensington to the Surveyor General, 25 November 1891, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

26 Hapakuku Moetara and Peneti Pana to the Native Minister, 27 January 1892, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

27 Note on Record Sheet, 15 February 1892, Sheridan to Native Minister, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

28 Note on record sheet, 15 February 1892, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA; copy of letter 139 to Peneti Pana, 17 February 1892, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA.

29 Sheridan to Wiki Te Paa, 23 March 1892, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LS1 25365, NA. - 57 - 30 Hapakuku Moetara, Reweri Tiopira and two others Petition to Parliament concerning the __ ~ ____ "" ___ ~ ___~ ____ "______Kahara~ R~_se!:Y~J?eti tion 1894/515 I translation on Department o-f--Lanos ano---~----~~~- Survey file 25365, LSI 25635, NA. 31 Sheridan to Native Affairs Committee, 18 September 1894, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. 32 Report on Hapakuku's petition (515/1894) by Native Affairs Committee, 3 October 1894, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. 33 Extract from Journal of House of Representatives, 3 October 1894, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. 34 Native Secretary to Chief Surveyor, 5 November 1894, copy on Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. 35 Kensington to Surveyor General, 14 December 1894, Department of Lands and Survey file 25365, LSI 25365, NA. 36 Note by Sheridan, ibid. 37 Rewiri died on 7 August 1896, succession hearing, 15 March 1897, p22, NMB 19, MLC. 38 Hapakuku died 1 January 1902, Succession hearing, 20 March 1903, p371, NMB 33, MLC. 4.3 The Kohekohe Coffins

1 These names occur in the Petitions of Piipi Cummins 1934 and Matene Naera 1930, see section 4.6.

2 Louis Morrell to the Commissioner of Crown Lands, 23 April 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA.

3 A note on the letter states that section 3 of Maori Antiquities Act 1901 would apply.

4 Commissioner of Crown Lands telegram to Morrell, 28 April 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA.

5 Commissioner Crown Lands to Morrell, 28 April 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA. - 58 - 6 Commissioner of Crown Lands to Menzies, 28 April 1902 and 6 May 1902, Department of ~.~ .... -~; .. -.----.__ ~ __ ._. __._ ... ~~_~_ ... ~___ LandLa.l!

7 Menzies to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 7 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA.

8 Undersecretary of Lands to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 7 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA.

9 Minister of Lands to G F Fowlds, 17 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA; Undersecretary of Lands to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 17 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA. 10 Menzies to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 14 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA. 11 Report on Meeting in Rawene by Blomfield to Native Minister, 30 May 1902 Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA. 12 Petition to the Native Minister by Ngakuru Pana, Hoterene Wi Pou, Heheremaia Kauere, Pire Teira, Iehu Moetara, Karora Kahuitara, Horomona te Hika, and re te Taipapahia, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA. 13 Blomfield to the Native Minister, 30 May 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA. 14 Inventory of articles with Menzies to Blomfield 28 May 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA; Blomfield to Menzies, 2 June 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA. 15 Native Minister to Iehu Moetara, 13 June 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA; undated translation, Department of Justice file 1902/718, JI902/718, NA. 16 Ngakuru Pana to Minister for Native Affairs, 1 July 1902. Piipi Tiopira, Wiremu Rangitira, Te Rore Taoho, Rinkaraka Pakana, Hohaia Paniora and Pohe Paniora to Native - 59 - Minister, 26 August 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA; Iehu -~~~_~ ____~~_~ ______~ ______._Mpj3-.t_ar_a~ __t_o __ HQ.n_~-..M...~_C_qI:'.J:'olJ,,., __ LSeptember 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA. 17 UnderseCretary of Justice of Undersecretary of Lands, 9 September 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA. 18 Undersecretary of Lands to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 17 September 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA. 19 Note dated 29 September 1902 attached to the letter from Undersecretary to the Commissioner dated 17 September 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA. 20 Note signed by Undersecretary of Lands attached to file copy of letter from Undersecretary of Lands to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 17 September 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA. This note is no longer on the original file. 21 Reupena Tuoro to Hone Heke M P and the Native Minister 22 September 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA. 22 Ngakuru Pana to Heke, 29 October 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA. 23 Blomfield to Undersecretary for Justice, 26 November 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA. 4.4 The Protest Continues

1 Hesketh and Richmond to Native Undersecretary, 6 November 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA. The "original native owner" was presumably Ngakuru.

2 Possibly this map is the one is attached to the letter from the Commissioner of Crown Lands to Surveyor General, 10 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LSI 48578, NA (doc D3:413). This map shows - 60 - Piwakawaka, Taraire, Waihanga and Wairau Wahitapu.

--~--~--~---~----~~-~-----"---~~-~------~ 3 Undersecretary toHesketh--anc::r~Ricfimon-d~-rr~----- November 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA.

4 Undersecretary of Lands to Undersecretary Justice, 25 November 1902, Department of Justice file 1902/718, J1902/718, NA.

5 Ngakuru Pana to Chief Surveyor, 21 June 1904, Department of Lands and Survey file 5566, BAAZ 1108/5566, NAA.

6 Mrs M A Bryers to Chief Surveyor, 22 June 1904, Department of Lands and Survey file 5566, BAAZ 1108/5566, NAA.

7 Bryers to MacKenzie, 22 June 1904, Department of Lands and Survey file 5566, BAAZ 1108/5566, NAA.

8 Chief Surveyor to Mrs M A Bryers, 11 July 1904, Department of Lands and Survey file 5566, BAAZ 1108/5566, NAA.

9 Minutes of Evidence to Commission of Inquiry with Report of Commission of Inquiry 1907, AJHR 1907 C18. 10 Report of Commission of Inquiry, 1907, AJHR 1907 C18. 11 Copy of Petition 1907/464 of Ngakuru Pana, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 12 Undersecretary of Lands to Native Undersecretary, 28 August 1907, Record sheet, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 13 Native Affairs Committee to House of Representatives, September 1907, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA; Extract from Journal of House of Representatives, 4 September 1907, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 14 Mrs Bryers to Native Minister, 19 July 1909, Native Department 1927/407, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA.

( 15 Native Undersecretary to Native Minister, 28 - 61 - July 1907, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA.

---~----~~~--~-16 ----~----~--PetTtioIi 13 57T91-0~oI-Ngakuru~Pancf7-T9-~August~------~-- 1910, Legislative Department file 1910/21, Le1/1910/21, 135/10, NA. 17 Undersecretary to Native Affairs Committee, 22 July 1910, copy on Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 18 Native Affairs Committee to House of Representatives 19 August 1910, Le1 1910/21, 135/10, NA; also on MAl 1927/407. 19 Record sheet, 23 August 1910, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 20 Mrs Bryers to Native Minister, 23 January 1911, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 21 Mrs Bryers to Reed, 9 September 1911, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA; Mrs Bryers to Native Minister 16 September 1912, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 22 Reed to Native Minister and footnotes, 15 September 1911, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA; Native Minister to Reed, 27 September 1911, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 4.5 The Origins of the Other Coffins

1 Menzies to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 7 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 4905, BAAZ 1108/4905, NAA.

2 Commissioner of Crown Lands to Surveyor General, 10 May 1902, Department of Lands and Survey file 48578, LS1 48578, NA.

3 Hamilton to COlonial Secretary 23 September 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins, E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

4 Exchange of correspondence between Hamilton and Spencer, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

( 5 Hamilton to Colonial Secretary, 23 September 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins - 62 - E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

~---~~~~-~-~~~,~~--~-~-~----~-~ ~ ~--~ 6 Note-added ~ to Hamil ton to ColonIar-~~~~~-~-~---~~~~-~- Secretary, 13 November 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins E Spencer, box Collections 1904-15, National Museum.

7 Hamilton to Spencer, 8 October 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

8 Telegram from Spencer to Hamilton, 13 November 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

9 Register of Accounts, 1907, NZ Colonial Museum, Departmental Number 357, National Museum. 10 Undated entry for No. 1794 and others, "Carved wooden coffins or burial chests from a cave, Hokianga" Maori Ethnology Register, National Museum. 11 Hamilton to Spencer, 17 December 1907, NZ Colonial Museum file Maori Coffins E Spencer, box collections 1904-15, National Museum.

12 Register of Accounts 1906, NZ Colonial Museum, Departmental No. 209, records of purchase of a Maori burial chest from Dannefaerd on 11 July 1906 for L50. 13 The Museum catalogue card for the coffin bears the number ME 10954, a much later number and shows that the coffin was confused with ME 1797 (which was exchanged with Otago Museum). It also gives that the correct catalogue number as ME 1789. Fox (1988:39) also confused this coffin with those purchased from Spencer. 14 Piipi Tiopira died in 1952; doc D3:589.

15 Manos Nathan personal communication to Michael Taylor, July 1989. - 63 - 4.6 The Next Generation

-~---~-~~--~~-~~--~1~------~~ __Waimamaku __ MA9~_.i SchogJ,,-_7 5th __ ~jl~ilee _____ ~ ______1885-1960 Souvenir Brochure.

2 Petition 1925/206 of Wiremu Ngakuru, Legislative Department file 206/1925, Le1/1925/12, NA.

3 Native Undersecretary to Native Affairs Committee, 23 September 1925, Legislative Department file 206/1925, Le1/1925/12, NA.

4 Native Affairs Committee Report on Petition 206/1925, Wiremu Ngakuru, 28 October 1927, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA; Extract from the Journal of the House of Representatives, 28 October 1927, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. 5. Record sheet, 22 November 1927, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA.

6 Petition 1930 of Matene Naera and others, Legislative Department file 82/1930, Le1/1930/9 No. 82/1930, NA.

7 Registrar of Native Land Court Auckland to Native Undersecretary 23 August 1930, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA.

8 Native Affairs Committee to House of Representatives 2 October 1930, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA.

9 Extract from Journal of the House of Representatives, 2 October 1930, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA 10 Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims Adjustment Act 1934, Section 34, Native Department file 1930/307, MA1/397, NA. 11 Application by Chief Judge, 11 November 1930, Native Department file 1930/307, MA1/397, NA. 12 28 January 1932, pp296-297, HKMB II, MLC. 13 4 July 1932, pp53-4, HKMB 12, MLC. 14 Report of Judge Acheson, The Native Land Court of New Zealand, Tokerau District - in - 64 - the Matter of the Wairau North and Waimamaku Blocks and in the Matter of Section 34 of ~~-__ ~_~ __ ~_~~_~ ___ ~_~~~~~ ___ ~~~ .. the Native Land Amendment and Native Land Claims AdJustment~Act;--I930--and-~an Inquiry ~~~-. into Petition No. 82 of 1930 of Matene Naera and Others, Respecting Burial-Places on the Said Blocks, 5 August 1932, AJHR 1932 G6B. 15 Report of Chief Judge Jones, Petition No. 82 of 1930 - Maori Burial Places on Waimamaku No.2, 2 November 1932, AJHR 1932 G6B. 16 Memorandum by Native Undersecretary, 2 November 1932, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA. 17 Report of Native Affairs Committee on Petition No. 82/1930 of Matene Naera, 2 March 1933 Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA; Extract from the Journals of the House of Representatives, 2 March 1933, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA. 18 Note by Minister 30 November 1933 on Record sheet from Clerk of House of Representatives, 2 March 1933, on Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA. 19 1 May 1933, p196, HKMB 12, MLC. 20 Reupena to Registrar, 12 May 1933, Maori Land Court Correspondence file 302/HK, MLC. 21 Registrar to Reupena, 24 May 1933, Maori Land Court Correspondence file 302/HK, MLC. 22 Petition 112/1984 of Piipi Cummins and 67 others, Legislative Department file 112/1934, Le1/1934/15, NA. 23 Native Affairs Committee Report on Petition of Piipi Cummins, 2 October 1934, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/38, NA; Extract from Journals of House of Representatives, 2 October 1934, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/38, NA. 24 Acting Native Minister to Minister of Lands, 17 April 1935, Department of Lands and Survey file 7/819, DOSLI. 25 Minister of Lands to Acting Native Minister, 30 July 1935, draft on Department of Lands and Survey file 7/819, DOSLI. - 65 - 26 Commissioner of Crown Lands to Morrell, 29 May 1935, Lands and Survey file 20/565, Vol II DOSLIA. 27 Morrell to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 29 June 1935, copy on Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA. 28 Native Minister to Piipi Tiopira, 11 September 1935, Native Department file 1930/309, MA1/397, NA. 4.6 Recent Developments

1 Iraia, Marsden, Klaracich and others to Minister of Maori Affairs, 23 January 1987, Department of Maori Affairs file 43/6/2, Department of Maori Affairs, Whangarei. 2 Department of Maori Affairs file 43/5/2/1, Department of Maori Affairs, Whangarei. 3 Speech by Minister of Maori Affairs, 22 November 1987, Department of Maori Affairs file 43/5/2/1, Department of Maori Affairs, Whangarei.

5.0 OTHER RESERVES 5.1 Taraire

1 Report of Judge Acheson, 5 August 1932, AJHR 1932 G6B, pl-3. 2 W R Young to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 11 October 1888, 24 March 1891, 12 April 1891, 30 March 1892, Lands and Survey file 3060, BAAZ 1108/3060, Vol I (Box 132), NA. 3 W R Young to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 30 March 1892, Lands and Survey file 3060, BAAZ 1108/3060, Vol I (Box 132), NAA.

4 Commissioner of Crown Lands to George Gibbon, 28 September 1892, Lands and Survey file 3060, BAAZ 1108/3060, Vol I (Box 132), NAA. 5 Application to Transfer Lease, 5 November 1898, Lands and Survey file 3060, BAAZ 1103/3060, Vol II (Box 132), NAA. 6 M A Bryers to Vernon Reed M.P., 9 September 1911, Native Department file 1927/407, MAl 1927/407, NA. - 66 - 5.2 Te Moho 1 Correspondence on Department of Conservation \ - -I--'~------"'-'-"------~flTes-'~61T3 and-rrOC-~T3-6-;--'DoC-;--Kaikone-:~------~--'---~

5.4 Kaiparaheka

1 Evidence of Tiopira, Waimamaku hearing, 16 June 1875, p208, NMB 2, MLC.

2 NZ Archaeological Association Site Record form, site N18/1, filed by D R Simmonds, undated, held by N Z A A file keeper, S Bartlett, Whangarei.

3 ibid.

4 Sarah Noble to District Conservator, 15 February 1988, Department of Conservation file DOC 736, DoC, Kaikohe.

5 ML 2014, Field Book 718, J I Philips, Survey Office, Department of Lands and Survey, held by DOSLIA.

6 Frank Cairn to Assistant Surveyor General, 26 August 1888, Department of Lands and Survey file 202, BAAZ/1108 202 (Box 8), NAA.

7 Noted added to ibid. by Kensington, 10 September 1888.

8 Commissioner of Crown Land to Frank Cairn, 20 January 1892, Lands and Survey file 3060, BAAZ 1108/3060, Vol 1 (Box 132), NAA.

9 Crown Lands Ranger to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 16 December 108, Lands and Survey file 11099, BAAZ 1108/11099 (Box 228), NAA. 10 Reupena Tuoro to Commissioner of Crown Lands, 23 April 1912, Lands and Survey file 11099, BAAZ 1108/11099 (Box 228), NAA.

11 Correspondence and Copy of PWD Plan 31653, 27 March 1911, Lands and Survey file 11099, BAAZ 1108/11099 (Box 228), NAA. 12 Department of Conservation file DOC 707, DoC, Waipoua. 5.5 Wairau Wahitapu

1 Reupena Tuoro to Chief Surveyor, 17 May 1897, Lands and Survey file 20/565, BAAZ 1109/1468b, NAA. - 67 -

2 Application for Survey and attached map, 15 June 1897 Lands and Survey file 20/565, 1109 1468b NAA.

3 Kensington to Reupena Tuoro, 29 July 1897, Lands and Survey file 20/565, BAAZ 1109/1468b, NAA.

4 Reupena Tuoro, Ahenata Rewiri and others, Application for Investigation of Title, 12 May 1897, Wairau Wahitapu Block Order File, MLC.

5 Ngakuru Pana and Peneti Pana, Application for Investigation of Title, 29 January 1902, Wairau Wahitapu Block Order File, MLC.

6 Wairau Wahitapu hearing, 8-9 June 1905, pp21-27, NMB, MLC.

5.6 Kukutaiapa

1 Evidence of Tiopira, Waimamaku hearing, 16 June 1875, p208, NMB 2, MLC.

2 NZ Archaeological Association Site Record form, site N18/4, filed by D R Simmonds, undated, held by N Z A A file keeper, S Bartlet, Whangarei.