Introduction and location

On 24 October 1864, at Nuhaka a meeting was held between crown officials and Rakaipaaka, concerning the sale of land to the crown.  Matenga Tukareaho was strongly in favour of selling land.  Ihaka Whaanga in his speech to the meeting (as reported by Grindell) suggests he was concerned at the extent of land being transferred to the Government by Rakaipaaka and the extent of consultation with those interested in the Nuhaka lands.

Grindell reported that Ihaka and his party were ‘desirous of holding this portion of the country for the present, but at some future, they would be willing to part with it, as the increasing necessities of a European population might require.’[1].

Korero:

Ihaka may also have urged caution on Te Matenga to protect the interests of those holders who were not present at the meeting. Grindell reported that Ihaka appeared anxious that the matter should be ventilated among them, and there was no need to rush into a transaction and that the land could be sold in due course if the people chose to do so. [2].   Such caution could also be construed as Ihaka Whaanga exercising his responsibilities as a chief to protect the wider interests of the Rakaipaaka people.  Europeans would be welcomed into the area and settled within a defined space, for the tribe’s advantage.  That Ihaka Whaanga intended to limit European settlement is further supported by his request before the Native Land Court sittings in February 1867 and September 1868 that the Tawapata South and North blocks (respectively) be made inalienable to protect the remaining tribal lands.[3].

As well as sealing an alliance with the government, Rakaipaaka of Nuhaka wanted to obtain the benefits of European settlement.

At the meeting of October 24 1864, Mclean promised to spend 100 pounds to form a dray road between Nuhaka and Mahia so that Nuhaka people might transport their produce to a port for shipping…[4]. This answered a problem raised by the Nuhaka people in1862, for instance, when they offered to construct a road between their cultivations and Waikokopu in order to ship their wheat to Napier.  At that time they had three years of wheat stockpiled for want of transport.[5].  According to Grindell’s report, rats eventually destroyed this stockpile and by late 1864, the Nuhaka people only cultivated enough produce for their own consumption…[6].  Again, as at Mahia, the limited economic options available to Nuhaka Maori by the early 1860s were a source of frustration for them, but one which an alliance with the government might alleviate.

The haste in which the Nuhaka agreement was made left some Rakaipaaka aggrieved, however, vindicating the concerns of Ihaka Whaanga about the extent of consultation.  The transaction was probably never fully discussed by all the interest holders in the land.

Rakaipaaka and Mclean agreed that the purchase price could be discussed once Mclean had the necessary information as to the size of the block.  Grindell reported that the sellers present, then recited the boundaries of the land offered, which were taken down in writing.  Grindell did not report the boundaries, but described the land encompassed by them, including the coast, the Nuhaka River And the flat land around it and up the valley, as far as Moumoukai.  He estimated the block as 20 square miles or about 256,000 acres [7].

TE PUTAKE:

On 16 March 1865, an agreement was signed to sell the Nuhaka block for 3,300 pounds. The block included land at the mouth of the Nuhaka river, running north and east from there, past many places listed in the deed, and back to ‘Parihikinui then falls to the beach, which it follows reaching Waikokopu’ and then past several other places, back to the mouth of the Nuhaka..[8].

Samuel Locke signed for the crown; the sellers numbered 94 Maori, including Paora Apatu and Ihaka Whaanga of Rakaipaaka.  The map attached showed the land to be 120,000 acres (this area was later shown to be completely inaccurate, even compared to the 250,000 Grindell spoke of.)The boundary re-joined the coast about four miles northeast of the mouth of the river.2, 200 pounds was paid on this day.[9].

At the end of 1864, Locke wrote to Mclean of the negotiations and the boundaries.

I was present when they handed over to the government all the land from where the road ascends from the beach at the Mahia to Nuhaka river then up that stream for a short distance than across the hill to the south of the Moumoukai then back for many miles then turns to the north and round in the direction of Maraetaha and then back to the Mahia.[10].

The Sale:

The sale was proclaimed in the New Zealand Gazette, 31 May 1865.[11]

In later disputes, a crucial argument was that the Gazette boundaries did not match those in the Deed;[12]. The notice, for land in the province of Hawkes Bay, listed as its northern boundary the 39^th Parallel, the then administrative boundary of Hawkes Bay.[13].

South of that line, the Deed and the Gazette were in rough agreement…[14].

The1, 100 pounds was paid on 30 March 1866 and a receipt written; [15], in which the boundaries were cited as those in the original Deed…[16].

The block had been gazetted in 1865 and was gazetted again in 1875; In the 1865 notice only the land in the Hawkes Bay province, south of the 39^th parallel, was listed.

The 1875 Gazette notice listed the boundary for the whole block but got several names wrong…[17].

Gazette Notices:

On the 16^th March 1865 when the first payment of 2,200 pounds was made, Purchase Deed No.147was issued. Purchase Deed No.148 was issued when the second and final payment of 1,100 pounds was paid on 30^th March 1866.

The first Gazette Notice extinguished 10,000 acres from the native title, which was south of the 39^th parallel, uncertainty and confusion resulted in the Deed No.148, extinguishing native title to thousands of acres north of the 39^th Parallel.

Petitions:

From 1879 there were many petitions submitted to the Native Affairs Committee and the Native Land Court concerning lands known as Manga o Puraka, within the boundaries of Nuhaka Block north of 39thParallel.  Many of the claimants were from the hapu of Ngai Tu, Ngai Tama, Ngai Te Rakato and Ngai Tarewa, all claiming Rakaipaaka signed away their lands. These hapu are all uri of Rakaipaaka and Rakaipaaka did not sign away these lands.

In 1936 there were two major petitions on the Nuhaka block. The first, from Hirini Whaanga Christy and 104 others,.[18]; was presented by Apirana Ngata and contained 14seperate points.

The petitioners claimed 28,267 acres of the Nuhaka block, roughly north of the 39^th parallel, the ownership of which had never been investigated by the Native Land Court, and that the sale in 1865 was of the coastal portion 9,520 acres, south of the 39^th parallel.

While the crown alleged the purchase of 38,267 acres and cited the Deed of 16 March 1865 and receipt of 30 March 1866 as evidence, yet the people had not known of their existence, until they were produced at the Sim Commission in 1927, they had not been told of them by Government agencies, despite repeated petitions since1879, and were surprised at their production.

 The petitioners said there was no knowledge, memory or tradition of a sale of 38,267 acres, only of the 10,000-acre front section, which was confirmed by the Gazette notice of 31 May 1865 extinguishing Native title in Nuhaka No.1.  Nothing further was done by the Crown until a further Gazette notice on 20 May 1875 which extinguished title to the whole area.[19].

Surveys:

The petitioners had begun objecting in 1879 and had spent thousands in pursuit of their rights.  They stated that the original map of the block in 1876 was simply a composite made up of other maps.  This is evident from the note dated November 1876 endorsed on the original map as follows; Compiled in the inspector of Surveys Office. The Western and Northern side from Mr Morrow’s survey; the Eastern side from Mr Campions survey of Paritu and Mr Lockes survey of Kopuawhara, the coast from Mr Cussen’s survey.

Locke’s survey of Kopuawhara (a block immediately adjoining Nuhaka no.1) was made in 1867, and Mr Campion’s survey of Paritu was made in January 1876, and yet in 1876 no survey of this block had been made or attempted.

Even as late as 13 May 1875, the Gazette notice of that date gives no area for the land claimed to be purchased.

The petitioners always doubted the authenticity of the deed of sale on 16 March 1865, and the receipt of 30 March 1866, in so far as it is alleged that the whole of the Nuhaka no.1Block, 38,267acres was sold.

Petition Inquiries:

On 9 October 1936, the Native Affairs Committee was informed that the Under Secretary of Lands agreed with the Commissioners of Crown Lands that the claims were unsubstantiated. However, the Committee referred the petition to the Government for inquiry.[20].

On 30 November 1937, Native Minister Langstone directed that two petitions from 1936 on Nuhaka (and one on Mahia) be included in the schedule of the Native Purposes Bill, 1937. They were included under Section 16 of what became the Maori Purposes Act, 1927.[21].

The Crown argued against all points. It said the 10-year delay between the 1865 NZ Gazette notice for the southern portion, and the portion north of the 39^th parallel was due to the independent administration of Hawkes Bay and Auckland provinces, and the 39^th was their boundary.

The Crown maintained the land was physically described by its boundaries and the inaccuracy of the 120,000-acre figure was irrelevant. It was not custom to set aside 10% in reserves, 3,300 pounds was a reasonable sum, and children often signed deeds of sale.[22].

The claim that the boundary was intended by the elders to be the 39^th parallel was rubbished, as it could have no significance in the mind of the Maori elders and its adoption appears to be an attempt “to make the crime fit the punishment”.[23].

That there was no separate survey of the northern portion was of ‘no great consequence’ as the surrounding land had already been surveyed and the Crown boundaries were not encroached upon. ‘The other points raised in the petition are of minor importance and call for little if any comment’.

The Court concluded that the petition was ‘not supported by the facts and no recommendation was made.[24].  

Court Decision:

On 2 October 1940, the report on the Petition of Hirini Whaanga Christy was forwarded to the Government. The Native Under-Secretary minuted to the Minister, ‘neither the Court nor the Chief Judge has made any recommendation and I suggest no action be taken’.[25].  The Minister responded simply ‘No Action’ and the file was closed.

Early Surveys:

In Wairoa courts, but not often in Heretaunga, the evidence of the surveyor was often called upon; he testified that the boundaries of the block had been pegged and marked according to law and delineated on the block map. Sometimes the land was, in his estimation, too steep, rough or valueless to survey; in these cases, he drew a compass bearing on the map.[26].

In 1867, Theophilus Heale drew the Governments attention to the deficiencies of colonial surveying; surveying on a triangulation basis had not been possible, and the common method adopted had been the ‘lowest one of all, that of boundary traverse by magnetic meridian, unchecked and unconnected by any geodetic or astronomical work whatever.[27].

While Heales remarks related more to Auckland Province than Hawkes Bay, he was discussing a system common to the whole colony. He acknowledged the existence of ‘gross discrepancies’ brought about by surveying detached blocks in a wilderness of bush which could not be reconnoitred let alone accurately surveyed.

He remarked that the Native Land Court had soon brought prominently into view the grossest defects of the old system.

Hundreds of detached block maps existed of blocks the position of which in latitude and longitude was not accurately known. He described the various compromises adopted to reconcile the district maps with earlier surveys.[28].        .

Wai 201:

This was a report commissioned in relation to early Crown purchases in Hawkes Bay.

Some of the findings were;

The imperial Government instructed the early Governors to pay minimal rather than market prices to Maori landowners. These instructions were passed on to the Governors. This was not a provision of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The Crowns right of pre-emption, which was in the Treaty, was arbitrarily waived at times when it suited the Crown, but in Hawkes Bay was preserved intact until 1865.

Using this monopoly, the Governor and his aides could instruct Mclean to follow a policy of paying Maori owners derisory prices for their lands, at the same time making it illegal to lease their lands.

Instructions by Governors to Crown agents were inadequate in kind and quantity.

Maclean should have been instructed to move slowly and cautiously, allowing plenty of time, months, or even years if necessary for discussion;

Purchases could have been delayed until boundaries had been marked on the ground by cleared survey lines and these marks inspected and agreed on by all interested parties.

He should have been instructed to make exhaustive enquiries until he was satisfied that he was aware of and had consulted all Maori communities with interests in his large purchases, and had sought out and conciliated the many conflicting claims.

He should have been instructed to conclude no deals save in the presence of representatives of all the groups concerned.

He should have been instructed to warn the Maori sellers to seek professional advice on sales; such advice could have been provided by the Crown by retaining the post of ‘protector of aborigines’, assigning to it legal counsel paid by the Crown, and separating it from the function of land purchase.

The fact that such an office existed in New Zealand’s early years as a British colony demonstrates both that the Crown was aware of the need for it, and that it was feasible in terms of budget.

Independent interpreters would also have been needed if such counsel were ignorant of Maori.

Provisions for inalienable reserves vested in hapu or combinations of hapu would have meant that Maori retained a proper endowment for their future.

Any failure by the Crown to reserve adequate tribal endowments or to make the reservations agreed to by the parties, and any failure to protect mahinga kai, urupa and wahi tapu.

Evidence concerning Maclean’s early purchases shows that from the outset he pursued a policy of refusing to consent to the wishes of the Maori sellers with regard to adequate reserves which would have formed a tribal endowment, reducing Maori reserves from many thousands to a few hundred or fewer acres.

Grievances:

Rakaipaaka has many grievances relating to Te Manga o Puraka, they have lost their forests, fisheries and waterways, mahinga kai and wahi tapu.

In being alienated from their lands they have lost their kaitiakitanga over all their taonga, their livelihood and existence.

[1] HBH; 19 Nov 1864 Doc.
[2] HBH; 19 Nov 1864 Doc.
[3] Berghan,pp 374,379
[4] HBH 19 Nov 1864 Doc .2
[5] Civil Commissioner to Native Minister, 24 Nov 1862, MA-NA 1\2,NA
[6] HBH  19 Nov 1864 Doc.2
[7] HBH  19 Nov 1864 Doc.2
[8] National Archives file, MA-MLP, 6\3- Deeds of sale for Hawkes Bay, NO.147&148.
[9] A copy of the sketch map,120,000 acres is in MA-MLP6\3, Deed No.147, along with a copy of an updated , unsigned petition.
[10] ATL, MS Papers 32, Folder 393. Locke to M CLEAN 31 December 1864.
[11] New Zealand Gazette, NO.18,,31 May 1865 p-161.
[12] MA-5\13\92 Vol.1.Memorandum compiled from correspondence on L&S.22\1389.(CLOSED FILE),undated.
[13] Land north of the 39^th fell in the province of Auckland.
[14] The 1865 Gazette Notice joined together a number of names that in the Deed were separate places. Translation of the Deed made by George B.Davies, Native Department, Wellington 30 Sept 1963.  Deed quoted from MA-MLP 6\3).
[15] MA-MLP 6\3, No. 148
[16] MA 5\13\92 vol. 1.
[17] New Zealand Gazette,No. 18, 13 May, 1865,p.161 and No.29, May 20,1875,p.359
[18] Petition No. 204\1936, Hirini Whaanga Christy and 104 others
[19] See. Doc. Bank, The 1865 notice referred only to the section within Hawkes Bay Province, the 1875 one covered the whole block.
[20] LE1\1936\16, Petition No. 204.
[21] Reports are in G-6, 1940, b.c. and d.
[22] Minutes of Native Land Court hearing, Tairawhiti District, in the matter of Petition No. 204.\1936, held on 30 June 1936, before Judge Carr. Printed in AJHR 1940.
[23] Minutes of Native Land Court hearing, Tairawhiti District, in the matter of Petition No. 204.\1936, held on 30 June 1936, before Judge Carr. Printed in AJHR 1940.
[24] Minutes of Native Land Court hearing, Tairawhiti District, in the matter of Petition No. 204.\1936, held on 30 June 1936, before Judge Carr. Printed in AJHR 1940.
[25] MA \1\5\13\92 Vol. 2. Minute dated 31 Oct. 1940.
[26] Crown Purchases of Māori Land in early provincial Hawkes Bay. Jan 1994, Ballara, A,  Scott;G. p. 153 Wairoa M.B.1
[27] AJHR 1867, A-NO.10.B, p.1, Report by Mr Heale on the subject of Surveys under the Native Lands Act.
[28] AJHR 1867, A-NO.10.B, p.1, Report by Mr Heale on the subject of Surveys under the Native Lands Act.