THE SOUTHERN MAORI.

Otago Witness, Issue 3994, 30 September 1930, Page 64

THE SOUTHERN MAORI.

STRAY PAPERS.

By

H. Beattie,

XVII—THE KATIMAMOE TRIBE. In our last article we saw how various, loose statements about southern Maori warfare had been woven into the myth that the Katimamoe tribe had been exterminated, and also how some writers contended that some of that tribe had been preserved as slaves or vassals. There is much more to be argued for the latter contention than for the former, but at the very best it rests on allegations which as a rule, merit the old Scottish verdict, “ Unproven.” . It is not an easy case to handle, for it bristles with difficulties, but a patient consideration of many titbits of evidence may eventually lead to a solution of this perplexing matter. In the first place, it is wonderful how the error regarding extinction could ever have made headway, for in his well-known book about southern New Zealand, written in 1844, Shortland says:—“The Ngatimamoe retired farther south; and at length, feeling themselves too much weakened to hope to regain their lost position, they made peace with their invaders, and formed alliances with them. Thus the two races became incorporated into one tribe, which, as most of their principal families had in their veins the blood of Tabu, was called generally Ngaitahu, or Kaitahu.” It is strange how this implicit statement has been overlooked, while Shortland’s erroneous remark about Te Puaho’e raiders coming down the Molyneux River enjoyed 50 years of currency and acceptance. In the case under review we see a true statement which was ignored ? n f*. relegated to the background, while half-truths and extravagant conclusions masqueraded in its place purporting to hlfit ° ry * Id a report dated March 18, Shortland writes: “ Tapui, Tuhawaiki, 1 atuki, and Kahupatiti, the principal chiefs in the south derive their origin both from Ngatimamoe and Kaitahu. In the same report Shortland continues:—“All the lands referred to are situate south of Taumutu, and the rights ? j European purchasers are acknowledged; the sales having been made by the admitted proprietors—the descendants of Ngatimamoe. Other Natives who now reside on some of these lands were invited to settle there by the chiefs of Ngatimamoe when a general movement to the southward took place during the wars of Te Rauparaha. They do not, however, from residence, pretend to any right to sell, but merely to occupy and cultivate, and many are now beginning to return to Akaroa and Kaiapoi. When the Otago Block was bought from the Maoris in 1844 the deed of sale says the land was sold by t-he Ngaitahu (tribe), thus carrying out what Shortland remarked about the tribal name being generally known as that of the principal associate in the partnership. Mr W. H. S. Roberts wrote: —“ Murihiku was purchased from the Ngatimamoe tribe of Maoris by Land Commissioner W. B. D. Mantel! in 1853: documents signed and first instalment of purchase money joaid at Port Chalmers on October 3.” Yet Mantell in drawing up the purchase deed of Southland does not name any tribe, but simply begins. “We. the chiefs and all the people,” etc. He knew that the Kaitahu and Katimamoe were then a united tribe, but he evidently wished to avoid any opportunity of giving rise to debate as to the respective rights of each. An aged Katimamoe told me that when Mantell took the names of those entitled to payment for Murihiku some of the principal men were away whaling or sealing, and their names were omitted, and Mantell was in hot water in consequence. The matter was never properly adjusted, and hence soreness ex isted for many years after. Commissioner Mantell, writing on July 5, 1856, refers to the Native inhabitants of Otago and Southland as “ the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe.” In another place he writes of John Topi Patuki as “chief of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe tribe.” Not “ tribes,” please note. Mantell knew that the two had joined, and that the word “tribe” was now more accurately descriptive, although “ tribes ” is commonly used. Mr 11. T. Clarke, in an official report on September 29. 1864, speaks of “ the Katimamoe and Kaitahu tribes ” as then existent in Otago. He was deputed by the Government to purchase Stewart Island, and he writes: There are some disputes respecting title. Some of the Natives set up a claim through Ngatimamoe ancestors, which claim Topi Patuki, the principal representative of the Kaitahu. altogether repudiates. ... On June 23, I met the Natives. There were 120 men present. ... I therefore requested that the different grounds of claim might be stated before me. Horomona Pukuheti .argued on the side of Katimamoe; Paitu and Wiremu te Rehn, two old men, on the side of Kaitahu. I need not trouble you with a detailed account. . . . Kaitahu established indisputably their right over Katimamoe, so that Pukuheti and his few friends were quite satisfied to hold a secondary position, and claim through their Kaitanu ancestry.”

It is a pity that Mr Clarke has not given us the gist of the arguments whereby the Kaitahu proved their claim to Stewart Island. The present ■writer understands it was based on the twofold fact, traditionally, that the Katimamoe never effectively occupied the island and that the great Kaitahu chief, Te Wera, did. An old Native on Stewart Island said to me:— “ Judge Palmer gave three methods or causes of holding land, take-tupuna (ancestral), take-raupatu (conquest), and take-tuku (gift—either absolute or limited). Topi’s claim • to Ruapuke was not through gift or war, but through ahi-

ka-roa (fire burning long, that is, lengthy ancestral residence)." As Topi was the paramount claimant of Stewart Island rights, he would probably base his demands on the same grounds. The verbal victory before Mr Clarke in the contested ownership of that island, however, does not disprove the Katimamoe possessorship of Southland.

In 1867, John Topi Patuki wrote several letters to the Governor “ on behalf of the Kaitahu and Ngatimamoe tribes,” in regard to the Princes street reserve, Dunedin, and Sir George Grey, in his replies, addresses him as “ Chief of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe tribes.” An official compilation issued in 1861 names the principal men of the Katimamoe then residing at some of the kaikas (villages) in Otago and Southland as follows:—

Otakou —Tare Wetere Te Kahu, Timoti Karetai and Teone Korako Turumaka. Oraka —Rawiri Te Awha and Poko. Kawhakaputaputa—Tukurua.

To this very brief list could have been added the folloiying names: — Maranuku—Haimona Rakiraki and Kingi Kurupohatu. Rarotoka —Horomona Patu.

Taieri —Wera Korako Matene. An exhaustive research would have re; vealed the names of other representative members of “ the extinct tribe ’’ still going about their lawful occasions. Mr F. A. Joseph read a paper on “ Taiaroa ” before the Otago Early Settlers' Association in September, 1900, in which he stated that “ Taiaroa, the chief, had blended in his veins the best blood of both the Ngatimamoe and Ngaitahu, the two dominant tribes of the South Island, and was subordinate only to Tuhawaiki.” On August 4, 1905, the Hon. H. K. Taiaroa died at Wellington and the press, in recording his death, spoke of him as “ the youngest son of the noted chieftain Taiaroa (of the Ngaitahu and Ngatimamoe tribes).” Editorial comment in the Otago Daily Times of April 12, 1901, refers to the Maori function held at Henley to mark the opening of hall and mentions the leading man of the Kaik as “ a worthy descendant of the line of principal chiefs of the once-powerful Ngatimamoe tribe ” and the paper further records the presence at the ceremony of a brother and sister, whose mother was a pure Ngatimamoe. Mr R. Carrick, writing in 1905 about incidents in Maori history, concludes: — “ I use the words * amalgamated tribes ’ advisedly. There be those who would have us believe the Ngatimamoes were a conquered people, and it suited certain purposes that the theory should remain uridistut'bed. The ‘ jawing ’ mana of these amalgamated tribes seems all along' to have merged into the Ngaitahu, and in the untimely death of poor Tom Ellison, it is likely to remain therein. True to the instinct of tribal, if not personal, predilections, that mana found it convenient to uphold its own tribal position, hence the story of the ancient Ngatimamoe having been a conquered race.” (Note.— Thomas Rangiwahia Ellison was of Katir mamoe descent on his mother’s side. He was a member of the world-famous Maori football team in 1888-9, and he died in the Wellington province on October 2, 1904, at the early age of 37. H. 8.) There is a certain element of truth in Mr Carrick’s conclusion, but it is not all the truth—which is very hard to come by in this puzzling inquiry. Let us hark back to Shortland again. He says: “I found that all the families of the present day, of any consideration, traced their origin to the Turanga, of Poverty Bay sources —as being the conquering side, and therefore the more honourable—and neglected altogether the Ngatimamoe sources, beyond the time of their conquest. Hence it was very difficult to obtain any information about the earlier history of that tribe. It must be sought for among the families which still remain of the old stock . . . but I had no opportunity of learning from them what they might know of their own history.” It is a pity that' Dr Shortland could not have met the learned men of Katimamoe in 1844, for we know very, little of their history. The reticence that has always marked them may be a natural corollary of the “subdued attitude ” which an earlier writer mentioned. They could not but recognise that they had been pushed south before a stronger people, and that taking the whole of the South Island, they were in a hopeless minority to the newcomers. At the same time it must be borne in mind that it would have cost the Kaitahu south of the Waitaki River a great effort and much further bloodshed to have finallydisposed of them if the exhausting struggle had been continued. Mv notes show that of the Maoris and halfcastes interviewed at intervals during 10 years, about one-third claimed descent equally from both Katimamoe and Kaitahu, while of the remainder somewhat more than half gave me their trible as Katimamoe. The only one noted a« speaking disparagingly of the other portion of the tribe was a halfcaste of Kaitahu lineage; otherwise the remarks showed that the old tribal animosity and jealqusy was mostly a thing of the past. It may* be added that the Katimamoe did not admit the fact with evident reluctance, but made the statement boldly as if proud of it. This is probably a later-day development, for when you _ examine their genealogies you find their usual lines of descent traced from prominent Kaitahu ancestors, and it is only with difficulty that a Katimamoe _ genealogy can be secured.- This reminds us of a similar trait of character in our own race when all our leading families traced their descent from the Normans as being of a more -honourable origin. Much more might be written to prove that the Katimamoe are by no means extinct, were not slaves, but made an alliance with Kaitahu. but enough has been given indubitably to establish their tribal existence to the present day. Further aspects of their eventful history will be considered when reference is made to some of the battles fought in Otagx (To be continued.)