A treaty is defined in literature as a contract in writing between two or more political authorities such as states or sovereigns, formally signed by representatives duly authorized and usually ratified by the law making authority of the state. These days we appear to be not allowed to discuss / debate what the treaty actually means in today’s world.
Questions arise therefore as to why a treaty was needed between Maori and settlers. In 1840 a disparate gathering of Chiefs met at a place called Waitangi. Some of the more powerful chiefs feared for their loss of mana if they signed and called for Governor Hobson to leave; other smaller tribes sought protection from the larger tribes by readily accepting the terms and conditions of what we now call the Treaty of Waitangi. A famous Ngapuhi chief of the time, Tamati Waka Nene called on Governor Hobson to stay and preserve Maori customs but most importantly, protect the weaker tribes from being enslaved by the more powerful . The killing, the slavery the cannibalism had to end. Reason enough for the signing of the Treaty. The document we call the Treaty of Waitangi crucially served its purpose- that of ensuring sovereignty over New Zealand by Britain. Without the signing of the Treaty, the country would have been lawless, or even worse – French. Little is ever discussed about the intent of one Baron de Theirry who in 1837 announced he intended to claim French sovereignty over New Zealand. Real or imagined the threat caused one James Busby to call a meeting and hopefully sign a hastily worded document - the Treaty of Waitangi . The question however does arise -did Maori fully understand what their chiefs signed. Was sovereignty explained and understood in its entirety with implications reaching far into the future. The answer is very unlikely.
Meantime the New Zealand Company settlers at Port Nicholson (Wellington ) had already formed a” Government” and appointed magistrates who were making laws just three months after the signing of the Treaty . Governor Hobson quickly issued a proclamation establishing sovereignty over all of New Zealand in May of 1840. We should all be eternally grateful that through colonisation came the opportunity to end perpetual conflict and invoke the rule of law albeit 3 months after the Treaty was signed.
Surveyors, cadastral maps and the Torrens system of land transfer didn’t exist within Maoridom which is probably why so many battles were fought between the tribes. There was a need for enforceable peace . Something of an oxymoron perhaps.
Historians tell us that prior to the Treaty we have some missionaries to thank for supplying muskets to some tribes around 1815 onwards who used them to good effect against those tribes who only had tradition weapons. No contest really. It is conservatively estimated that 20,000 Maori were killed by other more powerful tribes armed with muskets . Little wonder the average age expectancy of Maori was 30.
In 1835 the peoples of the Chatham Islands ( Morori ) were very effectively colonized by mainland Maori who enslaved the survivors of the Maori invasion. These unfortunate people were forbidden to speak their own dialect, marry or practise their own culture which all sounds very familiar when discussions around the colonization of New Zealand and beyond occur.
Britain was the dominant power during the 19th century just as the ancient Egyptians , the Phoenicians, Greeks and Romans colonized their known world. Like it or not the world was and is shaped by conquest . No partnership ever occurred between the colonizing force and the conquered. Nor did one occur in New Zealand. Only 5 countries managed to escape colonization.
The actual Treaty of Waitangi document appears to have lain dormant for many decades which may well imply the Treaty had for the most part - served its purpose. The rancour we face today did not exist as the document was being slowly eaten by moths in a long forgotten draw -somewhere. We now face the politics of resentment as the articles of the Treaty are constantly re interpreted to mean whatever any individual grouping believes they mean.
From academia to architecture, from industry to the arts, from medicine to the legislature, Maori who wished to do so, have excelled. The Treaty therefore in so many aspects has been a real success especially with the integration between the races. If Te Parti Maori and the Greens had their way our differing worlds would be accentuated instead of being further integrated. A them and us mentality would be further enhanced. Question; there are believed to be 700,000 Maori living in Australia. Are they in so called partnership with the NZ Government ?
What then is the relevance of the Treaty of Waitangi today -especially given the freely debated and accepted settlements by Iwi all over the country. It is foolish in the extreme to believe that power and authority can be obtained simply by demanding it with loud voices and threatening behaviour by a political minority. It’s time to move on.
Gerry Eckhoff is a former councillor on the Otago Regional Council and MP.
1 comment:
Mate, as an historian you make a great regional councilor. Your reasons for the treaty don't even come close. The idea that a bunch of Maori chiefs just happened to be wandering around Waitangi on that fateful day in 1840 is reminiscent of the cartoon history that iwi elites tell. The actual reason came by way of the King's letter in 1831, signed by 13 northern chiefs, calling on Britain to become their friend and protector. The answer from Britain was, essentially, that they weren't interested in another colony, and in any event, under international law, the King couldn't act as a sovereign within another Sovereign State. This, incidentally, mistakenly elevated New Zealand to the status of 'Sovereign' when it, in fact, failed on every measure (single government over defined territory holding monopoly on violence etc.).
Between 1831 and 1840 the situation in New Zealand became considerably worse. The musket wars were threatening to completely annihilate the population and the French and other nations were sniffing around. So Britain finally agreed to become a friend and protector on the proviso that she be declared sovereign over the country. Again, this was purely an issue of international law: without sovereignty the sovereign could not act withing the territory.
As for whether Maori understood what they were signing? Do any of us fully understand every ramification of every contract that we've ever signed? In 1840 Maori were largely literate and had traveled widely. They knew what a Governor (Kawana) was from their visits to Sydney. They were amazed at the novel idea that one person could hold the monopoly on violence, and that he was the sole authority over the entire country. This was entirely at odds with the sway of the chief (rangatira) who held no such monopoly, nor authority, and he could only rule by way of reputation (mana) and power of persuasion. Others had traveled all the way to England and been entertained by royalty. Because of this, and as evidenced by the speeches in the tent that day, it is likely on the balance of probabilities that the knew very well what they were signing up for - a hugely superior form of government with the power to prevent them from killing themselves.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.