NEW ZEALAND IN CRISISCan we fix it? - Yes we can!

Previous books published by the One New Zealand Foundation Inc.

He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people. (1992)(ISBN 0-473-02600-7)

From Treaty to Conspiracy – a Theory. (1998)(ISBN 0-473-05066-8)

NEW ZEALAND IN CRISISPublished by The One New Zealand Foundation Inc. P. O. Box 7113, Pioneer Hwy, Palmerston North, New Zealand. www.onenzfoundation.co.nz

First published 2011

ISBN 978 – 0 – 473 – 18629 – 6

NEW ZEALAND IN CRISISCan we fix it? - Yes we can!

CONTENTS Page

Dedication 4

Introduction 5

Part One – We are now one people 6

Part Two – What went so horrible wrong 17

Part Three – Can we fix it? – Yes we can! 30

Party Vote the Most Important Vote For Change 30

Letter from 13 Ngapuhi Chiefs 31

Declaration of Independence 32

Final Draft Article – Published 1992 34

Final Draft of the Tiriti o Waitangi 33

Final Draft Article – Published 1992 34

Final Draft of the Tiriti o Waitangi 33

Translation by Mr T E Young Native Department 38

Preamble and Consent Omitted from Treaty 39

Taranaki Sold Three Times 40

Principle for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi 41

Sir Paul Reeves and Government differ over Treaty 43

Judge Queries Ethics of Treaty Demands 44

Letter from Ngapuhi Elder, Graham Rankin 45

Speeches from the Chiefs at Waitangi 47

2

Warning/Disclaimer

All references to fraud, alleged fraud, corruption or a conspiracy in Part 2 of this book must be considered in the light of the fact that no criminal changes have been brought against anyone within its contents.

The reader should NOT assume that a person or persons, or organizations are guilty of any crime until that person or organization has been convicted in a Court of Law. What you read here may be elements of a possible prosecution case, were one ever brought, but please bear in mind that you have not heard the defence submissions.

The views and opinions in this book are not necessary the views and opinions of the author or the One New Zealand Foundation Inc as they have been compiled from many sources. If you feel any of the facts in this book are incorrect, please notify the One New Zealand Foundation Inc with written factual evidence and they will be corrected in the reprint. I must also apologise for the grammar and punctuation in this book, I am a historian and not a professional writer.

Thank you,

One New Zealand Foundation Inc.P.O.Box 7113,Pioneer Hwy,Palmerston North.

“Let me issue a word of warning to those that are in the habit of bandying the name of the Treaty around to be very careful lest it be made the means of incurring certain liabilities under the law, which we do not know now and which are being borne only by the Pakeha”. “The Treaty of Waitangi – An Explanation” by Sir Apirana Ngata, 1922.

Please read this book then do your own research to prove it to yourself. The Tiriti o Waitangi and the continuing events made us all one people under one flag and one law, intercourse between the people confirmed it. The Fourth Labour Government changed all this when they divided the people of New Zealand into Maori and non-Maori with its unsubstantiated Partnership and Principles.

He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people – New Zealanders

The One New Zealand Foundation Inc is a non-profit Incorporated Society promoting New Zealand under one Treaty, one flag and one law. “He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people”.

For further information or to become a member of the One New Zealand Foundation Inc. log onto www.onenzfoundation.co.nz

NEW ZEALAND IN CRISIS

3

Can we fix it? - Yes we can!

DEDICATION

I dedicate this book to my ancestors, Richard Taylor, Nathan Stafford, Alfred Buckland, William Crowther and all the other people that helped build this beautiful country of ours on the understanding, we are now one people under one treaty, one flag and one law.

“He iwi tahi taou – We are now one people”

This Agreement has been broken.

In 1840 Governor Hobson signed the Tiriti o Waitangi on behalf of Queen Victoria with over 500 chiefs who agreed to, “All the rights will given to them (Maori) the same as her doings for the people of England”. Article Three.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth as head of state; allowed her New Zealand Government to breach this agreement by writing the majority of New Zealanders out of the Tiriti o Waitangi by making it into, A Partnership between Maori and the Crown. This was never the intention of Queen Victoria, Governor Hobson or the 500 chiefs that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840

By giving her royal assent to the many apartheid Acts of Parliament, Queen Elizabeth ll has also breached the agreement Queen Victoria made in 1840 with the Chiefs, the Hapus, and all the people of New Zealand.

Please read this book then do your own research, do not take my word for it; prove it to yourself. The Treaty made us all one people with one Tiriti, one law and one flag for all. Please take the time to prove it to yourself, then stand up for your rights.

I would like to thank the many ONZF members that have helped me research, write and publish this book.

Ross Baker, Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc.www.onenzfoundation.co.nz

Introduction

It is very difficult to fix a problem, whether it’s a car, a watch or a leaking house if you do not know what caused it, the Treaty of Waitangi is no exception. While there are

4

thousands of books written about the history of New Zealand, not one gives a reason as to what caused the problem or how it can be fixed. New Zealand in Crisis helps solve this problem.

There is no doubt there were problems in New Zealand in 1831 when thirteen northern chiefs wrote to the King asking him to be their protector and guardian. The Europeans had arrived and with them the musket. Those tribes with muskets were attacking and slaughtering those without. It is estimated over half the Maori population were killed by the musket before the treaty as there was no united government or law in New Zealand for protection. Britain sent a Resident, James Busby to bring peace amongst the tribes and settlers but when this failed, it was agreed that New Zealand must become a British Colony if it was to have the law and order between its people Britain had promised.

Over the next 107 years, New Zealand was under the control of the British Government. While some of the rebel tribes felt they had been treated badly by the British government, most of these alleged claims were settled in the 1940’s. In 1947 New Zealand adopted the Statute of Westminster and New Zealand became its own sovereign nation under one flag and one law.

In 1975 Maori felt the government was unfairly treating them and the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 created the Waitangi Tribunal to investigate any further laws that may discriminate against Maori. In 1987 the Fourth Labour Government gave the Waitangi Tribunal powers to investigate claims dating back to 1840, but most of these claims had already had full and final settlements in the 1940’s.

The real problems began when the Fourth Labour Government enacted laws that gave Maori advantages over non-Maori. The Treaty of Waitangi was signed on the 6 February 1840 with a handshake and the words, “He iwi tahi tatou - We are now one people”, but the Fourth Labour Government made our Treaty into a Partnership between Maori and the Crown completely writing all New Zealand citizens out of the Treaty that could not claim a minute trace of Maori ancestry. The Fourth Labour Government then dreamt up Five Principles that the Crown would used to interpret the Treaty. These Principles were never debated by the public and do not reflect the one true principle of the Treaty, “He iwi tahi tatou - We are now one people”.

In 1990 Prime Minister Hon Geoffrey Palmer and Attorney General Hon David Lange realized the terrible mistake the Fourth Labour Government had made and tried to make amends but it was too late, the damage had been done, so they both quit politics, although Sir Geoffrey did state, "It is true the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and all the other statutes, which give explicit recognition to the Treaty are not entrenched. They can be swept away by a simple majority in Parliament”.

We must now elect a Parliament that will sweep away these apartheid statutes.

Ross Baker. Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc. 2011.

NEW ZEALAND IN CRISISPart One – He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people.

5

Any hint of Sovereignty gained under the Declaration of Independence was extinguished when Governor William Hobson made sure a majority of those chiefs that signed the Declaration of Independence also signed the Tiriti o Waitangi giving up all parts of New Zealand to Britain. While the Tiriti o Waitangi obtained Sovereignty of New Zealand to Britain, continuing events since 1840 has confirmed it.

By 1840 law and order in New Zealand was completely out of control. Five major events had caused Maori to ask Britain to intervene. They were: the fear by Ngapuhi that the southern tribes were gaining muskets and would travel north for revenge; a threat France was going to alienate New Zealand; the annihilation of Taranaki by the Waikato; the slaughter of the Moriori on the Chatham Islands and the loss of land to the settlers. The following is a time line of events that culminated in Britain obtaining sovereignty over the entire country and New Zealand became a British Colony under English rule/law.

1820 – 1830 - Ngapuhi Slaughters 60,000 of their Fellow Countrymen

Hongi Hika (Ngapuhi) had just returned from England where he had exchanged all the gifts the King had given him for 300 muskets when passing through Sydney on his return to New Zealand. Hongi Hika and his followers then went on a rampage south, slaughtering an estimated 60,000 of their defenceless, unarmed countrymen for the fun of it, but soon realized the southern tribes were arming themselves and would travel north for utu – revenge and needed protection. As the French, who the Maori feared most had also established themselves at Hokianga and were showing an interest in claiming New Zealand for France, the chiefs wanted to put Britain between them and the French. The chiefs, without any official records of sales or proof of ownership were also selling large areas of land to the settlers/speculators in exchange for muskets etc. Some areas were also sold more than once, which were also causing major problems between the Maori and the settlers. See letter from the two Taranaki chiefs, page 40.

1831 - Waikato Annihilate Taranaki, then Taranaki Slaughtered the Moriori

In 1831 the Waikato travelled south and completely annihilated Taranaki, one-third slaughtered, one-third fled south and the rest taken as slaves. A mere 50 remained in hiding. Nine hundred of the Taranaki that had fled to Wellington then commandeered the brig Rodney and travelled to the Chatham Islands (two trips) where they slaughtered or farmed the peace loving Moriori like sheep into virtual extinction for the next seven years. Moriori by Michael King, page 64.

1831 – Letter from the 13 Chiefs

In 1831 thirteen Northern Chiefs wrote to the King asking him to be their guardian and protector, not only from the French, but also from their own people – the southern tribes. The King acknowledged this request by sending a Resident, James Busby to New Zealand in 1833. See copy of letter from the 13 Chiefs, page 31.1835 – Declaration of Independence

In 1835 James Busby introduced the Declaration of Independence to the northern tribes to give them a form of identity, a united government and a flag under which New

6

Zealand ships could be registered. Thirty-four Ngapuhi chiefs signed this Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration stated they would meet in congress each year for the purpose of forming laws for the dispensation of justice, preservation of peace and good order, the regulation of trade and the sale of land etc, but the ever present inter-tribal tension and fighting took precedence over political co-operation, as always and it was abandoned 12 months later without one congress meeting being held. It finally became evident that the chiefs could never form a united working government. The Declaration could not have given full sovereignty as the chiefs only had power over their individual territories as long as they could defend them. As no united political structure existed within New Zealand at the time and congress never met to ratify the Declaration; it became null and void.

"Even though the declaration asserted sovereignty, Maori, who saw themselves as tribal rather than as members of a nation, would have been unable to exercise full rights as an independent state, there was no indigenous political structure upon which to base a united congress. However, it did introduce Maori to the idea of a legal relationship with Britain and therefore, five years later, to the Treaty of Waitangi". Historian Dr Claudia Orange.

Historian Michael King stating, “That the Declaration had no reality, since there was in fact no national indigenous power structure within New Zealand”. King also pointed out that some of the United Tribes were at war with one another within a year of signing the Declaration.

Historian Paul Moon agreed, “That the Declaration represented a 'regional goodwill agreement rather than a national document of truly constitutional significance'. No Congress ever met”. See copy of the Declaration of Independence, page 32.

It became evident that Maori did not have the ability or will to form a united government to bring law and order to a country completely out of control. 1837 – Call for More Effective Government

In 1837 serious outbreaks of inter-tribal fighting and lawlessness intensified in many parts of New Zealand, but as Busby had no forces (A man-o-war without guns) he could do little to stop it and the Maori Congress had failed to hold even one meeting. The missionaries, settlers, traders and many chiefs wanted more than the half-hearted official commitment represented by Busby and appealed to Britain for a more effective Government. As the inter-tribal fighting increased, the Maori population decreased and vast tracks of land were being sold to the land hungry settlers and the proceeds used to purchase muskets to settle old scores, Britain had to take more control as she had been asked and promised to protect the people and their property in 1831 and again in 1835.

To do this legally, New Zealand had to become a British Colony and for New Zealand to become a British Colony to bring law and order to both Maori and the settlers (“all the people of New Zealand”), Britain had to obtain the chief’s consent to sovereignty over the whole land.

7

For two years the Colonial Office debated the best way to become involved in New Zealand. It was decided, but with extreme reluctance, to send Captain William Hobson, a highly ranked Officer in the British Navy with a good knowledge of New Zealand, to negotiate a treaty with the chiefs to obtain sovereignty over the whole land so Britain could legally set up a government to bring law, order, protection and to investigate and settle land sales, titles and disputes for all the people of New Zealand, settler and Maori alike.

One Sovereignty and one law for all the people of New Zealand - the first time ever for Maori.

1839 - Proclamations

On the 14th January 1840 Sir George Gipps, Governor of New South Wales administered the oaths to Captain William Hobson making him Lieutenant-Governor of New Zealand. On the 30 January 1840, the day after Hobson arrived in the Bay of Islands, he read the Proclamations in accordance with Lord Normanby’s instructions; “Her Majesty has been graciously pleased to direct Letters Patent to be issued, under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, bearing date 17 th June in the year 1839, by which the former boundaries of the colony of New South Wales are so extended to comprehend any part of New Zealand that is or may be acquired in sovereignty by Her Majesty, her heirs or successors” and, “That Her Majesty’s authority had been asserted over British subjects in New Zealand” and, “That Her Majesty did not deem it expedient to acknowledge as valid any titles to land in New Zealand, which were not derived from or confirmed by a Crown grant”. Hobson also called upon all Her Majesty’s subjects to aid and assist him in the execution of his office.

1840 – Te Tiriti o Waitangi

Before Captain William Hobson left Britain, he was fully briefed on what the Treaty must contain. First, he must obtain sovereignty over the whole land, second, all Maori and the settler’s land and property ownership must be verified and titles of ownership given, a first time ever for Maori. Third, any land the Maoris wanted to sell must only be sold to the Queen’s representative, and fourth, the Maoris would be protected and guaranteed access to the same rights and laws as a British Subject. No more – No Less!

Captain William Hobson arrived on the 29 th of January 1840 and went about drafting a treaty as instructed by the Colonial Office with the help of James Freeman his secretary, Busby and the missionaries. Hobson became ill and gave his notes to Busby to complete. On the 4th of February, Hobson had recovered and went ashore to the American Consulate, James Clendon’s house to finalize the treaty with Busby and Clendon. Clendon had also been involved and a signatory to the Declaration of Independence in 1835. Clendon, as American Consulate was also interested in the American people and their assets (whaling and onshore processing plants etc) being protected under British rule by making sure Article 2 included, “all the people of New Zealand” and not just Maori as we are led to believe today. James Busby penned the final draft under Hobson instructions on the 4 th of February 1840. See copy of Final Draft, page 33.

8

At 4 pm on the 4th of February 1840 Hobson delivered the final draft of the Treaty to Rev Henry Williams and his son Edward to translate into the Maori language. At Waitangi on the morning of 5th of February, Hobson, Busby and Williams checked the translation to make sure it represented the instruction Hobson had been given by the Colonial Office before the final draft and the Maori translation were read at 10-00 am to the gathering of chiefs, their followers and the settlers, about 1000 people in total. The Chiefs then discussed the Treaty with Hobson, Busby and the missionaries, giving speeches for and against it for the next five hours. From these speeches, it can be seen that the chiefs had a very good understanding of the treaty. The understanding of both the terms and the consequent benefits to their people was again demonstrated at the Kohimarama Conference 20 years later. The meeting was adjourned for the chiefs to discuss it amongst themselves with another meeting scheduled for February 7. See copy of the chief’s speeches after the reading of the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 5 th of February 1840, page 47.

For the rest of the night the chiefs discussed the treaty with the missionaries at the Te Tii Marae. As Rev Henry Williams recalls, “We gave them but one version, explaining clause by clause, showing the advantages to them of being taken under the fostering care of the British Crown, by which act they would become one people with the British, in suppression of wars, and every lawless act; under one sovereignty and one law, human and divine.”

As the majority of the chiefs gathered agreed that the treaty was to their advantage and should be signed immediately, Hobson was summoned the next morning. While Rev Colenso tried to stop the signing as he believed the chiefs did not fully understand it, Hone Heke dispelled this by immediately stepping forward, being the first of 49 chiefs to sign the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 6th of February 1840 at Waitangi. As each Chief signed, Governor Hobson shook their hand and repeated, “He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people”, the only true principle of the Treaty of Waitangi.

8 February 1840 – 21 Gun Salute

On the 8 February 1840 the H M S Herald fired a 21-gun salute to commemorate the cession to Her Majesty of the right of sovereignty to New Zealand, although sovereignty was not declared until 21 May 1840. This 21-gun salute to commemorate the cession to Her Majesty of the right of sovereignty to New Zealand has continued every year at the Waitangi day celebrations since 1840 without dispute. Written in the HMS Herald’s logbook on the 8 February 1840, “A salute of 21 guns were fired to commemorate the cession to Her Majesty of the right of sovereignty of New Zealand”.

21 May 1840- Governor Hobson Claimed British Sovereignty

Governor Hobson claimed British Sovereignty on the 21 May 1840 over the North Island by Treaty and over the South Island by Discovery. The Proclamations were published in the London Gazette on 2 October 1840 and New Zealand became a British Crown Colony. Captain William Hobson became the first Governor of New Zealand. The Treaty was between two peoples having the authority and agreeing between themselves to wide powers affecting them both, but after the Treaty was signed, the chiefs had given up their individual territories to Her Majesty the Queen in return for protection and one law and one Sovereignty for all the people of New Zealand.

9

Treatise of the Tiriti o Waitangi

PreambleThe Tiriti o Waitangi ceded the chief’s individual territories to Her Majesty the Queen in return for protection and the same rights as the people of England so Britain could form a legal Government under British Sovereignty, English Law. “Nga wahi katoa o Nu Tirani e tukua aianei ki te Kuini - All places/parts of New Zealand which may be given up now or hereafter to the Queen”. See Preamble and Consent Omitted, page 39.

Most Government published Treaty texts today have the Preamble omitted, including the public viewing panels at Te Papa. The Preamble is the essence of the Treaty and explained the reason for a treaty and that all parts of New Zealand must be given up to the Queen for Britain to form a legal Government to bring law and order to all the people of New Zealand. Legally, the Preamble is part of the Tiriti o Waitangi. Without the Preamble, the Articles relate to nothing. The Articles were the laws that must be obeyed if the chief’s decided to sign the Treaty and give up their territories to Her Majesty the Queen.

Article 1“Ko nga Rangatira o te Wakaminenga me nga Rangatira katoa hoki ki hai I uru ki taua wakaminenga ka tuku rawa atu ki te Kuini o Ingarani aka tona atu-te-Kawanatanga katoa o o ratou wenua - The chiefs of the Assembly, and all the chiefs also who have not joined in that Assembly, give up entirely to the Queen of England forever all the Government of their land.”

Article 1. The Chiefs gave up entirely to the Queen the Government of their land.

Article 2“Ko te Kaini o Ingaranui ka wakarite ka wakaae ki nga Rangatira ki hapu ki tangata katoa o nu Tirani te tino rangatiratanga o ratou wenua kainga me o taonga katoa - The Queen confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and the tribes (Maori) and to all the people of New Zealand (settlers), the possession of their lands, their settlements and all their property”.

Article 2. Gave tino rangatiratanga to “all the people of New Zealand” irrespective of race, colour or creed. This was requested by American Consul, James Clendon and clarified when Rev Henry Williams translated the Tiriti o Waitangi from Governor Hobson’s final draft. Article 2 related to, “all the people of New Zealand”, irrespective of race, colour or creed living in New Zealand and those yet to come.

Article 3“Hei wakaritenga mai hoki tenei mo te wakaaetanga ki te Kawanatanga o te Kuini-Ka tiakina e te Kuini o Ingarani hga tangata maori katoa o Nu Tirani ka tukua ki a ratou nga tikanga katoa rite tahi ki ana mea ki nga tangata o Ingarani - This arrangement for the consent to the Government of the Queen. The Queen of England will protect all the Maoris of New Zealand. All the rights will be given to them the same as her doings to the people of England”.

10

Article 3. Confirmed there would be one law, the same law for all the people of New Zealand – English Law - a Law based on the Magna Carta, the Law of Nature.

There is no mention of Partnership, Principles, Foreshore, Forests, Fisheries, Seabed or Customary Rights in the Tiriti o Waitangi. The Crown held the Foreshore and Seabed in trust for all the people of New Zealand as in England.

“If you think these things are wrong, then blame your ancestors who gave away their rights when they were strong”. Sir Apirana Ngata. M.A., Ll.B., Lit.D. 1922

Final Draft is Lost

After Hobson and Williams had gathered further signatures, Hobson became ill again and the final draft was misplaced, although this was of no concern at the time as Hobson only authorised one treaty to be signed by the chiefs and that was Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the Maori language. The government’s English text of the Treaty used today is not the final draft and had nothing to do with the document the chief’s signed at Waitangi on the 6th of February 1840. Hobson’s secretary, James Freeman, who was authorised to make ‘Royal Style’ copies for overseas dispatch, compiled the English text from the rejected draft notes. Freeman made several of these English versions, which differed from each other but none of which had any legal standing as he had compiled them from Busby’s earlier rejected notes. See copy of Final Draft, page 33.

While it was of no concern at the time, Freeman’s text has since been used as the official English version to give privilege to Maori and to make Rev Henry William’s and his son’s translation seemed incompetent. The Tiriti o Waitangi was not translated from Freeman’s compiled English text but is being used today as the official English text and is attached to the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act. The Tiriti o Waitangi signed on the 6 th of February 1840 makes no mention of “Forests or Fisheries” and includes, “all the people of New Zealand” in Article 2.

There is Only One Treaty – Tiriti o Waitangi

There is only one Treaty of Waitangi as Governor Hobson stated in a letter to Major Bunbury when despatching him to collect further signatures from the southern tribes, "The treaty which forms the base of all my proceedings was signed at Waitangi on the 6th February 1840, by 52 chiefs, 26 of whom were of the federation, and formed a majority of those who signed the Declaration of Independence. This instrument I consider to be de facto the treaty, and all signatures that are subsequently obtained are merely testimonials of adherence to the terms of that original document". Governor Hobson never made or authorised an English version of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The only version Hobson authorised to be signed by the chiefs was in the Maori language and was signed on the 6 th of February 1840 at Waitangi. All others were “merely testimonials of adherence to the terms of that original document".

International Recognition

There is no denying that Britain legally obtained sovereignty of New Zealand as it was recognised and agreed to by the major powers at the time, especially France and

11

America. France also wanted sovereignty of New Zealand but accepted defeat on the 20 July 1840; “That sovereignty had been procured in a manner such as could be approved by other nations”. If sovereignty had not been obtained fairly, morally and legally, France would have challenged it.

1831 – Tribal Lore to English Law

Maori had been at war with each other for hundreds of years, so it was never going to end over night. War was a way of life, a sport amongst the Maori tribes to show their mana/power or for survival. To expect them to stop this inter-tribal fighting overnight, especially now they had muskets to settle old scores would be an impossibility; therefore would take time. Only a strong Governor with forces could break this pattern to bring law, order and unity between all the people of New Zealand. Most tribes were peaceful and law abiding and became very good citizens as soon as the Treaty was signed, only a few rebel tribes for various reasons did not honour the Treaty and resisted British sovereignty. It is very unfair to the people of New Zealand that did honour the Treaty and helped develop and civilize New Zealand, to be forced by government to compensate those that did not.

As the land was now governed under one law and one flag, the Imperial Troops were brought in to stop the fighting between the rebel tribes to bring law and order to all the people of New Zealand. It was also thought that if that if the Troops were not brought in to quell the inter-tribal fighting, the Maoris would soon destroy themselves. Many Maori joined the Imperial Troops and fought along side them in the rebel’s wars, as they did not agree with the rebel’s actions. It is estimated there were sixty times more Maori killed in the tribal wars than fighting the Imperial Troops. The Imperial Troops were used only to bring law, order and British sovereignty, not to take land. These wars were very costly and were not the fault of the Imperial or Colonial government, therefore the government had to confiscate land from the rebel tribes that continued to breach the Treaty to meet the cost of the wars and to show there was only one law and one flag for all the people of New Zealand. The wars ended without a true victory to either side with peace being achieved by the rebels accepting the advantages the Treaty gave. They decided it was better to accept the law and protection the Treaty gave than to be constantly at odds with the rest of their fellow countrymen.

In 1844 after the missionaries had Christianised the Waikato and the Governor had paid Waikato for Taranaki, the Wesleyan missionaries led the Taranaki slaves back to their homelands. Once the Taranaki that had fled to Wellington saw that the slaves had returned, they also wanted to return to their homelands. Te Whiti wrote to the Governor and the Governor allowed them to return as long as they promised to return peacefully and to stay on the northern side of the Waitara River, as he did not want fighting between them and the now despised slaves. The Southern returnees broke their promise, crossed the river and fighting developed killing many of the ex-slaves, innocent settlers, their families and destroying or confiscating their farms. The Waikato then joined the Taranaki as they declared, “Taranaki was the place to fight the British”. The Imperial Troops were brought in and eventually peace was settled over Taranaki with land being confiscated. Over the next 20 years, land was confiscated in various parts of New Zealand as payment for the troops, which had to be brought in to bring law and order to the tribes still practicing inter-tribal warfare. Many tribes fought with the British

12

troops as they also wanted the law, order and peace asked for and promised by the Treaty.

Land Confiscations

For nearly twenty years the Imperial troops fought the rebel Maoris at Taranaki, Waikato, and Tauranga. At this time, large areas of land were confiscated as payment for the costly wars, although many areas were returned soon after with compensation paid in some cases. Many innocent settlers lost their lives and land at this time, but their descendents have never had their land returned or been paid compensation. The wars cost the government 400,000 pounds in 1861, far more than if the land had been bought in peaceful times. In most cases the Maoris accepted these confiscations at the time. They fought and lost and therefore, had to pay the price. This in itself is Maori custom – plunder to avenge a wrong. The Imperial Troops at no time fought to destroy the Maoris; they fought to bring law and order to a small group of rebels. The majority of Maori were very good citizens, it was only a few as it is today, who were making it difficult for the majority.

“Some have said these confiscations were wrong and that they contravened the Treaty of Waitangi, but the chief’s placed in the hands of the Queen of England, the Sovereignty and authority to make laws. Some sections of the Maori people violated that authority, war arose and blood was spilled. The law came into operation and land was taken in payment. This in itself is Maori custom – revenge – plunder to avenge a wrong. It was their chiefs who ceded that right to the Queen. The confiscations cannot therefore be objected to in the light of the Treaty”. Sir Apirana Ngata, M.A., Ll.B.D. M.P., Minister of Native Affairs, 1922.

Many innocent settlers and their families also lost their farms as well as their lives during these tribal wars, but descendants have never receive compensation or a Government funded tribunal to hear their grievances as have Maori.

1860 - Kohimarama Conference

The Kohimarama Conference was held in Auckland in July 1860 and was attended by over 200 chiefs mainly from the North Island. It was one of the largest and the most influential Maori gatherings ever held. The conference revealed the nature of Maori comprehension of the Treaty signed 20 years earlier; in fact it was referred to as a covenant between Maori and European, not Maori and the Crown. Some chiefs were afraid the government might use the King Movement in the Waikato to abrogate the Treaty, a threat that had been made by the Governor and argued in favour of a renewed commitment to the Treaty. “Do not consent that the Treaty should be for the Europeans alone, but let us take it for ourselves. Let this meeting be joined to the Treaty of Waitangi, let us urge upon the Government not to withhold it from us”. The Conference finished with a resolution passed unanimously at the last session. “That this conference takes cognisance of the fact that several chiefs, members thereof, are pledged to each other to do nothing inconsistent with their declared recognition of the Queen’s sovereignty, and of the unions of the two races”. 1865 – Definition of Maori

13

With the intermarriage between the races, the Native Land Act of 1865 defined a Maori as, “An aboriginal Native and shall include all half-castes and their descendants by a Native”. As Maori have continued to intermarry with other races of their own free will and their Maori ancestry has become further and further diluted, so has the definition of Maori until today they are defined as, “A person of the Maori race of New Zealand and includes any descendant of such a person”. There is too much foreign blood in all Maori today for the Waitangi Tribunal or Government to attempt to compensate this group of New Zealand Citizen at the expense of others. The degree of intermarriage alone makes it imperative for the Government to come to its senses; Maori are no longer the distinct race of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840.

1869 – Official Translation by the Native Department in 1869.

An official translation was made of the Tiriti o Waitangi by Mr T E Young of the Native Department in 1869 for the government and is virtually word perfect to Hobson’s final draft found in 1989 and translated by the Rev Henry Williams and his son Edward into the Tiriti o Waitangi. Young’s translation is virtually word for word and length to the Tiriti o Waitangi and the final draft found in 1989, except the final draft is dated the 4 th of February 1840 and the phrase “all the people of New Zealand” in the Preamble and Article 3 is not found in the Tiriti o Waitangi or any back translation. Rev Williams change this in the Tiriti o Waitangi to “hapus/Maoris of New Zealand” to clarify Hobson’s final draft. While these three documents had never met until 1989, they match each other perfectly in word and meaning. There is no doubt the document found in 1989 was the final draft that the Rev Henry Williams and his son used to translate the Treaty of Waitangi into the Maori language, Te Tiriti o Waitangi but government refuses to accept this as it would completely destroy the Fourth Labour Government’s reforms and discriminatory legislation that future Government have continued to observe. See copy of the official translation of the Tiriti o Waitangi by the Native Department, page 38.

1907 – Colony of New Zealand was replaced with Dominion of New Zealand.

1911 – New Zealand Coat of Arms.

14

The New Zealand Coat of Arms is the oficial symbol of New Zealand. The initial Coat of Arms was granted by King George V on the 26 August 1911, and the current version was granted by Queen Elizabeth ll in 1956. In 1956, ‘Onward’ was replaced with ‘New Zealand’ and was approved by Her Majesty the Queen. A traditional expression of national identity, the New Zealand Coat of Arms proclaims the sovereign nature of New Zealand and the authority of the Government. The Coat of Arms can be seen on a variety of documents and papers of constitutional and national significance, ranging from Acts of Parliament, Proclamations, Passports and the logo on all Ministers’ letters etc. including the Maori Party. It also features on Her Majesty’s personal flag for New Zealand, the Queen’s Service Medal and the badge of the Order of New Zealand. The New Zealand Coat of Arms depicts the Crown at the top with Maori and European on the same level below the Crown with New Zealand underneath. The Tiriti gave all the people/citizens of New Zealand the same rights under the Crown.                CROWN

                                    Southern Cross                                       The Sea                European                 Farming                Maori                                        Agriculture                                Mining and Industry                                   NEW ZEALAND

1917 – Governor became Governor General of New Zealand

1930 – 1940’s – Full and Final Settlements

During 1930’s many full and final settlements were reached with Maori. Many meetings/hui were held around the country and the tribes and government agreed to many claims with full and final settlements being made. From the 1975 Government White Paper, the following Maori Trust Boards were set up where little or no tax is paid. Ngai Tahu (Land), Te Arawa (Rororua lakes), Tuwharetoa (Taupo lakes), Taranaki (Confiscated land), Tainui (Confiscated land), Whatatohea (Confiscated land), Waikaremoana (Confiscated land and Lake Waikaremoana), Aorangi (Land), Taitokerau (Land), Tuhoe (Land and Lake Waikaremoana) to name a few. Most of these tribes have again lodged claims with the apartheid Waitangi Tribunal and have been successful again by using distorted evidence, a fact admitted by the Chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal, Chief Judge Eddie Durie. See New Zealand Herald 17 November 1999, page 44).

These claims were fully and finally settled when the Government was still under the control of the British Government and were either lump sum payments, annual payments for a set time or payments in perpetuity. They were full and final settlements, which were negotiated between the tribe and normally a Maori Member of Parliament. Many of these claims have been renegotiated many times since, a fact overlooked by the Waitangi Tribunal and Government that continue to accept these claims as if full and final settlements had never been made. Richard Hill of the Justice Department

15

investigated and reported on these full and final settlements for the Lange Government in 1989.While these alleged claims were the responsibility of the British Government prior to 1947, the New Zealand Government continues to settle these generation claims over and over again using money from taxpayers that played no part in their creation. Most of the claimants today have more of the ancestry they claim created these alleged grievances than their Maori ancestry, but this is again overlooked by the Waitangi Tribunal and Government when recommending, negotiating or settling claims. Most settlements are made to Maori Trust Boards that pay no or little tax amounting to millions of dollars per year.

1947 – Statute of Westminster

The Tiriti o Waitangi was signed between 500 chiefs and the British Crown in 1840 and New Zealand became a British Colony under the control of the British Government. On the 25 November 1947, New Zealand adopted the Statute of Westminster, passed by the British Government in 1931. The Statute granted complete autonomy to New Zealand in foreign as well as domestic affairs. Prior to this, the New Zealand Government was under the control of the British Government; therefore any injustices created by Government against Maori before 1947 were the responsibility of the British Government, although most of these injustices had full and final settlements in the late 1930's and early 1940's. After 1947, all the people of New Zealand became New Zealand Citizens under one flag and one law, irrespective of race, colour or creed, but since this time, part-Maori, through the Waitangi Tribunal have gained advantages over their fellow New Zealand Citizens never intended or envisaged by those that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840.

1949 – New Zealand Passports

In 1949 The British Nationality and New Zealand Citizenship Act created a separate New Zealand citizenship. Passports issued prior to 1949 had the British Coat of Arms on a dark blue front cover with British Passport on the top and Dominion of New Zealand on the bottom. Passports issued after 1948, had the New Zealand Coat of Arms on the cover and New Zealand Passport at the top (although the words British Subject remained in New Zealand passports until 1977, along with New Zealand citizen). In 2009 Urewhenua Aotearoa and a silver fern were added to the now black front cover of New Zealand Passports with its New Zealand Coat of Arms. Customary Rights Extinguished in 1840.

While New Zealand accepted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, it must be remembered, the Maori chiefs gave up the government of their territories to Her Majesty the Queen, therefore tribal lore and customary rights/titles were extinguished when they signed the treaty in 1840 and accepted the same rights as the people of England. No more – No less. After the Treaty was signed, titles to land guaranteed in Article Two "to all the people of New Zealand" were issued under English Law to those that could prove ownership. Any titles that include the foreshore and seabed must be honoured by the people of New Zealand but the foreshore and seabed, that remained in Crown ownership/trust cannot be acquired under customary rights/title because the

16

Chiefs gave up that right in 1840 when they signed the Tiriti o Waitangi. It is also debatable whether Customary Rights existed in England in 1840.

What Went So Horribly Wrong?Part Two – The Fourth Labour Government.

Based on extracts from Sir Geoffrey Palmers Book, “New Zealand's Constitution in Crisis”, 1992. 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act

The Treaty of Waitangi Act created the Waitangi Tribunal, which was set up to hear and recommend claims after 1975 as previous claims had been fully and finally settled in the 1930/40’s. While the Tribunal recommended settlements to Government, they were not binding, although the Government seldom refused. The taxpayer’s fund the Tribunal as well as most of the research and legal fees that are seldom if ever questioned by the Crown lawyers or its researchers. New Zealand Citizens that cannot claim a minute trace of Maori ancestry cannot lodge a claim, participate, cross-examine claimants or their researchers or lodge an appeal. Most hearings are held on a marae where Maori protocol is observed and oral evidence in many cases over-rules documented evidence, especially if it is from a Maori elder.

The Waitangi Tribunal breaches Article 3 of the Treaty of Waitangi. The Tribunal is also taxpayer funded and for the benefit of part-Maori only. 1979 - Hon Geoffrey Palmer Enters Politics. In 1979 Geoffrey Palmer entered New Zealand politics after studying United States constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. This was at a time when the American civil rights revolution was at its hight, which was part of his studies. He also went to university with Chief Judge Eddie Durie, former Chief Judge of the Maori Land Court and Chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal. From his book, “New Zealand's Constitution in Crisis”, Geoffrey Palmer states, "At the University of Chicago I lived in a ghetto, on the one side of the street only whites lived, on the other side only blacks lived. Relations between the two groups were strained. Marches were taking place in the south to force racial equality". There is no comparison between our history and race relations in New Zealand compared to the people of America - absolutely none!  While there have been grievances against the Crown by Maori, they have not been between the races of New Zealand. Most New Zealanders have lived in harmony with each other, intermarriage between the races a common factor. We had the Tiriti o Waitangi in New Zealand giving the same rights to all the people of New Zealand, irrespective of race, colour or creed - not so in America – the black people were slaves. It is impossible to compare New Zealand's history and race relations with those in America.    1983 - Fourth Labour Government opens "A Can of Worms" based on American Civil Rights  In the Fourth Labour Government, the Hon Geoffrey Palmer became Attorney General, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party and Chairman of the Policy Council. Geoffrey

17

Palmer continues, "The factor that shaped my intellectual approach to Maori issues in New Zealand was my experience in the United States...... It was on this background that I drew, and with adaptations used as the basis for legislation to advance the interests of the Maori minority in New Zealand.  I did some researched on the outstanding grievances and it did not appear to me that looking into them would open the can of worms, which many feared. I took the view that the claims may take a decade to deal with, that it would cause some anguish but it would be worth it in the end".

Nearly 3 decades later, billions of dollars and hundreds of alleged claims still to be settled with no end in sight, how wrong he was. If it is allowed to continue the anguish this “can of worms” has created could very easily lead to violence.  Geoffrey Palmer teamed up with the Minister of Maori Affairs, Hon Koro Wetere. "We were able to accomplish a lot together in this area and I have a lot of respect for him. Why not give a body equipped with powerful research (Waitangi Tribunal) tools and powers of inquiry to look into old grievances and powers to recommend what should be done. It would be for the government of the day to decide what to do about the recommendations. A body, which looked at the evidence fully and fairly, sifted through the history and measured it against the treaty would give Maori an outlet for their grievances. The courts would give very heavy weight to the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal, which were of great value". 

Government power was shifting to the Waitangi Tribunal and the Courts without the public's knowledge or consent. How can it be fair when only 12% of the population can participate while the other 88% pay the bills without the right to participate, cross examine or appeal? 

1985 - Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act. While Prime Minister David Lange was overseas in Europe, Acting Leader Geoffrey Palmer introduce the 1985 Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act to hear claims dating back to 1840, which completely overlooked the fact that most of these claims had been fully and finally settled in the 1930's and 40's when the New Zealand Government was under the control of the British Government. This Act also stated, "Any claim that was or is, inconsistent with the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi". This was the first time the Principles of the Treaty had ever been mentioned and while they had never been debated by the public or defined, reference to them started appearing in many Acts of Parliament once the 1985 Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act was passed in 1985. But what were the Principles of the Treaty?     

The 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act and its amendment are the biggest injustices ever created by any Government on its people as it allows one group of New Zealand Citizens the privilege of a taxpayer funded apartheid Tribunal to claim against their fellow New Zealand Citizens using Principles and a Partnership dreamt up by Ministers and bureaucrats using false information and a false Treaty document.    1986 – The Five Principles wrote the Majority of New Zealanders Out of the Treaty of Waitangi

18

The Principles have never been publicly debated and first appeared publicly in a 1989 booklet entitled, “The Five Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi”, three years after they first appeared in legislation. They set out the principles by which the Government would act when dealing with Treaty issues. Most Acts of Parliament now contain references not to the Treaty but to the Principles of the Treaty. There is a vast difference between the Treaty and the Principles, which were dreamt up by Geoffrey Palmer and his bureaucrat colleagues using out of date information and false Treaty documents.

In 1986, Sir Geoffrey Palmer instigated the Principles, which effectively wrote the majority of New Zealanders out of the Treaty and made it into a Partnership between Maori and the Crown. This was never the intention of the Treaty or those that signed it. The Maori activists and the Courts grasped the Partnership with both hands and the can of worms was open. New Zealand would never be the same again; the Fourth Labour Government had now created a divided Nation of Maori and the others.

1986 - Changing the Bureaucrats Attitude to the Treaty. In 1986 Geoffrey Palmer and Koro Wetere teamed up again to change the bureaucrat’s attitude to the Treaty of Waitangi. They got together a Cabinet Paper, which required Government Departments to take Treaty Principles consideration into account when making policy. In June 1986, Cabinet: (1) "Agreed that all future legislation referred to cabinet at the policy approval stage should draw attention to any implications for recognition of the Principles of the Treaty". Not to the Treaty, but to the Principles dreamt up by people only interested in pushing their own hidden agendas. 1986 - State Owned Enterprise Act. In 1986 the Labour Government decided to change most of our trading departments into corporations run on commercial principles for profit. Maori became concerned that this big re-organization would have the effect of denying them Crown assets that passed out of the Crown's hands to the State Owned Enterprises, which then could not be given back under the Treaty to Maori claimants. The Government opposed taking this to the Privy Council with Geoffrey Palmer stating, "I was utterly opposed to the Privy Council having anything to say at all about what the Treaty meant in New Zealand".  Was Geoffrey Palmer afraid the Privy Council would say that the Treaty gave, all the people of New Zealand the same rights, irrespective of race, colour or creed and therefore the Principles and Partnership were a fallacy?   Hon Geoffrey Palmer, now the Minister of State Owned Enterprises made the following amendment to the State Owned Enterprise Act, (9). Treaty of Waitangi. "Nothing in this Act shall permit the Crown to act in a manner that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi". This Act stated that any State asset sold by the Crown would have a clause stating resumption to the Crown if a claim was successful. The Waitangi Tribunal recommendations in this instance were legally binding on the Crown. In Geoffrey Palmers book, “New Zealand’s Constitution in Crisis” he admits, “I thought this a rather elegant legal solution myself”, but he later admitted, “I was wrong”. The apartheid Waitangi Tribunal and the Courts now controlled the Crown's assets, our assets and Palmer thought at the time this was, “a rather elegant solution”. 

19

1987 – Out of Order Court of Appeal Establishes ‘Principles and Partnership’.

The 1987 Court of Appeal between the New Zealand Maori Council and the Attorney General (CA 54/87) stated, “The Treaty of Waitangi has been primarily interpreted in the New Zealand Courts and this Appeal was significant in establishing the modern views on the Principles of the Treaty”. This Court also confirmed the Treaty was a Partnership between Maori and the Crown.

On page 663 of the Appeal document we find instead of using an official text of the Treaty, this Court used an unauthorised text by Sir Hugh Kawharu, which he calls his, “Attempt at a reconstruction of the literal translation of the Maori text”. This is unbelievable; this Court decided to use an, “Attempt at a reconstruction of the literal translation of the Maori text” by a man representing people who were to gain most from its outcome. The Court stating, “It was put before us on behalf of the applicants. The Crown likewise accepted it for the purpose of this case”. Here we have the Crown accepting a bogus translation to interpret the Treaty and establish the unfounded “Five Principle of the Treaty” and a “Partnership between Maori and the Crown”. This Court of Appeal’s findings were a sham based on a bogus translation and must be ruled out of order. See the Five Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi, page 41.

There was Never a Partnership Between Maori and the Crown

Why do the Politicians, the Crown, the Courts and the media keep claiming a Partnership when there was no united Maori authority or all-over entity with the power to take on a Partnership? Maori were simply individual, scattered fighting tribes in no way equal to the status of a sovereign country under unified rule. It is unbelievable to even think that the most powerful nation in the world at the time would contemplate a partnership with some uncivilised natives, constantly at war with each other at the bottom of the world. Queen Victoria would never have agreed to a partnership with Maori in 1840.

1989 - The Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi In March 1989 three years after the Principles started appearing in legislation, Hon Geoffrey Palmer put forward a Cabinet paper seeking permission for a group of officials to prepare a paper setting out the Principles of the Treaty. Cabinet publish, “The Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi” on the 4th of July 1989. Principle 4 stating the Treaty was now a Partnership between Maori and the Crown, therefore writing the majority of New Zealanders out of the Treaty. Palmer stating,  "The work that went into the Principles were based on scholarly analysis of all the material available on the Treaty, including the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal and the judicial decisions up to this time”.  At the time the final draft had not been found; therefore "the scholarly analysis of all material available on the Treaty" that created the Principle and Partnership was obsolete a few months later when the final draft was found. The Principles and Partnership were now based on false information and false Treaty documents.

20

No Partnership and the Principles are a Fallacy. While the Fourth Labour Government now allowed claims to date back to 1840, created Five Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi, accepted the Treaty as a Partnership between Maori and the Crown and had written the majority of New Zealanders out of the Treaty of Waitangi, the final draft proved this completely wrong. The Tiriti o Waitangi was never a Partnership between Maori and the Crown. There is only one valid principle. “He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people”.  There was only one valid Principle agreed to by those that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in1840 "He iwi tahi tatou - We are now one people". The Principle for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi, are only opinions dreamt up by a group of bureaucrats based on false information. They have no relationship to the Tiriti o Waitangi's one principle of "He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people".  

1989 Fisheries Act  The Waitangi Tribunal sent an interim finding to the Minister of Fisheries on the 30 February 1987, which in effect said that if the fishing quota for commercial purposes were issued, the Crown would be in breach of its Treaty obligation since the Treaty guaranteed the tribes "full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their... Fisheries...". There is no mention in the Tiriti o Waitangi that over 500 chiefs signed that they had "full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Fisheries...". In 1989, the Government ended up giving Maori 20% of the fishing quota and $100 million dollars of taxpayer's funds, plus customary rights to exceed fish limits. The Waitangi Tribunal had used and the government had again accepted a false Treaty document. This was just one of many Acts that have been passed by Governments using a false version of the Treaty of Waitangi.   

1989 - The Final Draft is Found. Six months after “The Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi” appeared, John and Beryl Littlewood (Needham) were going through their deceased mother's estate when they found a document entitled, “The Treaty of Waitangi”. This document, which was named the Littlewood treaty document by the Government’s historians, created great excitement amongst the amateur and professional historians. Was it the long lost final draft of the Treaty of Waitangi? 

After two years of working on the authenticity of the final draft/Littlewood treaty document, Government paid historian, Dr Claudia Orange announced, "It was just another translation of the Maori version by an unknown author".  From its pedigree this is not so, the fact is, the Government did not want the people of New Zealand to know they had made a terrible mistake, therefore forced its paid historians and Government funded websites to misinform the public of its true identity. The Government had used false information to divide the people of New Zealand by stating the Treaty was a Partnership between Maori and the Crown. It had then created Five Principles that

21

misrepresented the Treaty to allow those that could claim some minute trace of Maori ancestry to steal assets from their fellow New Zealanders. The Government also did not want the Privy Council to get involved and tell the public “what the Treaty really meant”! 

On close inspection in 1990 I found it was dated the 4th of February 1840, the day the final draft was written. It was written on paper predating 1840 with a W Tucker watermark and it had the word soverignty spelt wrongly. Busby had spelt sovriegnty wrongly in his draft notes. Henry Littlewood had been James Clendon’s solicitor in New Zealand shortly after the Treaty was signed, therefore could have quite easily come into his possession and been passed down through the family. From its pedigree, this document could only be the final draft Hobson had given to the Rev Henry Williams to translate into the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 4th of February 1840. It was virtually word for word to the Tiriti o Waitangi and the Native Departments translation. See copy of article that appeared in “He iwi Tahi tatou – We are now one people” in 1992, page 34.  The final draft was virtually word for word to the translation Rev Henry Williams had made, except for the Preamble and Article 3 of the translation having the phase, "people of New Zealand" substituted for "chiefs and hapus" in the Preamble and "maoris" in Article 3. "All the people of New Zealand" was unchanged in Article 2 as it referred to “all the people of New Zealand”, irrespective of race, colour or creed.  No back translation has "people of New Zealand" in the Preamble or Article 3 and all are dated the 6th of February 1840, so it could not be a back translation from the Maori text. "Forests and fisheries" were not mentioned in the final draft and also not mentioned in the Tiriti o Waitangi signed on the 6th of February 1840. 

From extensive research in 1990 and published in my book, “He iwi tahi tatou – We are now one people” and the continuing research and documented evidence by historian Martin Doutré and published in, “The Littlewood Treaty – The true English text of the Treaty found”, this could only be the final draft. The English text that the Government has been using was not the document used to translate the Treaty into Maori. Governor Hobson never made or authorised an English version of the Treaty of Waitangi and it would have been impossible to translate the English version attached to the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act into the Tiriti o Waitangi. The document found in 1989 by John and Beryl Littlewood (Needham) was the final draft that was given to the Rev Henry Williams and his son Edward on the 4th of February 1840 to translate into the Tiriti o Waitangi. It was also the document Governor Hobson had read in conjunction with the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 5 February 1840 and the document he had given to James Clendon to make a copy and sent to his superiors in America. See Final Draft, page 33.

Partnership and Principles a Fallacy The final draft/Littlewood treaty document threw a completely different light on, "the work that went into the Principles that were based on scholarly analysis of all the material available on the Treaty". The final draft showed there was no Fisheries, Forests or Partnership in the Treaty and the newly announced Principles based on a few bureaucrats personal opinions, were a fallacy. The Fourth Labour Government created a divided Nation based on false and obsolete information! 

1990 – Governor General and Government Differ Over the Treaty

22

On the Australian ABC Four Corners report in 1990 called, “Trick or Treaty” the Government and the Governor General differed over the Treaty. The Attorney General, the Hon David Lange stating, “Did Queen Victoria for a moment think of forming a Partnership with a number of signatures, a number of thumb prints and 500 people. Queen Victoria was not that sort of person”. Prime Minister, the Hon Geoffrey Palmer warned against, “making literal interpretations from the Treaty”, stating, “The meaning of the Treaty in terms of its operational consequences now, was far from clear. In fact, it’s a documents that is so vague that that is its primary problem”. But Mr Palmer, you had just clarified the Treaty with your Five Principles making it into a Partnership in our legislation. Why the complete about face from our two leaders? See copy of New Zealand Herald article on “Trick or Treaty”, page 43.

The Governor General, Rev Sir Paul Reeves, of Maori descent joined Maori leaders by hinting that, “Injustices under the Treaty would lead to violence”! Here we have our Governor General, the Queen’s representative joining Maori leaders in violence if Maori did not get their own way. When Tainui leader Bob Mahuta was asked, “ If they would take it by force”, he replied, “Naturally yes”. Former labour Party Minister, Matiu Rata, stating, “When Maori people’s faith in the rule of law was destroyed, it introduces such thoughts of civil war”. A major fear of any Government and its Ministers.

1990 - Palmer and Lange About Face The only explanation for Palmer and Lange's about face in March 1990; they had just received Richard Hill’s report into the full and final settlements in the 1930’s - 1940s’ as well as being briefed on the final draft/Littlewood treaty document and realised the terrible mistake they had made.  What other reason could there have been? Up until 1990, they had both believed the Treaty was a Partnership between Maori and the Crown and had created the Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty to address alleged Maori claims, but now found most had already been settled and there was no Fisheries, Forests or Partnership in the Tiriti o Waitangi.   1990 - Palmer and Lange Quit Politics.  A few months after the ABC report, Prime Minister, the Hon Geoffrey Palmer and Attorney General, Hon David Lange disappeared from politics at the height of their political careers. Had they been pushed for changing their minds about the Partnership and Principles and the fear of a civil war as stated on the ABC programme? Or had they realised they had made a terrible mistake but it was now too late to make amends and so they both simply quit. Two leaders at the height of their careers do not just quit politics overnight without a very good reason.

In Geoffrey Palmers final two sentences in the Introduction of his book, he states, "For the situation we are in, I blame neither my former opponents nor my friends. It is a book written with sorrow, although with conviction that things can change ". Unfortunately, they have got worse - far worse Mr Palmer. Since 1990, I have written to both the Hon Geoffrey Palmer and the late Hon David Lange on numerous occasions asking whether they quit politics because of their terrible mistake or were they pushed. While they have never replied to my letters they have never denied it. While David Lange has taken it to the grave, we still await Mr Palmer’s reply; we believe the people of New Zealand deserve an answer.

23

 While in power the Hon Geoffrey Palmer and the Hon David Lange allowed the apartheid Waitangi Tribunal to hear claims dating back to 1840 and introduced the Principles and Partnership, the biggest injustices ever forced on the people of New Zealand by any Government. We believe, instead of staying on in politics and correcting their mistakes, they took the easy way out and quit!   The Fourth Labour Government successfully destroyed our country using false information and false treaty documents. Successive Governments have continued down this same path but no more so than Prime Minister, Hon John Key and Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, the Hon Chris Finlayson. 

Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

Prime Minister Key’s accepted of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. The New Zealand Government and the United Nations does not have a definition of Indigenous people. The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People gives people the right to self-identification, therefore they do not have to prove, who they are, where they came from, or when they arrived and our Prime Minister, the Hon John Key fell for it on our behalf, hook, line and sinker.

Negotiations Held in Secret

"What any man, whoever he may be, orders on his own is not law". Jean-Jacques Rousseau, book 11, Chapter 1, Treatise of Social Contract, 1763. While the 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act allowed for negotiations between the claimants and the Crown, this seldom happened until National took office in 2008 and the Hon Christopher Finlayson became Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. Many of the claims that had failed or stalled with the Waitangi Tribunal are now negotiated in secret with the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations. These negotiations are completely out of control with one man holding an open taxpayer's chequebook.

2000 - Final Draft’s Author is Revealed in Secret In 2000 Government historian Dr Phil Parkinson admitting in a Government internal memo, "The final draft known as the Littlewood treaty document, was in James Busby's hand"! It is time they came clean and admitted the Littlewood document is the final draft; the public deserves the truth from its taxpayer paid historians and Ministers.

It is unbelievable to even think that the most powerful Nation in the world at the time would contemplate a partnership with some uncivilised natives, constantly at war with each other at the bottom of the world. There is no partnership in the Tiriti o Waitangi; it made “all the people of New Zealand” irrespective of race, colour or creed, the same under English Law.

1993 – Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act

The 1993 Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act was to stop land in private ownership being recommended by the Waitangi Tribunal or acquired by the Crown to settle a Maori claim. This Act was breached when the Crown purchase Mr Allan Titford’s farm at

24

Maunganui Bluff without justification for Te Roroa’s alleged claim in 1995,.an alleged claim without one document of evidence that cost the taxpayers $3.5 million. See letter from Ngapuhi elder, Graham Rankin – “Te Roroa were only squatters”, page 45.

New Zealand Taken from Under our Noses.

While we fight over the Treaty causing land and assets values to fall in New Zealand, foreign investors are having a field day. They are buying up large areas of our most profitable land and assets at well below their true value. If we continue down this path, one day we will wake up and New Zealand will no longer be ours. One of the main reasons the chiefs signed the Treaty was to stop France from alienating New Zealand. We agreed to become “all one people” to fight the common enemy to save our country for ourselves. Since then we have fought together in wars all around the world to keep this freedom. Unless we unite again as one, we will loose our own country to foreigners.

Maori Trust Boards

From the 1975 Government White Paper, there were 11 functioning Maori Trust Boards set up by various Statutes to invest, expend or otherwise administer monies paid to various tribes by Government in respect to claims of different kinds that had full and final settlements in the 1930/40’s. In 1975 these included, Te Arawa, Tuwharetoa, Taranaki, Tainui, NgaiTahu, Whatatohea, Waikaremoana, Aorangi, Taitokerau and Tuhoe. Since this time, there are now hundreds of Maori Trust Boards that pay no or very little tax. Many of these should be investigated by the IRD.

Financial accounts of the Ngai Tahu Charitable Group obtained by Mountain Scene give some idea of how much the South Island iwi saves with its tax exemption. Without the exemption, the group would have paid $12.4 million tax on its 2008 profit of $37,667,000. The accounts to June 30, 2009 also show retained earnings of $270m. Normal company tax on this would have amounted to $89m. The charitable group's financial accounts for 2010 have not been released yet but one of the group's major firms, Ngai Tahu Holdings Corporation, this week announced a 2010 surplus of $35.5m. It's not known how much of this surplus will go into the charitable group's bottom line but normal tax on this amount would be $10.65m.

This tax-free money has allowed Ngai Tahu, Tainui and many other tribes to buy up assets with money that should have gone into running the country and reducing our debt. Maori assets are now worth in excess of $36 billion!

Waitangi Tribunal Must be Abolished

The apartheid Waitangi Tribunal is fully funded by the taxpayers and was set up to hear and make recommendations to Government of alleged past Treaty breaches by the Government against Maori, but the majority of these claims had been fully and finally settled in the 1930’s/40’s. Since its formation in 1975, it has helped advanced Maori and their assets to the tune of about $36 billion, in many cases by allowing claimants to distort, fabricate or omit vital evidence to favour their claim, a fact admitted by the Chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal, Chief Judge Eddie Durie. See NZ Herald, page 44).

25

While the Tribunal was initially set up to hear Maori grievances against the Crown, it is now an apartheid, taxpayer funded Government organization being used to distort our history and to steal assets and taxpayer’s funds that belong to all the people of New Zealand. Maori are no longer disadvantaged; therefore the Tribunal can no longer hide behind, Section 19 (2) of the 1993 Human Rights Act. It is time the apartheid Waitangi Tribunal was abolished; it is well past its use by date.

Under the Treaty of Waitangi, all New Zealanders are supposed to have the same privileges and responsibilities. In practice, however, some of those classed legally as Maori, have many extra privileges and diminished responsibilities. Most of this results from the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, which set up the Waitangi Tribunal.

The Treaty has a Preamble, Three Articles/Laws and the Consent, the Preamble and First Article to establish the Sovereignty and government of the Queen, the Second guaranteeing “all the people of New Zealand their dwellings and property” and the Third, “gave Maori the same rights as the people of England”. The preamble to the Treaty of Waitangi Act indicates that the Tribunal will relate to the whole Treaty, but its investigations have been limited almost entirely to Article Two and only to Maori interests, non-Maori are non-existent. The limitation isn’t surprising, since under the Act only Maori have the right to be heard by the Tribunal.

Either the whole Treaty should be in our domestic law, or none of it should be. Limiting the Act to those parts of the Treaty, which favour Maori only, is racist. The Tribunal must be open to all the people of New Zealand or abolished.

Let me issue a word of warning to those that in the habit of bandying the name of the Treaty around to be very careful lest it be made the means of incurring certain liabilities under the law which we do not know now and which are being borne only by the Pakeha”. Sir Apirana Ngata. Minister of Native Affairs, 1922.

The British Crown Took Responsibility for the Whole Country

The British Crown gained sovereignty over the whole country but the fact that some tribes did not sign the Treaty and still became subjects of the Crown is irrelevant. Britain took responsibility for the whole country after the majority had signed the Treaty, the tribes gaining all the protection of being British subjects, the same as the settlers, under the British Crown, British Law – Article 3. Ironically, even the tribes that didn't sign the treaty have gained all the benefits and received settlements and compensation over the years at the expense of their fellow citizens, referencing it as their reason and their right under the Treaty of Waitangi, which they did not sign, but have continually used to their advantage!

Select Committees

It is believed Select Committees are set up to hear public submissions into a Bill and report to Parliament on their findings. This is not necessary so, “The purpose of a committee's report to the House is to express the views of the committee. Those views may be informed by material they receive from others, but the purpose of the report is not to provide a summary of submitter's views. The submissions themselves

26

set out those views, and are published on the parliament website”, Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives.

A corrupt Select Committee, as in the Te Roroa Claims Settlement Bill and the Marine and Coastal Area Bill can mislead Parliament by withholding all submissions opposing a Bill from its report to Parliament to allow it to proceed. A Select Committee decides which submissions are heard depending on which way they want the Bill to proceed. Select Committees are a sham!

Maori are no Longer the Distinct Race Of People.

“Maori today are a people as one sees in legislation”, Mr. John Clark, past Race Relations Conciliator of Maori descent.

Maori are no longer the distinct race of people that signed the Tiriti o Waitangi in 1840. There is too much foreign blood in all Maori today for the Waitangi Tribunal or Government to attempt to compensate one group of New Zealand Citizen at the expense of the others. The degree of intermarriage alone makes it imperative for the Government to come to its senses and call an end to this nonsense. The Government must act in a manner that is consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi, to honour its obligations to “all the people of New Zealand”. Maori have intermarried with people of other races of their own free will until today; they have become a people of many mixed races, far removed from their Maori ancestors. This is confirmed by the need to continually change the legal definition of Maori since the 1865 Native Land Act as their ancestry became further and further diluted with other races. Today, anyone that can claim to belong to an iwi or hapu can claim to be Maori whether they have ‘genuine’ Maori ancestry or not.

Maori are not the ‘Indigenous People of New Zealand’

Maori were a race of people that arrived in New Zealand about 400 years before the first Europeans and are therefore by definition not indigenous to New Zealand. New Zealand was already inhabited by a fair skinned race of people, a fact told in many Maori legends and the archeology sites found around New Zealand. There is too much evidence showing Maoris were not the first people to settle in New Zealand to be indigenous but the Government refuses to allow this to be “officially” investigated. Any remains or artifacts believed to be pre-Maori are by default given to Maori to dispose of but very sound research and evidence by many historians and archeologists show these artifacts are not of Maori origin and Maori were not the first inhabitants of New Zealand.

We are also told the main Maori migration arrived in 7 canoes in about 1350, but it is doubtful whether a canoe could survive the oceans or be able to carry enough food and water for a voyage of this nature as well as the people surviving the elements without warm, waterproof clothing. There is a theory that island people where brought to New Zealand to load ships with flax and timber and were left behind where they intermarried with the original fair skinned people, the reason for the mixture of DNA within Maori. While the Government does not have a definition of the Indigenous People of New Zealand for obvious reasons, it still agreed to support the Declaration on the Rights of

27

Indigenous People, without evidence of who they are, where they came from, how they arrived here or when they arrived. The Declarations gives Indigenous People the right to self-identification. Titles and Wahi Tapu

The tribes never had Customary Title or rights to their territories. Territories were only occupied for as long as the tribe could defend it. Once another tribe defeated them, they lost all rights to their territory. This was the same for wahi tapu/sacred areas. It was only wahi tapu/sacred to the tribe that was occupying the land at the time. The new occupiers did not respect the old occupiers wahi tapu, in fact most destroyed them to show their mana/power over those they had just defeated. This was the reason for tribes hiding their deceased chief’s bones or uplifting and taking them when they were driven from a location. Many chief’s bones were later moved to legal cemeteries for safety when they became available. Titles giving legal ownership to land only began after the Treaty was signed, until then, the only lore that existed in New Zealand between the tribes was, “Might is Right”.

Once the Treaty was signed, land was surveyed and tribes were given legal title to their land and were free to sell it, at first only to the Queen’s representatives. Titles gave the tribe legal ownership to their individual territories without the need to constantly defend it, the first time ever for Maori.

While land sold before the Treaty was in most cases sold for European goods such as muskets, powder, balls, axes, nails and blankets etc, after the Treaty, all land was sold for money with legal, documented transactions. Under English Law, once land is legally sold, the previous owner loses all rights to it unless otherwise specified. All titles and transactions after 1840 are fully documented in our archives for all to see.

Land purchased before the Treaty had to be proved in the courts after the Treaty was signed and in most cases was limited to 2560 acres (4 square miles). Settlers that had purchased land before the Treaty and could not prove their purchase or afford the court costs, lost it as many did, especially in the South Island and in most cases was returned to the Maoris that sold it.

In some cases government issued titles to land included rivers and foreshore, but it is debateable whether this was possible under English Law dating back to the Magna Carta and the Law of Nature. If it is found the Government did not have this authority, then the Government must buy these back and return them to the Crown to hold in trust for all the people of New Zealand.

The Law of Nature

"By the Law of Nature things are common to mankind - the air, running water, the sea and consequently the shores of the sea". Emperor Justinian, 500 AD.  The Law of Nature has existed since Roman times, and was first articulated in the laws of Emperor Justinian 1500 years ago. In its early form, the idea of the public trust sought to protect the public’s rights to access certain resources, particularly navigable bodies of water. Public uses of water resources were to be protected by the state, which, as a trustee, could not grant exclusive rights to any single individual or entity.

28

Giving ownership or rights to an individual would infringe on the publics right to access and use the resources. The Law of Nature was inherited by England’s legal system, and emerged in 1215 as part of the Magna Carta. On the 21 May 1840 New Zealand became a Crown Colony and inherited the England's legal system, the Magna Carta and the Law of Nature. The Law of Nature was in existence long before the Maori race.

Marine and Coastal Area Bill

The Marine and Coastal Area Bill is a shining example of a Government completely ignoring the Tiriti o Waitangi and the people. In 1840, over 500 chiefs gave up entirely their Native/Tribal lore for the Queen’s law forever. The foreshore and seabed is the birthright and common heritage of all New Zealanders and as such should be held in Crown Trust for all the people to enjoy.

Over 5000 submissions were made to the Marine and Coastal Area Bill. Most opposing the Bill with many pointing out that the Bill breached the Tiriti o Waitangi but the Maori Affairs Select Committee, under the Hon Tau Henare’s chairmanship, rejected these submission and the concerns they contained from its report to Parliament and the Bill was passed.

New Zealanders will not forget John Key's promise that this Bill would not proceed if the public did not support it. Equally reprehensible that MPs who displayed utter cowardice by privately admitting they did not support the Bill while publicly turning their backs on their constituents to vote for it.

It is estimated that just one small area off the Taranaki/Wanganui coast contains iron ore worth $1.1 trillion.  It is hardly surprising that corporate iwi are so keen to seize ownership of these resources, set it up as a trust and pay no or little tax!

The Marine and Coastal Area Bill breaches Article 3 of our Tiriti o Waitangi, which gave Maori the same rights as the people of England (the settlers).

Conclusion   The Treaty of Waitangi is a very simple document. The Preamble explained that if Maori wanted British protection, they must give up all parts of New Zealand to the Queen. Article 1 said they must give up their entire government to the Queen forever. Article 2 guaranteed to the chiefs and tribes (Maori) and to “all the people of New Zealand” (the settlers) their land, settlements and property. Article 3 gave Maori the same rights as the people of England (the settlers). The Consent said the Maori chief’s understood the meaning of the words and agreed to sign the Treaty dated the 6 th of February 1840 with a hand shake and the words “He iwi tahi Tatou – We are now one people”.

Over 500 Chiefs signed the Treaty of Waitangi and New Zealand became a British Colony under British rule and English law based on the Magna Carta and the Law of Nature. All legislation and reforms made by the Fourth Labour Government in relation to the Treaty must be abolished as they were based on false information and false Treaty documents. There was never an English version of the Treaty of Waitangi, it was never a partnership between Maori and the Crown and no Government has the right to base

29

legislation on unsubstantiated principles based on personal opinions and hidden agendas.

Can We Fix It? – Yes We Can!Part Three - Acts not entrenched Leading Constitutional Lawyer and the man that instigating all the reforms, Sir Geoffrey Palmer stated, "It is true the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and all the other statutes, which give explicit recognition to the Treaty are not entrenched. They can be swept away by a simple majority in Parliament”.

It's time the majority of New Zealanders that have suffered under the Fourth Labour Government’s unsubstantiated reforms, continued and expanded by future Governments, petition their Member of Parliament to force Parliament to repeal these apartheid Acts of Parliament based on the Hon Geoffrey Palmer’s experiences in America and using false information and false Treaty documents. If they will not agree to repeal these Acts, then we should not vote for them as they will continue to endorse this false legislation and you and your children will continue to suffer at the hands of these traitors. 

Party Vote the Most Important Vote for Change!

MMP can work to our advantage as the party vote determines the number of members of Parliament a party can have.   If a party gets 25% of the party vote, but only wins, say 10 electorates, it gets an extra 20 list MPs, a total of 30 of the 120 MP’s.   A National Party supporter who believes strongly in “One law for all” and who lives in, say, Wellington Central can vote for the National Party candidate in that electorate and ACT with their party vote. If we use our vote to support the Party that supports “One law for all”, then we can sway the balance of power by having more members in Parliament that will support, “One law for all the people of New Zealand”. 

While the One New Zealand Foundation Inc is non-racist, non-political, we do support any Political Party that believes in, “One law for all the people of New Zealand”.

On the 18 May 2011, Don Brash, the leader of the ACT Party gave his word, “ I am committed to one law for all the people of New Zealand. I have been strongly of this view for a very long time”.

Over the years, Don Brash’s opponents and the media have labeled him as being racist, but how can he be racist when he is committed to, “One law for all the people of New Zealand”, irrespective of race, colour or creed?

We urge members of the One New Zealand Foundation and others interested in, “One law for all the people of New Zealand” to give their party vote to ACT. The more party votes ACT receives, the more chance we have of repealing the Acts of Parliament, which give privilege and advantage to Maori over non-Maori New Zealanders.

"It is true the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 and all the other statutes, which give explicit

30

recognition to the Treaty are not entrenched. They can be swept away by a simplemajority in Parliament”. Sir Geoffrey Palmer, New Zealand’s leading ConstitutionalLawyer. Vote : One ACT for all

Letter from 13 Ngapuhi Chiefs asking King William for protection in 1831

(Enclosure 2 in No.1.)From William Yale, Esq, to the Colonial Secretary, New South Wales, Waimate, New Zealand. November 16, 1831Sir, I have the honour to forward to you, by His Majesties Ship, “Zebra” the enclosed New Zealand document, with its translation, and to request that you will lay it before the Governor for his information. I have further to request that it be transmitted through His Excellency to the Secretary of State, in order to it being laid before His Majesty. I have, &c,

(Signed) William Yale. (Enclosure 3 in NO.1)

To King William, the gracious Chief of England. King William, we, the chiefs of New Zealand assembled at this place, called the Kerikeri, write to thee, for we hear that thou art the great chief of the other side of the water, since the many ships which come to our land are from thee. We are a people without possessions. We have nothing but timber, flax, pork and potatoes. We sell these things however to your people; then we see property of the Europeans. It is only thy land, which is liberal towards us. From thee also come the missionaries who teach us to believe on Jehovah God and on Jesus Christ His Son. We have heard that the tribe of Marian [the French] is at hand, coming to take away our land. Therefore we pray thee to become our friend and the guardian of these islands, lest the teasing of other tribes should come near us, and lest strangers should come and take away our land. And if any of thy people should be troublesome and vicious towards us we pray thee to be angry with them that they may be obedient, lest the anger of the people of this land fall upon them. This letter is from us, the chief’s of the natives of New Zealand.

(Signed) William Yale,

Secretary to the Church Mission Society, New Zealand.

Wererahi Chief of Paroa.Rewa Chief of WaimatePatuone & Nene Two brothers, Chiefs of HokiangaKekeao Chief of AhuahuTitore Chief of KororarikaTamoranaga Chief of TaiamaiRipe Chief of MapereHara Chief of OhaiawaAtuahaere Chief of KaikoheMoetara Chief of PakanaiMatangi Chief of WaimaTaunai Chief of Hutakuta

31

English Translation

Declaration of Independence of New Zealand

1) We, the hereditary chiefs and heads of the tribes of the Northern parts of New Zealand, being assembled at Waitangi, in the Bay of Islands on this 28th day of October, 1835, declare the Independence of our country, which is hereby constituted and declared to be an Independent State, under the designation of The United Tribes of New Zealand.

2) All sovereign power and authority within the territories of the United Tribes of New Zealand is hereby declared to reside entirely and exclusively in the hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes in their collective capacity, who also declare that they will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves in their collective capacity to exist, nor any function of government to be exercised within the said territories, unless by persons appointed by them, and acting under the authority of laws regularly enacted by them in Congress assembled.

3) The hereditary chiefs and heads of tribes agree to meet in Congress at Waitangi in the autumn of each year, for the purpose of framing laws for the dispensation of justice, the preservation of peace and good order, and the regulation of trade; and they cordially invite the Southern tribes to lay aside their private animosities and to consult the safety and welfare of our common country, by joining the Confederation of the United Tribes.

4) They also agree to send a copy of this Declaration to His Majesty, the King of England, to thank him for his acknowledgement of their flag, and in return for the friendship and protection they have shown, are prepared to show, to such of his subjects as have settled in their country, or resorted to its shores for the purposes of trade, they entreat that he will continue to be the parent of their infant State, and that he will become its Protector from all attempts upon its independence.Agreed to unanimously on this 28 day of October, 1835, in the presence of His Britannic Majesty's Resident.

(Here follow the signatures and marks of thirty-four hereditary chiefs or Heads of tribes, which form a fair representation of the tribes of New Zealand from the North Cape to the latitude of the River Thames.)English witnesses:(Signed) Henry Williams, Missionary CMSGeorge Clarke, CMSJames Clendon, MerchantGilbert Mair, Merchant

I certify that the above is a correct copy of the Declaration of the Chiefs, according to the translation of Missionaries who have resided ten years and upwards in the country; and it is transmitted to His Most Gracious Majesty the King of England, at the unanimous request of the Chiefs.

(Signed) JAMES BUSBY, British Resident at New Zealand.

32

33

34

35

36

THE FINAL DRAFT OF THE TIRITI O WAITANGIThis is a typed copy of the final draft Governor Hobson gave to the Rev Henry Williams and his son Edward to translate into the Tiriti o Waitangi at 4 pm on the 4 February 1840.

Note the word Sovereignty is misspelt, it is dated the 4 February 1840, the day it was written and Rev Henry Williams made corrections in his translation to whom various parts referred to in the Preamble and Article Three. Article Two referred to; “all the people of New Zealand”, irrespective of race colour or creed.

The Final DraftHer Majesty, Queen of England in Her gracious consideration of the Chiefs and the people of New Zealand, and Her desire to preserve to them their lands and to maintain peace and order amongst them, has been please to appoint an officer to treat with them for the cession of the Sovreinty of their country and of the islands adjacent, to the Queen. Seeing that many of Her Majesty’s Subjects have already settled in the country and are constantly arriving, and it is desirable for their protection as well as the protection of the natives, to establish a government amongst them. Her Majesty has accordingly been pleased to appoint Mr. William Hobson, a Captain in the Royal Navy to be Governor in such parts of New Zealand as may now or hereafter be ceded to Her Majesty and proposes to the Chiefs of the Confederation of United Tribes of New Zealand and the other chiefs to agree to the following articles.

Article One.The Chiefs of the Confederation of United tribes and the other chiefs who have not joined the confederation, cede to the Queen of England for ever the entire Sovreignty of their country.

Article second.The Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the chiefs and the tribes and to all the people of New Zealand, the possession of their land, dwellings and all their property. But the chiefs of the Confederation of United Tribes and the other chiefs grant to the Queen, the exclusive rights of purchasing such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to sell at such prices as may be agreed upon between them and the person appointed by the Queen to purchase from them.

Article thirdIn return for cession of their Sovreingty to the Queen, the people of New Zealand shall be protected by the Queen of England and the rights and privileges of the British Subjects will be granted to them.

Signed, William Hobson, Consul and lieut. Governor.

Now we the chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand assembled at Waitangi, and we the other tribes of New Zealand, having understood the meaning of these articles, accept them and agree to them all, In witness thereofOur names and marks are affixed. Done at Waitangi on the 4th February 1840.

37

BACK TRANSLATION FROM THE ORIGINAL MAORI TREATY BY; MR. T E YOUNG, NATIVE DEPARTMENT, 1869.

Victoria, Queen of England, in Her kind thoughtfulness of the chiefs and Hapus of New Zealand, and Her desire to preserve to them their chieftainship and their lands, and that peace may always be kept with them and quietness, She has thought it a right thing that a Chief should be sent here as a negotiator with the Maoris of New Zealand – that the Maori of New Zealand may consent to the Government of the queen of all parts of this land and the islands, because there are many of her tribe that have settled on this land and are coming hither. Now the Queen is desirous to establish the Government, that evil will not come to the Maori or the Europeans who are living without law. Now the Queen has been pleased to send me, William Hobson, a Captain in the Royal Navy, to be Governor to all parts of New Zealand which may be given up now or hereafter to the Queen; and he give forth to the Chief of the assembly of the Hapus of New Zealand and other chiefs the laws spoken here.

The FirstThe Chiefs of the Assembly, and all chiefs also who have not joined the Assembly, give up entirely to the Queen of England forever all the Government of their lands.

The SecondThe Queen of England arranges and agrees to give to the chiefs, the Hapus and all the people of New Zealand, the full chieftainship of their lands, their settlements and their property. But the Chiefs of the Assembly, and all other chiefs, gives to the Queen the purchase of those pieces of land which the proprietors may wish, for payment as may be agreed upon by them and the purchaser who is appointed by the Queen to be Her purchaser.

The ThirdThis is an arrangement for the consent to the Government of the Queen. The Queen of England will protect all the Maoris of New Zealand. All the rights will be given to them the same as Her doings to the people of England.

William Hobson, Consul and Lieutenant – Governor.

Now, we the Chiefs of the Assembly of the Hapus of New Zealand, now assembled at Waitangi. We, also the Chiefs of New Zealand, see the meaning of these words; they are taken and consented to altogether by us. Therefore are attached our names and marks.

This done at Waitangi, on the six day of February, in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty, of our Lord.

Note. From the above, the Rev Henry Williams made two corrections in his translation to clarify whom Governor Hobson was referring. One in the Preamble, “people of New Zealand” to “chiefs and Hapu of New Zealand” and Article 3, “People of New Zealand” to “Maoris of New Zealand”. Also the date was changed from the 4th February 1840, the day the final draft was written to the 6th February 1840, the day it was signed. Rev Henry Williams also corrected Busby’s spelling of sovereignty. All back translations do not have the errors of the final draft and are all dated the 6 February 1840.

38

Preamble and Consent Omitted from Treaty

Since the Principles for Crown Action on the Treaty of Waitangi appeared in 1985, most Government Treaty of Waitangi texts have the Preamble and the Consent omitted, including the large public display panels at Te Papa. If the Preamble and Consent remained, the Principles, Partnership and most Waitangi Tribunal recommendation would not stand up to scrutiny.

The Preamble (A legal part of any document)The Preamble is the essence of the Treaty and explained the reason for a treaty and that all parts of New Zealand must be given up to the Queen for Britain to form a legal Government to bring law, order and protection to all the people of New Zealand. Without the Preamble, the Articles relate to nothing. The Articles were the laws that must be obeyed if the chief’s agreed to sign the Treaty and give up their territories, powers and governments to Her Majesty the Queen.

If the Chiefs wanted the protection they had asked for in 1831 and again in 1835, they must give up their individual territories to Her Majesty the Queen. “Nga wahi katoa o Nu Tirani e tukua aianei ki te Kuini - All places/parts of New Zealand which may be given up now or hereafter to the Queen”. (Preamble).

The Articles/LawsThe Three Articles that followed the Preamble were the laws that must be obeyed by all the people of New Zealand, irrespective of race, colour or creed. When signed, “The Queen of England will protect all the Maoris of New Zealand. All the rights will be given to them the same as her doings to the people of England”. No more – No less!

ConsentThe last paragraph of the Treaty was the Consent from the chiefs. “Now we the chiefs of New Zealand see the meaning of these words. They are taken and consented to altogether by us. Therefore are affixed our names or marks. This done at Waitangi on the 6 February 1840”. The Chiefs that signed the Treaty were highly intelligent and powerful men, they had spent many hours debating the Treaty and saw it was to their advantage to sign it. All signatures that were subsequently obtained were merely testimonials of the original document, “Done at Waitangi on the 6 February 1840”.

The Tiriti o Waitangi consists of the Preamble, the Three Article and the Consent.

Customary Rights or Customary Title.

There is no mention of Customary Rights or Titles in the Tiriti o Waitangi. Once the Tiriti was sign, the chiefs had given up all Native Lore for English Law. A law that would give protection and a government for all the people of New Zealand, irrespective of race, colour or creed. A law based on the Magna Carta and a law that had been in existence long before the Maori race ever existed. A law dating back to the Magna Carta in 1215 and Law of Nature some 1500 years ago, a law the chiefs had asked for in 1831 and Queen Victoria had promised and provided in 1840.

39

TARANAKI SOLD THREE TIMES In the book, “The History of Taranaki”, published in 1878 by B. Wells, a letter from warrior chief Ihaia Kinkumara, written in conjunction with his friend Tamati Tiraura, is addressed to the settlers in New Plymouth. In this letter, the chiefs mention three of the earlier purchases of Taranaki.

“Friends, formerly we, the Maoris, lived alone in New Zealand; we did wrong one to another, we ate one another, we exterminated one another. Some had deserted the land, some were enslaved and the remnants that were spared went to seek other lands. Now this was the arrangement of this Ngatiawa land. Mohau was the boundary on the north. Ngamotu on the south; beyond was Taranaki and Ngatiruanui. All was quiet, deserted; the land, the sea, the streams, the lakes, the forest, the rocks were deserted; the food, the property, the work was deserted; the dead and sick were deserted; the landmarks were deserted. Then came the Pakeha hither by sea from other dwellings, they came to this land and the Maori allowed them – they came by chance to this place - they came to a place whose inhabitants had left it. There were few men here - the men were remnant, a handful returned from slavery. And pakeha asked, where are the men of this place? And they answered they have been driven away by war, we few have come back from another land. And the Pakeha said, are you willing to sell us this land, And they replied, we are willing to sell it so that it will not remain barren, presently our enemies will come, and our places will be taken from us again.So payment was made, it was not said, let the place be taken, although the men were few, the Pakeha did not say, let it be taken, but the land was quietly paid for. Now the Pakeha thoroughly occupied the purchases made with their money, and the Maoris living in the land of bondage, and those who had fled heard that the land had been occupied and they said, Ah! Ah! Ah! The land has revived, let us return to the land. So they returned. Their return was in a friendly manner. Their thought of the Pakeha was, let us dwell together, let us work together. The Maoris began to dispute with the Pakeha. When the Governor saw this, he removed the Pakeha to one spot to dwell. Afterwards the Pakeha made a second payment for the land, and afterwards a third, and then I said Ah! Ah! Very good indeed is the goodness of the Pakeha, he has not said that the payment ceases at the first time. My friends the Pakeha, wholly through you, this land and the men of this land have become independent, do not say that I have seem this your goodness today for the first time, I knew it formally, at the coming here of governor Grey, I was urgent that the land may be surrendered and paid for by him, that we may live here together, we the Maori and the Pakeha. And my urgency did not end there but through the days of Governor Grey”  This letter was written by the warrior chief Ihaia Kinkumara and his friend Tamiti Tiraura at Waitara on the 15th July 1860 to the settlers of Taranaki and records that the land in the area was paid for three time over.

40

PRINCIPLES FOR CROWN ACTION ON THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

No mention is made of the Preamble or Consent in the Principles. The Preamble is the essence of the Treaty. It explained to the chiefs that if they wanted protection, not only from a foreign invasion, but also from themselves, they must give up their territories to Her Majesty the Queen for Britain to form a legal Government. Without the Preamble the Articles have no meaning, they relate to nothing. The Treaty of Waitangi gave the same rights to all the people of New Zealand, No more – No less.

1. The Principle of Government The Kawanatanga Principle

The first Article of the Treaty gives expression to the right of the Crown to make laws and its obligation to govern in accordance with constitution process. This Sovereignty is qualified by the promise to accord Maori interest specified in the Second Article of the Treaty.

Note. The Second Article gave the same rights to the chiefs, tribes and to all the people of New Zealand, irrespective or race, colour or creed.

2. The Principle of Self Management The Rangatiratanga Principle

The Second Article of the Treaty guaranteed to iwi Maori the control and enjoyment of those resources and taonga, which it is their wish to retain. The presentation of a resource base restoration of iwi self management, and the active protection of taonga both material and cultural, are necessary elements of the Crown’s policy of recognising rangatiratanga.

Note. The Second Article gave the same rights to the chiefs, the tribes and all the people of New Zealand, irrespective or race, colour or creed. Taonga at the time the Treaty was signed translated as property – things owned - possessions. Land etc. was never owned by Maori pre-treaty, it was only “held” for as long as they could defend it. Might was Right!

3. The Principle of Equality

The Third Article of the Treaty constitutes a guarantee of legal equality between maori and other citizens of New Zealand. This means that all New Zealand citizens are equal before the law. Furthermore, the common law system is selected by the Treaty as a basis for that equality although human rights accepted under the international law are incorporated also.

The Third Article also has an important social significance in the implicit assurance that social rights would be enjoyed equally by Maori with all New Zealand citizens of whatever origin. Special measures to attain that equal enjoyment of social benefits are allowed by international law.

Note. The Third Article stated, “The Queen of England will protect all the Maoris of New Zealand. All the rights will be given to them the same as Her doings to the people of England”. The Third Article did not give equal rights to Maori; it gave the same rights to Maori as the people of England. No more – No less!

41

4. Principle of Cooperation

The Treaty is regarded by the Crown as establishing a fair basis for two people in one country. Duality and unity are both significant. Duality implies distinctive cultural development and unity implies common purpose of community. The relationship between community and distinct development is governed by the requirement of cooperation, which is an obligation placed on both parties to the Treaty.

Reasonable cooperation can only take place if there is consultation on major issues of common concern and if good faith, balance and common sense are shown on all sides. The outcome of reasonable cooperation will be partnership.

Note. While the Treaty of Waitangi was between two distinct races of people, Maori have intermarried of the own free will until today; they are New Zealand Citizens of many mixed races. There is no mention of a Partnership in the Treaty; once the Treaty was signed Maori gave up their independence for the same rights as the people of England. No more – No less.

5. Principle of Redress

The Crown accepts the responsibility to provide a process for the resolution of grievances arising from the Treaty. This process may involve courts, the Waitangi Tribunal or direct negotiation. The provision for redress, were entitlement is established, must take account of its practical impact and of the need to avoid the creation of fresh injustices. If the Crown demonstrates commitment to this process of redress then it will expect reconciliation to result.

Note. The Tiriti o Waitangi gave Maori the same rights as the people of England. No more – No less. Therefore any redress to Maori through the Courts, Waitangi Tribunal or direct negotiation must also be available to “all the people of New Zealand”, irrespective of race, colour or creed. Without this, “fresh injustices are being created”. The Waitangi Tribunal is an apartheid tribunal and must be abandoned; it cannot hide behind the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, Section 19, (2) any longer. With over $20 billion in assets, Maoridom is no longer oppressed.

The 1975 Treaty of Waitangi Act and its amendments are the biggest injustices ever created by any Government on its people as it allows one group of New Zealand Citizens the privilege of a taxpayer funded apartheid Tribunal to claim against their fellow New Zealand Citizens using “Principles” and a “Partnership” dreamt up by Ministers and bureaucrats using false information and a false Treaty document. The “Principles” and “Partnership” have no relationship to our Tiriti o Waitangi, they were enacted into law, under Hon Geoffrey Palmer’s direction and a Court of Appeal based on false information and a false Treaty document. There are no “Principles” or “Partnership” in the Tiriti o Waiatngi. THE TIRITI O WAITANGI GAVE THE SAME RIGHTS TO ALL THE PEOPLE OF NEW ZEALAND, IRRESPECTIVE OF RACE, COLOUR OR CREED.

There is only one Principle in the Tiriti o Waitangi:

HE IWI TAHI TATOU – WE ARE NOW ONE PEOPLE – NEW ZELANDERS

42

Sir Paul and Government differ over Treaty on ScreenNZPA 6 March 1990 Sydney

The clashing views of the Governor General, the Most Rev Sir Paul Reeves, and the Government on the Treaty of Waitangi were aired on Australian Television of Monday night.

The Prime Minister Mr Palmer, and his predecessor, Mr Lange, now Attorney General, ruled out yielding to major financial and economic claims by Maori under the Treaty of Waitangi when they were interviewed on the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s Four Corners current affairs programme. But Sir Paul joined Maori leaders in hinting that failure to address “injustices” under the treaty would lead to violence. While Mr Palmer described the treaty as vague and unclear, Sir Paul compared it to the “covenant between God and Abraham or God and Noah” and said it was a binding document. “Many Pakeha people get impatient at what they see at be the way in which Maori keep dredging up things that happened 100 years ago” he said. They say, ”Why can’t we just live together?” and Maori can’t buy into that because their justice won’t go. What we’ve got to do is relieve people of that sense of injustice and if we don’t take the justice option, we run the risk of reaping the whirlwind”. Sir Paul said a white backlash against Maori claims was unavoidable and that the backlash was an expression of prejudice. Even though change “scares the pants off” prejudiced people, he urged legislators to create a society beneficial to all. The head of the Ngaitahu Maori Trust Board, Mr Tipene O’Regan, acknowledged that the Crown could not afford to meet the value of the tribe’s South Island claims and declined to say how much the tribe would accept in settlement. But he agreed to the reporter’s suggestion it would have to be, “hundreds of millions of dollars”. Mr Palmer said such expectations were unreasonable and would not be met. “The idea that somehow hundreds of millions of dollars are going to change hands in a short period of time …. Is, I’m afraid, idle”, he said. “And the reason it is idle, is that the country can’t afford it and it won’t happen. And in any case, I don’t know of any authoritative adjudication anywhere that would suggest it ought to happen”. Both Mr Lange and Mr Palmer warned against making literal interpretations from the Treaty. “Did Queen Victoria for a moment think of forming a partnership with a number of thumb prints and 500 people”? Mr Lange said. “Queen Victoria was not that sort of person. That does not distract from the significance of the Treaty of Waitangi. It can become the Magna Carta of New Zealand society but it is not going to become that from Dead Sea scroll eschatology examination”. Mr Palmer said the meaning of the Treaty, in terms of its operational consequences now, was “far from clear”. In fact, it’s a document that is so vague that that is its primary problem”, he said. A Tainui leader, Mr Bob Mahuta said, if thousands of young Maori were allowed to sit and brood on their situation, being unemployed and deprived, they would react lie any other young blacks around the world. “They will take from the haves because they are the have-nots. They have nothing to loose”. He said. Asked if they would take by force, he said, “Naturally, yes”. A former Labour Government minister, the Hon Matiu Rata said, that when Maori people’s faith in the rule of law was destroyed it would introduce such things as civil war. “That would be so absolutely absurdly stupid”, he said. “That is why our ancestors signed the treaty”. End.

The One New Zealand Foundation Inc. has the DVD and a transcript of the Australian Broadcasting Commission’s Four Corners Programme, “Trick or Treaty”

43

Copy of Article published in the New Zealand Herald, Wednesday 17 November 1999.

Judge queries ethics of treaty demandsResearchers ‘pressured to change findings’

WELLINGTON - Some Treaty of Waitangi claimants have asked researchers to change findings that would be unhelpful to their cases says the chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal.

Justice Durie said also that some tribes had even tried to make the payments of researchers conditional on findings being altered. He said the issue – and several others – had raised questions about the need for a code of ethics for researchers claims lodged under the Treaty. The comments were in a paper, Ethics and Values, released on the Indigenous People and Law website.

Justice Durie said some groups had required commissioned researchers to remove material unhelpful to the claimant’s cases or amend their conclusions. Sometimes this was a condition of the researchers being paid. Some also presented biased claims, omitting evidence against their argument that should be presented.

“There are also complaints from researchers of instructions not to consult with certain persons, or only those approved by the claimant groups,” said Justice Durie.While codes of Ethics had caused problems with indigenous claims overseas, he believed they were a good idea.

Tribunal Director, Morrie Love believed the problem raised had occurred with contracted researchers. The Tribunal had had problems with some claimant’s reports but this was now rare. It now had a wide historical overview of issues covered by the claims around the country and was able to pick up any of the discrepancies quickly.

Claimants could obviously say what the wanted. “At the end of the day, a claimants claim is a claimants claim”. But claims were heavily scrutinized. Once submitted, the Crown case was also put followed by an independent tribunal report. A code of ethics was probably a good idea, but ultimately it was up to researchers to fulfill their ethical responsibilities.

Justice Durie said other issues which, could be covered by a code were:

A view by some claimants that kaumatua opinions and recollections should not be challenged or cross-examined. Whether all evidence presented to the tribunal should be publicly available.

“The Tribunal is able to restrict the publication and availability of material, but blanket restrictions give the appearance of secrecy and undermine public confidence in the process”.

Final statements as a result of the claim process so far (1999) total more than $530 million (NZPA)

44

Graham Rankin,16 Rankin St, Kaikohe.June 4th 2001. Minister of Treaty Claims, The Hon Margaret Wilson. Tena koe,

Eighteen months ago I met a man of good Bohemian stock. I have met him several times later, a young man with a terrible bile in his belly, and rightfully so. No living person should suffer the pain he and his wife and children, at the hands of Government and Associates, Ministers in particular. From the time the Te Roroa claim took effect, I asked, "could this be the land of our fathers".

In my view, how could Te Awha Parore and Tiopira own so much land, when Maori, at some time in our history had communistic laws? The Chief only apportions a small parcel of land for family requirements, no more, no less. The land belonged to the Tribe not the chief.

Te Roroa people are only squatters, living on the edge of Waipoua Forest. They don't even know what they are!! Ngatiwhatua or Ngapuhi. Like the Israelites, driven out of the Bay of Islands to Whangaroa, then fled with Hongi Hika in chase to Waipoua.

My Ngaitu people were the earlier settlers, our Tupuna, Chief Kohuru of the funerary chests at Kohekohe. I am angry that the chests were never returned to Kohekohe, but interred in a simple ceremony at Waimamaku without permission.

I have read the Te Roroa report, also attended the findings at Waikara Marae, men and women in the finery, Ministers, Members of the Tribunal, others in country apparel, gumboots, oilskins, horses, tractors and dogs, out for a great day. The big tops, a large dining area, all at the expense of the Government of the day.

Before the seal had set, this 15th day of May 1990, the great philosophers found there was a grave mistake. Accordingly, a prompt change to the Act was pushed through by Parliament, "land that was owned by private ownership should not be challenged". The work of the claim was shoddy, unclean and destructive in the eyes of our New Zealand Society.

My question Minister, the land can never be given to Maori, sitting as a "crown jewel" when it should be returned to Allan Titford, now. I asked Titford to bring me copies, various deeds, Court minutes, successions before writing. I am satisfied what I have witnessed, by the sequence of events, from the time the Crown purchased Maunganui lands from Te Awha Parore in successions, or lease, is compatible with the standard within the law of our country.

Also let it be known to the Tribunal and yourself, in permanent storage, Turnbull Library had "an epitome" of official documents, relative to native offers and land purchases in the North Island of New Zealand. A very useful follow up guide for

45

claims. Compiled and edited by N.Hansen Turton. There is a large section contained about Maunganui lands. Enclosed, is exhaustive research provided by Titford. Maps and Deeds can be supplied if required. I am a devoted protector of my Maori Peoples interests if a case is fair and accurate, same goes for Pakeha people.

I must reiterate, this must be the saddest case I have come upon. Bad research coupled by greed and inefficiency. Please have the Tribunal sight this letter. Be guided by extra care in the future. Tena Koe Hoi ano

Signed, Graham Rankin, Ngapuhi elder.

Regards to our great Prime Minister.

Note. Unfortunately, Graham Rankin has passed away since writing this letter to the Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations.

SHODDY, BAD, UNCLEAN, DESTRUCTIVE IN THE EYES OF NZ SOCIETY

The Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations showed little interest in this letter when she wrote, "it runs counter to the evidence presented to the Waitangi Tribunal".

Ms Wilson, this is exactly what Mr Rankin is telling you - The Waitangi Tribunal and your Crown researchers got it wrong. It was bad research, shoddy, unclean and destructive in the eyes of New Zealand Society.

46

THE CHIEF’S FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE TREATY?As can be seen from the speeches and comments from the chiefs after Governor Hobson had read them the final draft and the Tiriti o Waitangi on the 5 th February 1840, they understood the Treaty. While the chiefs who were in close contact with Pompallier, the French Catholic Bishop were against the Treaty for obvious reasons, the chiefs who in most cases had become Christians under the missionaries were in favour of it. They realized, as well as being unable to form a united government it was too late now to turn the Governor away and must accept British law and order if they were to survive. They also realized for this to happen, they must cede their Sovereignty to Britain for New Zealand to become British soil under, one flag one law. The following points are very obvious from the chief’s speeches and comments.

They were afraid France would annex New Zealand.They knew they were ceding their Sovereignty and were afraid they would become slaves.They were afraid without British intervention and laws they would destroy themselves.They were afraid the Governor would steal their land. They knew it was too late to turn the foreigners away.They wanted protection of their lands, dwellings and property. They wanted the same rights as the people of England.They wanted Hobson to be their protector, their father, their Governor.

HERE FOLLOWS THE CHIEF’S SPEACHES (Taken from, “The Treaty of Waitangi” by T. Lindsay Buick)

TE KEMARA (Page 126)The first speaker was Te Kemara, chief of the Ngati Kawa tribe. “Health to thee, O Governor. This is mine to thee, O Governor. I am not pleased towards thee. I will not consent to thy remaining here in this country. If thou stayest as Governor, then perhaps Te Kemara will be judged and condemned. Yes, indeed, and more than that – even hung by the neck. No, no, no, I shall never say yes to your staying. Were we to be an equality, then perhaps Te Kemara would say yes. But for the Governor to be up and Te Kemara down – Governor high up, up ,up, and Te Kemara down low, small, a worm, a crawler. No, no, no, O Governor! This is mine to thee. O Governor, my land is gone, gone, all gone. The inheritances of my ancestors, fathers, relatives, all gone, stolen, gone with the missionaries. Yes, they have it all, all, all. That man there, the Busby, the Williams, they have my land. The land on which we are now standing this day is mine. This land, even this under my feet, return this to me. O Governor, return me my lands, Say to Williams, ‘Return to Te Kemara his land’. ‘Thou, thou ,thou , thou baldheaded man, thou hast got my lands. O Governor, I do not wish thou to stay. You English are not kind to us like other foreigners. You do not give us good things. I say, go back, go back Governor; we do not want thee here in this country. And Te Kemara says to thee, go back, leave to Busby and to Williams to arrange and to settle matters for us natives as heretofore”.

47

Te Kemara later admitted the French Bishop Pompallier had told him, “Not to write on the paper, for if he did, he would be made a slave”. Te Kemara had already sold most of his land. REWA (Page 128)The next speaker was Rewa, chief of the Ngati Tawake tribe, “How d’ye do, Mr. Governor. This is mine to thee, O Governor. Go back; let the Governor return to his own country. Let my lands be returned to me, which have been taken by the missionaries – by Davis and Clarke and by who and who beside. I have no lands now - only my name, only a name. Foreigners come, they know Mr. Rewa, but this is all I have left – a name. What do native men want of a Governor? We are not white or foreigners. This country is ours, but the land is gone. Nevertheless, we are the Governor – we the chiefs of this our father’s land. I will not say ‘Yes’ to the Governor remaining. No, no, no, return. What! This land to become like Port Jackson, and all other lands seen by the English. No, no, no, return. I, Rewa say to thee, O Governor go back. Send the man away. Do not sign the paper. If you do you will be reduced to the condition of slaves, and be compelled to break stones on the roads. Your land will be taken from you and your dignity as chief will be destroyed”.

MOKA (Page 128)The next speaker was Moka, chief of the Patukeha tribe, “Let the Governor return to his own country, Let us remain where we are. Let my lands be returned to me – all of them – those that are gone with Baker. Do not say ‘the lands will be returned to you’. Who will listen to thee, O Governor? Who will obey thee? Where is Clendon? Where is Mair? Gone to buy, buy our land, notwithstanding the book (Proclamation) of the Governor”. Hobson interrupted the speaker saying any lands illegally taken would be returned. “That is good, O Governor! That is straight. But stay, let me see. Yes, yes indeed! Where is Baker? Where is the fellow, Ah, there he is – there standing. Come, return to me my lands”. To this Mr. Baker replied, “We shall see whether they will return”. Moka continued, “There, there, that is as I said. No, no, no, all false, all false, alike. The lands will not be returned to me”

TAMATI PUKUTUTU (Page 133) Next to speak was Tamati Pukututu, chief of the Te Uri-o-te-hawato tribe. “This is mine to thee, O Governor, Stay, Governor, stay. A Governor for us – for me, for all, that our lands may remain with us – that these piritoke and piriwa-awa, these homeless wanders who sneak about, sticking to rocks, and to the side of brooks, and gullies may not have it all. Remain O Governor; remain for me, for us. Remain here as father for us. These chiefs say ‘Don’t stay’ because they have sold all their possessions and they are filled with foreign property, and they have also no more to sell. But I say, what of that? Remain, Governor, remain. You two stay here, you and Busby – you two, and they also, the missionaries”.

MATIU (Page 133)Next to speak was Matiu, chief of the Uri-o-ngongo tribe, “O Governor! Stay, stay, remain, you as one with the missionaries, a Governor for us. Do not go back, but stay here, a Governor, a father for us, that good may increase, may become large to us. This is my word to thee. Do thou remain here, a father for us”.

48

KAWITI ( Page 133) No, no, go back, go back”, cried Kawiti of the Ngati Hine tribe. “What dost thou want here? We native men do not wish you to stay. We do not want to be tied up and trodden down. We are free. Let the missionaries remain, but as for thee, return to thine own country. I will not say yes to thine sitting here, What, to be fired at in our boats and canoes at night! What, to be fired at when quickly paddling our canoes by night! I, even I, Kawaiti, must not paddle this way or that way because the Governor said No, because of the Governor, his soldiers and his guns. No, no, no, go back, go back, there is no place here for a Governor”.

WAI (Page 134)A chief of the Ngati Awake tribe, Wai, now spoke, “To thee, O Governor! This. Will you remedy the selling, the exchanging, the cheating, the lying, the stealing of the whites? O Governor! Yesterday I was cursed by a white man. It that straight? The white man gives us natives a pound for a pig, but he gives the Pakeha four pounds for such a pig. Is that straight? The white man gives us a shilling for a basket of potatoes, but to the Pakeha he gives four shilling for a basket like that one of ours. Is that straight? No, no, they will not listen to thee, so go back, go back. If they would listen and obey, ah, yes, good that, but have they ever listened to Busby? Will they listen to you, a stranger, a man of yesteryear? Remain indeed! For what? Wilt thou make dealing straight?

PUMUKA (Page 135)The next speaker was Pumuka, a man of influence in the Roroa tribe, “Stay, remain, Governor; remain for me. Hear all of you. I will have this man a foster-father for me. Stay, sit thou here, Governor. Listen to my words, O Governor. Do not go away; remain. Stay, Governor, stay. I wish to have two fathers – thou and Busby and the missionaries”.

WARERAHI (Page 135)Warerahi, chief of the Ngati Tawake, then spoke. “Yes, what else? Stay, sit, if not what else? Stay, if not how? Is it not good to be at peace? We will have this man as our Governor. What? Turn him away! Say to this man of the Queen, ‘Go back’? No, no”.

The next speaker was Hahiro of the Ngati Rehia tribe. “To thee, O Governor this. Who says remain? Who? Hear me, O Governor! I say no, no. Stay indeed! Who says stay? Go back, go back. Do not thou sit here. What wilt thou stay here for? We are not thy people. We are free. We will not have a Governor. Return, return, leave us. The missionaries and Busby are our fathers. We do not want thee, so go back, return, depart”. TAREHA (Page 137)Tareha, a great chief of the Nga Puhi, then spoke. “No Governor for me - for us native men. We, we only are the chiefs – the rulers. We will not be ruled over. What! Thou a foreigner up, and I down. Thou high, and I, Tareha, the great chief of the Nga Puhi tribes low! No, no, never, never. I am jealous of thee; I am, and shall be until thou and thy ship go away. Go back, go back, thou shall not stay here. No, no, I will never say yes. Stay! Alas! What for? Why? What is there here for thee? Our lands are already gone. Yes, it is so, but our names remain. Never mind, what of that – the

49

lands of our father alienated. Dost thou think we are poor, indigent, poverty stricken – that we really need thy foreign garments, thy food. Look at this”. Tareha holds up a handful of fern root. “See, this is my food, the food of my ancestors, the food of the native people. Pshaw! Governor, to think of tempting men – us natives – with baits of clothing and food! Yes, I say, we are the chiefs. If all were to be alike, all equal in rank with thee – but thou the Governor up high – up, up, up, as this tall canoe paddle, and I Tareha, down, under, beneath! No, no, no. I will never say yes. I will never say stay. Go back return! Make haste away. Let me see you (all) go; thee and thy ship. Go, go, return, return”.

HONE HEKE (Page 139)The next speaker was Hone Heke, the nephew and son-in-law of Hongi Hika, and admittedly one of the most influential men, both by lineage and achievement, in the north. The mana of Heke was the greatest. “To raise up or to bring down? To raise up or to bring down? Which? Who knows? Remain Governor, remain. If thou shouldst return we natives are gone, utterly gone, nothinged, extinct. What then shall we do? Who are we? Remain Governor, a father for us. If thou goest away, what then? We do not know. This my friends is a good thing. It is even as the word of God. Thou to go away! No, no, no! For then the French people or the rum sellers will have us natives. Remain, remain, stay with thou here; you with the missionaries all as one. But we the natives are children. Yes, it is not for us, but for you, our fathers – you missionaries - it is for you to say, to decide what it shall be. It is for you to choose, for we are only natives. Who and what are we? Children, yes, children solely. You, our fathers – you missionaries. Remain, I say, Governor, remain. A father, a Governor for us”. .

TAMATI WAAKA NENE (Page 143) Tamati Waaka Nene the Nga Puhi chief of Hokianga spoke. “I will first speak to us, to ourselves, the natives. What do you say? The Governor to return? What then shall we do? Say here to me, O ye chiefs of the tribes of the northern part of New Zealand, how are we hence fore to act? Friends! Whose potatoes do we eat? Whose were our blankets? These spears (holding up his taiaha) are laid aside. What has the Nga Puhi now? The Pakeha gun, his shot, his powder. Many months has he been in our whares; many of his children are our children. Is not the land already gone? Is it not covered, all covered with men, with strangers, foreigners – even as grass and herbage – over whom we have no power? We the chiefs and natives of this land are down low: they are up high, exalted, yet they make no slaves. What do you say? The Governor to go back? I am sick, I am dead, killed by you. Had you spoken thus in the olden time, when the traders and grog sellers came – had you turned them away, then you could well say to the Governor, ‘Go back and it would have been correct, straight, and I also would have said with you, ‘Go back’- yes, we together as one man, as one voice. But now as things are, no, no, no. What did we do before the Pakeha came? We fought, we fought continuously. But now we can plant our ground, and the Pakeha will bring plenty of trade to our shores. Then let us keep him here. Let us all, be friends together. I am walking beside the Pakeha. I’ll sign the Tiriti O Waitangi”. He then turned to the Governor. “O Governor remain. I, Tamati Waaka, say to you, remain. Do not thou go away from us; remain for us a father, a judge, a peacemaker. You must not allow us to become slaves. You must preserve our customs, and never permit our lands to be wrestled from us. Yes, it is good it is straight. Stay thou here, dwell in our midst. Remain, do not go away. Do

50

not thou listen to what the chiefs of Nga Puhi say. Stay then, our friend, our father, our Governor.

PATUONE (Page 145)Nene was followed by his elder brother Patuone of Ngati Hao. “What will I say on this great occasion, in the presence of all these great chiefs of both countries. Here then this is my word to thee, O Governor! Stay, stay – thou and the missionaries, and the word of God. Remain here with us to be our father to us, that the French have us not, that Bishop Pompallier, that bad man, have us not. Remain, O Governor, stay, stay, our friend”.

TE KEMARA (Page 146)Te Kemara, who had been the first speaker and had patiently, heard out Heke, Nene and Patuone, but unable to restrain him self, jumped up in his lively and breezy manner, proceeded to counter the flow of the pro-British oratory. “No, no, who say stay, Go away, return to thine own land. I want my lands returned to me. If thou wilt stay, ‘return to that man, Tekemara, his land, then it will be good. Let us be all alike. Then O Governor, remain. But the Governor up, Tekemara down, low, flat! No, no, no. Besides, where art thou to stay, to dwell? There is no place left for thee”. Leaping forward, he seized hold of Hobson hands and shook them heartily, grinning gleefully, while shouting in his best English, “How d’ye do, eh Governor. How d’ye do, eh Mr. Governor”. Which he repeated over and over. This occasioned amongst the native a general expression of applause, and a louder cheer from the Europeans, in which the natives joined. This ended the meeting at 4-00 o’clock in the afternoon.

THERE WAS NOW NO OTHER ALTERNATIVEAs can be seen from the comments from the chiefs, they all had a good understanding of what the Treaty meant but some were afraid the British would steal their land and make them slaves. They all understood they were going to be under the control of the British Government and that the country was to be ceded to Britain. While some did not want this to happen, they could all see there was now no other alternative. The chiefs who had taken on the Catholic religion and in closes contact with the French or the ill-disposed Europeans, were the chiefs most opposed to the Treaty. They had been brainwashed into believing they would become slaves to the British if they signed the Treaty.

After the meeting ended, the Chiefs and their followers then moved to the area where the Te Tii Marae stands today and discussed the Treaty with the missionaries late into the night.

As the Rev Henry Williams recalls, “There was considerable excitement amongst the people, greatly increased by the irritating language of the ill-disposed Europeans, stating to the chiefs in the most insulting language, that their country was gone, and they now were only taurekareka (slaves). Many came to us to speak upon this new state of affairs. We gave them but one version, explaining clause by clause, showing the advantages of to them of being taken under the fostering care of the British Government, by which act they would become one people with the British, in suppression of wars, and of every lawless act, under one Sovereignty, and one law, human and divine”.

51

THE TREAT IS SIGNEDThe meeting was to convene on the 7 th February, but the Chiefs could not wait that long as they now felt it was to their advantage to sign the Treaty as soon as possible. The good impression created by Heke and Nene therefore stood, and before the evening had closed, there were a large number of chiefs anxious to sign the Treaty. Hobson was summonsed on the morning of the 6th February 1840 to accept the signatures of the 49 chiefs who were willing and ready to sign.

THERE WAS NO DOUBTThe Tiriti O Waitangi was again read to the gathering and signing commenced. Governor Hobson, who had apparently recovered from his recent illness, appeared to be in the cheeriest of spirits, and as each chief signed the Treaty he shook him by the hand, and repeated in Maori,

“He iwi tahi tahou” - “We are now one people”.There is no doubt by this final comment, the chief’s were now fully aware they were to be one people under one flag and one law with all the people of New Zealand.

From their comments, they knew there was to be no “Partnership” or “sharing of power” in any shape or form. The Governor would be up, up, up to make the laws they must all obey with all the people of New Zealand as one. They signed the Tiriti O Waitangi because they would have “the same rights and protection as all the people of New Zealand to their lands, dwellings, settlements and property under one flag and one law”. Something they had never had before and the reason Heke, Nene and other great chiefs encouraged their fellow chiefs to sign the Tiriti O Waitangi.

As can be seen from the above, the Chiefs agreed to cede their Sovereignty to Britain by signing the Tiriti O Waitangi to become one people under one flag and one law with all the people of New Zealand, but the Government and their professional historians continue to lie to the people of New Zealand and to insult our ancestors, both Maori and non-Maori by using a Treaty compiled from the rejected earlier drafts. From the speeches and comments the Chiefs gave at the meeting, prior to signing the Tiriti O Waitangi, and at the Kohimarama Conference in 1860 they fully understood what they were signing and signed it of their own free will. It also shows there was only one “official” Treaty document, and that is the final draft and the translation from it, the Tiriti O Waitangi, that was read to the chiefs on the 5 February 1840 before they agreed to it and signed it on the 6 February 1840. It’s time the Government and their professional historians stopped lying to the people of New Zealand and admitted they have made a terrible mistake and act accordingly. Ross Baker,

Researcher, One New Zealand Foundation Inc. 6/11/2004

52