General copyright and disclaimer - ResearchSpace@Auckland ...

continue or arise if certain issues remained unresolved. In Dieffenbach’s view, the majority of
Maori welcome Europeans into their country; after all, they constantly provide food for visitors,
and increased their cultivations to welcome them for that purpose (II:146), albeit without
expecting such large numbers of colonists. Their willingness to sell appears in part due to a
“desire of acquiring civilization, protection, and instruction from a European colony” (I:92), 130 a
wish which is naturally not shared by all. They are aware of their own rights, and as a
consequence have not sold all of their land as many claim, but have in general kept the best areas
for cultivation. However, when this is not the case, various miscommunications have resulted, in
which the blame should rest firmly on the European purchasers as they readily assumed that the
Maori would not only understand but also have the same meaning for the European conception of
‘ownership’:
The deeds of purchase have almost always been written in a foreign language and in a vague form,
and the purchases were often conducted without a proper interpreter being present. Where the
natives had made no particular reserve for themselves, the land was sold by them with the implied
understanding that they should continue to cultivate the ground which they and their forefathers
had occupied from time immemorial; it never entered into their minds that they could be
compelled to leave it and to retire to the mountains. (II:143)
Thus, the Maori granted permission for Europeans to use their land, unaware in many cases that it
would pass through many hands since the first buyer, “who perhaps bought it for a hundred
pipes”, without the thought of actually occupying it: “They wanted Europeans amongst them; and
it was beyond their comprehension that one man should buy for another, who lived 15,000 miles
off, a million of acres, and that this latter should never come to the country, or bestow upon the
sellers those benefits which they justly expected” (II:144).
The New Zealand Company plan of reserving a tenth, and later an eleventh, of the
sections sold to European colonists for the Maori may have appeared sound in theory, but as
Dieffenbach notes, practice was another matter:
This plan, as regards the town allotments, was certainly very judicious and expedient, as the best
means to procure a sufficient fund to be applied to the expenses of protecting and civilizing the
natives. It was, however, an error to believe that they would at once occupy their town allotments,
sovereignty over the three islands. This was a mere formal step to prevent other nations, or individuals, or bodies,
from acquiring in any way sovereign rights. It should not imply any duties to be performed by the natives, nor any
sacrifices to be made by them, before they had become fully acquainted with the duties of a citizen, and were able to
participate in the benefits of the new organization” (II:142). (For further information, see Claudia Orange, The Treaty
of Waitangi. 2 nd Ed. Wellington: Williams Books, 1995; Alan Ward, A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in
Nineteenth Century New Zealand. 2 nd Ed. Auckland: Auckland University Press, 1995.)
130 Cf. II:39.
103