UNOCCUPIED NATIVE LANDS.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 395, 13 September 1911, Page 7

UNOCCUPIED NATIVE LANDS.

(By Arthur S. Orrnsbv.)

AND "TAIHOA POLICY."

During a recent trip of Mr Massey through the King Country he made the statement that there were 118,000 acres of unoccupied native land in the vicinity of Kavvhia. This statement was quoted in the Auckland Herald, and several other leading papers made use of the figure, and out of the statement worked up a very black-looking case against the Maori and his unoccupied lands, and against those responsible for the policy that would prevent him from being• deprived outright of his inheritage. Now, I am going to contradict this as being nothing but a grossly exaggerated and misleading statement. 1 know the district well-—have lived in it all my life, and the largest block of unoccupied native land anywhere near Kavvhia, of which I am aware is the "Matakowhai block" of 45,000 acres, nearly half of which the Government has acquired, the remainder being split up between hundreds of owners; as to the Maoris in the immediate vicinity of Kavvhia, the amount owned by individuals is very small indeed, and works not to an average of about 20 acres a piece, there being very few with 100-acre shares, and just an odd one or two with anything like a 20acreholding; they are reduced practically to bedrock, the "Papakainga" ! alone remaining to the majority. | Mr Massey is for ever harping on i the unoccupied native lands and the j "Taihoa Policy" of the Government, | and particularly of Sir James Carroll, j Native Minister, in regard to Maori lands. This is nothing more than an i electioneering dodge of the Opposition ! —a popular cry—to carry favour with I the capitalist and speculator, and the | poor Maori is made the butt. Mr Mas- ! sey closes his eyes io the unoccupied ! Government land in the Dominion, j which could well be spared, and thrown I out to the "wolves" first of all, while | the Maori is given further breathing | space in which to allow the younger | generation, which certainly is awaking ! to the seriousness of the position, to i work out its own salvation; only as a j last resort, let him be thrown out of I the "sledge." However, I have no I intention in this article of attempting I to solve the native land question, but ! rather to correct an inaccurate state- ! ment, and to defend the so-called : "Taihoa Policy" of the Government and of Sir James Carroll, to which | the Opposition attributes the slow j progress of the district. I To a certain extent I admit that the fact of there being unoccupied Maori land, and the present general I unsatisfactory state of the Maori land : laws, are retarding progress, but not ; to the exaggerated extent that is im- ! puted to them. There are other drawi backs to progress to mention one: I j fearlessly affirm that the majority of settlers throughout the Kins* Country I as also in other districts have taken up land not with the intention of mak- ; ing any permanent home but purely | for speculative purposes. They are waiting for the next man; and in the j case of many of the Government hold- j ings they are made too large to be : effectively working or of permanently ; settling on their holdings; they are | merely hanging on doing just enough ; and no more to comply with the conditions of their tenure; waiting for i the first chance to "sell out well." Now what is this "Taihoa Policy" to which Mr Massey attributes the slow progress of the districts ? Ever ' since the Treaty of Waitangi the Go- ! vernment has had a problem before it -—-"Maori lands and how to deal with | them for the best." There have ! been and still are those who would de- ; prive the Maori of every acre he po3- ' sssscd by right of conquest as they so arrogantly put it; for the which j their forefathers honost men and true ; of the good old days fought and bled; j and who with the magnanimity that j the British have ever shown the 1 weaker were glad to make peace on the j generous terms of that famous.Treaty ! of vVaitangi. There have been and | still are those who would see the | Maori make the best of his land; who I would save him from the blandish- ! ments of the unscrupulous land-shark i with his "blankets his tobacco and his rum." Now I am not taking up a brief on the Native Minister's account. He is well able to take care of himself; but I am firmly of opinion that to the tact and cuation, together with the spirit of justice that has characterise Sir Jas. Carroll's land policy,the Dominion, and particularly the King j Country, owes much of its advance, its present prosperity and the amicable relations existing between the S two races. Contrast it with the blundering bull-headed, policy controlling affairs during and subsequent to the Waikato Wan Not taking into consideration even the hundreds of valuable lives that were lost, think of the j hundreds of thousands of pounds it cost the country; directly, in the actual cost of the war, and indirectly and afterwards in the thousands of pounds that were spent in trying to UHdP tj]e evil that this forcing, push- i ing, blundering policy Y>ji9 yeapon- j sible for. In the 70' a, in eonae- j quence of it, the Government had to j resort to its "tea and sugar policy," | as a means of pacification; store- j keepers on ana near the borders of j the King Country had to suffer the j indignity of having Maoris coming j into their stores, and, as I myself I have seen, demanding in the haughtiest and most dictatorial manner, anything that they took a fancy to, for whiwh, of course, the country had to pay eventually, Aa a result of it, the Government thought it advisable to provide hundreds of chiefs and influential men with free houses and pensions running into hundreds of thousands of pounds of secret service money to undo the mischief. In short, it took years of patient dealing to overcome the hostility of the King Country and other natives to undo the mischief. It has been computed that, taking everything into consideration, the Waikato land cost the Government about £4 an acre; compare this with the 4s 6d per acre, the approximate

I average price, for which, by the dipi lomatie "Taihoa" policy of Sir James Carroll, about 2,000,000 acres of the "Rohepotae" or King Country was bought. Had the same policy been used in the King Country as had been used in the Waikato, no end of trouble would have arisen; the Maoris would certainly have resisted ; settlement would have been held in check ; ! European settlers would not have | been there yet; the "Rohepotae" | would have still been a closed disj trict.

So, far from being malinged, and having unjust charges placed to his account, just because the speculator cannot p;et hold of the Maori land as fast as he could wish Sir James Carroil deserves to have a monument erected in his honour, and, when his inevitable day shall have come, to his memory for the inestimable service he has rendered the Dominion.

Now, as I mentioned before, the younger generation and the more enlightened of us are awaking to the seriousness of affairs, and to the importance of occupying and cultivating our lands. We see unmistabable signs of this in the efforts of the Young Maori Party, in the activity among the Maoris along the East Coast in the direction of sheep farming, in the number of Maoris, a total of about 2IP, engaged in dairy-farm-ing in various parts Taranaki, Southern Wairoa, Hawke's Bay, the North, and in the King Country. There is evidence that the Maori, under equally favourable conditions, can hold his own with his pakeha neighbour; along the East Coast he has topped the market with his wool; he has been creditably successful as a dairy farmer, and it is generally admitted by factory managers and inspectors that once he knows what is expected of him, the Maori is second to none in cleanliness.

If Mr Massey, instead of railing against the "Taihoa Policy," and clamouring for the unoccupied land of the Maori, lent his talents to devise means of providing the Maori with facilities for occupying his land, and for borrowing money to improve it, he would be conferring an incalculable benefit; and would earn the undying gratitude of the Maori. I hold thtit every self-supporting person, whether pakeha or Maori, goes to make up the Dominion's most valuable asset; consequently any policy that aims at making self-supporting, independent citizens, is sound policy; and of measures that tend to pauperise a people and make them burdens on the community the reverse is true. Now, the Maori's place is on the land--on the land that

he already has. With financial assistance, advice and instruction in the initial stapes, there is every reason to believe that he would be a success as a sheep or dairy farmer. What is responsible for there being so much unoccupied land? Chiefly the fact of most of it being held cummunistically, and what is owned by all is owned by none —hence, no one will run the risk, after clearing, fencing', etc., of having the. other owners stepping in and demanding a share in the fruits of his labours; and, consequently, the land lies idle. The Maori is quite ready —in fact, is quite anxious —to occupy and improve his land, were he only sure that he would not have to share his hard-earned gair.s with others. Once remove this stumbling block by individualising and giving him a clear and legal title to his interests, and provide him with the same facilities for borrowing money for the improvement of his land, and there will, I feel sure, be no longer any necessity to i;ry out against the unoccupied Maori land; the Maori, instead of becoming a pauper, a burden on the State, and a problem for succeeding Governments, would become an industrious, self-supporting, self-respecting citizen a most valuable asset to the Dominion.