Chapter 1: Government Policy and Maori Reaction, 1880–1890

Now ... that is exactly what we desire—namely that our committees should have lawful authority. ... 6

This went further than the Government intended, Bryce noting that, 'of course they must be confined to the powers conferred by the Act. They possibly think that the powers of the Committees will be more absolute than is really the case.'7 Subsequent efforts to utilise clause 19 of the rules gazetted by Ballance, which stated that Native Committees could charge fees, quickly prompted a circular from his successor (Mitchelson) that they should use the powers of amendment under clause 9 to strike that power out.8 The Native Committee could wield moral authority only. It will be seen, however, that the body did provide a useful vehicle of negotiation, playing a prominent role in discussions with Ballance, and in the negotiations with the Government over the Piako lands.

A continuing focus for Hauraki concern in the period covered by this report was the destructive effect of land legislation as mediated through a court structure which had been based on the English model without recognition of Maori social usages. The Thames Native Committee met with Ballance in 1885 as he toured the area in promotion of his proposed changes in land legislation. The major issues raised by the Committee were the adverse effects of the Native Land Court and lack of consultation with Maori in making laws. Hoani Nahe, as chairman, asked that Bills be circulated among Maori before being brought in—to which Ballance agreed—and advocated not withdrawal from the title system but greater Maori management of it:

They were very pleased to hear that they were to be allowed to manage their lands for themselves. It was his opinion that, if the preliminary investigation of land were gone into by the Native Committee, it would be much easier for the Native Land Court, and thereby the Maoris would be relieved of the expenses they were now put to in attending Court and paying Court fees, &c.9

Nahe believed that only land that was undisputed should be allowed through the court.10

Ballance responded with some sympathy, admitting to the Thames people that there were serious injustices in the way the system had hitherto operated:

I feel myself shocked and disgusted at the enormous expenses attending the passing of some blocks through the Native Land Court, for it is a notorious fact that some of the blocks have been entirely eaten up by the expenses of lawyers and agents, and in various other ways, the Natives deriving no benefit whatever from the sale of theirs, while their lands have been gone forever.11

Ballance's proposed solution represented a genuine attempt to meet Maori concerns about the impact of individualisation of title, but did not fulfill their aspirations to total control of that process. He had formulated two legislative measures, the Native Lands Administration Act and the Native Land Court Act of 1886, by which he hoped to

6 'Whakarongotai to Wilkinson,' 7 November 1883. NO 84/157 in . Doc. 2, pp. 5–6.

7 'Bryce minute,' 3 December 1883. In .

8 'Circular to all Chairmen of Native Committees,' 5 July 1889. NO 89/1274 in .

9 'Notes of Native Meetings', AJHR 1885, G–1, p. 31. Doc. 3, p.8.

10 Ibid., p. 37. Doc. 3, p.14.

11 Ibid., p. 31. Doc. 3, p.8.

23