THE CROWN, THE TREATY, AND THE HAURAKI TRIBES, 1880–1980

(a) The search for control: Native Committees and the Native Land Court

While small groups of kingites resisted survey and public works on the ground, others among the Hauraki iwi attempted to control the pace of alienation by legal means, petitioning the Government, meeting with officials, pursuing legal protection or remedy through the common law and warden courts, and seeking the recognition of the authority of their own institutions. The runanga meetings held in response to the shooting of a surveyor at Pukehange (discussed in The Crown, The Treaty and The Hauraki Tribes, 1800–1885) demonstrated that Maori forums of decision-making continued to operate effectively in the Hauraki rohe. In the early 1880s Maori throughout the country revived the effort to obtain authorisation of such structures to adjudicate matters both of title and of law and order.1 In 1883 Bryce (Native Minister, 1879–1881, 1882–1884) responded to these demands, passing the Native Committees Empowering Act which gave regional committees the authority to discuss disputed land claims, advise the Court, and to referee Maori disputants in certain circumstances, provided that both parties had agreed to accept such arbitration.

Ward points out that the structure established by the Government was ill-suited to Maori perspectives. Bryce intended that only six or seven committees be set up for the whole of the North Island. Eventually 12 regional organisations were formed but Maori would have preferred far smaller, local committees at hapu level.2 Nonetheless, Hauraki, with a history of confederation among the tribes sustained by interlocking right-holding patterns, quickly sought to utilise the structure. A committee was convened, it being resolved that Ngati Tamatera and Ngati Paoa should both send in two members. Three members were to be drawn from both Ngati Maru and Ngati Paoa, and one each from Ngati Hako and Ngati Koi.3 Still, the imposition of arbitrary administrative lines based on Government convenience rather than traditional tribal affiliations, resulted in the grouping of people along the west shore of the Firth (Ngati Paoa and Ngati Whanaunga) with Waikato rather than with Hauraki as they had requested.4 Ngati Paoa based at Waiheke similarly expressed their dissatisfaction at being included in the Kaipara district, with people to whom they held little tie.5

Despite these problems, Hauraki Maori responded with initial enthusiasm to an apparent opportunity to regain authority over the land and law, seeking far wider powers than the Government had in fact contemplated. Raika Whakarongotai, who had chaired the committee at Pukehanga, wrote to the Government:

Your letter ... has arrived and I have seen the information you give in it as to the powers Native Committees will possess to investigate titles to land and to adjudicate on offences.

1 A. Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial 'Amalgamation' in Nineteenth Century New Zealand, Auckland, 1974. p. 290.

2 Ibid.

3 Taipari to Wilkinson,' 6 December 1883. NO 84/156 in MA 23/13 A. Doc. 1, pp. 1-3.

4 See 'Wilkinson memo. for Under Secretary Native Department,' 11 February 1884. NO 84/484 in . Doc. 1,

p. 4

5 'S. Percy Smith to Lewis,' 7 January 1884. In ibid.

22