The I_haia Taueki_Trust
Report to the Beneficiaries
Sat 16th April__- 1994
CONTENTS
- Chairmans Report
2.. Historical Research Report
APPENDIXES
a. Whakapa
b. Maps
Ihaia Taueki and Muaupoko Lands:
A Brief History
A Report Commissioned by the Ihaia Taueki Trust Board
Dr BryanD. Gilling
April 1994
IHAIA TAUEKI AND MUAUPOKO LANDS:
A BRIEF HISTORY
Bryan D. Gilling
The Origins of Muaupoko
The earliest inhabitants of the Horowhenua area were apparently of Waitaha, a people of ancient but obscure lineage, sometimes identified with the so-called Moahunter people reputed to precede Maori occupation of Aotearoa. Waitaha were supplanted by Ngati Mamoe, finally settling in the South Island around 1470. Ngati Mamoe, in their turn, then occupied the area for several centuries. In the mid-nineteenth century there were still stories of their existing in the remote parts of the Tararuas, much like the legends of the Yeti or Bigfoot. Some were absorbed into Rangitane and Muaupoko as those iwi took over.
The earliest Muaupoko ancestors reputedly came with Whatonga in the Kurahaupo, arriving at Mahia and Heretaunga two centuries before the Great Fleet and others with Turi in the Aotea at Patea. Therefore, G.L. Adkin says, 'the tribe is something of a survival of the older native order amidst the newer'. The two groups may have been distantly related and when those from Hawke's Bay travelled to Horowhenua in the wake of their Rangitane kin, those from Taranaki linked up with them, displacing Ngati Mamoe in Horowhenua. Once there, the name Muaupoko - the 'front of the head' - was adopted, referring to their geographical location in the lower jaw of Te Ika-a-Maui.
The first people clearly defined as Muaupoko were the children of Te Mou and of Ngataitoko. Ngataitoko killed Te Uira, Te Mou's father, although Te Uira had rescued Hikaotaota, who then became Ngataitoko's wife. After this killing, Te Mou's mother took him to live with family near present Dannevirke, where he married his second cousin, Puakiteao. Later, this couple returned to Te Koropu, near Hokio, and raised four children: Tireoterangi (m), Te Riunga (f), Ruatapu (m) and Potangotango (m).
Ngataitoko and Hikaotaota, who were descended from the Rangitane sub-tribe Hamua, raised three children: Kawainga, Pariri and Te Rongopatahi. Their descendants now form the Ngati Pariri hapu of Muaupoko. Other progenitors of Muaupoko were Tupatunui and Tupohonui, another member of the Hamua sub-tribe who had helped Ngataitoko kill Te Uira.
Tireoterangi and one group of his children settled at Te Koropu, near the outlet of the Hokio from Lake Horowhenua. He and his brother Potangotango driving off Ngati Kahungunu who tried to settle nearby. He was killed by Ngati
-2-
Apa exacting revenge for an insult made to them by one of his friends. His brothers, Ruatapu and Potangotango, took revenge for that by leading a taua of Rangitane who defeated Ngai Tai at Te Paka. They also avenged the killing of their grandfather, Te Uira, when a Hamua/Ngai Tuhakeke party came into their territory. They killed many, but two leaders, Rakeimanuhiri and Te Angiimua, were saved by the brothers' sister Te Riunga, who took them into her house on an island in Papaitonga and forbade her brothers to kill them. Te Angiimua, and his brother Huratapapa then married Hineitohua and Tui, grand daughters of Ngataitoko, while a third brother, Turanga, married Te Riunga's daughter Wairoto. These marriages united the various branches of Muaupoko.
Ruatapu moved to the South Island, where he died in battle, but his children remained at Horowhenua. Two of his sons, Tairatu and Horapoto, built the artificial islands Te Waikiekie and Te Roha a Kawau in Lake Horowhenua. Potangotango conducted raids into the northern Wairarapa, but his permanent home was Te Kapa, at the northern end of Lake Horowhenua. By his first wife, Pirihongi, he had one child named Whanokirangi, and by his second wife, Tokai, he had six children.
By the mid-nineteenth century, Kerehi Tomu (Te Mitiwhaha) described Muaupoko as structured into four hapu, each with a principal Chief: Ngati Pariri (Himiona Kowhai), Ngati Ao or Aiteao (Kerehi Tomu), Ngati Hine (Makere Te Rou and Noa Te Whata) and Ngati Tamarangi (Ihaia Taueki). There was what appeared to be a fifth hapu, Muaupoko-tuturu (permanent Muaupoko), but this was rather a supreme council of hereditary chiefs or elders. A sixth hapu, Ngati Whano, was a subsection of one of the others.
Ihaia Taueki
We turn now briefly to set out what has been recorded about the chief Ihaia Taueki, after whom the Ihaia Taueki Trust Board is named.
J.M. McEwen shows whakapapa which link Ihaia Taueki and his wife Rawinia back to their distant Rangitane origins and forwards to the early twentieth century. Rawinia (or Ngatahi) was the principal woman of Ngati Pariri as well as of other Muaupoko hapu, and the daughter of Merehira Te Marika. Ihaia Taueki's son was Tiripa and his grandson was Hema. Another son of Ihaia was drowned while fishing, aged three or four. His sister was Hereora, mother of Rakuraku Hunia. Ihaia's father, Taueki, was married to Kahukore. Taueki's parents were Tapuwae and Kuraituhi, Tapuwae being the fifth child of Tokai, the second wife of Potangotango.
-3-
What of Ihaia's character? He was described as 'a gentle, pious, patriarchal-looking old man', 'the leading chief', of a 'dignified, benevolent character', 'characteristic of the best in Maori chieftainship', 'whose large generous simplicity of soul had made him generally beloved'. By John McDonald's account, Ihaia, who was a lay reader in the Anglican Church, could not accept the challenge of Te Whiti's doctrines and effectively lost his mind in the strain of choosing between religions.
Born in 1809, by 1896 Ihaia was 'too old and dilapidated to give evidence', and he 'had been very deaf for some time, and perfectly blind. He is a very old man.' He died on 2 February 1898.
How did Ihaia compare in status to the contemporary Muaupoko chiefs, especially Keepa Te Rangihiwinui and Kawana Hunia? Keepa himself stated that in 1873 the other principal chiefs of Muaupoko were Ihaia, Raniera, Rewiri, Taueki [perhaps Rawinia], Te Atua and Te Rangirurupuni. He should perhaps have added Kawana Hunia and Te Rangi Mairehau. Te Rangi Mairehau agreed that both Keepa and Ihaia were leading chiefs, but claimed himself to be 'the representative of Taueki', who was 'the old chief of Muaupoko', and who had an ancestress from Ngati. Apa, a paternal ancestor from Muaupoko, and connections to Rangitane.
John and Hector McDonald both testified that Taueki was the ariki of Muaupoko at the time when Te Whatanui first arrived, but thought that in more recent times the tribe had become more divided into the four hapu.
Alexander McDonald testified to the changeable nature of a chief's mana. Having asserted that Kawana's father had greater standing than Keepa's since he had remained on the land, he added that neither of these ancestors was of the highest rank. McDonald also testified 'there were two men, both above these two. The actual chief who resided here was Taueki; but it is alleged that the chief who made the general peace at Karekare was a man called Taiwherua. Taueki was a peaceable, politic man, who was able to hold his tongue and be quiet.' He continued, 'I consider that Ihaia Taueki is the ariki of the tribe. Although he is the son of that great chief, and may be considered the ariki, he has not attempted to dispute the position or influence of Kemp.' He thought that through infirmity Ihaia was unable to challenge Keepa's dominance over Muaupoko, although this did not diminish Ihaia's rights.
In this debate about ranks, it is important to be aware that the information was given in the context of an adversarial Court confrontation.
This information helps us to sketch a brief picture of Ihaia Taueki. He was descended directly from what what was apparently the senior line of Muaupoko chieftainship and was rangatira of Ngai Tamarangi hapu. Unlike those of Keepa
-4-
and Kawana, the line from which Ihaia sprang was never absent or driven from the Horowhenua area. Continuous ahi ka has been maintained by the family since at least the era of their ancestor, Potangotango, in the mid-1750s.
As a person, he was 'gentle', 'pious', 'dignified', benevolent' and possessing a 'large generous simplicity of soul'. In these characteristics, he seems to have followed his father, Taueki, who was 'a peaceable, politic man, who was able to hold his tongue and be quiet'. Such a man would have held moral authority, as indeed Ihaia seems to have done, but may well have been pushed to one side in situations of public conflict by the assertive, even violent, Kawana and Keepa.
Perhaps under such leadership, Muaupoko might have avoided open conflict with Ngati Raukawa and continued to live in peaceful mutual accommodation. They might also have avoided the centrifugal effects of the inter-necine struggle which developed around the confrontational personalities of Keepa and Hunia and which led more or less directly to Muaupoko's dispossession of most of their ancestral lands.
The Arrival of Te Rauparaha and Te Whatanui
The relative tranquility of the Horowhenua region was shattered in the early nineteenth century when Te Rauparaha made several expeditions south to the Horowhenua/Kapiti region. The first was in 1819-20, passing down the coast,
harassing Ngati Apa in Rangitikei, going further on to Otaki and around the coast to Wairarapa, before returning to Kawhia.
Having thus scouted out the southern part of the island, in 1820-22 Te Rauparaha trekked south with many of his Ngati Toa to escape from the relentless pressure being exerted against them by Waikato, whom he had antagonised. When he arrived in Horowhenua, looking to settle permanently, his son was killed by Ngati Pariri at Koputaroa, beginning a vicious cycle of reprisals. Muaupoko knew that Te Rauparaha would seek vengeance and sought assistance from Ngati Apa, Rangitane and Whanganui. There were many killings, skirmishes and full-scale battles. He beat their combined forces at Haowhenua at Otaki and continued his revenge against Muaupoko specifically by wiping out their island pa on Papaitonga. The allies regrouped, though, and overcame him at Waikanae, forcing him into refuge on Kapiti. However, Te Rauparaha finally defeated them all at Waiorua on Kapiti, establishing himself securely in the coastal area of the Horowhenua-Kapiti district.
Te Rauparaha had made numerous requests to his relatives Ngati. Raukawa to join him, but only in 1828 did Te Whatanui lead the bulk of the tribe south. Te Whatanui then established himself at Horowhenua as the protector of Rangitane
-5--
and Muaupoko from the enduring hatred of Te Rauparaha. Ngati Raukawa settled along the coast both north and south of the Manawatu River mouth and inland in the Shannon area, mostly in the ancestral lands of Ngati Apa and Muaupoko.
Since Te Rauparaha could not touch Rangitane and Muaupoko while they were under Te Whatanui's protection, he managed to lure them out in 1834. He gained the support of Te Ati Awa and Ngati Tama, who invited both tribes to a feast, during which they were ambushed with many killed - the 'Battle of the Pumpkins'. A reprisal raid killed 60 Ngati Toa. This was the last fighting in the region, as with the introduction of Christianity by Octavius Hadfield in 1839 the gospel of peace was observed.
Through these wars, the Tauekis, almost alone of the leading chiefly lines, remained on the Horowhenua land.
The Peace Arrangements between Te Whatanui and Muaupoko
As with Te Rauparaha's 'conquest' of Muaupoko, so there are many versions of the relationship between Muaupoko and Te Whatanui. Many denied that Muaupoko were ever subject to Raukawa. Others asserted that they were little better than slaves and occupied any land only through Te Whatanui's generosity.
John McDonald gave the following account of the meeting, which must have taken place in 1828-9:
A meeting of the tribes was arranged with some difficulty at RauMatangi.... The Muaupokos were suspicious and doubtful. Te Whatanui assured them of his goodwill.
'Koai nu ai he maru koe [I doubt whether you are safe rata to shelter under],' said old Taueki, bluntly.
'Heoia no te mea e pa kiau ko te ua anake o te rangi [Nothing can touch you but rain from Heaven],' answered Te Whatanui confidently.
Muaupoko remained safe under the protection he faithfully offered, except when lured away to the Battle of the Pumpkins. Others confirmed this basic account. Keepa also said, 'Shortly after this Taueki pointed out to Te Whatanui land at Horowhenua; he said to him, "If you want any timber, there is bush; you can use that;" and Te Whatanui did not go to any other place.'
One the one hand, such a story indicates Taueki allocating Te Whatanui a place to stand out of Muaupoko land. On the other, some sources agree with John McDonald who dismisses the Muaupoko contention that they had never actually been conquered by Raukawa as 'merely a quibble; the Muaupokos occupied their limited domain through the forbearance of Ngati Raukawa; they had no rights, but only such privileges as were allowed them by the toleration of that tribe'.
-6-
John McDonald described the boundaries of the land which Te Whatanui allocated and demarcated for Muaupoko to live on and use as being about 20,000 acres, carefully defined by high carved posts. It began on the top of Tenamairangi, then ran straight inland to Tauateruru. From Tauateruru the line ran directly to the snowline on the ranges, along the range to another peak, then down to the island Ngatokorua in the Poroutawhao swamp, then southwest to Oioao flat. McDonald is insistent that this was the sum total of the Muaupoko lands, that they were surrounded by and dependent upon Raukawa.
The Muaupoko Resurgence
Te Whatanui the elder died in 1849. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Whatanui Te Tahuri, who also died in 1869, and was then succeeded by the next son, Whatanui Tutaki. Some of the old Muaupoko, survivors of the pre-European period, lived with Tutaki at Raumatangi. Most Raukawa, of Ngati Hula, lived at Poroutawhao. Between them lived the rest of Muaupoko, some 200, nearly all within the fortified pa of Raia Te Karaka on the peninsula Pukearuhe jutting out into Lake Horowhenua. The chiefs who led Muaupoko at that time were Taueki, Himiona Te Haupo and Te Rangi Rurupuni. Other small Muaupoko settlements were at Te Hou, at Otaiwa near the Hokio's outlet of Lake Horowhenua and with Raukawa at Kouturoa.
Muaupoko readiness to fight on the Government side during the New Zealand wars stemmed largely from previous tribal antagonisms: opposition to the. Pai Marire faith adopted by many Raukawa, and revenge on Te Ati Awa for the Battle of the Pumpkins. Keepa's force therefore included some 100 Muaupoko, most of their surviving able-bodied men. A few, though, were sympathetic to Pai Marire led by Motai as the local 'prophet'.
After the Wars, their newly regained fighting spirit spread abroad amongst Muaupoko. They began to take action to regain full control over their ancestral lands. Tension began to rise between the two tribes. Kawana Hunia then called a great hui as the start of a campaign to gain not just what the Muaupoko originally wanted - control over Lake Horowhenua and the Hokio - but formal ownership of a much larger area.
The hui was held at the new meeting house, Kupe, in 1870; the issue was simply whether the boundary to the north of the Hold() was at Tauatururu or further down, since some claim for Te Whatanui's family was always admitted. The runanga concluded that Muaupoko had been treated generously, although it was agreed as a gesture of goodwill to shift the boundary line so as to split Kupe and run from there to the hill Taiwhitikuri on the north of the Hokio. This did not
-7-
give Muaupoko the control of the lake and stream they wanted and was so slight an adjustment that it could be regarded as an insult. Keepa returned soon after with the Muaupoko warriors and built the fighting pa Pipiriki on the lakeside. Threats and counterthreats culminated in raids on stock and the burning of houses over the next several years, involving the intervention of Native Minister Donald McLean.
The Native Land Court
The arrival of the Native Land Court in the region came with the hearing into the Himatangi Block in 1868. Several principles were established in this seminal judgment which greatly affected how the Native Land Court later received and adjudicated upon the Horowhenua Block: pre-1840 conquest had to be followed by continuous and extensive occupation to confer rights on the conquerors; the original occupants also retained their rights alongside the conquerors if they had maintained ahi ka - their fires burning on the land - somehow; and only a small portion of the conquerors had rights, only those who lived on the land in question, rather than the whole of the tribe.
In the Horowhenua case, the Native Land Court in April 1873 admitted that Muaupoko had been glad to make use of Te Whatanui's protection against Te Rauparaha, but the Court decided that that surrender of their land had never been the price or condition of that protection. It recognised that Muaupoko had never been dispossessed of the Horowhenua lands, and concluded that the small area at Raumatangi had been gifted by Muaupoko to Te Whatanui personally - in recognition of which they set apart a 100-acre reserve.
While the Court hearing was being conducted, Keepa applied not only legal and customary pressure, but psychological pressure as well. To remind the Court of his personal importance and his valiant service as a leader of warriors for the Government, he wore his military uniform and paraded his men outside the courtroom. It was Keepa who took them down to the beach and showed them the exact location of the block's boundaries. The final area of the Horowhenua Block, 52,460 acres, was greater than Muaupoko had originally claimed, and the expectation was that Keepa would be kaitiaki of the whole block on Muaupoko's behalf.
In 1886, the Native Land Court sat again, this time to subdivide the Horowhenua Block into 14 smaller segments. The proposals put to the Court seem all to have been thrashed out amongst Muaupoko outside and were presented as 'consensus' agreements which the Court had only to rubberstamp. The judge went along with this interpretation and there was virtually no discussion of the awards before they were formalised.
-8-
These subdivisions included the small strip for the railway and 4,000 acres to be sold the Government for the township of Levin. Most of the others were unimportant and non-controversial. The other most important blocks were No.9 (the 1,200 acres at Raumatangi as a gift for Te Whatanui's descendants to fulfil Taueki's promise), the 11,300-acre No.11 which would be divided up with 105 acres each for the members of the tribe, No.12 of 13,137 acres up into the Tararuas, and No.14 of 1,200 acres at Papaitonga. No.11 was put in the names of Keepa and Warena Hunia only, No.12 in Ihaia Taueki's name alone and No.14 in Keepa's name alone.
Problems arose with Block 11 by 1890 when Warena Hunia claimed he and Keepa were only ever intended to be joint absolute owners and he went to Court to try to have his share partitioned out so that he could sell it. Keepa considered they were kaitiaki for thewhole tribe and resisted Hunia in numerous court cases in the Native Land Court, the Native Appellate Court, the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal and before the Native Affairs Committee of the General Assembly over the next few years.
In the subsequent Land Court dealings, the tribe was torn apart in the struggle for individual advantage. Dishonesty and scrambling for advancement at another's expense became commonplace and were compounded by the involvement of unscrupulous Pakeha, especially those who conducted cases in the Court, acting as the advocate for one party against another. John McDonald tells of several cases where someone with rights was deprived by someone with few or none. Partly because of the lack of personal attachment which individuals had to the 105-acre segments they were allocated, the bulk of Block 11 was soon lost. McDonald describes the process:
No sooner was the individualisation complete than a horde of land-hungry settlers swooped down upon them, bought where the Maori would sell, and where they would not, obtained grazing rights, and by advancing money to the owners, eventually got them into such a position that they had to sell.... and it was not long before hardly a single Maori remained in possession of his 105 acre block which he had accepted so hopefully.
In the meantime, a well-known lawyer specialising in Maori land dealings, Sir Walter Buller, had become involved. First he was Keepa's legal adviser, then he gained a lease from Keepa over Block 14, which was turned into a mortgage through which he gained ownership of the block as Keepa's legal costs mounted. However, Buller had powerful political enemies, especially the Minister of Lands, John McKenzie. As he fell out with them so they began to accuse Keepa and him of
-9-
fraudulent dealings over Block 14. Matters were compounded by Warena Hunia's adviser being allied politically with the Government.
The Horowhenua Block Acts 1895 and 1896
Legislation was eventually passed to force the issue. Ignoring the Supreme Court judgments already given, the Horowhenua Block Act 1895 (a) authorised the formation of a Commission of Inquiry which sat in 1896, and (b) stipulated that 'the costs and expenses of such Commission shall be charged upon such of the lands as the Commission may determine.' Thus, not only was the Minister of Lands going to try to gain revenge upon his personal enemy, Sir Walter Buller, but right from the outset it was determined that Muaupoko would be the ones to pay for his personal vendetta.
In no part of the Parliamentary debate was the subject of the costs being charged against Muaupoko ever mentioned. It seems to have been taken for granted. The focus was on the confusion within the Block and on the allegations of corrupt dealings against Buller, Keepa and Warena Hunia. There was no appreciable notice taken of the fact that the interests of a whole tribe were at stake here.
The Commission of Inquiry criticised almost all of the dealings that had taken place within the history of the Horowhenua Block, apart from the original 1873 decision. It castigated Judge Wilson for having subdivided it without further investigation. A small area was added to the Raukawa allotment at Raumatangi. The Crown was criticised for continuing with purchasing from Hunia although knowing his ownership was greatly disputed. Keepa was ordered to account for his use of tribal money. Buller was criticised for his deep personal involvement and continuing conflicts of interest in representing Keepa and other Muaupoko as well as himself.
The Horowhenua Block Act 1896 was passed specifically 'to as far as practicable give effect to the recommendations in the [1896 Commission's] report set out'. Its provisions were mainly aimed against Keepa over the issues of trusteeship and Block 14. In addition, one certificate of title for Block 12 was to be issued in favour of the Crown, cancelling the existing certificate in the name of Ihaia Taueki. Compensation was to be made to the Maori owners for any land taken by the Crown under this Act, but before any such compensation was paid for Block 12, the costs of the 1896 Commission - £1,266/19/5 - were to be deducted.
So this 1896 Horowhenua Block Act was the instrument by which Muaupoko (and especially Ihaia Taueki) were deprived of their land, Block 12 simply being removed from their ownership.
-10-
Conclusion
A number of conclusions can be drawn from this material.
(a) The Taueki line is descended directly from Potangotango and can demonstrate uninterrupted occupation of the Horowhenua area for well over two centuries, up to the present day.
(b) The relationship was between Ngati Raukawa and Muaupoko predates the Treaty of Waitangi by some 12 years. It is clear that Muaupoko as a whole were never enslaved or dispossessed by Raukawa. At most, they may have been restricted north of the Hokio behind the line from Tauateruru. There was definitely an agreement reached between Taueki for Muaupoko and Te Whatanui for Raukawa in which Te Whatanui provided his protection against Te Rauparaha, and Taueki gifted land to Te Whatanui. What remains unclear is just how the relationship between the two great chiefs operated.
(c) Ihaia Taueki was obviously one of the chiefs of greatest standing, probably of the greatest standing by birth, within Muaupoko in the mid-late nineteenth century. His father, Taueki, had been the person with whom Te Whatanui had dealt. When the Horowhenua Block was first subdivided, Block 12 was put in Ihaia's name alone. This was as both a recognition of Ihaia's standing within the tribe and so that he could be kaitiaki of the land for the tribe as a whole.
(d) As compared to Ihaia, both Keepa and Kawana Hunia seem to have less _ claim to standing within Muaupoko. Keepa's father, Tanguru, had great standing, but had left the region and had aligned himself and his son much more closely with Wanganui. Keepa only really returned to Horowhenua, and then part-time, in the late 1860s. Hunia's main connections were with Ngati Apa. He and his family, too, had not kept their fires alight continuously on Horowhenua land and he did not come back to live there permanently in the 1870s. The Taueki line, however, had not only been originally of great standing, but had clearly preserved their rights through ahi ka. The fact that Ihaia's influence was overwhelmed from 1870 by Keepa and Kawana seems to have resulted more from his 'gentlemanly' and self-effacing personality, and perhaps his ill-health, contrasted with Keepa's political and military influence and Kawana's self-aggrandising pushiness, than because they had any superior rights by birth or occupation. When Keepa and Kawan returned and built Kupe and Pipiriki, they only had a place to stand because of Taueki's ageement with Te Whatanui and his subsequent maintenance of ahi ka.
(e) Much of the evidence we have of what went on in the nineteenth century when the land was being subdivided and sold off comes from Court records. Almost everybody involved had their own barrow to push and testified to their own advantage. We know that there was deliberate lying taking place, because a number of people later confessed to it. This makes it very difficult to discern the exact details of the truth in many situations.
(f) The different subdivisions of the original Horowhenua Block were made in the names of varying people apparently on different conditions. It seems that Ihaia Taueki was put into Block 12 under the same conditions as were Keepa and Warena in Block 11, that is as a kaitiaki for the tribe as a whole. Unlike Hunia in Block 11, and Keepa in other blocks, he was, however, unable to gain any benefit from it - nor were the tribe - as a decade later the Government simply took it off them.
(g) The litigation obviously stemmed partly from and made much worse divisions within Muaupoko. However, there were other influences at work too. Particularly, in the 1890s there was a personal battle going on between the Minister of Lands and Sir Walter Buller. The Horowhenua Commission was set up not out of concern for Muaupoko, but as a weapon for McKenzie to use against Buller. Muaupoko not only had to pay heavily in legal costs, but also were alone charged with the costs of holding the Commission. This seems a denial of natural justice. The Government never intended itself to carry the cost of dispensing justice to the Maori of Horowhenua.
John McDonald summarised the way in which the 53,000 acres of Horowhenua land just drifted out of Muaupoko possession after 1896:
First the 800 acres given by Kemp in settlement of legal debts, then the 4,000 acres taken for the township of Levin, 11,000 acres divided into sections of 105 acres each, practically the whole of which the owners parted with for one reason or another within a few years, and the State farm of 1,500 acres. Now the (1896] Commission recommended that Block XII, the mountainous country, 13,000 acres in area, and the block of 4,600 acres set aside for the 'rerewaho' be acquired by the Crown, this being eventually done, so that with the 1,300 acres given to the Ngati Raukawa and the 1,200 acres acquired by Buller, a block of 15,000 acres only was left, the greater part of which was sand hills, some grassed and more of it drifting. The Royal Commission of 1896 recommended that this area be put in the hands of the Public Trustee in trust for the tribe, but apparently the recommendation was not adopted, and the greater part of this area also, has now drifted out of their hands.
He notes that even to fight in the Courts for what was theirs or to have it simply pass through the system Maori had to pay, and their currency was land. He quotes an elder, Mohi Rakuraku, 'The land has been our ruin. In the times of our ancestors which have gone by, we have received no hurt similar to this: give us back what land is left.'