Home-garden production was recorded for the only time in the population census of 1956, 344,104 households (62·4 per cent) having home gardens. Of those with gardens, 28·7 per cent grew some potatoes and 29·7 per cent some vegetables. All probably had flower gardens. Home gardens are usually between one-eighth to one-quarter acre, the average probably being one-sixth. Nearly all gardens are planned, developed, and tended by the owner himself; there are very few landscape architects or jobbing gardeners. New Zealand's climate encourages the growing of a range of plants wider than that of any other country of like size; indeed, probably as great a range is grown here as in the whole of the United States. For instance, one nurseryman grows more than 3,000 varieties of woody plants.

The early settlers brought with them an English love of gardening. Early records and pictures show that gardens were established as soon as houses were built. Mainly European fruits, flowers, and vegetables were naturally preferred as New Zealand had few suitable native ornamental plants or vegetables. Citrus were favourite fruits in the warmer parts. At the same time, introduced trees were used for shelter planting on farms. It is hard to realise in Taranaki and the Waikato, for example, that Pinus radiata, macrocarpa (Cupressus macrocarpa), and Lawson's cypress (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana) are not native to New Zealand. And in Central Otago, the Lombardy poplar's spring and autumn colours now lend a natural, almost native, beauty to the countryside.

It was not long before many of these introduced plants flourished aggressively and became trouble-some weeds, especially gorse and sweet brier and, more recently, Cape tulip (Homeria collina) and water hyacinth (Eichornia crassipes).

Many of the large farm homesteads which were established some 60 to 100 years ago, and planted in the English eighteenth century “landscape” fashion, are now places of great beauty with many fine specimen plants. Nowadays farm homesteads are more modest and can hardly be distinguished from larger suburban properties. Most of the early larger city gardens (often 1-acre sections) are now subdivided. A few specimen plants from these still exist – old camellias in Wadestown, Wellington, or Norfolk Island pines in Mount Smart Road, Onehunga. Historic and notable trees are at present being recorded by the New Zealand Forest Service and the Royal New Zealand Institute of Horticulture. Many such plants and trees were imported or grown by nurserymen, and the wide range of their nurseries was an indication of community interest in trees, shrubs, and flowers.

(1799–1869).

Founder of the first Jewish congregation in New Zealand.

Abraham Hort was well known among London's Jewry, where he earned a reputation as a philanthropist long before he thought of coming to New Zealand. He had filled the highest positions in the Duke's Place Synagogue and had served upon many charitable boards. As an intimate friend of Sir Isaac Lyon Goldsmid, Bt., a director of the New Zealand Company, he became interested in the Company's plans. In order to explore the suitability of New Zealand as a field for Jewish immigration, with a view to relieving the pressure on Jewish charities at home, Hort arrived in Wellington on 2 January 1843, where his son Abraham Hort junior had established an importing business some years earlier. Before leaving London, Hort received from Solomon Herschell, Chief Rabbi of England, a written authority to establish a Jewish congregation in Wellington and “to promote Judaism in whatever way he thought fit” and, knowing the difficulty Jewish settlers experienced in finding brides within the faith, he brought out several young Jewesses, all of whom later married into the Wellington Jewish community. Shortly after his arrival Hort conducted the first Jewish service held in New Zealand, and immediately afterwards applied to Lt. Willoughby Shortland for a site for a synagogue and cemetery. This was approved on 16 May 1843.

Hort was elected one of the town's aldermen in October 1843 and signed the Wellington address of sympathy to the Nelson settlers after the Wairau affray. In 1845 he served on the military subcommittee for the defence of Wellington. Hort returned to London on the Clantarf in May 1859 and died there on 18 October 1869. His daughter, Jessie, married Nathaniel Levin, and another, Margaret, married Sir Francis Dillon Bell.

Hort was very active in Wellington's public meetings in the 1840s and 1850s, especially when the cause was philanthropic, while in the infant Jewish community he undertook the important role of pioneer organiser.

by Bernard John Foster, M.A., Research Officer, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

• History of the Jews in New Zealand, Goldman, L. M. (1958).

(Pseudowintera colorata).

This is a small to tall shrub common in montane to subalpine forests from the Mamuku Plateau southwards to Stewart Island. In the southern part of its distribution it extends from the lowlands to the timberline. It is unpalatable to deer and as these introduced animals (mainly red deer) eat out the forest undergrowth, horopito frequently takes its place. Thus it is becoming very common in some broadleaf forests. Frequently it forms thickets after the destruction of forest. The leaves are up to 2 in. long, about elliptic, dull green and red-blotched above. They are glaucous below and are peppery to taste. The small flowers occur in fascicles; the fruits are dark-red to black and fleshy.

Another species, P. axillaris, is also known as horopito. It occurs in lowland and lower montane forests from the north to the top half of the South Island. It is taller growing, forming a small tree up to 25 ft high; the leaves are larger and glossy above and the fruit is red. The two species hybridise where they meet.

Pseudowintera is an endemic New Zealand genus of what is considered a most primitive family of flowering plants, the Winteraceae. Most members of this family are found in tropical South-East Asia and South America.

by Alec Lindsay Poole, M.SC., B.FOR.SC., F.R.S.N.Z., Director-General of Forests, Wellington.

G.C.S.I., C.B., F.R.S.(1817–1911).

Botanist.

A new biography of Hooker, Joseph Dalton appears in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography on this site.

Joseph Dalton Hooker was born at Halesworth, Suffolk, on 30 June 1817, the second son of Sir William Jackson Hooker, regius professor of botany at the University of Glasgow and, afterwards, director of Kew Gardens. He was educated at Glasgow High School and at the University, where he graduated M.D. in 1839. In that year Sir James Clark Ross took him as naturalist in HMS Erebus on his Antarctic expedition. During the winter months (1840–42) the expedition explored Tasmania, New Zealand, and the Falkland Islands. Hooker spent three months in New Zealand and, with Colenso and Sinclair, made many botanical excursions and collected many specimens. On his return to England in 1843 he began to collate the botanical results of his explorations – his two-volume Flora Novae Zelan-diae appearing from 1852 to 1854. About 1843 Hooker became friendly with Charles Darwin and in the succeeding years the two discussed every point of Darwin's theory of evolution. From 1848 to 1851 he explored northern India and little-known regions of the Himalayas, collecting specimens for his Flora Indica. He became assistant director at Kew in 1855; and, in 1860, began work on the monumental Genera Plantarum (1862–83). In 1865 he succeeded his father as director of Kew, with the result that, for the next 20 years, administrative matters restricted the time he could devote to original research. Nevertheless, he found time to publish descriptive Floras for several colonial Governments, his Handbook of New Zealand Flora being completed in 1867. After his retirement from Kew in 1885 he continued his researches and explorations. In 1896 he edited the EndeavourJournal of Sir Joseph Banks.

Among the many honours showered upon Hooker were three from New Zealand institutions: he was an honorary member of the Philosophical Institute of Canterbury (1863); a silver medallist at the New Zealand Industrial Exhibition (1865); and an honorary member of the New Zealand Institute (1871). He died at Sunningdale, England, on 10 December 1911.

After his death the London Times wrote of Hooker: “He is perhaps the most distinguished botanist of his time. Certainly as a field botanist he had an unrivalled knowledge gained … from personal study and observation in almost every quarter of the globe… He will be most remembered for his labours in geographical botany. Essays like those on the ‘Flora of Australia’ and ‘The Distribution of Arctic Plants’ were largely instrumental in overthrowing the old doctrine of the ‘immutability of species’”.

by Bernard John Foster, M.A., Research Officer, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

• Life and Letters of Sir J. D. Hooker, Huxley, L., ed. (1953)
• The Times (London), 12 Dec 1911 (Obit).

(1893–1928). MONCRIEFF, Lieutenant John R. (1899–1928).

Aviators.

The brief biographies of Hood and Moncrieff are as inseparable in history as they are in public recollection. These men perished together somewhere out at sea in a gallant if somewhat ill-organised attempt to be the first to fly the Tasman from Australia to New Zealand. Before they began to plan their flight they were ordinary undistinguished individuals, differing from the general run of their fellows only in the passion they had for flying, but from the moment of the announcement of their venture their names became widely known. George Hood was the son of a pioneer Wairarapa settler, F. Hood, and was born under the shadow of the Tararuas in 1893. He left the farm to serve in the First World War, and returned to New Zealand with only one leg. Despite this he was posted to the Territorial Air Force Reserve where he continued to be keenly interested in aviation.

John Moncrieff was a New Zealander by adoption. Born in Scotland in 1899, he came to New Zealand at the age of 16 and trained first as a motor engineer, later joining the infant New Zealand Air Force. He was rejected for active service flying in the First World War on account of his youth, but he joined an infantry unit in the later stages of the conflict and from there contrived to be transferred to the Royal Air Force, with which he served in France. On his return to New Zealand in 1919 he was, like Hood, posted to the Territorial Air Force Reserve, and here the two met. The ill-fated flight was originally conceived by Moncrieff, but the final plans were made and carried out by Moncrieff, Hood, and an Australian, Captain Knight, whose life was preserved only by the fact that the plane which they eventually acquired could carry only two. Knight lost out on the venture by the toss of a coin. In spite of many discouragements, including finance, the difficulty of securing a suitable aircraft, and fierce official opposition on both sides of the Tasman, the partners procured a Ryan monoplane, similar to the one used by Lindbergh in his Atlantic crossing, and the projected flight was announced on 23 December 1927. Test flights, apparently not over-exhaustive, were carried out, the Government ban was lifted, and the Aotearoa, as the plane was named, took off from Richmond, Sydney, on the afternoon of 10 January 1928. It was a 1,450-mile hop to Trentham, Wellington, and the plane's communications equipment was only elementary, relying on the morse code, in which neither of the airmen was very proficient. Little is known of the flight but carefully weighed evidence after the event established that the flyers were still airborne 12 hours after leaving Sydney on a flight which they estimated would take 14 hours. Their two wives, Mrs Laura Hood and Mrs Dorothy Moncrieff, waited at Trentham Racecourse with thousands of others, but the Aotearoa failed to arrive. The exact fate of the plane has never been finally determined, but the daring and spectacular adventure ended in failure and tragedy.

George Hood was the more experienced of the two airmen. He was a man of strong purpose and natural reserve, with a fierce dislike of anything in the nature of publicity hunting or stunting. He was considered to be completely devoid of fool-hardiness, but full of confidence as to the outcome of the flight, which he saw as the precursor of a commercial service across the Tasman.

John Moncrieff was a vigorous, wiry, muscular man in the prime of life, quick-witted and resourceful. He had plenty of the dour determination of the Scot, but was at the same time mercurially adventurous, and on active service had shown that he possessed a brain quick to act in the face of emergency and danger.

by Ronald Jones, Journalist and Script Writer, New Zealand Broadcasting Corporation, Wellington.

• Evening Post, 11, 12, 13, 14 Jan 1928.

In New Zealand the procedure for recommending candidates for the New Year or Birthday lists is quite unofficial and, in the event of fewer names being received than the honours available, the Government never canvasses to fill the lists. Nor is it in any way mandatory that recommendations should be made. No recommendations were sent forward for the Birthday list in 1931 “for it was felt that with the depression and the serious economic crisis the matter was one that could well stand over until the next opportunity”. This reason still applied when recommendations for the 1932 New Year list were considered, and again no New Zealand names were sent forward. In 1940 the practice of forwarding New Zealand names for inclusion in the list of civil honours was discontinued for the duration of the war and was not resumed until New Year 1946. Following the publication of the Birthday list in June 1946, the Prime Minister was questioned in the House about the procedure of recommendation for honours. He replied: “It has been the custom for many years for His Majesty's advisers to receive recommendations and sometimes requests from many sources, including members of Parliament, local bodies, and various organisations, for names to be placed on the honours list. These are carefully scrutinised and considered, due regard being paid to geographical allocation. The final acceptance does not … rest with His Majesty's advisers. As the honours to be conferred are limited in number a certain amount of criticism can be expected”. When pressed for an explanation of the sources of such recommendations the Prime Minister said: “Ever since the country had been a Crown Colony, the intention aimed at and the invariable practice in dealing with honours was that those people or organisations who considered certain persons had given faithful service in some public capacity, that was conducive to the advancement or benefit of the country and its people, would submit the names to His Majesty's advisers, and the list of names would be considered with due regard to the geographical allocation…. The Government had always accepted suggestions from both sides of both Houses and from representatives of local bodies, such as chairmen of county councils, but no government could guarantee that all suggestions would be adopted, because there was only a limited number of honours available and a selection had to be made – indeed any public body or private person could make recommendations….”.

In view of the very large number of candidates for the few honours available, there are often criticisms about prominent or deserving persons being omitted from the lists. In many cases a name many be omitted because it is felt that there is no fitting honour available. Such a person may not be offered a Knight Bachelorship because it is felt that his services merit a K.C.M.G. or higher, and there may not be a vacancy in the appropriate order. In most cases, also, the persons recommended are not approached in the matter until the recommendation has been approved by the Sovereign. Before the lists are gazetted they are then asked if they will accept the honour.

by Bernard John Foster, M.A., Research Officer, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

• The Statutes of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath (1948)
• The Statutes of the Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George (1954)
• The Statutes of the Royal Victorian Order (consolidated and revised, 1936)
• The Statutes of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (1954)
• The Statutes of the Imperial Service Order (1954)
• Guide to Titles, Pine, L. G. (1959)
• De Brett's Peerage, Baronetage, Knightage and Companionage (1954)
• New Zealand Parliamentary Debates, Vol. 273 (3 Jul 1946)
• Dominion, 5 Jul 1946, 26 Sep 1957.

The system of conferring honours is governed by provisions of the statutes constituting the various orders and, as the following chart shows, the number of honours available in any year and the mode of making recommendations are strictly defined. In addition, most orders contain provisions limiting the total number of awards that may be made in any year or group of years. Commonwealth Prime Ministers cannot recommend persons for admission to the Orders of the Garter, Thistle, Bath (Civil Division), Merit, or the Royal Victorian Order. The Companions of Honour appear, although this is not clearly specified in the statute, to be granted on the recommendation of the British Prime Minister. In the orders open for conferment upon citizens of Commonwealth countries a certain proportion of the total number of places in all classes is reserved for these. These may only be filled by recommendations from this source or from the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations. When the Commonwealth places in any order are filled no further awards may be made until a vacancy occurs.

In proportion to population, the Commonwealth countries are liberally treated.

The practice of conferring British honours on distinguished persons in New Zealand dates from 1858 when the then Governor, Sir Thomas Gore Browne, was invited to bring deserving cases to the notice of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. Originally these recommendations, which were made by the Governor without reference to his ministers, were for one or other of the classes in the Civil Division of the Order of the Bath. Later, probably in the 1860s, the Governor consulted unofficially with the Premier whenever recommendations were to be made. In the early 1870s the Statutes of the Order of St. Michael and St. George were revised to enable colonial statesmen to receive honours for their services. Until after the passing of the Statute of Westminster, however, colonial honours were notified in the English lists, although, on occasion, the Governor was informed in time to make a simultaneous announcement. By 1931 the New Zealand Prime Minister had assumed a larger part in preparing the list of recommendations. Up until the First World War honours were conferred only in the two orders already mentioned, as well as in the Imperial Service Order (since 1902) and in the degree of Knight Bachelor. Only one or two New Zealanders were included and sometimes years might pass between successive conferments. The constitution of the Order of the British Empire, in 1917, has meant that more honours are available for Commonwealth citizens. The practice of publishing honours lists at the New Year and on the occasion of the Sovereign's birthday is comparatively recent, being adopted in the early years of this century. Previous to this New Zealand creations were either “spontaneous”, as in the case of Sir William Fox and Sir Edward Stafford, or were made on the anniversary of the orders concerned.

(c. 1780–1828)

Ngapuhi war chief.

A new biography of Hongi Hika appears in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography on this site.

Hongi Hika was born about 1780 near Kaikohe, the son of Te Hotete, chief of Te Tahuna (Kaikohe), and Tuhikura. Through his father, Hongi was descended from Rahiri and from Puhi-moana-ariki, the eponymous ancestor of the Ngapuhi. He was thus a member of the senior chiefly line of his tribe and related to all the principal Ngapuhi chiefs of his day.

In 1806 Hongi first attracted attention as a warrior during a series of indecisive engagements between the Ngapuhi, under their fighting chief Pokaia, and their traditional enemies, the Te Roroa hapu of Ngati Whatua. Such was his prowess on this occasion that, in the following year, he was one of the tribal leaders, at the battle of Moremonui, where the Ngapuhi were successfully ambushed by Murupaenga, of Ngati Whatua. Pokaia was killed in this engagement and the Ngapuhi only escaped because Murupaenga forbade pursuit. In 1808 Hongi was present at the battle between the Ngati Korokoro branch of Ngapuhi and the Te Roroa at Wai-mamaku. Although this skirmish was indecisive, Hongi was greatly impressed by the effectiveness of the Ngapuhi muskets against traditional Maori weapons. In 1812-13 Hongi led a large taua into the lower Hokianga district. His object was to punish the Ngati Pou for eating some of the Ngapuhi who had fallen at Moremo-nui. He besieged Whiria pa unsuccessfully, being forced to withdraw when he heard that Tuoho had reduced his own Pakinga pa near Kaikohe. Hongi retaliated by taking, with much slaughter, Te Tehi's pa on the lower Waihou. He then crossed Hokianga Harbour and destroyed Tuoho's pa, Maeri-rangi.

In August 1814 Hongi visited Sydney, accompanied by his nephew Ruatara, Kendall, and Hall. There he met Marsden, whom he impressed by his courteous demeanour and by his apparently insatiable curiosity about European culture and customs. He returned to New Zealand in December 1814 and assisted Marsden to establish his first mission station. After Ruatara's death a few months later, Hongi and Korokoro waited on the missionaries and promised to protect the infant mission. Thereafter he was the constant protector of all the missions within his territories. He was ever anxious to encourage the presence of Europeans among his people for the material benefits they could bring, and he punished, with exemplary severity, any Maoris who committed offences against them.

Although Hongi displayed a great interest in European agriculture, military affairs were his principal preoccupation and he lost no opportunity to acquire muskets and ammunition. In January 1817 he led a fleet of canoes to make peace with the tribes living at North Cape. On the way, however, he quarrelled with the Whangaroa tribes and returned home hastily, because he feared his new foes might attack the mission during his absence.

In January and February 1818 two Ngapuhi expeditions set out from the Bay of Islands to avenge past wrongs done by the East Cape tribes. The first of these was commanded by Te Morenga and the second by Hongi. On the way the latter joined forces with the Ngati Paoa chief, Te Haupo, and their combined fleets ravaged many places in the Bay of Plenty district. They reached Hicks Bay, where Te Haupo was killed in a skirmish with the Ngati Porou. In January 1819 Hongi's expedition returned to the Bay of Islands bearing with it nearly 2,000 prisoners and many dried heads. In August Hongi was preparing to chastise the Whangaroa Maoris, but agreed to defer this pleasure until after Marsden left New Zealand. He did, however, become involved in a minor affray at Oruru when he went there to collect his father-in-law's bones. About this time Hongi signed a deed granting the missionaries land for a new station at Kerikeri.

On 2 March 1820 Hongi and Waikato left in the whaler New Zealander to visit England, where they spent several months in the care of Kendall and Leigh. The two chiefs stayed at Cambridge for a short time and helped Professor Lee, who was then compiling a Maori dictionary for the Church Missionary Society. Hongi was well received everywhere he went. He again showed his interest in the arts and crafts of the country and in British military organisation. George IV received him in audience and presented him with a suit of chain mail and several guns. While in England Hongi went to great pains to secure guns and exchanged many of the presents which were showered upon him for these. He returned to Sydney in the Speke and, while there, secured more arms and powder. He also learned of his son-in-law's death during a war against the Thames tribes. Two of the chiefs responsible, Te Hinaki and Te Horeta, were in Sydney at the time and Hongi spoke openly of his intention to lead a force against them as soon as he returned to New Zealand. The Thames chiefs, at Marsden's suggestion, abandoned their projected visit to England and returned to New Zealand with Hongi. The party reached the Bay of Islands on 11 July 1821 and, shortly afterwards, Hongi began to prepare for his campaign. On 5 September 2,000 Ngapuhi, armed with 1,000 muskets, laid siege to Mauinaina pa at Tamaki. It was taken with great slaughter – Te Hinaki and 2,000 of his men, as well as many women and children, being killed. The victorious force remained on the battlefield eating the vanquished until they were driven off by the smell of decaying bodies. After this Hongi laid siege to the Ngati Maru pa at Te Totara (Thames), but failed to reduce it after a two days' siege. He withdrew after making peace with the defenders, but returned under cover of darkness and took the pa without difficulty. As two of his near relatives were killed in this engagement, Hongi treasured the pretext for the new campaign he was meditating upon – against the Waikatos.

In January-February 1822 Hongi led 2,000 men against Matakitaki pa, which was situated near Pirongia. The taua's progress up the Waikato River was delayed by many obstacles left by the tribes retreating before them. They reached Matakitaki in May and reduced it without difficulty. Many Waikatos were trampled to death when they fled from the Ngapuhi guns. The Waikato chiefs, Te Wherowhero and Te Kanawa, managed to rally some of their tribesmen and succeeded in beating the Ngapuhis back into the pa. Other Waikatos retreated to Orongokoekoe, where they were again defeated by the Ngapuhi superior weapons. Shortly after this, at Otorohanga, Te Wherowhero surprised a small band of Ngapuhi who had captured most of the principal women of Ngati Mahuta. Hongi soon led his party back to the Bay of Islands, while the Waikatos took refuge in the fastnesses of the upper Mokau.

Early in 1823 Hongi invaded the Rotorua district on the pretext of avenging a tribal murder. With Te Wera and Pomare, he led a huge taua inland from Maketu and besieged the Arawas on Mokoia Island. Later in the same year he made peace with the Waikatos, whom he permitted to reoccupy their tribal lands. In 1824 Hongi planned a campaign against his traditional enemies – the Ngati Whatua. A great battle was fought in 1825 at Te-Ika-a-ranga-nui, when the Ngapuhi lost 70 men and their foes over 1,000. After this he led a smaller party to Rotorua and thence to the Waikato in search of Ngati Whatua survivors. He overtook these at Nohoawatea pa, near Otawhao, where a further engagement was fought. As a result of Hongi's preoccupation with the Ngati Whatua, their close relatives, the Ngati Raukawa, emigrated southwards to join Te Rauparaha. In January 1827, during a skirmish at Mangamuka beach near Hokianga, Hongi received a bullet wound in his lungs. After this he returned to Whangaroa, where he died on 6 March 1828.

Hongi had two wives. One was Tangiwhare, the mother of Riparo (born c. 1804) and a daughter. The other was Turi-ke-tuha, the blind wife who accompanied and advised him on all his campaigns. She was the mother of Hare Hongi (c. 1803–25), who was killed at Te-Ika-a-ranga-nui, and of Harata, who later married Hone Heke.

Hongi Hika was not a great military tactician, but depended for his success principally upon the superiority of muskets over traditional Maori weapons. The Ngapuhi were defeated on many occasions when smaller forces could be deployed strategically against them. Among his foes, Murupaenga and Te Wherowhero were both better generals. Hongi's campaigns were fought according to the traditional rules of Maori warfare and were, in this respect, no more barbarously conducted than those of Te Rauparaha in his own time, or of Titokowaru or Te Kooti a generation later. His use of muskets in close proximity to his enemy, however, was the reason for his enemy's casualties being so much higher. In this connection it is perhaps worth noting that the European settlements in the Auckland isthmus later, in large measure, insulated the Ngapuhis from the vengeance of their southern enemies when they, too, obtained firearms.

by Bernard John Foster, M.A., Research Officer, Department of Internal Affairs, Wellington.

• Maori Wars of the Nineteenth Century, Smith, S. P. (1910)
• Nine Months Residence in New Zealand in 1827, Earle, A. (1909)
• From Tasman to Marsden, McNab, R. (1914).