Alienation of Land within the Parihaka Block

275 Pages·2009·14.11 MB·English

-
- 1>.
1
REPORT TO WAITANGI TRIBUNAL
]
ALIENATION OF LAND WITHIN THE
PARIHAKA BLOCK
..
This report was prepared by Marlene Benson
with assistance from Milton Hohaia
1
J
May 1993
~J
;
I
I.. ...
281
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Table 1 - Schedule of Land Granted by the 8
Crown to Maori, within the
Parihaka Block
3.0 Background information and Title Histories 10
of the Reserves made within the Parihaka
1 Block:
3. 1 Table 2 - Summary of alienation in the 12
reserves on the seaward side of
J the main road
r Block 1, Opunake Survey District:
3.2 Section 41, Whatarau te Manu 14
3.3 Section 71, Eruini 14
3.4 Section 72, Kerepa Taharangatira 15
3.5 Section 73, Otukarewa . 15
3.6 Section 78,. Pungarerere 16
3.7 Section 81, Tawhitinui 16
~
j~.. "~'."J" 3.8 Section 84, Ihaia Ngakirikiri 17
3.9 Section 88, Parimoto Reserve 18
3.10 Section 90, Okahu Reserve 18
) 3. 11 Section 95, Raumati & one other 19
3. 12 Section 96, Manahi 20
3.13 Section 99, Te Tokaroa 21
3.14 Section 101 Kerenene 21
1
3.15 Section 102 Pukerimu 21
t Block 5, Opunake Survey District:
3.16 Section 1, Oraukawa 23
3. 17 Section 5, Paparoa 23
J
Block.5, Cape Survey District:
3.18 Section 15, Tuiraho 24
J
Block 8, Cape Survey District:
3.19 Section 2, Tarakihi 25
3.20 Section 92, . Whanganui 25
3.21 Section 93, Ihutangi 26
3.22 Section 94, Whatarau Ariki 26
PAGE
I
~.
282
3.23 Section 95, Ikaroa 27
3.24 Section 126 Wharehoka &Whatarau 27
Block 12, Cape Survey District:
1
3.25 Section 4, Whqrehoka 30
3.26 Section 29, Te Pokaiheruiwi Ruaroa 30
3.27 Section 31, Wi Tako Ngatata and another 31
3.28 Section 39, Wi Tako Ngatata 31
1 3.29 Section 51, Otuakaia Reserve 31
3.30 .Section 54, Mataurukuhia Reserve 32
3.31 Section 55, Tipoka 33
1 3.32 Section 56, Waitaraiti 33
3.33 Section 57, Wairua 34
] 3:34 Section 23, Pungarehu Reserve
3.34. 1 Background 36
( 3.34.2 Title history 38
\ 3.34.3 Table 3 - Summary of alienation
within the Pungarehu reserve 45
3.35 Ngatihaupoto Reserve
]
3.35.1 Background and summary 48
3.35.2- Title Histqry - 51
3.35.4 Table 4 - Summary of alienation within -94
Ngatihaupoto reserve
3.36 Ngatituhekerangi Reserve
3.36.1 Background and summary 98
1 3.36.2 Title History 102
3.36.4 Table 5 - Summary of alienation within 116
Ngatituhekerangi reserve .
.J
3.37. Parihaka Reserves
3.37.1 Summary and Background 118
3.37.2 Title History 129
3.37.3 Map of Reserve 165
3.37.4 Table 6 - Summary of alienation within
the Parihaka reserves 170
3.37.5 Parihaka Papakainga 172
1
3.38 Tapuinikau Title Histories 184
J
3.39 Waiotama
3.39.1 Summary and Background 187
J 3.39.2 Title History 191
3.39.4 Table 7 - Summary of alienation within the
Waiotama Reserve 203
283
)
PAGE
4.0 Table 8 - Summary of Alienation that
occurred within the whole of the
Parihaka Block 204
Map of Parihaka Block
5.0 Conclusions about the main methods of
!
Alienation:
5.1 Public Trustee management of the Land 206
I
5.2 Legislation and partitioning of the 216
Reserve.
5.3 Crown purchases 221
5.4 Sales confirmed by District Maori Land Board 228
or the Maori Land Court.
5.5 Amalgamation of the west Coast leases 231
and sales by the Maori Trustee in the 1970s·
5.6 Declarations made under Part 1 of the 234
~ Maori Affairs Amendment Act 1967
j~~)
5.7 Development Schemes 235
6.0 Crown sales and Leases of the Land not 242
Granted to Maori within the Parihaka Block
7.0 Summary of available information on what 261
happened to the money controlled by the
Public Trustee
.).(
)
I
J
J
lii
';J.
:[h) ..
h
J!t
~~{1
1
I)
I
I
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The aim of this report is to provide information on what
happened to the land within the Parihaka Block from the
time it was confiscated to the present.
For the purposes of this report the Parihaka Block is the
land from the sea to the mountain, between the Waiweranui
stream in the north and Moutoti in the south. The
boundary in the east has been' taken as the edge of the
National Park.
The land within the block was confiscated by the Crown in
1865 under a proclamation of 2nd September 1865 under the
New Zealand Settlements Act of 1963. (NZG 5/9/1865)
I '
There were no sales by Maori of any of this land from the
time it was confiscated in 1865 to the time of the West
Coast Commission in'1880. There are also no ~ecor9s of any
payments of any other kind being made for any of the land
during this period. -,ft.,...,' ~ ~ ,
Of the approximately 45 000 acres in the block, a total of
t
21 482 were granted to Maori by the Crown from 1882 (see
schedule Table 1 for a description of the lands granted).
The rest of the land was either sold or reserved by the
I
Crown (see section 6.0).
The bulk of this report is concerned with the land that
L the Crown chose to grant to Maori within the Parihaka
Block. A title history of each of these grants has been
prepared and this report aims to identify the main methods
of alienation that occurred and the degree of choice that
J was involved by the owners in these alienations.
There is also a summary of the records that have been
I
located concerning the money from the West Coast leases
that was controlled by the Public Trustee.
I
During the period that this report covers there were rapid n
changes both in land ownership/control and land use .('.;" !llA'1t:1~,..
I . paahua~(the,
Prior to the confiscations apd up until the
suppression and invasion of Parihaka in November of 1881)
:D the land was under hapu and iwi control and organization.
The land provided an economic base for these people and
:"'!> ...
r
2
parts of the Parihaka Block had been developed by the iwi
to use for intensive horticulture including large areas of
wheat to supply the two flour mills. In 1865 there were
also large continuous tracts of native forest which
supported a wide range of different birds and plants.
Since confiscation the control of the land has changed
from being communally owned/controlled to being under
mainly individual ownership (largely non-maori) and the
land itself has been cleared and developed for intensive
agriculture use, mainly dairy farming.
The main issues and concerns that have emerged during the
writing of the report can be summarized as follows:
LAND GRANTED TO MAORI
The Crown made the first sale of the land that it had
confiscated within the Parihaka Block in May 1881 over 18
months before it granted any land to Maori.
The Crown was totally in control of the process of issuing
'grants to Maori and so could decide ~hat proportion of
this land could be pold by the Crown and what proportion
-of the block was to be granted. '
I~
The amount of land granted was supposed to be enough to
support the people named in the grants. However in no
I
reserve does the amount granted to each person achieve the
50 acres, that is specified in Section 24 of the Native
Land Act of 1873.
In the end, the total area of the reserves is only 21 482
acres, which is over 13 000 acres less than was at one
I time or another promised by the Crown.
The reserves on the sea side of the road were mainly small
isolated areas of land, with little economic value~
I
Although the grants made here were important in terms of
reserving places of special significance to the owners,
the size of the reserves, did not allow any of the former
1
paa sites in this block to provide an economic base for
the iwi.
The Crown could also make the decision about which parts
of the land within the block were granted. It is not
known exactly when or how it decided what paa sites,
cultivations, urupa and fishing sites to grant in the
seaward side and what not to' grant. The bulk of the land
"granted to Maori is on the inland side of the main south
road. This is less suitable for use for intensive
" '" horticulture, as it is nearer to the mountain, and
3
therefore has a shorter growing season and more frosts.
j
The Crown made the decision about whose names the grants
were made in - it was acknowledged that very few people
from this block attended the west Coast Commission
1 hearings, the names being supplied by Hone Pihama and
others. This raises the question of how many names were
omitted. The determination of the ownership of the land
did not go through the procedures of the Land Court, and
so there was no opportunity for people to disagree or add
names to the lists.
Lastly, the Crown was in charge of the legislation under
which the grants were made.
CONTROL OF THE LAND AFTER IT WAS GRANTED TO MAORI
\ The period after the grants were made in 1882 and 1883, up
until 1915 - 1916, was the period where the Public Trustee
1 had control of all the reserves in the Parihaka Block,
under the various west Coast Settlement Reserves Acts and
their amendments.
]
The first issue about this, is why this control of tbe
reserves was necessary anyway. The Taranaki Iwi haq-been
in control of the land for many hundreds of years, without
needing anyone else to make decisions for them.
] The level of control of the Public Trustee was increased
under the 1892 Act when the land was vested in the Public
Trustee in fee simple in trust for the owners.
The Public Trustee could now lease the land under leases
that had a perpetual right of renewal. These leases have
set the pattern for land ownership and alienation within
the Parihaka Block ever since.
t>
These decisions could legally be made by the Public
Trustee without adequate consultation or any input at all
from the people who actually owned the land. The Public
J
Trustee could also decide the terms of the lease. Even
though technically there was a method available for the
owners to be involved with the setting of rents, in
J
practice it was usually set by the Public Trustee.
The advantages of the perpetual west Coast leases were
all with the leaseholders. They could mortgage the lease,
sub let it, transfer it to others and also borrow money to
develop the land from the Government. They also had
security of tenure and could receive compensation for any
improvements they made.
(
J
4
The leases were supposed to provide an economic income for
the owners. In fact due to the low rates of rents, the
high costs deducted from rents and the inadequate amount
of reserved lands, the amount of money received by the
owners was insufficient to provide for their support.
1
The Public Trustee decided to lease large proportions of
the reserves - leaving little for the owners to live on or
to eventually freehold.
1
OCCUPATION LICENCES
The attitude of the Public Trustee to the system of
J
occupation licences is clear - it was to be used to break
down the system of communal land ownership.
This system allowed the Public Trustee an enormous amount
of power. He could decide who could live on the land,
where they could live, and how much they would have to pay
for the licences. The occupation licences also gave the
holders no security of tenure.
PARTITIONING OF RESERVES
The authority in control of the partitioning changed often
during the period from 1881 to 1913, creating confusion
for the owners and the Public Trustee alike and affecting
who would receive the rents from the leases and who could
live where.
J
In the period from 1887 to 1916 one section of the
Ngatituhekerangi reserve had three different sets of
owners.
1
The partitioning in 1915 - 1916, under the West Coast
Settlement Reserves Amendment Act of 1913 and of 1914 and
1 1915, allowed the reserve~ to be individualized and meant
that many of the owners only received uneconomic shares of
land.
j
Some people only received shares in land that was leased
in perpetuity so they did not receive anywhere they could
actually live. The freehold orders meant that people
J
could now be charged for survey fees, rates and prosecuted
for noxious weeds.
METHODS OF ALIENATION:
Table 8 on page 192 summarises what has happened to the
land in. each reserve.
5
Crown purchasing -
Crown purchasing of land under the 1909 Land Act is the
most common way that land was alienated throughout the
whole Parihaka Block. It accounts for 8 500 ,acres or 38%
of the total land alienated in the block. This legislation
removed the protection against alienation from the west
Coast Settlement Reserve Acts and allowed at the request
of the leaseholders, for the land that they held under
West Coast leases to be freeholded. In the case of the
Parihaka reserve this legislation also allowed for
freehold land owned by Maori to be purchased by the Crown
and then sold or leased to returned World War One
soldiers.
The first issue about this is why the Crown felt the need
to do this in the first place - in who's interest were
these purchases and how much were they made to fulfill
Government policies to provide cheap farmland to pakeha
settlers?
There are also concerns raised about the method of
purchasing - whether the owners were left landless, the
,threats made by tpe purchase officers in order to get
people to sell.the .la~d and the involvement of the Land
- - --- - -- Court in purchasing.
~
'
t~J
Land Sales By Owners
It is difficult to determine at this stage the reasons
behind the sales that took place by individuals of
freehold land. Some of the factors that may have effected
I
the choice people had over selling land include the
charging orders for rates and survey costs that existed
over many of the sections that were sold.
1: )
Other factors that may have effected peoples choices were
the uneconomic and fragmented nature of the land that
people owned.
There are also issues raised about the sales that took
place through meetings of owners under part XXIII of the
Maori Affairs Act of 1953. This Legislation allowed for
sales to occur even though not all the owners were present
at the meetings or had even been notified of them. It
also allowed for the approval of sales which owners
present at the meetings objected to.
Although this is all legal under the present and past
legislation, none of these things can happen during sales
of land other than Maori land and this legislation means
that peoples land can be sold without their consent or
6
i
"
" ,) even without their knowledge.
')
Amalgamation and sale of the West Coast Lease Land -
J
In 1963 the land that remained under West Coast Leases was
amalgamated onto one title in the name of the Maori
1
Trustee: This decision had been arrived at following
reports made by the Maori Affairs Department and meetings
held with representatives of people who owned shares in
the land (these are summarized in Taranaki Minute Book
73A) .
I
The decision to amalgamate the leased land meant that
peoples individual shares were no longer attached to any
particular piece of land but represented shares that they
held in the whole Parininihi ki Waitotara Reserve.
The result of this was that when the Maori Trustee
approached shareholders and leaseholders in the late 1960s
to see if they wanted to buy or sell, the land was
alienated on a first come first served basis.
This means that in the case of the Ngatituhekerangi
,reserve, of "whi:ch nearly half was sold by the Maori
Trustee by this method, it is difficult to tell how many
of the people who inherited their shares from interests in
'this particular piece of land, sold those shares.
The questions that are raised by this method of alienation
are - firstly why did this period of selling take place,
did people understand the implications of having one title
for the whole of the West Coast Reserves and how many of
the owners were actually consulted before this decision
was made.
This period of selling represents a major dissatisfaction
on the part of the owners over owning land that is held
under West Coast Leases.
Development Blocks -
While this is not a form of alienation, it was decided to
discuss the effects that placing land under the control of
J the Maori Affairs Department in this way, had on peoples
ability to gain benefit from that land, or to be involved
1 in the decision making about this land.
The first question that was raised was the question of how
people were able to decide to put the land under the
control of the Maori Affairs and did they feel that they
had a choice. The threats of charging orders for rates,
noxious weeds and the placing of land under the control of