Wairau Affray (1843)

Prior to the signing of The Treaty of Waitangi/ Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the New Zealand Company have been making land deals to commercialise the land to British settlers, with the ultimate motive of colonisation of Aotearoa. According to historian Vincent O'Malley, "[...] When the crown arrives in 1840, one of the first things it does, is to issue a proclamation that says all prior land transactions would be investigated by a Land Claims Commission. And if these are not upheld, the claims to land will be dismissed. The New Zealand Company's claims are subjected to this." 

The Blenkinsop Indenture of 1832 of the Wairau Valley was one of the land claims which had to be investigated. Six Māori rangatira, two of them being Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata, signed the deed. What was agreed between the chiefs and Captain John William Dundas Blenkinsop was that the deal "allowed [Blenkinsop] to draw sufficient water and timber from the Wairau as he required, for the simple one-off payment of an 18-pound cannonade." (Baker, 2015). The written term that states that the deed in fact allows Blenkinsop to have full rights to the Wairau Valley region was not mentioned, nor agreed upon. This is significant as it shows the fundamental deed that started Pākehā settlements in the Nelson region was one of injustice and manipulation, revealing the true motivations of British settlers who negotiated with Māori - they were looking to colonise the land, disregarding the tangata whenua and their customs. This is what the land conflict between Ngāti Toa and The New Zealand Company stemmed from, and therefore the deal is a significant political factor that led to the Wairau Affray.

The person who was responsible for this process from The New Zealand Company was Land Commissioner William Spain. However, according to Vincent O'Malley, Spain was slow to investigate the land claims Ngāti Toa appealed because he was occupied with another land case appeal. In hindsight, the Wairau Affray may not have happened if Land Commissioner William Spain was able to investigate the land claims at Wairau Valley on time. The situation shows the complex dynamic of land deeds between Māori and Pākehā at the time, and how unauthorised land deeds that The New Zealand Company made complicated the partnership between Māori and Pākehā.

The New Zealand Company began to run the first land surveys in the Wairau Valley from April 6, 1843, according to the plaque commemorating the first surveys of Wairau Valley by the Tuamarina river site. Ngāti Toa rangatira (chiefs) Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata was displeased by this action, as they believed the land purchase was never consulted with Ngāti Toa. Additionally, according to an article by The Evening Post recalling the event, Ngāti Toa peacefully escorted the surveyors: "Te Rauparaha had their [surveyors'] gear shifted from the huts and the toi-toi strips removed from the survey pegs. A bonfire was then made of the huts and toi-toi strips, Te Rauparaha maintaining that they were the property of the Maoris. (sic.)" This shows the disapproval of Ngāti Toa for The New Zealand Company's lack of respect towards Māori rightful land ownership, and also the constitutions that they set out for themselves in a partnership between Māori and Pākehā. It also supports the argument that The New Zealand Company and its dubious land deals around Aotearoa was a great political factor that heightened tensions between Māori and Pākehā, leading up to the Wairau Affray.

Fry, S. (2023, March 3) Photo of the Blenkinsop Cannonade. [Photo]. Blenheim, New Zealand.

Gold, C. (April 1851). Wairau April 1851 [Artwork]. Retrieved from Owen, D. (2022, June 13). The Wairau Affray: A series of unfortunate events. National Library of New Zealand.

The core of conflict of land between Māori and Pākehā roots from deep political and cultural beliefs upheld by both parties. This is most reflective through the two versions of The Treaty of Waitaingi and Te Tiriti o Waitangi. In Article One of Te Tiriti, the word kawanatanga, which means governence, was used. What this implied was that the Crown were allowed limited govern abilities. However, in the Treaty, the word sovereign was used. This implied that Māori is giving up the sovereignty of Aotearoa, and the Crown would have full control over Aotearoa resources and communities, including Māori. This caused conflict for European settlers who came to the country with the aim to benefit from the colonisation and commercialisation of land in Aotearoa. Māori and New Zealand history lecturer Danny Keenan said: "Some Nelson settlers like Police Magistrate H.A. Thompson unhappily saw it differently; and they were all set to insist on something more when facing Māori over Wairau." This proves that the mistranslated terms from the Treaty of Waitangi impacted how colonists thought of the ownership of the Wairau Valley, and therefore it was one of the key underlying factors which led to the complications in land ownership between Māori and Pākehā, which was relevant for the disputes surrounding the Wairau Affray.

Additionally, British colonists did not view the Treaty as a partnership, it was a way for the Crown to colonise Aotearoa and gain political influence, in Aotearoa and internationally. When the Crown looked at Aotearoa as a commodity, Māori viewed the land as tapu (sacred). "Māori believed they belonged to the land, rather than that the land belonged to them." (Whaanga, 2012). It explains why Ngāti Toa was adamant in their important land ownership of the Wairau Valley. Dr Lloyd Carpenter commented on the mindset of British colonists when they colonised New Zealand, and how their attitude contributed to the lack of consideration over Māori rights: "They were new people in a new country, and one of them was a buffoon... These were people who thought Indians were dirty and untrustworthy, who treated anyone from Africa as a cannibal also not to be trusted. They felt no need to honour anything signed between the British and 'savages.' That simply didn't fit their world view." This shows the great divide in Māori and European views on the relationship between the land, people and governance, which underlies the conflict that Ngāti Toa and European settlers faced before the Wairau Affray.

"In the first place the Englishmen were wrong; they had no right to build houses upon land to which they had not established their claim the sale of which you disputed, and upon which Mr Spain had not decided. They were wrong in trying to apprehend you—you who had committed no crime. They were wrong in marking and measuring your land in opposition to your repeated refusal to allow them to do so until the Commissioner had decided on their claim [...] as the Englishmen were very greatly to blame, and as they brought on and began the fight, and as you were hurried into crime by their misconduct, I will not avenge their death."

— Robert Fitzroy