could no longer get for their relatively poor produce the prices which formerly induced their energy. It is to be noted, too, that a strong market has been created for all food produce by the Californian and Australian gold rushes. When this extraordinary demand ceased prices dropped heavily both in Australia and New Zealand. Meanwhile, the good lands were diminishing fast, by sale. It may be that the rate of sale was too fast, but it is plain nonsense to blink the fact that the pressure to sell was irrestible. Once let settlement commence and the rest had to come.

Chiefs Lose Power Notwithstanding all this, could not the Maoris have gone on on the lands they occupied on a communal agricultural or even pastoral basis—to a greater extent than in fact happened? In my view this was impossible because the old system of social government was breaking down, and there was nothing to replace it as yet. Under the older system, there was a coherent will in the community, expressed finally perhaps through the chief or chiefs, but nevertheless naturally flowing from all. Management on details would be vested in the chief or such other person as might be delegated. As settlement spread, however, and employment could be obtained either with settlers, local authorities or Government contractors, the relatively tight group fell apart. Some at least of the men sought work with a cash payment, or if not for that for the adventure and interest of novel ways. There was, in fact, little to hold them together. The office of chieftainship became more and more a ceremonial status and pakeha law began to permeate the tribal settlement. The ultimate authority of force was little by little prohibited. The slaves were now free men and had an interest in maintaining their changed status. This short essay must omit to deal with the effect of the wars which did not touch all districts or even a majority of them. The Waikato, Taranaki, the East Coast and Bay of Plenty were affected but some to a minor degree only. Notwithstanding the temporary tightening of tribal ranks around the chiefs and men of influence it seems that even these episodes would in the long run accelerate rather than reverse the decadence of the corporate entity that once existed. The more travelling involved, the long absences from tribal lands, the loss of those lands and the settlement on them of pakeha—all these spelt the end of the communal working group. It seems unlikely that the preservation of the communal type of title would, by itself, have held together the tribal or hapu community as a working and living group. Perhaps there could have been a middle course—something short of a title vested in all the owners in defined shares. Possibly an incorporated body such as is common today, managed by a committee of management composed in the main of the recognised leaders of families. Such an arrangement would be closer in spirit to the ancient ways. But even here, there is room to think that the other forces already mentioned might have been too strong. It must have been a necessary part of any changeover in title that the membership of the tribe or title be fixed and this recording of membership would at this stage at any rate contain the seeds of individualism. It was not until much later that, after a period of despair and poverty, the East Coast people prompted by men trained in the pakeha world, drew more closely together again in communal farming projects.

Individual Ownership Inevitable and Successful One is drawn more and more to the conclusion that the type of title given to the Maori people by the laws of the Europeans was relatively unimportant in the general circumstances that then existed. The brutal facts are that no one was genuinely interested in preserving Maori land in Maori ownership. On the contrary the Government, the settlers and many Maoris were concerned mainly with buying and selling. No device of titles or restrictions could have held up the irresistible pressure of settlement. By the time this pressure was relaxed, it was too late in many districts. The cream of the land was gone. What was left was relatively unattractive, and while it might be suitable for a papakainga area was by no means adapted to modern farming use. It is with this remnant of land that we are now concerned. There is little enough in comparison with the growth of the people. It is too late to change the broad outlines of the system, even if there were good reasons for doing so, but there are plenty of ways and means of improvement. The pattern is fairly clear. The main line of progress must, it seems, be towards true individualisation—one person or family owning and using land in the most efficient and productive way. Another special line is that of the incorporation where a central management runs a large block for the benefit of the owners. There is an enormous amount of work to be done before we can be satisfied about the condition of Maori land. The question is whether this work can be done within a reasonable time. This will depend largely on the recognition by the people of the extent of the task, and their determination to tackle it. Fortunately it is clear that most people are now aware of the problems and are doing their best to overcome them. If this attitude is kept up there can be no doubt of success.