MAORI FLAGS

Maori “King” Flags

Recognising that the Union Jack was the symbol of British power, and rejecting the Treaty of Waitangi from which that power derived, the Maori tribes who banded together to elect a King sought a similar mana for their monarch. The three flags (F7) hoisted on 23 April 1857 when Te Wherowhero accepted kingship emphasised this by carrying the words “Kingi” (King) and “Niu Tireni” (New Zealand). The flag of the King movement is also the personal flag of the “King” and is flown at his residence at Turangawaewae (Ngaruawahia), and precedes him when he visits the other maraes which recognise his authority. When the “King” dies his flag is interred with him and a new one is made for his successor. The flag is strictly tapu and is kept by a hereditary custodian.

A special “King” flag (E4) was hoisted at Ngaruawahia in 1861, probably in conjunction with Ta-whiao's accession. The blue and yellow device represents the three islands of New Zealand. Another version of this flag, recorded about the same time, shows the device in the form of three four-pointed stars. From time to time recruiting parties toured North Island villages on behalf of the movement. In January 1864 two special recruiting flags (E5 and 6) were carried by a party which visited Waiapu in Poverty Bay.

Hauhau Flags

The Hauhaus believed that the British flag possessed mana of itself, and that it was thus a particular manifestation of divine power. Te Ua also believed that the Europeans worshipped a terrible deity to whom the military did homage around the flagpole every morning and evening. It is little wonder, therefore, that the Hauhaus gave much attention to their flags and “Niu Pole” ceremonies. Hauhaus usually showed three flags in their poles – a pennant, “Riki”, which was a war flag; the flag of the prophet, apostle, or priest who presided over the ceremony; and “Ruru” – the flag of peace. The relative positions of Riki and Ruru showed whether or not the meeting was a peaceful one. The flags seen at Tataroa (F6) in 1865 were warlike and the Pakeha observer felt himself fortunate to escape with his life.

Te Ua's personal flag (10 ft × 3 ft 6 in.) bore the legend “Kenana” (Canaan) showing that he identified the Maoris with the Jews. The standard of the Hauhau “movement”, and the largest flag ever flown in New Zealand (22 ft 10 in. × 12 ft 4 in.), bore a life-size figure of Te Matairenga – the Maori God of War – challenging the enemy to fight (E8). Patara, one of the five “apostles” of Hauhauism, possessed a handsome flag, “Rura” – a pacifier, which represented the Angel Michael and also the gospel (E9). Kereopa, one of the “apostles” and Volkner's murderer, flew a grey bordured pennant. Titokowaru, the Hauhau guerilla leader in Taranaki, flew a red war pennant with white devices in his campaign against Whitmore (F3). Peehi Turoa, the upper Wanganui chief who signed the Treaty of Waitangi but who remained hostile to the Europeans, lost his flag “Paerangi” after the Battle of Moutoa (1864). In design this flag is reminiscent of the “King” flags (E10). When colonial troops occupied Omarunui Pa (Hawke's Bay) on 12 October 1866, they captured a pennant (6 ft × 2 ft 6 in.) (E24). Note the direction of the cross. One of the most famous Maori rebel flags was that captured at Gate Pa in April 1864 (E11). The star, believed to represent the Star of Bethlehem, is in the ascendant. A lesser known but more colourful flag was hoisted by the rebels at Papatupu, on the Waitotara River, in 1868 (E12). The Maoris were fond of long whiplike pennants. The one shown (F2) was flown by Hauhaus in the Bay of Plenty and measures 16 ft × 1 ft 6 in. Note the red fimbriation on two sides of the blue, and the white fimbriation around the outer edges of the red tip.

Te Kooti Flags

Te Kooti, like Te Ua, believed in the “power” of flags and used many during his campaigns, altering their designs and symbolism as his fortunes under them waxed or waned. His most fabulous war flag, “Te Wepu” (the whip) – measuring 52 ft × 4 ft – was originally made by the nuns at the Greenmeadows Mission School for the chiefs of the friendly Ngati Kahungunu. Te Kooti captured it in 1868 and retained it until 7 February 1870, when Gilbert Mair captured it near Rotorua (F8). Te Kooti lost another “powerful” flag at Te Po(u)rere. This measures 6 ft × 2 ft 8 in. The symbols, which were supposed to be exceptionally potent, have never been explained (E13). Tuwharetoa Maoris from Tokaanu used a handsome flag (E14) in their campaigns under Te Kooti. The colonial forces saw another of Te Kooti's flags in the Opepe engagement in 1869 (E15). It was never captured and nothing is known of its later history. In February 1870 Colonel McDonnell captured the flag flown by Te Kooti's forces at Tapapa (north of Putaruru) on 25 January 1870 (E16). The stars are similar to those used in “King” flags, and the green and black device in the top left-hand corner was at first mistaken for the Union Jack.

Maori “Queen” and Tribal Flags

As the Maoris are so fond of flags, it is not surprising that the Government and other organisations adopted the practice of presenting standards to chiefs and tribes as a reward for their loyal services during the Maori Wars, the flags themselves being unique in that only one of each was made. Some of these, such as “Te Rakau i Mataahu”, which Queen Victoria presented to Major Ropata in the 1860s, incorporated the British Red Ensign with special devices. But those presented by the Government usually consisted of the New Zealand Red Ensign (12 ft × 6 ft, with trunk and halyards) with the name of the hapu, or of a notable ancestor, worked or printed on the fly. Maoris preferred this flag because red was a colour denoting rank and mana. Moreover, the hapu that could boast a genuine “Queen” flag was bound to acquire great prestige in the eyes of less fortunate hapus. The Maoris of the Ngati Makino tribe of Otamarakau Pa (near Rotorua) requested a flag in August 1902, and this (E17) was duly presented by the Government. Some times the hapu specified the design it wanted, as did the Whakarewarewa hapu on the accession of Edward VII (E18). In commemoration of the Wanganui tribes' victory over the Hauhaus at Moutoa Island (14 May 1864), the ladies of the town presented a large silken flag, of their own design, to the local chiefs (E19). In this the centrepiece of the crown is gold, while the small device below represents (in their natural colours) Maori and European hands clasped in friendship.

In 1894, in order to strengthen their hold among the East Coast tribes, the Church of England presented flags to many hapus. One of these, the flag of the subtribe of Rongomai-Wahine at Opoutama, is still used on ceremonial occasions.

SHIPPING COMPANY FLAGS

Many shipping companies have, at various times, been interested in the New Zealand service, and a full catalogue of their house flags would possibly run to several hundreds. A flag (A19) with a long continuous association with New Zealand is that which has been flown successively by the Tyser Line (1886), the Commonwealth and Dominion Line (1914), and the Port Line (1916). Richardson and Co., Napier (A20), was the first shipping company formed in New Zealand (1859), and their flag has become well known on the eastern coasts. The flag of the Northern Steamship Co. (A21) has been seen in northern waters since the company's formation in 1881. The New Zealand Shipping Co. (1873) always shows a pennant above its house flag. This dates from the days of sail when the pennant was flown to indicate that the ship was a steamer. The Union Steamship Co's flag (A22) has been in use since 1875. Mention has already been made of the Shaw Savill and Albion Co's. flag (A23). This has been displayed by Shaw Savill ships since 1858, but before this was used by ships belonging to Messrs Willis and Gann (established 1842). As this was only two years after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi it lends a certain credibility to the belief that the company adopted the New South Wales Gazette version of the flag of the independent tribes – suitably altered by the omission of the fimbriation.

The flag of the South Pacific Trading Co., formed in the 1870s under the aegis of Sir Julius Vogel, placed the initial letters of the company's name upon the red panels of Queen Makea's (of Rarotonga) personal standard. Among the many other maritime flags which have been flown in New Zealand waters are those of the Kamo Colliery Co. (North Auckland) (E2) and of the “Circular Saw” Line which operated from Auckland (E1). A version of the latter, with the saw teeth pointing in the reverse direction, is now used by Henderson and Macfarlane Ltd., of Auckland. Another interesting flag is that which used to be flown on shore stations on the Kaipara mail run to indicate to passing steamers that there was mail to be collected (E3).

COMPANY, CHURCH, AND OTHER FLAGS

Flags used by business enterprises, clubs, religious, and uniformed organisations form a miscellaneous category of New Zealand flags which it would be too large to catalogue in full. The following, therefore, must be considered as a brief and only partially representative selection. It must be emphasised, also, that those in this category are private flags in that they are displayed only by the groups concerned, and that while some may be known nationally and even internationally, their significance is reserved to the groups whose purposes they serve.

Among business flags, that of the Australia and New Zealand Bank is a noteworthy representative, because it is an instance of a flag which has been designed by the Royal College of Heralds from the company's official coat of arms (E20). Another distinctive private flag is that belonging to the Wellesley Club in Wellington (E21). This is based upon the crest of the Dukes of Wellington, whose family name the club perpetuates. Several religious denominations use special flags. The Anglican and Presbyterian Churches use the flags of St. George and St. Andrew respectively, and the Ratana and Ringatu Maori Churches also have their special flags. The church flag most often seen in New Zealand, however, is that belonging to the Salvation Army. This is invariably in red, yellow, and blue, colours which symbolise, respectively, the blood of Christ, the fire of the Holy Spirit, and the purity of the soul. The flag's design has changed slightly over the years, particularly as regards the number of points on the star. This originally had five points (E22), then six, and lately eight. Today this is the standard flag of the Salvation Army units (E23), and with the addition of each individual unit's name is so used throughout the world.

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

• Flag Collections: Dominion Museum, Wellington

• Flag Collections (MSS): Ball Collection (MSS), Turnbull Library
• Gordon Collection (MSS), Dominion Museum. Flags of All Nations, G.B. Admiralty (1889) (1907) (1930) (1948)
• Flags of the World, Carr, H. G. (1961)
• C.O. 209/1 (MSS), Colonial Office (1934)
• G. 28/3(Enclosures to Government Despatches) (MSS) (1867)
• M.A. 24/13 (Flags Requested File of Maori Affairs Department) (MSS) (1902). (The above MSS references are held in National Archives.) Laurenson Papers (MSS), Turnbull Library
• New Zealand Gazette: 1869, p. 556
• 1874, p. 122; 1899, p. 2167; 1939, p. 1548.Appendices to the Journal of the House of Representatives: 1908, A. 1, p. 17
• 1909, A. 2, p. 7; Regulations for the R.N.Z.A.F. and Air Board Orders (1952)
• R.N.Z.N. Regulations and Instructions (1958)
• The New Zealand Wars, Cowan, J. (1955).

The Modern Era

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.

Maori Land Boards

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.

Problems of Development

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.

Land Title System

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.

The Modern Era

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.

Maori Land Boards

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.

Problems of Development

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.