- f r OFFICIAL rv)..<.. \ Cc.') ~',-k'\,\' I +3..... '... ", ~'-,-... "'.. ~. Wai 143 Ngati Tama Ancillary Claims by Dr Giselle Byrnes, November 1995
A Report Commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal for the Taranaki claim (Wai 143) concermng NGARAUTIKA BLOCK AND PUKEARUHE TOWN BELT SECTIONS 6, 7 & 8 by Dr Giselle M. Byrnes Any conclusions drawn or opinions expressed are those of the author
Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. The Claim 3. The Location 4. History of Maori Occupation 5. The Situation in 1860 5.1 Ngati Tama in the rohe 5.2 Role in the Waitara war 6. The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 6.1 Objectives 6.2 Military Settlement 6.3 Effects on 'rebel' and' loyal' natives 7. The Compensation Court 7.1 The purpose of the Court 7.2 The rules of Fenton 7.3 The Court and N gati T ama 8. The West Coast Reserves 8.1 The situation facing Fox 8.2 The recommendations of the Commission 8.3 West Coast Legislation 9. Block History 10. Urenui Development Scheme 10.1 The land involved 10.2 Objectives of the scheme 11. Land taken for roading purposes 12. Conclusions/Issues for further consideration Bibliography Appendix (A 1) Document Bank (Doc #1-30) 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 5 5 6 8 10 10 10 11 13 13 18 23 24 39 39 39 40 41 43
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 1 1. Introduction The aim of this report is to investigate the events which led to the Ngarautika block not being returned to Ngati Tama as had been agreed under the West Coast Settlement (North Island) Act 1880 and the West Coast Settlement Reserves Act 1881, how the land was vested in the Public Trustee, and subsequently subdivided and leased, and how the Crown acquired title to this land. The report will cover all aspects of land ownership from 1880 to the present day, giving details as to the authority under which subdivision of land occurred, who the beneficiaries were, the location and area of land taken for roading purposes, and the location and area of land taken under the U renui Development Scheme. The report will also identify the individual land blocks in the Pukearuhe Block, those which were returned and those which remained confiscated, and in particular the fate of the three Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 and 8. The location of the land which was offered in exchange for the other town sections should be noted, together with those who were the beneficiaries from the land exchange, and who was involved in the land exchange agreement. This report has been researched and written by Dr Giselle Byrnes, a historian commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal in March 1995 to investigate this and other Ngati Tama ancillary, or discrete, claims in Taranaki. 1 I have a Doctor of Philosophy in History from the University of Auckland, and prior to my appointment at the Tribunal I was employed as a Tutor and Lecturer in New Zealand history at the University of Auckland. While every effort has been made to produce a comprehensive report on the history of the Ngarautika block, time limitations have prevented me from exploring the full implications of the West Coast Settlement Reserves legislation; rather, the focus here is on how it affected Ngati Tama in the case of this particular block. t 2. The Claim Ngati Tama claim that the block known as Ngarautika, granted to them in 1884 under the ( West Coast Settlement (North Island) Act 1880 and the West Coast Settlement Reserves Act 1881 as compensation for the loss of traditional lands, was not returned to them in the manner they wished but in an alien form of individualised title. 2 Ngati Tama further claim that the Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 and 8, set aside as reserves by a Compensation Court ruling of 1866, were \ returned in such a way that the land was_ne.ver_transferreclfor_the-benefit-olngati_tama_under-traditionaltenu1:e-as-guat:ant d-to---- them in the Treaty'.3 Moreover, Ngati Tama submit that the imposition of a surveyed township over the traditional settlement at Pukearuhe was an abuse of Kawanatanga, and was, therefore, a ~reach of the Treaty of Waitangi. 1 Under the terms of this commission I have been required to produce six of these reports over a period of eight months. See Appendix 1 (A1) for a copy of this commission. 2 Ibid., p. 35. 3 F19, Wai 143, p. 35. See also the Ngarautika Block Report.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 2 3. The Location Ngarautika is defined as Section 4, Pukearuhe, Block VI, Mimi Survey District, North T aranaki. 4 It consists of 576 acres of land marked by hills, steep ravines and rugged bush. The land is unsuitable for grazing or farming. In 1915 the Ngarautika block was subdivided into 6 parts: Ngarautika A, Bl, B2, C, D and E. The Pukearuhe Town Belt" Sections 6 and 7 (23a Or 38p), and 8 (47a 3r Op) are situated on the southern end of the Pukearuhe township, surveyed in 1866 as a military settlement. The sections are bounded in the west by the sea and in the east by the Ngarautika Block. s 4. History of Maori Occupation Ngarautika is situated within the traditional rohe of Ngati Tama in North Taranaki. In his History and Traditions of the Maoris of the West Coast North Island o/new Zealand Prior to 1840 (1910) Stephenson Percy Smith described the Ngati Tama boundaries with reference to the Taranaki surveyor and local historian W. H. Skinner's account of the region. 'The lands of the Ngati-Tama tribe', wrote Smith, extended from [the] Mohaka-tino river to a place named Titoki, two miles south of Puke-aruhe pa. They thus had a sea frontage of about fourteen miles, and their boundaries extended inland until they were met by those of Ngati-Haua, of Upper Whanganui, and with whom they were often allied in war and also in marriage. 6 The land between the Mokau river and Pukearuhe pa, generally known as Poutama, was the traditional home of N gati l' ama. The N gati T ama claimants have defined the western boundary of the Ngati Tama rohe as Te Moana Nui A Kiwa; the southern bbundary with Ngati Mutunga is at Titoki, a stream that reaches the coast at Wai-iti; and the northern boundary is marked by the Mokau River. 7 The eastern boundary with Ngati Maru is more difficult to ~scertain, as the majority of ancestral place names have not been recorded on maps.8 4 See Figure 1. 5 See Figures 13, 14. 6 Stephenson Percy Smith, History and Traditions of the Maoris of the West Coast North Island of New Zealand Prior to 1840, New Plymouth, 1910, p. 111. 7 F19, Wai 143, p. 12. 8 In their evidence submitted to the Tribunal, Ngati Tama suggest that the most accurate and authoritative delineation of their traditional rohe is given in the maps used by the 1927 Sim Commission. Ibid., p. 12, App. No. 1, p. 108a. For a fuller discussion of the history of Maori occupation of the area, see the Mohakatino Parininihi and Mokau Mohakatino Blocks Report.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 3 5. The Situation in 1860 5.1 Ngati Tama in the rohe The Ngati Tama claimants maintain that before the migration southwards in 1835, the movement of Ngati T ama in and out of the roh~ remained fluid. They have cited the travels of Katene Puoho who moved south during the 1820s and returned to Poutama around 1823. 9 The Ngati Tama claimants also refer to the exploits of Taringakuri Kaeaea, who in 1832, took a party of 40 warriors and canoed from their stronghold, Pa T angata at the mouth of the Tongaporutu River, to Ngamotu to assist Te Atiawa against the invading Waikato forces, and to the activities of Rangikatatu and Hurihanga, who led N gati Tama waka on the return journey from Waikanae in 1848. 10 In The Coming o/themaori (1952), Te Rangi Hiroa stated that' [in the 1830s] Ngati Tama, Ngati Mutunga, and Atiawa returned to the Taranaki lands ( of the unextinguished fires. I 11 The Pakeha historical record confirms that Ngati Tama were in the rohe during this period. Smith recorded that in the early 1820s the resident Pukearuhe people were reported to have been at the first siege of PukerangioraY In Old Whaling Days (1913), Robert McNab tells of Thomas Ralph, a pakeha trader from Sydney who established a trading post at Mokau in 1832, and how he had been captured by N gati T ama and taken to their pa, and there held hostage until N gati T ama had heard the fate of the pakeha at Moturoa. 13 By the 1830s the effects wrought by epidemic and the musket wars had greatly facilitated the ease with which the northern tribes were able to move in and out of T aranaki. At this time Ngati Tama, along with other Te Atiawa iwi of Taranaki, migrated south, everl.tually settling in the Chatham Islands and Cook Strait area. Michael King, in Moriori: a people rediscovered (1989), has recounted how Ngati Tama migrated south in 1835 to the Chatham Islands where they settled mainly at Waitangi and Kaingaroa. 14 In 1867 and 1868 three groups of Te Atiawa Maori, comprising a total of 356 Ngati Mutunga and N gati T ama, left the Chathams on their return heke to T aranaki. They left only 20 people behind who were either too old or unwilling to leave. King has proposed three major ( 9 Ibid., p. 295. 10 Ibid., p. 23. See also Smith, History and Traditions, p. 474; F19, p. 23. Te Puoho and a Ngati Tama war party went south in 1836, from Paturau (Golden Bay) to Ruapuke, via Mawhere, Arahura, Hokitika and Tuturau, see Atholl Anderson, Te Puoho's Last Raid, Dunedin, 1986. 11 Te Rangi Hiroa, The Coming of the Maori, Wellington, 1952, p. 382. 12 Smith, History and Traditions, p. 363. 13 Robert McNab, The Old Whaling Days: a history of southern New ZealandJrom 1830 to 1840, Invercargill, 1913, pp. 52-53. 14 Michael King, Moriori: a people rediscovered, Auckland, 1989, p. 109.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 4 reasons why Ngati Tama and Ngati Mutunga returned to Taranaki. Firstly, he suggests that they were attracted back to Taranaki because the economic base of cropping in the Chathams was in serious decline; secondly, the Native Land Court and Compensation Court sittings which were to be held in T aranaki required the attendance of claimants in order for their claims to ownership of land to be heard; and thirdly, that the teachings of Te Whiti 0 Rongomai and Tohu Kakahi appealed to those seeking spiritual sanctuniry at Parihaka, which had become a site ofthe restoration of Maori confidence. 1s N gati T ama themselves believed that the heke fulfilled a prophecy given in 1835 that they would eventually return to T aranaki. This belief was particularly advanced by the events of 1868. The appearance of the Aurora Australis, an outbreak of measles epidemic which killed a large number of Maori and Moriori on the Chathams, and the destruction wrought on the settlement of Tupuangi by a tidal wave were all considered as omens signalling their return. 16 More recently, Grant Phillipson, in his Report to the Waitangi Tribunal on Matters of Relevance to the Chatham Islands Claims, has' suggested a more practical - and perhaps more pressing - explanation for the return. This was that the Native Department suspected that some settlers had made pre-hearing deals with the Maori owners of land, who had then returned to the mainland. 17 Despite the reasons for the return heke, the weight of evidence suggests that the migration of Ngati Tama to the Chatham Islands was indeed temporary and that on their return they resumed occupation of their traditional estate. 5.2 Role in the Waitara war With regard to the wars surrounding the Pekapeka purchase in 1860, and the second war of 1863, fighting did not take place on the Ngati Tama estate. 18 In his evidence given before the Sim Commission in 1927, the surveyor and local historian W. H. Skinner claimed that 'Ngati T ama as a tribe were absent during the War'.19 On further examination by the Commissioners, however, Skinner added that there may have been individual members [of Ngati TamaJ there. 20 15 King, Moriori, p. 109. 16 Ibid., p. 109. 17 Grant Phillipson, 'Report to the Waitangi Tribunal on Matters of Relevance to the Chatham Islands Claims', A16, Wai 64, p. 23. 18 W. H. Skinner, RDB, vol. 49, p. 19162. See also 'Districts that fed the war', map by Charles Heaphy in AJHR, 1861, E-IC, p. 2. The Ngati Tama rohe was included in this area. See also Heather Bauchop, 'The Wars and Iwi Losses, Taranaki 1860-70: A Summary, June 1992, Hll, Wai 143. 19 RDB, vol49, p. 19161. 20 Ibid.
Ngarautika Block and Pukeartthe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 5 6. The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 6.1 Objectives The Act which empowered the government to confiscate land, was, as Hazel Riseborough has noted, euphemistically labelled 'The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863'.21 It was ironic that while much of the Act was concerned with settiement - particularly military settlement - its real effects were felt through its powers of confiscation. The declaration of confiscation was simultaneously announced with a proclamation of peace which declared that the war which had commenced at Oakura was now at an end. The Act, which passed into law on 3 December 1863, was intended to suppress acts of 'rebellion' against the Crown in the designated Districts and included provisions for the permanent protection and security of the well-disposed Inhabitants of both races for the prevention of future insurrection or rebellion and for the establishment and maintenance of Her Majesty's authority and of Law and Order throughout the Colony.22.( The Act declared it 'lawful for the Governor in Council from time to time to set apart within any such District eligible sites for settlements for colonization and the boundaries of such settlements to define and vary'. 23 The net effect of the New Zealand Settlements Act was to declare confiscated land to be Crown land by declaring it to be a District according to the provisions of tl1e Act. These Districts were defined as the lands of any people deemed to have been in rebellion since 1 January 1863, and could be proclaimed from time to time as the governor thought fit and set aside for settlement. 24 Riseborough has further noted how Frederick Whittaker, Premier and Attorney General, simply passed off the Act as a kind of public works act under which all ( land could be taken (in districts proclaimed to be in rebellion) and compensation paid to owners, excepting those owners who had been in rebellion. 25 Although the New Zealand Settlements Act passed into law in 1863, its implications were not realised until at least two years later. On 2 September 1865 an Order in Council declared Middle Taranaki and the rohe of Ngatiawa and Ngatiruanui as Districts under the New Ze_aLand_S_ettlements_AcL1K6J_and_theJandLwithiathQse~istricts_to_he_confiscatecllands. --l 21 Hazel Riseborough, 'Background Papers to the Taranaki Raupatu Claim', A2, Wai 143, p.? 22 See further Ann Parsonson, 'The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863',122, Wai 143. 23 New Zealand Statutes, 1863, pp. 19-20. 24 For further discussion see Riseborough, 'Background Papers', A2, Wai 143, pp. 21ff. 25 Ibid., p. 22, see also NZPD, 1861-63, pp. 869-74.
Ngarautika Block and Pukeartthe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 6 That part of the Ngati Tama estate included within the District of Ngatiawa was therefore deemed to be confiscated land. 26 The proclamations of the Middle Taranaki and Ngatiruanui Districts excepted all those lands within the boundaries held under grant from the Crown. Thus, the confiscations were not effective over the purchased land then sold to settlers, but were effective over the native reserves. 27 The Taranaki confiscation boundary now extended inland from White Cliffs in the north to Wanganui in the south, with coastal T aranaki effectively becoming one district. 28 The traverse of confiscation went from west to east including 1,275,000 acres of land which cut across the rohe of the Taranaki, Te Atiawa, Ngati Ruanui, Ngati Mutunga, Ngati Maru, Ngati Tama, Nga Rauru and Whanganui iwi. 29 The N gatiawa district included all that land bounded on the north-west and north by the sea from the mouth of the River Waitara to the tunnel at Parininihi, and thence by a straight line in a direction due east (true bearing) for a distance of 20 miles; on the south-east by a straight line from the eastern extremity of the said northern boundary in a direction 30 degrees west (true) till it intersects the straight line between the summit of Mount Egmont and Parikino on the Wanganui River; on the south by the said last named straight line from its intersection with the said south-eastern boundary to its intersection with the Kairoa and Waimate Road; on the west by the eastern boundary of the Middle District of T aranaki proclaimed under the New Zealand Settlements Act, 1863, from the point last named to the commencing point at the mouth of the River Waitara. 3o The total area of land confiscated north of the Waingongoro River comprised 934,325 acres. Of this total area, 47,800 acres were designated for military settlements, 45,681 acres were selected as rural lands, 1,115 acres were to be suburban sections, and 1;004 acrestwere set aside for townships. 6.2 Military settlement In the second reading of the New Zealand Settlements bill, William Fox stated that the primary aim of the Act was to assist in the suppression of rebellion by introducing 'so strong a population into the disturbed districts... that the Natives might be deterred from all hope 26 New Zealand Gazette, no. 35, 5 September 1865, p. 266; New Zealand Statutes, 1863, pp. 19-23; RDB, pp. 3991,4039. 27 Janine Ford, 'Title histories of the native reserves made in the Fitzroy, Grey and Omata purchases in Taranaki (1844-1848), F24, Wai 143, p. 11. 28 See Figure 2. 29 John Walsh, 'The Compensation Court in Taranaki', draft chapter prepared for the Waitangi Tribunal, February 1993, Wai 143, p. 10. )0 Cited in B. Wells, The History of Taranaki, New Plymouth, 1878, p. 259.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 7 of successful resistance to the establishment of law'.3! Military settlement was therefore the instrument with which the Government hoped to implement the policy of confiscation and to ensure 'the future security of the settlers and the permanent preservation of peace' In Taranaki.32 In October 1863, Alfred Domett had presented to the government a plan of military settlement which included the introduction of 20,000 men throughout the North Island who would assist in suppressing rebellion by dissident Maori. 33 Approximately 4000 men were to be located in Taranaki, distrubuted in about forty settlements averaging 100 men each and requiring 190,000 to 200,000 acres of land. 34 Domett suggested that the Military Settlers come from Australia and England (the latter with assisted passages) and the entire scheme was to be financed by 'the sale of the lands forfeited by the Natives at war against US'.35 The plan was to have a dual purpose, encouraging European settlement while providing a permanent military force on the ground. 36 It was anticipated that the military settlers would clear the land and construct roads in addition to performing garrison duties. Domett's scheme proposed to make roads and plant settlers through and about the frontiers of the present settlements... [and] take as the sites of our settlements either the plains and valleys, however far stretching into the interior, still connected with and continuous from those already settled, and thus capable of being included with them within one ring of defence... 37 31 NZPD, 1861-63, pp. 782-85. 32 Alfred Domett, 'Memorandum on Roads and Military Settlements in the Northern Islands of New ( Zealand', AJHR, 5 October 1863, A-8a, p. 1. See also 'Papers Relative to the Formation of Military Settlements in the North Island of New Zealand', AJHR, 1863, A-8a, A-8b. For further discussion of the theory and practice of the military settlement scheme in North Taranaki, see Suzanne M. Cross, 'Muru Me Te Raupatu: Confiscation, Compensation, and Settlement in North Taranaki, 1863-1880', M. A. thesis, University of Auckland, 1993, pp. 134-73. See also the Pukearuhe Historic Reserve Report. 33 Riseborough has suggested that the scheme of military settlement proposed in New Zealand may have been adapted from that which Grey had used in South Africa, but it could, like the. idea of confiscation,-"al""s""o--.:h!.'='a,-,-v:::o.e..t!h""ad"'-- -I its genesis in Ireland. Riseborough, 'Background Papers', A2, Wai 143, p. 13. 34 Of these 4000 men, 100 would be situated on the north from New Plymouth to Waimate; another 1000 on Ngatiruanui land in the south; and 2000 along the coast, see Domett, 'Memorandum on Roads and Military Settlements', pp. 3, 8. 35 From such land there was to be deducted 'the amount required for the Natives themselves [and] the amount required for free grants to the settlers...'. Ibid., pp. 5-7. 36 Wells, History oftaranaki, p. 257. 37 Ibid., p. 2.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 8 He also anticipated that 'the introduction of such an amount of armed population, formed into defensive settlements, as would overawe the Native Tribes... [and] at least be always ready and able to check or punish their incursions and depredations. 38 When these settlements were established, it was hoped that the men released from military duty would then settle on the land, and becoming permanent residents in the province, would by their presence, ensure peace and security. " Pukearuhe, near the northern boundary of the Ngati Tama rohe, was considered by Domett as the site of a future northern frontier post which could 'be held by 200 men in a stockade (or less) against any Native force whatever; and would be easily provisioned by sea... '.39 Pukearuhe was one of seven military settlements in North Taranaki, including Huirangi, Manutahi, Mataitawa, Tikorangi, Manganui and Urenui. Of the total area confiscated, 35,000 acres were allotted to the military settlers, 6,622 acres were returned to Maori or reserved for their use, while the remainder was allotted for education or roading purposes. South of the Waingongoro River 50,000 acres were laid out for military settlements, the towns being Kakaramea, Ohawe and Makoia. However, the scheme did not result in the expected increase in population, and even before the expiration of the three years' residence required to establish a title to the land allotted under the terms of their service, a large number of the original military settlers had left the district. 40 By 1866, when the three years of service had elapsed, enabling the military settlers to own their allottments 'unfettered by any conditions', the majority of them either sold or mortgaged their land and left the district, so that by the end of the following year, less than a tenth of the original military settlers remained. 41 6.3 Effect on \ rebel' and \ loyal' natives Those Maori who had joined forces with the Imperial and Colonial forces were labelled 'Friendlies', or \ loyal natives' Y The title of 'loyal native' was reserved for those Maori who had never taken up arms against the Queen, and who had not fallen out of favour with the government. Conversely, those' misguided people' who had fought to defend their lives and land were labelled' rebels'. As Heather Bauchop has recently argued, the labelling of Maori as \ rebel' and \ loyal' reflected the social and economic expectations held by the British, and that the inscription of these terms had a detrimental effect on undermining Maori identityy 38 Ibid., p. 1. 39 Ibid., p. 3. 40 Ibid., p. 261. 41 Ibid. 42 See also Heather Bauchop, 'The Wars and Iwi Losses in Taranaki 1860-1870: A Summary', Wai 143, pp. 8-9. 43 See further Heather Bauchop, 'Denigration and Denial: Crown Renaming of the Land, History and (continued... )
Ngarautika Block and Pttkeartthe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 9 Indeed, the imposition of prescribed labels threatened iwi identity and suggested the \ divide and rule' policy frequently invoked by the British colonial authorities. The proclamation of 2 September promised that no land of any loyal native would be taken except as deemed necessary for the security of the country, and that compensation would be granted. It did not, however, mention how to apply for compensation, or even that a Compensation Court existed. 44 It was not until June 1866, that the Compensation Court commenced its proceedings in Taranaki. 45 It 'was significant for Ngati Tama and others considered \ loyal' that the government, as Fox stated, proposed \ to confiscate no lands except those of which the owners have been engaged in open rebellion. '46 Under the terms of the Act confiscation was presented as a punishment of the rebels and included a promise that no further retribution would be met on the rebels, excepting for those acts the government considered to be particularly treacherous. 47 Moreover, the Act included the provision that all rebels who came in within a reasonable time and submitted to the ( Queen's authority would receive a sufficient quantity of land (under Crown 'grant) in the named district. 48 When the proclamation appeared in the New Zealand Gazette on 26 October 1864, it gave \ rebels' until 10 December to submit and/or take the oath of allegiance to the Crown. 49 Confiscation was designed as a punitive measure to be administered to those \ rebels' who had taken up arms against the Crown in the land wars of the 1860s. The historical evidence suggests, however, that the policy of confiscation as it was administered on the ground, failed to distinguish between those labelled as \ rebels' and those considered \ loyal' who had not participated in the conflict.?o Under the terms of the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 N gati T ama were classified as \ loyal' and were (at least in theory) to be exempted from the punitive aspects of the confiscation legislation. 43(... continued) Undermining of Iwi in Taranaki', June 1993, I19, Wai 143, esp. pp. 3, 12. 44 Order in Council proclaiming certain lands confiscated under the New Zealand Settlements Act, 1863,2 September 1865, no. 35, New Zealand Gazette, pp. 266-267; RDB, v.ll, pp. 4039-4040., 45 The first sitting was in New Plymouth in June 1866. New Zealand Gazette, no~,~q) 11 Aeri11866, p. 142; AJHR, 1866, A-l3, pp. 3-16. The last sitting of the court took place from 18 to 20 March 1874 in Wanganui, see AJHR, 1880, G-2, p. 80. 46 AJHR, 1864, Appendix to E-2, pp. 17-18. 47 Ibid. 48 New Zealand Gazette, 5 September 1865. 49 Riseborough, 'Background Papers', A2, Wai 143, p. 31. 50 Ibid. (
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 10 7. The Compensation Court 7.1 The purpose of the Court The New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 provided for compensation payments to be made to any dispossessed Maori who had remained loyal and a Compensation Court was established to determine the terms of the compensation and'to whom it would be granted. Section 13 of the New Zealand Settlements Act required the Colonial Secretary to convey the claims received to a judge of the Compensation Court. Notification to claimants in T aranaki entitled to compensation under the New Zealand Settlements Act was given in a notice advertised in the New Zealand Gazette on 5 April 1865, and published separately on 8 April. This notice gave a description of the land under consideration and outlined the offences that would exclude potential claimants from obtaining compensation. Under the terms of this notice, in both Maori and English, claims were to be made in writing within six months for those living in New Zealand, or eighteen months for non-residents. 51 The proclamation of peace, which followed soon after the confiscation announcement obscured the process of seeking compensation even further. It stated that out of the lands that had been subject to confiscation, the Governor would 'restore considerable quantities to those of the Natives who wish to settle down upon their lands, to hold them under Crown grants, and to live under the protection of the law'. 52 Commissioners were to be responsible for placing 'Natives who may desire it upon lands at once, and will mark out the boundaries of the blocks which they are to occupy' Y It added that those who did not make themselves known would be excluded. 51 7.2 The rules of Fenton As Chief Judge of the Native Land Court and the Compensation Court since 1865, Francis Dart Fenton was instrumental in devising the central principles upon which the Court procedure was based. An important rule maintained by Fenton was that only evidence presented to the Court was admissible, thereby excluding those claimants who were absent from the hearing. In the terms established by the Court, not to appear was not to exist. As Bryan Gilling has noted, '[this] would not have been so much of a problem had the Court sittings been well advertised and held in places easily reached by potential claimants... [and] in practice, many claimants never heard their lands were being adjudicated on until after the 51 RDB, vol11, pp. 3991-93, 4004-4006. See further John Walsh, 'The Compensation Court in Taranaki', Wai 143. 52 New Zealand Gazette, no. 35, 5 September 1865, p. 267; RDB, vol. 11, p. 4040. 53 Ibid. 54 Ibid.
Ngarautika Block and Fukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 11 fact, and even not until the new purchasers arrived to take possession and force them off.,s5 The conduct of the hearings did not proceed without some confusion, which seemed to have come initially from the form of application to the Court. 56 Fenton also believed that a body of enquiry, such as the Native Land Court, should be guided not by existing English case law, but by a return to the' principles of equity', therefore establishing its own precedents. \ The Native Land Court', Fenton told a Select Committee in 1891, 'must respect its own precedents, or you will never build up a system of common law.'57 The introduction of the' 1840 rule' was one such example of Fenton's efforts to institute a system of common law principles in New Zealand. 58 7.3 The Court and Ngati Tama In September 1866 the Compensation Court sat in New Plymouth to hear claims from Ngati Tama, Ngati Maru, Ngati Mutunga, Puketapu and Pukerangiora Maori to the Ngatiawa coast block. 59 Judges Rogan and Lyon presided. The Court found that 'finding it impossible to' appraise the value of the chiefs on the loyal side or the rebel side, each man on each side was of the same value, and had an equal estate'.60 In keeping with Fenton's practice, the Court ruled that the claims of those who were absent from the land in question in 1840 would not be considered by the CourtY While 560 claimants were rejected, and 400 resident claims were classified as 'rebel', 575 claims were admitted. Atkinson and the \ loyal' claimants are reported to have agreed to a settlement out of court, the details of which were to be determined by Parris. 62 In November 1867 and in February 1868 Rogan asked Parris for details of these settlements. Parris produced a summary of the settlements and an incomplete list of those entitled to an award, which totalled 42,000 acres. ( \ The exclusion of some Ngati Tama and other Taranaki iwi (Ngati Mutunga and Ngatiawa in particular) by the 1866 Compensation Court decision dissatisfied many people. In 1867 the 55 Bryan D. Gilling, 'Report to the Waitangi Tribunal on Matters of Relevance to the Chatham Islands', Wai 64, pp. 12-13. ( 56 For further discussion, see further Bauchop, 'The Aftermath of Confiscation - Crown Allocation of Land to Iwi: a case study in confiscation', June 1993, 118, Wai 143, pp. 59-61. 57 AJHR, 1891, G-1, p. 55. 58 For further explication see the report on the MOKaU Mohakatino and Mohakatino Parininihi Blocks, \'{1ai 143. 59 See also the Fukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 Report. 60 'Second Report, West Coast Royal Commission', AJHR, 1866, A-13, pp. xxxv-x..x..xvii. 61 Ibid. 62 Although no report of this September hearing was submitted to Parliament, notes of the Court proceedings suggest that the Court observed the rules of the earlier Taranaki hearings [over which Fenton had presided]. Walsh, 'The Compensation Court in Taranaki', p. 26.
Ngaratttika Block and Pttkeartthe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 12 'absentee' Taranaki Maori held a meeting in Wellington in the presence of Hon. J. C. Richmond, the Native Minister. The meeting concluded with an arrangement that 12,200 acres of land should be awarded to the five tribes. 63 The number of individuals involved was recorded as 755, and the area authorised for each person was 16 acres. An Order in Council was drafted, but after the Attorney General questioned the authority of the government to effect such a change, the issue was suspended. 64 The important point here is that the admission by the government in 1867 that the absentees were allowed at least some land in Taranaki may be read as an implicit rejection of the 1840 Rule as it was devised by the Compensation Court. 65 Parris explained his actions in a Memorandum addressed to the Royal Commissioners of 16 March 1880: With reference to the awards of lanclto absentees made by the Government subsequent to the sitting of the Compensation"Court in 1866, it was considered that, as in all land purchases made in this district the absentees were paid part of the purchase money, the rule of the Compensation Court which excluded all Natives who had not been in occupation since 1840 [the 1840 Rule] was unfair and arbitrary; and in that view of the question an award of 16 acres each was made for the absentees of the different hapus, so far as their numbers could then be ascertained from their resident relatives. 66 On 11 June 1867 Parris, wrote to J. C. Richmond, informing him that In the N gatiawa Coast, Waitara South and Oakura Blocks, that is from the \Vhite ' Cliffs (the northern -extremity of the confiscated territory) to Hangatahua, in the Taranaki District, and also in the Ngatiruanui Coast form Patea to Wa~ngongoro, so much of the available land by the seaboard has been taken up for the Military Settlement Scheme, that there is not sufficient to satisfy the awards to loyal Natives within the same lines, but there is a great deal over very fine country inland of those lines, as soon as it can be made available, which is a work of time, and cannot be reckoned upon as available at the present time. 67 63 West Coast Commissioner to Native Minister, Appendix N, AJHR, 1884, A-Sa, p. 7. 64 Janine Ford, 'The Decisions and Awards of the Compensation Court in Taranaki, 1866-74', \'7aitangi Tribunal Report 1991, Wai 143, pp. 48-58. 65 Gilling proposes this and elaborates on this argument, Gilling, p. 55. 66 Memorandum, Parris to West Coast Commissioners, 16 March 1880, copy in F19, Wai 143, p. 93. 67 Letter Parris to J. C. Richmond, 11 June 1867, copy in 'Reserves Made for Friendly Natives and for Returned Rebels inthe Bay of Plenty, Ngatiawa, Middle Taranaki, and Ngatiruanui Districts', AJHR, 1867, No. 5, A-18, No. 5.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 13 The awards of the 1866 Compensation Court to Taranaki Maori were published in the New Zealand Gazette, on 13 November 1867. The awardees in the Waipingao to Titoki district were listed as follows Name Rural acres Town acres Hakaraia 500 1 Nopera 500 1 Wi Katipu 250 1 WiWeke 200 1 Hera Hinera 250 1 Mata Rangwhakawaia 250 1 Miriama Trewa 250 1 Pirihira Kikoti 250 1 Mata Rua Ahuroa 250 Rahi Waka 250 Mata Whareaupaki 250 Waimapua 250 68 A total of 20 Compensation Awards were granted in the Waipingao to Titoki district, to 12 grantees, comprising a total area of 3,458 acres. 69 In the Bell Block to White Cliffs district, 68 grants were made to 1,382 grantees for a total area of 2,700 acres. 70 8. The West Coast Reserves 8.1 The situation facing Fox (, For the purposes of this report, the terms 'confiscated territory' and 'West Coast Land District' need to be defined. Under the terms of the West Coast Settlement (North Island) ( Act 1880, the' confiscated territory' in Taranaki was defined as the land commencing at the White Cliffs, and thence by a line running due East, 20 miles; thence by a line running in a South-westerly direction to the Ngaire swamp; thence by a line known as the "Confiscated Line" to the point where it strikes the Waitotara River, and by that river to the sea.71 The West Coast Land District was designated as that land 68 New Zealand Gazette, 13 November 1867, p. 443. 69 'West Coast Royal Commission', AfHR, 1884, A-Sb, p. 16. 70 Ibid. 71 New Zealand Statutes, 1880, p. 173.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 14 commencing at the mouth of the Stoney River, and ascending that river to its source; thence by a right line to the summit of Mount Egmont; thence by a right line to the source of the Waingongoro River, and descending that river to the South-Eastern corner of Block X., Ngaire Survey District; thence by the southern boundary of that block to the line known as the "Confiscated Line", and thence by that line to the point where it strikes the Waitotara River, and by that river to the sea.72 On 19 December 1879 the Confiscated Lands lnquiry and Maori Prisoners' Trials Act was passed into law. This provided for the' Inquiry into alleged Grievances of Aboriginal Natives in relation to certain Lands [between the White Cliffs and Waitotara] taken by the Crown', and it allowed the Governor in Coucil to 'Postpone the Trials of certain Prisoners who have been committed for Trial for alleged Offences concerning such Lands'.73 Bryce was intent on seeing the Maori Prisoners' Dentention Bill through parliament. This bill provided that 'all Natives' arrested bewteen the White Cliffs and Waitotara on or after 19 July should 'be deemed to have been and to be detained' under the provisons of the Maori Prisoners' Act. In the debate which surrounded the introduction of the Confiscated Lands Inquiry and Maori Prisoners' Trials bill, Bell disagreed with the preamble which stated that it was 'alleged' that promises had been made, and he reminded the Legislative Council that while the proclamation of 1865 confiscated 'the land of those in rebellion', it not only' did not confiscate the land of those who remained loyal, it conserved their rights and made the express promise to them that their land should not be taken. '74 These promises, Bell argued, were 'absolute promises, whose fulfilment some day was a necessity on the part of the Government'.75 The following month the West Coast Commission was appointed to investigate claims on these promises. On 20 January 1880 the governor, Sir Hercules Robinson, appointed William Fox, Francis Dillon Bell and Hone Mohi Tawhai commissioners under the 1879 Act. 76 Their commission required them to 'inquire into, examine and report upon' claims brought before them related to promises made, or 'alleged to have been made', by the government regarding the lands between the White Cliffs and the Waitotara river confiscated under the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 and amending acts. In 1881 it was claimed that 'the whole object of the West Coast Commission inquiry was to show the Natives that we were going to Inquire into 72 New Zealand Statutes, 1880, p. 174. 73 NZPD, 1879, pp. xxxii, p. 798. The second part of the Act repeated the provisions of the earlier Maori Prisoners' Trials Act which had lapsed. See further Hazel Riseborough, Days a/darkness Taranaki, 1878 1881, Wellington, 1989, pp. 87-90. 74 NZPD, 1879, pp. 864-65. 75 Ibid. 76 Tawhai was a Ngapuhi chief and member for Northern Maori.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 15 unfilfilled promises, and to do them justive in respect of those promises'.77 The commission of 23 December 1880 empowered Fox to allocate the awards of the Compensation Court and to define reserves \ in satisfaction of all promises or engagements made by or on behalf of Her Majesty or the Government... which have formed the subject of inquiry' by the west coast commissioners. 78 In addition, all evidence presented before the com~issioners was to be \ fully and fairly taken down and transcribed in writing' and, if deemed necessary, to be accompanied by a \ full and accurate translation... duly verified as correct'.79 The West Coast Commission held its first sitting at Hawera on 11 February 1880, with Fox and Bell as commissioners. Tawhai, appointed as a third commissioner, had asked to be relieved of his duties, feeling that he would be like a \ carthorse with blinker on, driven by a man with a whip who pulls the reins which way he pleases'.8o The West Coast Commissioners, William Fox and Francis Dillon Bell, presented three reports: the first on 15 March, the second on 14 July and the third was produced on 8 August 1880. 81 The West Coast Settlement (North Island) Act 1880 empowered the Governor to \ settle outstanding [land] questions on the West Coast of the North Island of New Zealand'.82 The Act further authorised the Governor to ( make a final settlement of every claim or grievence of any nature arising out of any award, promise or engagement howsoever made, by or on behalf of the Government of the colony, in respect of land situate[d] within the confiscated territory... and to issue Crown grants in fulfilment of such award promises and engagements. 83 The Governor could also \ make and set apart reserves for Natives within the confiscated territory, to be inalienable by sale, lease, or other disposition, and to issue Crown grants for t h e same... ' 84 The successor to the 1880 Act was the West Coast Settlement Reserves Act 1881, which aimed to regulate the sale or leasing of the reserves and provide for the \ Administration of 77 NZPD, 1881, xxxviii, p. 479. 78 AJHR, 1881, G-5, p. 7. 79 AJHR, 1880, G-2, App A, pp. 1-2. 80 Ibid., p. 91. 81 See further Janine Ford, 'The Administration of the West Coast Settlement Reserves in Taranaki by the Public/Native/Maori Trustees 1881-1976', report for the Waitangi Tribunal, December 1994 [to be completed]. 82 New Zealand Statutes, 1880, no. 39, p. 171. 83 Ibid., p. 172. 84 Ibid.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 16 Reserves made for Natives within the Confiscated Territory' (according to the 1880 Act).85 Section 5 of the 1881 Act included provisions for the Governor to 'make, alter, and revoke regulations for the proper administration and management of West Coast settlement reserves... '.86 The Act also empowered the Governor to appoint a West Coast Settlement Reserves Trustee, 'who shall, subject to the direction of the Public Trustee, conduct all or any portion of the routine business relating to reserves. '87 The 1881 Act applied to 'all lands within the confiscated territory given back to Natives or granted to any of them for their benefit, except lands given to them under awards of the Compensation Courts, or by the Governor in respect of special services rendered by such Natives previously to the [1880] Act'.88 The Act included further provisions that all but Compensation Court and' special' awards were to be placed under the control of the Public Trustee, that the reserves were to be surveyed and divided' for the benefit of Natives and the promotion of settlement' and leased for the best improved rent available. Leases were limited by 21 years and subject~to public tender, and leases made prior to the 1879 Act could be confirmed for the term for which they were made. Perhaps the most significant feature of the 1881 Act was that it aimed to 'provide an independent means of maintenance for the Natives' and it dealt with the rights and interests of the lessors rather than those of the lessees. 89 Fox, as the chief architect of the 1881 Act, was convinced that restrictions on alienation should be included in the crown grants as they were issued, lest 'the Natives... be at liberty to deal with the lands the very next day in a reckless manner' and the government would consequently have to be responsible for them' as paupers for the rest of their natural lives'.90 However, continual settler pressure on the government resulted in a succession of amendments to the 1881 Act.91 This included fifteen major and several minor amendments and twelve commissions of enquiry established to investigate into or consider Maori grievances III Taranaki between 1881 and 1974.92 The context in which the original commissioners conducted their investigations was one of increasing anxiety in Taranaki. The debate surrounding the Maori Prisoners' Trial Bill and the conflict over the making of roads through the cultivations at Parihaka provoked a series 85 New Zealand Statutes, 1881, no. 19, p. 119. 86 Ibid., p.120. 87 Ibid. 88 Ibid. 89 But as Riseborough has argued, by 1883 these priorites had been reversed, as the rights of the lessees had come to transcend those of the lessors. Riseborough, 'Background Papers', A2, Wai 143, p. 183. 90 NZPD, 1881, xl, p. 729. 91 Riseborough, 'Background Papers', A2, Wai 143, p. v, chapter 4. 92 See Appendix 2.
Ngarautika Block and Pukearuhe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 17 of confrontations. 93 As Alan Ward has observed, McLean wanted the' ex-rebels' on the west coast of Taranaki to reoccupy the defined areas within their former territory. In supporting the bitter south Taranaki settlers, however, Fox made the district south of the Waingongoro unavailable to 'ex-rebels' by means of armed patrols. 94 When Fox came in to address the question of compensation for lands taken, the west coast was therefore suspended in a state of uneasy tension.. The West Coast Commission of 1880 had two primary objectives: 'to do justice to the Natives' and to continue ' [the] English settlement of the country'. 95 The commissioners - particularly Bell - believed that justice would only be done to the Maori if the goverment honoured the promises made to them by previous ministries, the paramount issue being that those who lived in peace would not be dispossessed of their land. Bryce, however, took the opposing view on how to settle the west coast question. For him there was' one means, and one means only, of settling for ever this vexed question', which was to establish, as soon as possible, 'a close European population' on the west coast. 96 (','. The powers of the West Coast Commission were limited.' Although it had the authority to investigate the unfulfilled promises of land granted to Maori, it could not question the justice (or injustice) of compensation. Bauchop has argued that the Commission in fact tied up the loose ends of the confiscation, and in effect applied the confiscation to an extent which had not occurred previously.97 From the commencement of their investigations, the Commissioners had made it clear that they refused to hear any evidence which called into question the validity or justice of the confiscation. Instead, they restricted their enquiries to hearing the grievances of those people who had appeared before them so that the Governor might 'make good... the faith of the country by giving them whatever successive Governments had promised'.98 Indeed, the weight of opinion in the settler community in Taranaki echoed their sentiments. The press, for example, was indignant at the suggestion that the commission was in fact appointed to ( 93 See further, Jane Reeves, 'Exiled for a cause: Maori Prisoners in Dunedin 1869-1872 and 1879-1881', paper presented in partial fulfilment of the requirement for a B.A. Hons in History, University of Otago, 1989, A8, WaLL43. -----------------.-----------------.----------1 94 AIan Ward, A Show a/justice: Racial 'amalgamation' in nineteenth century New Zealand, Auckland, 1973, p.235. 95 West Coast Commission Third Report, 5 August 1880, AJHR, 1880, G-2, pp. xlv-ixiv. 96 Cited in Riseborough, Days a/darkness, p. 111. 97 See further Bauchop, 'The Aftermath of Confiscation - Crown Allocation of Land to Iwi: a case study in confiscation', pp. 167. ' 98 West Coast Commission Third Report, AJHR, 1880, G-2, pp. xlv-xlvii.
Ngm"autika Block and Pukeanthe Town Belt Sections 6, 7 & 8 18 enquire into the legality of confiscation, which, they argued, had occurred \ by the right of might'.99 The west coast tribes were informed of the commission by a proclamation, also dated 20 January 1880, which notified them that those with claims and grievanc~s could bring them before the commissioners. If they failed to take this opportunity, the b1ame would rest with them and not with the government. 100 Although previous confiscation legislation had assured loyal natives that they would retain their land, they were now obliged to come before the commissioners in order to have these promises fulfilled. In the event, however, so few Maori. appeared before the commissioners that decisions about reserves were frequently made for them in their absence. 101 8.2 The recommendations of the Commission Two weeks after the commissioners' final report had been received, Bryce introduced the West Coast Settlement (North Island) Act to the house. This was to enable the governor to implement the recommendations of the commissioners. In his introductory speech, however, Bryce made it clear that justice for the Maori was a secondary consideration while the settlement of the west coast was to be its first. Despite the stated intentions to have \ that coast settled by European settlers' some concessions would be made in the form of assigning 'suitable reserves' to the natives as might be 'expedient and necessary'.102 The Commission recommended that 201,000 acres should be returned by the Crown to both \ rebel' and \ loyal' Maori. These lands became known as the West Coast Settlement Reserves. Fox proposed the best course to pursue would be to have the reserves surveyed and allocated to each of the tribes entitled under Mr Richmond's promise... but not to recommend any further action till the Government may be able (if it ever is) to ascertain who are the proper persons to become grantees... In the meantime the execution of the surveys will have made it possible, if the necessity ever occurs, to deal with the land in the manner contemplated at the time the promises were made. l03 The leases of these lands took two distinct forms. The first of these included a large area of land north of the Waingongoro River placed under the control of the Public Trustee and leased under regulations of 1883 by public tender for a period of 21 years and then for a period of 30 years. The rationale of this lease was that the lessees would be compensated for some improvements. Under the 1881 West Coast Settlement Reserves Act the reserves were to be 99 Patea Mail, 4 February 1880, cited in Riseborough, Days a/darkness, p. 93. 100 Ibid., pp. 2-3. 101 Ibid., p. 234. 102 Cited in Riseborough, Days a/darkness, p. 111. 103 West Coast Commissioner to Native Minister, Appendix IV, AJHR, 1884, A-Sa, p. 7.