(that is, primarily economic) means, then the opening up of the Thames goldfield was the thin edge of the wedge by which the Crown, with or without foreknowledge, moved the Maori economy irreversibly towards this stage of subordination.122 For it was the conferring of miners' rights that precipitated the rush of thousands of diggers to the Peninsula thereby swinging the demographic balance in the colonists' favour; facilitated the penetration of the region by communications; and incited Maori to sell land, under the Native Land Court, to an extent unthinkable before 1865.

Hauraki belief in own autonomy

Yet, on the eve of the opening of the Thames goldfield, Hauraki Maori had, by and large, not regarded themselves as conquered, but as an autonomous people still in charge of their economic destiny. Nothing had changed with regard to the opening up of land to mining, aptly expressed in the deed of agreement between McLean and Marutuahu chiefs in 1861 throwing open the northern part of the peninsula, between Waiau and Moehau, to prospecting. The deed recited: should gold 'really be found' and terms 'made with the Government for the regular working of such gold; let all men know, likewise that the title to the land remains with us, and will not be affected by this arrangement.' 123

Early Crown policies cautious

In this uncertain situation James Mackay became a key player. How decisive was his role will be demonstrated later. Not without reason has he been called the 'Maker of Thames'.

But though masterful and able to exercise initiative, he carefully paced his policies. Appreciating how volatile was the so-called 'Native political situation', he chose to occupy the middle ground between contending parties, Maori and European, just at that point of decision which provided opportunities to bring about a change in either

side.124

Limits to Crown's even-handedness

Mackay and other apologists for the opening of the Thames goldfield prophesied that diggers would 'open a mine of wealth for themselves and the Natives', and that benefits would accrue to Maori and Pakeha alike.125 They did not. The Crown was less than even-handed in ensuring that Maori benefited fully, because the reality was that the field, on which the economic survival of the province depended heavily in the 1860s, was obliged to develop in a way that would not endanger Auckland's interests; and the underlying principle of colonial administration in a continuing period of financial stringency was that economic development must be carried out 'on the cheap'.

123 Agreement between Te Taniwha and others and Donald McLean, 2 Nov. 1861, Enclosure C, p. 17, AJHR, 1869, A-17.

124 Hutton, '"Troublesome Specimens"', p. 26.

125 Mackay as reported in the House of Representatives, 2 Sept. 1868, NZPD, 1868, Vol. 3, p. 89.

50