THE SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC SITUATION OF HAURAKI MAORI AFTER COLONISATION
described as 'gum diggers from various parts'. The 1874 census is believed to have underestimated the total Maori population; it should be adjusted upwards by perhaps 5% (see Pool, p. 76; Table 5.2 gives reported and adjusted figures and 'best' estimates). If that adjustment is made for Hauraki the total would rise to just over 1,900. When this adjusted figure is set beside the adjusted Fenton figure of 2,500, a regional population decline of 24%, or 1.4% a year results. This accords with Pool's statistics which suggest that the Maori population as a whole declined at an annual rate of about 1.5% over this period (Pool, p. 75, Table 5.1).
2.17 Puckey was again responsible for the Hauraki figures in the 1878 census. His first table of 'tribal' numbers (he also gives a table relating to `Ngati Maru' as one of a number of 'principal tribes) is given under the heading 'Hauraki District' and so allows comparison with the tables of 1878 and 1881. This table gives a total of 1,451, which includes 5o gum and timber workers identified as 'different tribes from a distance'. But the places of residence specified in the table exclude the whole of the western side of the Firth; in 1874 25o people were listed as resident in this area. Further, the 1878 census probably under-estimated the total Maori population by more than 5%. If this regional figure is adjusted to allow for this under-estimate and for the exclusion of places of residence to the west of the Firth, a total of around 1,700 results. This adjusted total does not suggest more than a moderate decline since 1874.
2.18 In 1881 the enumerator was the new Native Agent, G.T. 'Wilkinson, at this time still resident in Thames; the area is designated 'Thames District'. The places of residence given suggest a district much like that of 1874, with the major exception that it excludes the area north of Wharekawa in the Firth and also Waiheke. The total is given at 1,637; this includes 5o gum diggers described as Te Arawa 'and others', so 'Waikato and others' and a few more from outside the region. For all Maori, the 1881 census is considered to be only a slight under-estimate; applied to the region this would not materially affect the total as returned. This suggests a slight decline from the adjusted total for 1878.
2.19 For the Maori population as a whole, Pool describes a rapid decline from 1840 to 1878 followed by a slower decline from 1878 to 1891 with a recovery in numbers setting in from 1891 on (Pool, pp. 6o, 75). The earlier part of this pattern seems reasonably applicable to the Hauraki region. In summary, the figures, as returned and as adjusted, are as follows:
1874 returned 1814 adjusted c.19oo
1878 1451 c.I7oo
1881 1637 c.i600
2.2o The county-based figures that follow, which are considerably higher, make it clear that the two series, 1874 to 1881, and 1886 to 1916, cannot be readily linked. It is possible, perhaps likely, that the enumerators for the earlier period were distracted from giving a reliable regional count by a concern for the collection of 'tribal' numbers and did not look closely enough at people from 'outside' tribes resident in the region. Certainly, the
23