around the Aupouri tribe, but for the life of me I couldn't understand how my tupuna Kawiti became involved at the very end by the inclusion of one of his waiatas. Surely the Aupouri have their own, and for the information of the writer he was never known as Kawiti te Riri but his grandson was known as Te Riri. I was very disappointed to find that the arara or trevally story was omitted. I would have thought that Te Kohuru would have been mentioned. Also, Te Kohuru's escape from the cooking ovens of the Aupouris would have made exciting reading — but I may have objected if you had shown who his descendants are. Talking about whakapapa, it is a pity that quite a number were incorrect, and that they were not extended to show the connections to the other tribes. The thought that crossed my mind — the book would have doubled its mana if some of the spicy yarns of the good old days had been included. What about those remittance men from the old country, the Tararas and many other people who went to the gumfields? People like Bill Evans, the Yates family, old Anaru Ngawaka and a host of others who were characters in their own right and who in the main made the Far North. The Maori text suffered considerably due to the lack of Maori knowledge of the proof reader. The following are but a few examples: page 16, mate not matu; page 30, Ka pa instead of Kapa; page 74, Hinga instead of Einga; page 79, te waahi not tewaahi; ka hurihia not kahuri hia; a taku not ataku; ki te not kite. Enough pin pricking at this stage. Let me acknowledge one thing — the good in the book far outweighs the bad. As a matter of fact, I like it. I am particularly grateful for her story in chapter 25, which shows that in this modern day and age, some of the old customs are very much alive. The people of Matire's generation are becoming as scarce as hen's teeth, and the pity of it all is that they will take with them the stories and traditions of our people and leave little behind. On the other hand, if they have Matire's courage and put their thoughts on paper all will not be lost. Well, Matire, even if your stories are a bit one-eyed, how about some more?

ADMINISTRATION IN NEW ZEALAND'S MULTI-RACIAL SOCIETY Edited by R. H. Brookes and I. H. Kawhuru Oxford University Press available from Government Printer, $2.00 reviewed by J. R. McCreary One of the problems presented in reviewing a book of this kind is that it is a collection of papers by a variety of authors drawn from differing backgrounds and, to some extent, each paper is complete in itself and worthy of comment. The authors divide into two general groups — the academics and the administrators. The academics are made up of Dr Kawharu, Department of Anthropology, Auckland University; Dr Metge, Department of Anthropology, Victoria University of Wellington; and Dr Ritchie, Professor of Psychology, Waikato University. The administrators include, R. J. Mardle, Department of Labour; R. L. Bradly, onetime Superintendent of Education, Auckland; J. M. McEwen, Secretary for Maori and Island Affairs; L. G. Anderson, Superintendent of Child Welfare. They are a panel drawn together for the New Zealand Institute of Public Administration's annual convention held at Auckland in 1966. The first three papers set the stage against which the administrators must present their policies and practices. Kawharu, in the introduction, raises the question of how much we know of our multi-racial society and puts in a special plea for research which may show what can, in fact, be done. Mardle, drawing on census returns, departmental reports and private research papers, shows what we do know of the ethnic constitution of our population, emphasising not only the Maori and Polynesian elements but the Chinese, Indians and non-British Europeans who help to form New Zealand's population. Finding such a polyglot collection included under the general heading of ‘multi-racial’ made me doubt again the wisdom of the use of the term ‘race’, as I had done on first seeing the title of the series. Metge, however, deals with this question in her opening section and points out that if one attempts to substitute something such as ‘ethnic group relations’ for ‘race rela-