A few concluding remarks may be directed at the land title system that has evolved over the past 100-odd years and to some of its more general consequences.

In 1865 the Native Lands Act established the Native Land Court to give effect to the guarantee offered by the Crown in the Treaty of Waitangi to determine Maori title to land in accordance with custom, and otherwise to safeguard it. Judicial interpretation of this Act produced a series of interim title decisions as between tribe and tribe, for which the critical evidence was tribal tradition and genealogical descent. The principle followed in the first investigations was to determine the primacy of the claim of one set of ancestors over and against another and then to accept into the title, with or without conditions as to occupation, all persons tracing descent from these ancestors. The relative interests of the persons listed was expressed in various ways, but all was done with the ultimate purpose of evolving a working basis for partition.

Such, in brief, was the method devised to transmute a Maori title system, once defined by its own nexus of codified values, into one now valid in English common law and accessible to commerce. These preliminary investigations were litigious and complex enough: but it was not long before succession, intermarriage, and partition brought the first instalments of a process that has ended in the chaos of multiple ownership and fragmented holdings. Beyond the rare cases of single ownership, separate blocks of land came to be held by a number, either as tenants-in-common, i.e., conjointly, with the same or unequal shares, or, where individual interests had been partitioned, as tenants in severalty.

“Consolidation”, referred to earlier, was the first effective measure designed to counteract the degeneration of titles. It was sound in theory and undoubtedly served to improve Maori titles to the point where they could be used to raise development finance. Nevertheless, so long as titles can proliferate at the death of each generation of owners, the process will be never ending.

More recent devices include:

1. “Conversion”, in which the Maori Trustee (formerly the Native Trustee) buys interests in Maori land less than £25 in value and sells them to individual Maori or to Maori incorporations.

2. “The £10 Rule”, in which the Maori Land Court (formerly the Native Land Court) vests the whole of a deceased person's interest in any one (or more) successor to the exclusion of any other.

This is done without payment to those excluded, providing the value of any excluded interest is not more than £10.

by Ian Hugh Kawharu, M.A.(CANTAB.), B.SC.(N.Z.), B.LITT., D.PHIL.(OXON.), F.A.O. Research Fellow, University of Auckland.

It appears now, however, that although young Maoris are offering themselves for selection for State assistance, the current standard required is beyond the majority of them. On the other hand some of the best qualified applicants are not land owners' nominees and, being “landless”, just cannot be settled. To date no way has been found around the impasse. In the first place there is too little land to offer those who have nothing other than the requisite skill for farming and, secondly, there are too few skilled applicants coming forward from those who have the land.

While the emphasis thus far has been laid on the positive results of the current era of Maori land settlement, the reckoning must also include at least one negative aspect. The reasons are at present obscure, but sizable tracts of land formerly well farmed under development have now reverted to second growth and have gone out of production.

Meanwhile, the incorporation of blocks with congested titles has continued independently of the State-sponsored land-settlement schemes. According to the 1960 Report on Maori Affairs, less than half out of a total of approximately 300 incorporations are “active” today. The contributing causes in many cases are commonly said to be due to inefficient administration – especially accounting – as well as the struggles of competing factions.

Despite the undoubted success of the State programmes of assistance there are still considerable numbers of Maoris who work their land indifferently. And it is from these families that increasing numbers are seeking external employment for wages, mainly to satisfy their consumer demands. Much thought must needs be directed to the problems posed by such land owners and others who remain seemingly indifferent to the use they make of their heritage.

Despite these innovations, to which had been added certain increased powers vested in the Native (Maori) Trustee, it was still impossible in 1925 to offer Maori land as a mortgage security until the title was complete and unencumbered. And the percentage of Maori land that fulfilled these conditions was negligible. Gradually, however, measures were taken to overcome this difficulty. In 1900 the Maori Land Administration Act brought District Councils into being. Comprised in part of elected Maori members, these Councils later became known as Maori Land Boards and had the prime responsibility of arranging leases of land vested in them by Maori owners in the various districts into which the country had been divided. In 1926, when Parliament recognised the urgent need to promote settlement, it granted permission to Maori Land Boards to lend moneys for development, while allowing the titles to the lands given as security to be adjusted later. But it was not until 1929 that Parliament finally addressed itself to the growing problem of Maori land use and, having done so, it gave authority to the Native Minister to develop and settle idle Maori land with funds provided by the Minister of Finance. Such areas as were to be developed in any given locality were brought under a specifically named scheme and owners, on agreeing to the plan of work, were then prohibited from interfering with it and from alienating any of the land involved.

Efforts in various directions were coordinated: in the field, there was the breaking in of virgin country and, in some instances, the reorganisation of haphazard practices where there had already been some agriculture. On the administrative side the consolidation of titles received systematic attention. Supervision was another critical aspect of the development, and often local Maoris, whose tribal prestige had already fitted them for leadership, acted in a liaison capacity between the settlers and the European agricultural supervisors. Later, training farms, now discontinued, were established on a small scale.

In the 34 years during which land settlement has been the responsibility of the Department of Maori Affairs, 455,230 acres have been grassed at an annual average of 14,400 acres, and some 2,200 farms have been thereby established. Development has varied from 22,100 acres in 1940 to 5,700 acres in 1945, 8,100 in 1961–62, and 10,064 in 1963–64.

The turn of the twentieth century saw the Maori people and their lands at the crossroads, in more senses than one. In so far as they were wishing to use their heritage in competitive agricultural production their hopes were being thwarted through lack of finance. Maori land legislation, which had pursued its own tortuous course independently of the vicissitudes of the Maori people for some 40 years after the Native Rights Act of 1862, appears to have done little besides ensuring that Maori land sales were at once simple and legally valid. In none was the settlement of the Maori upon his own land a primary consideration. The crux of the matter was that the so called “communal title” had proved to be an effective instrument for purposes of sale, but never for raising development loans. “Incorporation” was an early remedial device for overcoming this basic difficulty, i.e., the creation of a body corporate by a majority of owners in a title, acting through a committee of management, to raise funds on the security of the land for its development.

“Consolidation”, like “incorporation”, was another measure intended to overcome the handicaps inherent in Maori land titles. The method eventually adopted in the East Coast, Bay of Plenty, King Country, and North Auckland districts, was to gather into as few locations as possible the interests of individuals which had been scattered by their unrestricted succession to the interests of both parents. Fragmentation of Maori land titles was, and still is, the inevitable outcome of requiring none other than genealogical evidence to support a claim to an interest in a tribal estate.

In each consolidation scheme the opportunity was taken, first, to clear all encumbrances (legal and survey fees, unpaid rates, etc.) and, secondly, to make the new consolidated holdings conform to the demands of agriculture in regard to optimum size, access, water supply, and so forth. Judicially and socially the measure had to overcome some inertia to begin with, but as its positive consequences were seen and appreciated so it gathered momentum. By and large it enabled the closest approximation to be reached to individual or at least to compact family ownership in tribal land.

Statutes passed in 1903, 1906, 1909, and 1912 indicated a growing appreciation by the Legislature of the Maori need of aid in order to help himself. Enactments of these years made finance, at least, more readily available to the Maori, although prejudice against his titles died hard. Yet again, on the Maori side, many were deterred from involving themselves with mortgages, and of those who actually found assistance not a few contrived to do so without committing their land.

Because the Maori “King” is the paramount chief of several important tribes, the tangi following his death is always a long-drawn-out and lavish occasion. While the tangi is taking place, the Kauhanganui, or Maori Parliament, meets to choose his successor. As this meeting is held shortly after the “King's” death, his successor is usually known well before he is installed in office and crowned. Potatau, the first King, was chosen for his personal mana and illustrious descent. His son and successor, Tawhiao, was chosen from several contenders, notable among whom were his sister Te Paea, and the chiefs Kerei and Wiremu Tamihana Te Waharoa. Since Tawhiao's time the succession remains with members of the Te Wherowhero family and, generally, falls to the deceased King's eldest surviving son. The Kauhanganui still retains some discretion in the matter, however, because when Te Rata died the choice was made between his eventual successor, Koroki, and his second cousin, Princess Te Puea Herangi.

The coronation takes place on the last day of the tangi for the dead “King” and shortly before his interment. Tawhiao's was the only coronation where the ceremony was delayed, due to the fact that Potatau died in the midst of difficult negotiations with the Colonial Government at a moment when the future of the King movement lay in the balance. Tawhiao's coronation was not held until nearly two months after his father's death and was attended only by his relatives and a few high chiefs.

The ceremony itself is simple and impressive. It begins when the King-elect, who wears Potatau's coronation korowai (mantle-cloak), is escorted to a point facing on to the marae. Three sides of this are lined by those who have come to pay their last respects to the late King while, by the fourth side, near where the King-elect stands with the principal chiefs of the King tribes, is an open tent containing the late King's coffin. The proceedings are all in Maori. A clergyman first recites the preliminary portions of the Anglican service and preaches a sermon. When this is over the senior descendant of Wiremu Tamihana Te Waharoa steps forward to stand facing the King-elect. He then crowns the King by laying a Bible upon his head, saying as he does so, “Your ancestors in the olden days were wont to be anointed with oil, but, since the advent of Christianity, they have been anointed with the Word of God. Therefore I place the Word of God upon your head”. Te Waharoa then leads the “King” forward, declaring him to be “King of the Maori race, in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”. The Bible used in this part of the ceremony has crowned each of the King's predecessors. As the Bible is laid on the King's head, the late King's flag, which has been flying at half mast, is lowered and his successor's flag is hoisted to the top of the flagpole.

After his coronation another high chief presents the King with a white feather – the emblem of purity and truth. The chiefs make short speeches saluting the new King and the ceremony ends with prayers, hymns, and the Benediction. Afterwards the King is conducted back to his tent. Later in the day he follows his predecessor's coffin to its last resting place, in the Royal Burial Ground on the summit of Taupiri Mountain.

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

• The Maori King, Gorst, J. E. (1959)
• King Potatau, Jones, P. te H. (1959)
• Daily Southern Cross, 31 Jul 1860
• New Zealander, 19 Sep, 8 Oct 1860
• New Zealand Herald, 18 Sep, 19 Sep 1894, 25 Nov 1912, 9 Oct 1933.

Statistics from public hospitals show that there is a higher disease incidence among Maori than non-Maoris in almost all diseases treated, a very important finding being that the Maori is in fact more susceptible to the degenerative changes which occur in the human body during late middle life and old age. Because there are few old Maoris, it had been wrongly though that they did not suffer from these degenerative diseases. The higher mortality rate from cancer among the Maoris does not necessarily signify a higher racial incidence. Cancer is a disease which, if diagnosed early enough, may be curable. And early diagnosis is dependent on the recognition by the patient of the first suspicious signs and symptoms.

Some of the heart, kidney, and lung conditions which show a comparatively high death rate in the Maori from middle age upwards may well be the aftermath of infectious diseases incurred during childhood – for example, scarlet fever and whooping cough can result in kidney and respiratory damage. They may also produce in the Maori chronic types of disease which lower his chances of survival.

In the early colonisation of New Zealand the Maoris were ravaged by diseases which killed a high proportion of the people. It is doubtful, however, after over 100 years of association with the European, whether any marked degree of susceptibility to these contagious conditions can remain. It is felt that their poorer standard of health is caused not so much by a greater susceptibility, but rather by the substandard conditions of their housing, where sanitation, water supply, and sewage tend to be more primitive than the average European household. There is also a lower standard of nutrition, personal hygiene, and a failure to provide adequate clothing for children.

Maori and European units in the Second New Zealand Expeditionary Force served under similar conditions and yet the health record of both races is similar. In fact, in the case of infective hepatitis the Maori seemed less susceptible than the European.

In a paper on tuberculosis among Maori troops in the Second World War, Dr McDonald Wilson stated that “… the fact that a group of Maoris with this background in civil life who were like the Europeans, incompletely screened prior to going overseas, lived in a strange climate, and underwent all the herding together and privations of campaigns, developed over the years a total of only 48 cases of pulmonary tuberculosis, definitely suggests the Maori is not susceptible to tuberculosis – probably no more so than the average European if he lived under similar conditions to the Maori. With this has to be borne in mind the fact that the incidence of tuberculosis among the Europeans in New Zealand is one of the lowest in the world”.

It is important when dealing with health statistics to appreciate the fact that, in the future, the census and the registration figures for births and deaths will always be unreliable. For all statistical purposes a Maori is defined as a person with 50 per cent or more of Maori blood. The 1961 census shows 62·2 per cent full-blooded Maoris, which is higher than the figure 62·1 in 1945, and very much at variance with the 1936 census figures of 25 per cent for South Island Maoris. Field workers believe that intermarriage has reduced the number of full-blooded Maoris to about 20 per cent, or 30,000, with possibly 120,000 Maoris having a strain of European. Should any of the Maoris in this latter group marry Europeans, their children should be classified as Europeans; but this is not the rule. For census purposes the Maoris and part-Maoris tend to classify themselves into the group in which their interests and cultural ties are strongest; hence the increase of full-blooded Maoris which, though not a true figure, is evidence of their strong racial pride. New Zealand is probably the only country in the world where people with one-quarter, or even an eighth part, of their heriditary blood are proud to belong to a racial minority and to identify themselves with it.

by Rina Winifred Moore, M.B., CH.B., Medical Practitioner, Nelson.

• Primitive Economics of the New Zealand Maori, Firth, R. (1929)
• Report on Department of Maori Affairs, with Statistical Supplement, Hunn, J. K. (1960)
• Maori-European Standards of Health, Medical Statistics Branch, Department of Health, (1960).

In 25 years from 1936 to 1961 there has been a marked change in the type of work which the Maori does. Because the 1936 and 1961 census have different classifications, it is impossible to draw comparisons in all fields of employment. In 1936, however, 45·29 per cent of Maoris were employed in primary production. That this figure in 1961 had dropped to 21·9 per cent gives some indication of the movement of Maoris from rural into urban areas. Craftsmen are unfortunately classified here, with process workers and labourers, but into this group fall 44·5 per cent of Maoris in the 1961 census.

In the pre-school period more than three Maori children die in proportion to every European child. At school age, children are at the healthiest stage of their lives yet Maori deaths are proportionately just under four times those of the European. In adolescence and early adult life (15–24 years) the Maori rate for men is but double that of the European, whereas in women of these ages the Maori rate is four times greater. In these ages tuberculosis exacts a heavy toll in young Maori women. From 25 to 44 years the deathrate is small among the European, but substantial among the Maori, the rates being treble those of the European. After 45 years the disparity of Maori deaths over European declines, but there is still considerable discrepancy. The reasons for these disparities may be assessed as follows:

1. A High Birthrate

   Whenever races have a very high birthrate, this is usually followed by a high infantile mortality rate, because it means that a high proportion of the population are dependant, and therefore not able to contribute either towards the economic support of the population or the management of the family unit. In effect, two parents have to look after the welfare of a large number of children.

2. Substandard Housing

   This high birthrate is followed naturally by a higher proportion of substandard housing among Maoris than among Europeans, and even where the housing conditions are reasonable, housing tends to become substandard by reason of overcrowding.

3. Overcrowding

   A small social survey carried out by the Social Science School of the Victoria University of Wellington estimates that the size of the average Maori rural family is 12 as compared with five for non-Maoris, and that the average Maori urban family is six as compared with three to four for non-Maori.

4. Emotional Instability

   There are a higher number of Maoris suffering from this disorder, because with large families it is difficult for parents to give sufficient individual attention and affection to children in the community where their traditional cultural pattern is being modified so quickly and rapidly by the impact of Western culture. There is also a lack of security because Maori families are moving rapidly from one social level to another with each succeeding generation.

Pomare was convinced that his people would not follow the Tasmanian to extinction; he believed that the destiny of the Maori lay in their absorption by the Pakeha, and that a new race would emerge from the union. In 1906 the census showed that the tide had turned and there was an increase in the Maori population of 4,588. In 1958 the natural increase of the Maori was 37·57 per thousand, as compared with 16·26 per thousand for the non-Maori New Zea-landers. This high natural increase of the Maori is accompanied by a significantly higher birthrate, together with a steadily declining Maori deathrate. The rates for the non-Maori have remained fairly stable. At their present rate of increase the Maoris could comprise 14·7 per cent of the population by the year 2000, as compared with 6·65 per cent in 1959.

This high rate of population increase per thousand of existing population may be transitional as there is a comparatively larger proportion of the Maoris under 21 years of age as compared with 40 per cent of the non-Maoris. For the same reason the death rate, when expressed as a rate per thousand of the population, appears much lower among the Maoris than non-Maoris. There is also a slightly higher proportion of Maori females in the child-bearing ages – 42 per cent, as compared with 39 per cent for non-Maoris. As the Maori population evolves to a more normal distribution of age structure, some fall in the birthrate per thousand of population can be expected, coupled with a rise in the deathrate on the same basis.

Although the Maori deathrate is lower than the European, it should be noted that, because of the different age structure in New Zealand of both populations, a comparison of the European-Maori deathrate, based on specific age rates, gives a totally different picture.