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

They have run it through the centre of the native lands: as soon as they came to a block owned by Europeans, they turned it off directly and ran it through a Native block—they avoided the European block. When they got to a piece owned by Mr Bennett, they took only a very small portion indeed off it. As soon as they crossed the river, directly on the other side was a Native block of land all under cultivation, and they ran it right through that.19

A similar criticism was made by Hoani Nahe—that the Government in giving power to county councils to take land for roading purposes had exposed Maori to discriminatory practices. He complained that the county had been able to put four roads through a Maori block to give access to European-owned lands but that the same courtesy was not extended to Maori when they required access to the main county road.2° Others such as Ngapari and Tamati Waka protested that tapu places were degraded when roads and other public works were taken through. Tamati Waka questioned, for example, why the Council should take a road over Wairau Te Rangaitapu, arguing that the road over Totara should be sufficient.21

Ballance gave assurances to the Hauraki leaders that due regard for their wishes would be given in the matter of where roads would be laid. He made on-the-spot concessions, directing that a 'deviation' be made to accommodate Tareranui's complaints and promised that, in future, surveyors would be directed to take the road with least possible injury to Maori cultivations. He assured the Hauraki gathering that surveyors had been given instructions to be careful where they took roads and that any complaint brought to the Government would be fully investigated.22 Whether these guarantees were upheld still requires investigation.

Closely connected to complaint about the lack of consultation with Maori over the construction of roads and public works on their land, was the issue of rates. The increasingly dominant Government view was that Maori equally benefited from public works development and, despite lack of representation within local bodies, they were expected to uphold the duties of ownership by paying the rates which supported those undertakings. But K. Marr argues that Maori for their part, 'could not see why land they had held for centuries ... should suddenly become subject to taxes often when they saw no benefit from them.' Many saw the imposition of rating as simply another Government device to acquire land from them.23 In the Hauraki district, the resistance to the county road being built from Thames to Paeroa was partly grounded in the fear that its construction would make the adjoining blocks liable to rates, and the local county council was eventually obliged to enter into an explicit arrangement promising that the area would never be subject to this sort of tax. These events are discussed in greater detail in Chapter Five where it will be suggested that the arrangements reached between Ngati Maru and the Thames County Council failed to bridge the gap between the expectations of Maori

19 Ibid. Doc. 3, p.10.

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

21 See speeches of Tamati Waka and Ngapari, ibid., pp. 37-39. Note also ongoing protest of Tukukino with reference to ferry landing site at Te Puke on Thorp's land' at p. 34. Doc. 3, p.n.

22 Ibid., pp. 33, 40. Doc. 3, pp. 10, 17.

23 K. Marr, `Public Works Taking of Maori Land 1840-1981.' Report prepared for Treaty of Waitangi Policy Unit, December 1994, p. 84.

26