Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

A Compendium of Official Documents Relative to Native Affairs in the South Island. Volume Two.

No. 1. — Memorandum on the Middle Island Question, by the Under Secretary Native Department

No. 1.
Memorandum on the Middle Island Question, by the Under Secretary Native Department.

The papers which I have collected and which are I believe very incomplete, divide themselves under two heads:—

1st.The general question of the obligations of the Government on account of unfulfilled promises to the Natives.
2nd.The particular questions which have been brought under the attention of the Government by different officers.

1. Under the 1st head comes:—

a. Mr. Mantell's correspondence with the Secretary of State in 1856, in which he states, "That by promise of more valuable recompense in schools, in Hospitals for their sick, and in constant solicitude for their welfare and general protection on the part of the Imperial Government, he procured the cession of large tracts of land. Thirty millions of acres for small cash payments."

The responsibility of fulfilling these promises was shortly afterwards evaded, or certainly not openly recognized. The transfer to the local Government of the lands acquired (though the Natives knew nothing of this transfer); the idea that lapse of time would, by extinction of the Native race, [gap — reason: deletion] an easy solution of the difficulty, and successive changes of Government, seem, from Mr. Mantell's statements, to have co-operated in causing a neglect which the rest of the correspondence shows to have been unjustifiable.

Mr. Mantell's letter of 5th July, 1856, appears to have two objects:—

1st.To obtain for the Natives of the Middle Island their undoubted rights.
2nd.To exonerate himself from the blame of the nonfulfillment of contracts and promises of which he had been the channel. This letter does not enter into details of negotiations which Mr. Mantell "says have been conducted and concluded by me to whom also all Ngaitahu questions were invariably referred, and in my absence there is not an officer in the Government competent to give an opinion on matters so vitally affecting the Ngaitahu tribes."

The rest of the correspondence is especially valuable as being a record of the facts:—

(1st).That Mr. Mantell's instruction from Lieutenant-Governor Eyre, authorized him to make the promises he did.
(2nd).That the promises were freely made by him in full confidence that they would be carried out, a confidence justified by the action of the Governor of that day.
(3rd).That it was in great measure by aid of these promises that he succeeded in effecting the purchases.
(4th).That the action taken by Mr. Mantell, in closing the negotiation in question, action which involved the assumption of considerable personal responsibility, was entirely approved page 76and adopted by the Government at the time, and received the special commendation of Sir George Grey, through the then Colonial Secretary, Mr. Domett.

The next documents are:—

b. Mr. Clarke's reports of September 29th and 30th, 1864. There may have been correspondence of which I am unaware in the interval of eight years, but without any good result to the Natives.

These reports (as the subsequent reports of Mr. C. C. Brown) show:—

1st.That the Natives retain a perfect recollection of the promises made to them through Mr Mantell, and a through appreciation of the treatment they have met with in respect of those promises. This is shown by the stipulation inserted in the Deed of Purchase of Stewart's Island, at this time (1863), stipulations which I may observe in passing have not yet been fairly carried out.

The payment of the first instalment of interest to the Natives on one-third of the purchase money was made six months after it was due, and the investment of the last £2,000 in lands has not yet been effected. This last investment is for schools and hospitals; (proposals to which a singular fatality appears to be attached). Pending this investment, as a matter of ordinary business, interest should be paid on the capital.

(2nd).Mr. Clarke's report of the 29th, gives a statement of the condition of those Natives as true as it is deplorable.

Their position is a far worse one than that of the Natives of the Northern Island. Isolated here and there in the midst of a population which characteristically despise and impose upon them, they are only brought into contact with the ugliest excresences of European society, (drunkenness, &c.), and from the inaction which up to the time of Mr. Clarke's visit, has prevailed on the part of the Government, they have been deprived of the education which might have enabled them to appreciate the better forms of civilization. Added to this, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Brown both notice the rankling feeling of regret and discontent which prevails, and which in the absence of any national esprit de corps, or power of resistance such as obtains in the north, tends still further to demoralize them. The blame they naturally throw upon those, who, they say, have deceived them.

Mr. Clarke's suggestions as to appointment of officers, establishment of schools, &c., are mainly those which will be dealt with in detail under head 2.

The next document is:—

c. Mr. Fox's memorandum on Mr. Clarke's report in which he states, that, till November, 1863, the sole responsibility of the administration of Native affairs rested with the Imperial Government.

However that may be, this memorandum is the starting point of action, which was set on foot by the succeeding Government, who appointed Mr. Hunter Brown to look after the interests of the Natives in the Middle Island, and whose intention (as appears from the documents) it was to fulfill the unredeemed pledges of the Imperial Government.

He says, "considering the great length of time during which faith has failed to be kept with these Natives, they were entitled to a very large amount of arrears, and the Government should propose to the Assembly no niggard vote for the purpose. Since the pledges were given, a whole generation has run to seed without receiving the benefit of that culture which was promised."

Mr. Fox, in conclusion, suggests that the Provinces of Otago and Canterbury should, by legislation or otherwise, be charged with the cost of carrying out the plans referred to. This was written at a time when the proceeds of educational reserves in Dunedin were sufficient to defray the charges of all necessary schools in that Province. Recent action in respect of those reserves leaves no hope of consideration of such a claim, except it be enforced by the Legislature. The fulfilment of these promises should it is presumed have been made a condition of the lands being handed over to the Provinces in the first instance.

The Provincial Government of Canterbury last year gave £50 towards the school at Kaiapoi. £200 was sanctioned by the Provincial Council in default of action being taken by the General Government. Beyond this and a previous gift, I believe of £200, I know of no instance of any disposition to assume responsibility on the part of a Province.

The special questions which require attention are of two classes:—

(a.)Incomplete action in respect of land purchases, division of reserves, and other land questions.
(b.)Detailed suggestions of Mr. Hunter Brown and others as to the best mode of carrying out the unfulfilled pledges of the Government in respect of schools, hospitals, &c.

Commencing with the Province of Canterbury, the most important question of the 1st class, is the settlement of Matiaha Tiramorehu's claim* for payment in compensation for his interest in a large extent of country between the Waimakiriri and Wai-au-ua, for which claims he received nothing, when that part of the country was bought.

The history of this claim is briefly this. The Ngatitoa Deed purported to extinguish Native claims in the Middle Island as far as Kaiapoi. Subsequently Mr. Kemp, in 1848, was sent to make a further purchase from the Ngaitahu tribe, the northern boundary of which commenced at Kaiapoi at the land sold by the Ngatitoa. (See Appendix 58, c. 4).

Mr. Kemp (see Parliamentary papers of 45) conducted this purchase in a manner at variance with his instructions in many respects, and Mr. Mantell was appointed to complete the purchase. It then appeared (see letter of 30th January, 1849, Appendix 58, c. No. 3), that the Ngatitoa had professed to sell land which did not really belong them, but to the Ngaitahu, and that the Ngatitoa boundary did not really extend further south than the Wai-au-ua, and consequently the Native Title remained unextinguished over a block of land between the River at Kaiapoi and the Wai-au-ua. The title over this block was finally extinguished by Mr. Hamilton, 5th February, 1857, but Matiaha who

* Matiaha was subsequently paid £200 in satisfaction of this claim; inclusive of this amount, the Ngaitahu claimanta to land north of Kaiapoi, have been paid in all £1,000.—A. Mackay.—22nd October, 1870.

page 77had a claim to part of the purchase money received nothing, he being ill at Moeraki at the time of the sale.

Mr. Hamilton in his letter 5th January, 1855, gives the reasons of the Ngaitahu for denying the right of the Ngatitoa to sell the land in question. This letter (see Appendix 58, c. No. 3 page 27) deserves especial notice.

It is strange that Matiaha's claim to an interest in this land should not have been brought to Mr. Hamilton's notice, as if it had been so brought he could not have concluded the purchase as he did, without obtaining Matiaha's signature to the deed. I do not see Matiaha's very remarkable letter of the 7th February, 1849, among any published documents, though I believe it appeared in the public newspapers at the time. In this letter he speaks very plainly of the wrong done by the Ngatitoa and puts the claim of the Ngaitahu very strongly.

Matiaha's letter of 22nd October, 1849 (see Appendix 58, c., No. 3 page 9), accuses Governor Eyre of having given the payment of a part of their (the Ngaitahu) Island to the Ngatitoa, but his claim implied in this letter seems to have attracted no attention at that time. The Colonial Secretary's letter enclosing this letter to Mr. Mantell requests the latter gentleman to instil into the minds of the Natives the sacredness of all obligations they may enter into, and Mr. Kemp was instructed to decline to reopen or alter questions relating to land and arrangements made relative to reserves.

The next which I find of this claim is in a letter from Mr. Mantell (62-325, 25th March), in which he states that though. Mr. Hamilton and others have satisfied many of the claimants to the block, from Kaiapoi to Kaikoura, he has not heard that the more extensive rights of Matiaha have ever yet been fairly considered and himself dealt with.

In January, 1865, nearly three years later Mr. Buller gives a general report upon some claims for payment preferred by Canterbury Natives, but omits all mention of Matiaha's claim. He only replied in general terms to the Natives, expressing his conviction that the claim would not be for one moment recognized by the Government.

N.B.—These claims were subsequently decided by Mr. Mantell to be of no value. (See Mr. C. C. Brown's letter of 1st May, 1865, No. 13, with minutes attached).

He told the Natives in reply to the statement that the runanga was grieved when it considered the extent of the land and the smallness of the payment, that the great value given to their remaining lands by the settlement of Europeans constituted the real payment for their waste land, an argument* which would appear to be set aside by the fact of any payment being made at all, and certainly ought not to be adduced ex post facto.

Mr. Buller seems further to rely upon the terms of Mr. Hamilton's Deeds of Purchase. I would hero submit that the legal validity of these Deeds of Purchase appears of a questionable character. The Natives whose names are appended to the deed say, "with us will be the consideration for any person coming forward to claim the land because we have finally received the money for the entire surrender of the land."

The questions appear to arise:—

1st.Can a number of joint owners sell a property without the knowledge and consent of the remainder, binding themselves to satisfy subsequent claims which may arise?
2nd.If this is under any circumstances legal, and the price received is far below the real value of the property, what will be the position of the absolute claimant, pressing the real value of his share, when the joint owners cannot make good their agreement?

It would seem that in equity the deed must be set aside.

If there be any question as to the validity of these deeds (on which point it might be well to take a legal opinion), would it not be expedient to satisfy Matiaha and others?

Upon these papers there appears an endorsement by Mr. Mantell dated 10th March, 1865, to the effect that "further payments must in justice be made to Matiaha Tiramorehu and his followers. Mr. Commissioner Brown will report on this."

Mr. Hunter Brown's letter (No. 21, of 3rd June), in compliance with this minute, states that he had seen Matiaha, who told him that he was ill when Mr. Hamilton's purchase was made, and suggests a payment of £200 to Matiaha.

On the 21st May, Matiaha writes, through Mr. Hunter Brown, pressing this claim as well as the settlement of the Kaiapoi reserve question. In reply, 12th June, Mr. Mantell directs Mr. Brown to inform Matiaha that he will bring his Waipara claim before Government, and endeavour to get some compensation for him.

Matiaha then writes 19th July, 1865, on the subject, and states that he has heard through Mr. Brown of Mr. Mantell's promise to bring his claim before the Government, and wishes to fix Mr. Hamilton's payment on a particular part of the block. (See letter and Mr. Brown's report upon it of 11th, August No. 53).

Mr. Hamilton's memorandum of 17th October, notes that:—

(1st).Matiaha, though it was notorious that he (Mr. Hamilton) was appointed to settle outstanding claims, during 11 months made no claim for payment. He never heard of the claim before, nor had Mr. Commissioner Johnson ever heard of it.

Mr. Hamilton sums up his remarks with suggestions:—

(1st).To obtain Messrs. Johnson's, Mantell's, and Buller's views.
(2nd).To call on the Maoris who sold to satisfy the claim.
(3rd).To enquire into the whole case at a general meeting of the Maoris, and come to a decision either absolutely against the claim, or to deal justly and generously with the Maoris.

* I think this wrong on second thought.—(Signed) W. Rolleston.

page 78

With regard to these suggestions, I must observe that Mr. Hamilton was not aware that the Government had already, 10th June, admitted the justice of Matiaha's claim.

Mr. Hamilton, among other remarks, says:—

"As the Maoris are now declared by law to be British subjects, he (Matiaha) might probably proceed in equity, notwithstanding the statute of limitations, in the Supreme Court against the Crown, to recover the whole of his share of some six years' arrears of pasturage rent with interest, which the Crown levied on sheepfarmers, on all the land north of the Kaiapoi boundary line of the first purchase." This land amounts to some 1,140,000 acres. Beyond all question, the Crown had no title to it up to the 5th February, 1857, although it had been leased out, and occupied by the Crown Tenants, ever since 1851, or earlier.

The only further papers on the subject are Mr. C. C. Brown's letter of 6th September, giving his reasons for naming the sum of £200, as compensation to Matiaha; and his letter of 10th November, calling attention to the promises made generally to the Natives of the Middle Island, as to schools, hospitals, &c., and to his recommendation on these subjects.

He particularly draws attention to Matiaha's claim.

W. Rolleston.

14th December, 1865.