The Treaty of Waitangi – A History
The quest for pan hapu unity and a Maori nation began in the 1820′s with some rangatira beginning to talk about a Maori parliament. Two factors contributed to the Declaration of Independence. The first was a climate of perceived threat by both Maori and the Pakeha settlers. The second was disunity among the hapu making it difficult for them to present a united front to Pakeha demands. Maori were concerned at the increasing lawlessness of Pakeha who had settled here, together with their accelerating demands for land. This generated a growing unity amongst northern iwi who desired that Pakeha should control their own people. Traders and colonists also sought authority to control those of their own race who had settled here. Anglican missionaries sought to forestall the efforts of the French Catholics.
In 1831 thirteen rangatira of the north gathered at Kerikeri to sign a petition to King William IV. They requested the King be a “friend and guardian”, to protect them from foreign threat and the misconduct of British subjects already settled here. There was no question of handing over any autonomy to Britain. Those rangatira were clear in their desire to retain their autonomy and independence.
A national flag was adopted by twenty-five northern rangatira at Waitangi on 20 March 1834. The flag, an instrument for the registration of locally built ships, was used by Maori in their trading offshore, principally to Australia. More importantly it was an internationally recognisable symbol of Maori autonomy and nationhood. The flag gained widespread acceptance in other area (iwi) as a symbol of Maori sovereignty. Claudia Orange states “there was also talk of a parliament house and a passport system that included deportation of undesirable Europeans.”
On 28 October 1835 Busby assisted a group of thirty-three northern rangatira gathered at Waitangi to draw up the Declaration of Independence. It contained articles of confederation and declared the country to be independent. A confederation of tribes was formed to be known as the ‘United Tribes of New Zealand’. The rangatira declared their country to be an independent Maori state (he Wenua Rangatira) with all “sovereign power and authority residing in the rangatira in their collective capacities.” No legislative authority or governmental function could be exercised by other than the rangatira except as appointed by the confederation and acting under the authority of laws the confederation had enacted. They also petitioned King William IV “to be a parent to their infant state… its protector from all attempts upon its independence”. The Declaration used two significant terms: “te mana i te wenua” (the mana is the land) and “tino rangatiratanga” (full authority and control). Neither the mana nor the tino rangatairatanga in the land and its people would be transferred to any other power. Both terms assort that the sovereignty of the country lay firmly in Maori hands. Manuka Henare states “The Declaration was a statement by Maori to both the outside world and to themselves that these islands of Aotearoa and Te Waipounamu were to be an independent state.”
The declaration was signed by four more rangatira in 1836; three in 1837; two in 1838 and one more in 1839. Two notable southern leaders were amongst later signatories: Te Wherowhero Potatau of Waikato and Te Hapuku of Ngati Kahungunu. In effect the Declaration was being discussed and signed up to the time Te Tiriti o Waitangi was being drafted. This Maori initiative was a clear assertion of Maori sovereignty.
In later settler history the Declaration was presented as a somewhat fanciful event, organised by Busby for both Maori and British good, ‘the French are coming” being the catchcry. Such an interpretation legitimised ordered colonisation. However the Declaration had a more profound meaning to Maori, being an expression of their autonomy and independence. They have consistently referred to it in this way ever since. In the present day the document has begun to assume a wider significance. The Declaration has bee consistently referred to by Maori ever since. The Maori Congress in October 1993 called for universal recognition of the Declaration Of Independence of 1835. It launched an educational campaign by placing advertisements in Wellington’s two daily newspapers containing the full text of the declaration in both Maori and English.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi
Te Tiriti o Waitangi was initiated by Governor Hobson and first signed at Waitangi on 6 February 1840, then subsequently at the Wesleyan Mission station at Mangungu (with John Hobbs acting as interpreter). It was then taken to many other venues throughout the country, ultimately being signed by 482 rangatira. Historically it is of a different order to the Declaration of Independence. It was the initiative of a foreign power whose agenda was settlement of its nationals in this land. It was necessary in order to sanction colonisation. Like the Declaration it too was about mana i te whenua and te tino rangatiratanga, being an endorsement of the Declaration of Independence. Te Tiriti guaranteed Maori their tino rangatiratanga. In the words of the English translation of the Maori version, the Queen agreed to the rangatira and the iwi retaining full power and control (tino rangatiratanga) of their lands, their villages and all their taonga including the Maori way of life.
The Maori version of Te Tiriti confirmed tino rangatiratanga or Maori sovereignty over all things Maori in article 2. It granted to the Crown in article 1, kawanatanga, which is a transliteration of governorship. Maori would have been in no doubt as to the meaning of rangatiratanga, and on the basis of its being guaranteed in Te Tiriti, willing to sign it. In 1840 Maori had no desire and no need to give away their mana i te wenua and tino rangatiratanga affirmed just a few years earlier in the Declaration of Independence. What they gave to the Crown was limited power to control new settlers. That power was kawanatanga. In retaining tino rangatiratanga it was clear to Maori that their ability to control their own destiny was not diminished. In granting kawanatanga they saw that they would benefit from limited controlled immigration and the introduction of new technology. So Maori were to retain the substance of the land while the Queen was to have the shadow. Article 3 did not make Maori into British subjects. Rather it recognised the continuing right of Maori to en¬ joy their own laws, customs and lifestyle, just as British subjects enjoyed their own. There was some advantage however for Maori in being regarded as British. For instance it made travel overseas a lot easier. This was reinforced in article 4 which is part of the recorded tradition of the Treaty, where the Governor agreed to protect Maori ritenga or custom; also the choice of religion with particular reference to the Church of England, the Wesleyan Church and the Church of Rome.
However the English text of the Treaty which successive governments have relied on for their legitimacy, or their own unilateral proclamation of sovereignty, assumes that Maori gave away all their sovereign power to the Crown. Such an idea would never have been acceptable to Maori. 200,000 Maori had no need whatever to concede any power to just 2,000 settlers. They signed the Maori text because they knew what it meant. Their sovereignty was to remain intact.
When calling for recognition of the Declaration of Independence, the chief executive of the Maori Congress, Tu Williams, stated, the Treaty of Waitangi could not have been entered into without the Declaration, because treaties were made between nation states. He went on to say that both documents provide “a constitutional basis for a respectful relationship between the Crown and Maori tribes”.
On the incorrect assumption that Maori ceded sovereignty, successive governments have set about usurping their mana i te whenua and tino rangatiratanga. A significant step was the imposition and establishment of a Westminster style parliament in the 1852 Constitution Act, which deprived Maori of the right to control their own destiny by transferring power to the settlers. The denial of mana i te whenua and tino rangatiratanga has most recently been expressed in Treaty claims settlements policy, government social and economic ideology, electoral reform, republicanism, globalisation and GATT and in discussions on and government opposition to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Comments via Facebook