POLITICS OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAORI

Te Ao Hou, 1972, Page 60

POLITICS OF THE NEW ZEALAND MAORI Protest and Co-operation, 1891–1909 by John A. Williams Published for the University of Auckland by the Oxford University Press, $7.75 reviewed by Professor Angus Ross In the outside world New Zealand is best known for three things: first, its wonderful green grass and in consequence its pastoral and agricultural products; secondly, its social welfare legislation, especially in the days when New Zealand was something of a social laboratory; thirdly, its reasonably good record in the matter of race relations. The fact that visiting scholars seek to study this last subject is proof of its interest and importance, even if they have caused embarrassment both by the facts they have uncovered or by the opinions they have expressed. Sometimes, too, they have anticipated publication by New Zealanders who could have said so much more so much better. Harrison M. Wright and David P. Ausubel are Americans who qualify for special mention in this connection. Another American scholar, John A. Williams, associate professor of History at the State University of New York at Stony Brook, can now have his name added to the growing list of visiting writers whose books on race relations in New Zealand warrant serious attention. In his introduction to this study of Maori politics in the short but important period between 1891 and 1909, Professor Williams explains his purpose: after joining most authorities in claiming that the Maori has been much more successful than the American Indian or the Australian Aborigine in adapting to a European-dominated situation, he raises the question of how success is to be defined or measured and asks “what were the Maori goals, and how successful were the Maoris in achieving them?” Conscious that the interests of Maori and settler conflicted at very many points and that the Maoris had to use various techniques to solve the problem of improving their position in the new society that was emerging in the late 19th century, Williams says, “An aim of this study is to focus more than previously on Maori protest, while avoiding, if possible, an overcorrection by which the important role of co-operation would be overlooked”. His concern for balance has led him to reiterate, “The aim of this study is to correct the previous overemphasis on co-operation and harmony in Maori-settler relations, but not in order to show that these relations were therefore bad.” The carrying-out of these intentions may not quite measure up to the clarity with which Professor Williams has defined his aims, but nevertheless he has in this scholarly and well documented study broken new ground and given his readers much food for thought.

While its examination of the period up to 1890 is necessarily limited, this book proceeds to dismiss the theory that a Maori renaissance took place in and after that year, since the Maori protests which the Young Maori party took up were also the concern of the Maori King Movement and of the Great Council (Kauhanganui) which it established. Maori opposition to laws made and administered by Pakeha in the interests of Pakeha took various forms: the 1892 agreement to form a Kotahitanga, or union, was early associated with the decision to form a separate Maori parliament and the publication of such Maori news papers as Huia Tangata Kotahi at Hastings, Te Puke ki Hikurangi, which lasted from 1897 till 1913, and The Jubilee (Te Tiupiri) at Wanganui, all of which provided eloquent evidence of the literary and political abilities of their promoters. The author touches, if sometimes too lightly, on the divisions in the Maori ranks and the degree to which those who wanted a state within a state had to give way to those who favoured a pro-governmental line as a means to an end towards which well-intentioned Europeans were also lobbying and pressing. Just as, at an early stage, he raised the important question whether James Carroll was “primarily the spokesman of the Maoris in the government or merely the spokesman of the government to the Maoris”, he could have followed this line of enquiry much further in respect to Sir Apirana Ngata and other leaders who emerged in the period under study. Such questions are more easily raised than answered. Certainly, mixed motives inspired those who helped Seddon to secure the passage of the Maori Lands Administration Bill and the Maori Councils Bill of 1900, two important acts which failed to give anything like complete satisfaction to the Maori people. At best, the Maori councils then established were only partially successful as agencies of Maori self-government. Similarly Maori land problems remained unsolved. In the period up to 1909 progress was made and the peace was maintained, but neither co-operation nor protest, singly or together, had produced entirely satisfactory answers. Politics of the New Zealand Maori is something like the protests with which it deals: it raises questions without providing full or satisfactory answers. It reveals how limited is our knowledge of certain people and movements. How far, for example, was Rua a reformer who deserved to get more support outside the Urewera country than he in fact received? Were Tana Taingakawa and T. T. Rawhiti justified in splitting from the king movement and claiming they could unite the Maori people under the Treaty of Waitangi? Has not Professor Williams himself been too glib in his discussion of European standards of justice and sympathy for the Maori and in his generalizations about the importance of the interplay between Maori protest and Maori co-operation? In general, the answer must be that he has written a pioneer survey of questions raised in the late 19th century which continue to have their importance in the present day and, in so doing, he has placed both Pakeha and Maori in his debt. His book should be essential reading for all with a concern for the promotion of the best interests of the Maori even where differences arise as to what are the best interests and as to how they can be realised. It should certainly be studied carefully by the young men of Nga Tamatoa and those who have been strongly impressed by the patterns of development in African and Asian countries where Europeans constitute a minority. Much work remains to be done in New Zealand both in historical research and in planning for the future. Professor Williams has pointed out several topics on which New Zealand and visiting scholars can and should do further and fuller research and writing.