Jonathan Swift’s observation in 1710 that “Falsehood flies, and the Truth comes limping after it” seems entirely apt for last week’s parliamentary debate on disestablishing the Māori Health Authority.
No fewer than three MPs — MPs Cushla Tangaere-Manuel (Labour), Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke (Te Pāti Māori), and Steve Abel (Greens) — referred to the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907, conjuring an image of an oppressive settler state dedicated to crushing mātauranga [traditional knowledge] and “Māori spiritual leadership” — as Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi has described it.
“What is the strategy?” asked Hauraki-Waikato’s Maipi-Clarke. “What does that mean, by taking out mātauranga Māori? Is that Tohunga Suppression Act 2.0?”
Last November, she was reported in Time magazine saying: “So mātauranga — knowledge from not just Māori but indigenous people specifically within the Pacific and our great migration to Aotearoa — allowed us to be scientists in our own ways, it allowed us to calculate our environment, allowed inclusion. It was a whole other perspective that colonialism actually wiped out through the Tohunga Suppression Act.”
The Act has been regularly cited for years as an example of vast government overreach. In 2018, legal researcher Max Harris wrote a column for e-tangata titled “Racism and White Defensiveness in Aotearoa: A Pākehā Perspective” that included this extraordinary assertion: “Strong Māori agency didn’t stop the government from violently intervening in many aspects of Māori life. For example, the government threw the peaceful leaders of resistance at Parihaka (Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi) into jail in 1881, and banned traditional Māori health and healing practices through the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.”
Few commentators seem to feel the need to actually read the four short clauses of the Act, or examine the circumstances in which it arose, or acknowledge that the legislation was presented to Parliament by Sir James Carroll — one of Māoridom’s most-eminent statesmen, who was the first Māori to win a general electorate seat and who served as Acting Prime Minister in 1909 and 1911.
Furthermore, the four MPs holding the Māori seats — Apirana Ngata, Hōne Heke Ngāpua, Tame Parata and Henare Kaihau — supported the bill.
It was also strongly backed by Māui Pōmare, who became New Zealand’s first Māori doctor in 1899 — and Minister of Health in 1923.
Appointed Māori Health Officer in 1901, Pōmare was a fierce critic of the practices of some tohunga. These included treating feverish patients by putting them in cold water and plying them with alcohol, as well as exorcising devils. Much to his outrage, the ministrations of tohunga had led to the deaths of 17 children in one pā alone.
Former Cabinet minister Willie Jackson knows his history and is a rare exception among politicians in being willing to publicly correct the myth. In an article in Stuff in 2017, he acknowledged that Apirana Ngata took a bold stand in backing the Tohunga Suppression Act — and pointed out that the influential politician was “more concerned about mortal risks posed by charlatans dispensing lethal concoctions than any diminishment of Māori traditions and knowledge”.
Yet the latter falsehood persists — and is repeatedly propagated in the media — as the truth limps a long way behind it.
On December 31 last year, for example, The Post published a column by Treaty lawyer Roimata Smail that stated: “In the English version of the Treaty, the Crown asserted sovereignty — power to make laws affecting everyone, including Māori. [This] had swift and severe consequences, as the Crown enacted laws intruding into every aspect of Māori lives. The Tohunga Suppression Act criminalised Māori healthcare and science…”
Later in the same column, Smail doubled down: “The Tohunga Suppression Act once criminalised Māori healthcare…” It did nothing of the sort, of course. The Act was solely aimed at those using traditional Māori healing practices who also presented themselves as having supernatural or spiritual powers. It was directed specifically at anyone who — as the second clause put it — “gathers Maoris around him by practising on their superstition or credulity, or who misleads or attempts to mislead any Maori by professing or pretending to profess supernatural powers in the treatment of cure of any disease, or in the foretelling of future events”.
The law made no attempt to prohibit many of the traditional treatments used by tohunga, such as medicinal plants and herbs, even if they turned out to be worthless.
The Post’s editors presumably don’t know much about the Act themselves or they might have made sure the correct information reached their readers. Perhaps they simply took Smail at her word on account of her background. The biographical notes on her publisher’s website describe her as a “lawyer specialising for two decades in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. She represented lead claimants in the Waitangi Tribunal inquiry that led to the watershed Hauora Report and the establishment of Te Aka Whai Ora, the Māori Health Authority.”
The Listener didn’t appear to be better informed either. In an article published in that magazine a week later, Smail wrote:
“In the arena of health, the wisdom of Māori healers — some of which included what would today be described as very much in-vogue ‘wellness’ — was outlawed through the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.
That’s right, laws were made banning Māori from using traditional healing practices that have since undergone a revival.” Again, that is not what the historical record shows. And, in fact, the Act was regarded as largely ineffectual. Some suspected it was aimed principally at the prophet and faith healer Rua Kēnana, but it was never used against him.
Not only was the legislation used sparingly — leading to only nine convictions — but prosecutions included a “White Tohunga”, Pakeha nurse Mary Anne Hill, of Grey Lynn, Auckland. Several of her patients (presumably Māori) died after she had treated them.
Smail’s columns — as well as positive reviews of her booklet on Stuff and The Spinoff — were part of a promotional push for her very slender publication ‘Understanding Te Tiriti — A Handbook of Basic Facts about Te Tiriti o Waitangi’, which went on sale early this year. Its basic premise is that the rangatira who signed Te Tiriti never ceded sovereignty to the Crown, and therefore the government had no constitutional right to make laws that applied to Māori.
In her opinion, such laws included the Tohunga Suppression Act — which, she says, “made Māori healthcare and science illegal”.
This is gross misinformation. And even if Smail’s argument that Māori never ceded sovereignty has currency in some quarters, that is no justification for misrepresenting the purpose and effect of the Act itself. Furthermore, not mentioning that the law was a Māori initiative, and thus providing important historical context, is intellectually dishonest.
I emailed Smail in early February to ask: 1. Do you know that the Tohunga Suppression Act was introduced to Parliament by (Sir) James Carroll, who was Māori, and the Minister of Native Affairs (and later Acting Prime Minister on two occasions)?
2. Do you know that all four MPs holding Māori electorates — including Apirana Ngata — voted in favour of the bill?
3. Do you know that a prosecution could only be brought under the Act with the approval of the Minister of Native Affairs? (James Carroll held that position from 1899 to 1912, which meant he, or his successors, could ensure the law was not used to unfairly punish or persecute Māori.)
4. Do you also know that the Act did not “[ban] Māori from using traditional healing practices” — and that it was, in fact, solely aimed at “charlatans”?
Smail did not respond to my email — nor to a second one I sent last week copying in her publisher, Wai Ako Books, in an effort to prompt a reply.
Her guide certainly looks like it will be popular. The Auckland public library system holds 30 copies. At the beginning of this week, there were 29 readers requesting a copy as soon as one becomes available.
Christchurch’s libraries hold 11 copies, and Wellington, five. Rotorua Library has one copy, while Hutt City Libraries has eight copies on order.
It is also advertised on Wheelers publishing website as an educational resource for schools.
Given that the 31-page booklet will undoubtedly be widely read — including by school students — perhaps Smail should amend any new edition to make it clear the Tohunga Suppression Act was an initiative led and endorsed by prominent Māori politicians and doctors, and that it was aimed specifically at curbing the activities of “charlatans” but not of genuine practitioners.
However, reporting the facts accurately would obviously undermine her narrative of colonial oppression. The chances of a revision seem slim.
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by ThePlatform.kiwi and is published here with kind permission.
The Act has been regularly cited for years as an example of vast government overreach. In 2018, legal researcher Max Harris wrote a column for e-tangata titled “Racism and White Defensiveness in Aotearoa: A Pākehā Perspective” that included this extraordinary assertion: “Strong Māori agency didn’t stop the government from violently intervening in many aspects of Māori life. For example, the government threw the peaceful leaders of resistance at Parihaka (Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi) into jail in 1881, and banned traditional Māori health and healing practices through the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.”
Few commentators seem to feel the need to actually read the four short clauses of the Act, or examine the circumstances in which it arose, or acknowledge that the legislation was presented to Parliament by Sir James Carroll — one of Māoridom’s most-eminent statesmen, who was the first Māori to win a general electorate seat and who served as Acting Prime Minister in 1909 and 1911.
Furthermore, the four MPs holding the Māori seats — Apirana Ngata, Hōne Heke Ngāpua, Tame Parata and Henare Kaihau — supported the bill.
It was also strongly backed by Māui Pōmare, who became New Zealand’s first Māori doctor in 1899 — and Minister of Health in 1923.
Appointed Māori Health Officer in 1901, Pōmare was a fierce critic of the practices of some tohunga. These included treating feverish patients by putting them in cold water and plying them with alcohol, as well as exorcising devils. Much to his outrage, the ministrations of tohunga had led to the deaths of 17 children in one pā alone.
Former Cabinet minister Willie Jackson knows his history and is a rare exception among politicians in being willing to publicly correct the myth. In an article in Stuff in 2017, he acknowledged that Apirana Ngata took a bold stand in backing the Tohunga Suppression Act — and pointed out that the influential politician was “more concerned about mortal risks posed by charlatans dispensing lethal concoctions than any diminishment of Māori traditions and knowledge”.
Yet the latter falsehood persists — and is repeatedly propagated in the media — as the truth limps a long way behind it.
On December 31 last year, for example, The Post published a column by Treaty lawyer Roimata Smail that stated: “In the English version of the Treaty, the Crown asserted sovereignty — power to make laws affecting everyone, including Māori. [This] had swift and severe consequences, as the Crown enacted laws intruding into every aspect of Māori lives. The Tohunga Suppression Act criminalised Māori healthcare and science…”
Later in the same column, Smail doubled down: “The Tohunga Suppression Act once criminalised Māori healthcare…” It did nothing of the sort, of course. The Act was solely aimed at those using traditional Māori healing practices who also presented themselves as having supernatural or spiritual powers. It was directed specifically at anyone who — as the second clause put it — “gathers Maoris around him by practising on their superstition or credulity, or who misleads or attempts to mislead any Maori by professing or pretending to profess supernatural powers in the treatment of cure of any disease, or in the foretelling of future events”.
The law made no attempt to prohibit many of the traditional treatments used by tohunga, such as medicinal plants and herbs, even if they turned out to be worthless.
The Post’s editors presumably don’t know much about the Act themselves or they might have made sure the correct information reached their readers. Perhaps they simply took Smail at her word on account of her background. The biographical notes on her publisher’s website describe her as a “lawyer specialising for two decades in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. She represented lead claimants in the Waitangi Tribunal inquiry that led to the watershed Hauora Report and the establishment of Te Aka Whai Ora, the Māori Health Authority.”
The Listener didn’t appear to be better informed either. In an article published in that magazine a week later, Smail wrote:
“In the arena of health, the wisdom of Māori healers — some of which included what would today be described as very much in-vogue ‘wellness’ — was outlawed through the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.
That’s right, laws were made banning Māori from using traditional healing practices that have since undergone a revival.” Again, that is not what the historical record shows. And, in fact, the Act was regarded as largely ineffectual. Some suspected it was aimed principally at the prophet and faith healer Rua Kēnana, but it was never used against him.
Not only was the legislation used sparingly — leading to only nine convictions — but prosecutions included a “White Tohunga”, Pakeha nurse Mary Anne Hill, of Grey Lynn, Auckland. Several of her patients (presumably Māori) died after she had treated them.
Smail’s columns — as well as positive reviews of her booklet on Stuff and The Spinoff — were part of a promotional push for her very slender publication ‘Understanding Te Tiriti — A Handbook of Basic Facts about Te Tiriti o Waitangi’, which went on sale early this year. Its basic premise is that the rangatira who signed Te Tiriti never ceded sovereignty to the Crown, and therefore the government had no constitutional right to make laws that applied to Māori.
In her opinion, such laws included the Tohunga Suppression Act — which, she says, “made Māori healthcare and science illegal”.
This is gross misinformation. And even if Smail’s argument that Māori never ceded sovereignty has currency in some quarters, that is no justification for misrepresenting the purpose and effect of the Act itself. Furthermore, not mentioning that the law was a Māori initiative, and thus providing important historical context, is intellectually dishonest.
I emailed Smail in early February to ask: 1. Do you know that the Tohunga Suppression Act was introduced to Parliament by (Sir) James Carroll, who was Māori, and the Minister of Native Affairs (and later Acting Prime Minister on two occasions)?
2. Do you know that all four MPs holding Māori electorates — including Apirana Ngata — voted in favour of the bill?
3. Do you know that a prosecution could only be brought under the Act with the approval of the Minister of Native Affairs? (James Carroll held that position from 1899 to 1912, which meant he, or his successors, could ensure the law was not used to unfairly punish or persecute Māori.)
4. Do you also know that the Act did not “[ban] Māori from using traditional healing practices” — and that it was, in fact, solely aimed at “charlatans”?
Smail did not respond to my email — nor to a second one I sent last week copying in her publisher, Wai Ako Books, in an effort to prompt a reply.
Her guide certainly looks like it will be popular. The Auckland public library system holds 30 copies. At the beginning of this week, there were 29 readers requesting a copy as soon as one becomes available.
Christchurch’s libraries hold 11 copies, and Wellington, five. Rotorua Library has one copy, while Hutt City Libraries has eight copies on order.
It is also advertised on Wheelers publishing website as an educational resource for schools.
Given that the 31-page booklet will undoubtedly be widely read — including by school students — perhaps Smail should amend any new edition to make it clear the Tohunga Suppression Act was an initiative led and endorsed by prominent Māori politicians and doctors, and that it was aimed specifically at curbing the activities of “charlatans” but not of genuine practitioners.
However, reporting the facts accurately would obviously undermine her narrative of colonial oppression. The chances of a revision seem slim.
Graham Adams is an Auckland-based freelance editor, journalist and columnist. This article was originally published by ThePlatform.kiwi and is published here with kind permission.
7 comments:
Fascinating. I hope your article goes far and wide. NZ definitely needs more truth like this right now. Keep up the great work, Graham.
I'll take your word for it Graham, that Willie Jackson knows his history. Good for him. it's not common amongst those with a grievance, as you point out. How ignominious. Thank you once again for painstakingly spelling out the truth - but who reads it? they don't!
What is or was the legend on the gate to the Ratana church at Ratana? Logan Campbell in his book Poenamao (and others, like Polak)) had interesting observations about tohunga. But presumably no maori deign to read such objective material.
Willie Jackson certainly has a more accurate understanding of the Tohunga Suppression Act than Roimata Smail, or even Max Harris, who is a seriously bright (if incurably woke) lawyer.
And of course the three left-wing MPs who referred to it in Parliament last week are no better.
It's become lazy shorthand to use the Act as evidence of a cruel Pakeha colonial state even when it has no connection with historical reality.
It's become just another stick to beat Pakeha with that goes unquestioned in the media.
Check out Frederick Maning (1812 -1883) and his book Old New Zealand. Fascinating.
Hi Anonymous 12.13. The recent RNZ series Balck Sheep covered Maning. Key parts of the book, such as the fight for life with an intruder, omitted by pro maori RNZ. But his classic quote in a private letter sounds like the private opinion of a long term uncaptured Waitangi Tribunal member. Prgrammes available on line.
Maning was an interesting character and intermittently strongly Maori and strongly settler. However his book is about experiences living with Maori. Some parts are morbidly funny, some very sad and others interestingly. He is highly critical of tapu and tohunga. Read the book and form your own opinions. The book is readable albeit idiosyncratic in style. It should be mandatory in schools - history, social studies, English and general studies.
Post a Comment