4 Transactions. 



wherever these people congregated they were attacked, dis- 

 persed, and massacred until not one place of any importance 

 was left them as a fortress, and the wretched remnant of these 

 once important tribes was a number of frightened fugitives 

 furtively living so long only as they could escape their foe's 

 notice. So severely were the tribes dealt with that, even count- 

 ing Ngatiraukawa, a Government censor in 1860 estimated the 

 total Native population of the Manawatu at six hundred persons. 

 The conquered territory was parcelled out. Ngatiawa had the 

 south, Ngatitoa the centre, while the northern portion, including 

 the Rangitikei and Manawatu, was allotted to the Ngatiraukawa. 

 To use the words of an old Native, — 



"30th April, 1866. 

 "To Captain Russell, Native Minister. 



"What we have said is true — neither Ngatiawa, Rangitane, 

 nor Muaupoko have anything to do with it [the land]. The truth 

 is, on our arrival they were all killed or beaten by Te Rauparaha. 

 The mana of the land had also departed, and they remained 

 slaves. Again, Te Rauparaha was continually slaying the people 

 who had murdered his children. On account of our long residence 

 at last Rauparaha ceased slaying them, and then they lived. 

 The word of Rauparaha went forth, Let the land remain for 

 Raukaroa as far as Rangitikei, as far as Otaki. By this time 

 we obtained authority over these lands, and by this our with- 

 holding the land is just. Again, we have been living on it for 

 many years. We have lived on the land thirty-one years. The 

 fire of Ngatiapa has not been kindled up to the present day. 

 This is why our speech has been put forth — first Governor 

 Grey, second Governor Browne, third Governor Grey again. 

 Our determination to hold fast the land is fixed and will never 

 cease." 



Now, were the Ngatiraukawa justified from a Native point 

 of view in this claim ? In order to be in a position to fairly 

 estimate this, certain salient features should be borne in mind, 

 which it seems to me have been lost sight of by most of those 

 who have given the matter impartial consideration. One 

 cardinal factor dominates any theory on the subject — a 

 factor entirely opposed to our common views of titles to 

 land. We must eliminate from the discussion all question 

 or idea as to who owned the land. Maoris knew no owner- 

 ship in land. No individual owned land, no hapu owned 

 land, no tribe owned land. Over certain very limited areas 

 individuals possessed certain usufructuary rights — in certain 

 game - places, cultivations, and eel - weirs families or hapus 

 might have a joint right, excluding to some extent the rest 

 of the tribe — while the aggregate of these rights of enjoy- 



