On June 17th 1843, a land conflict between Ngāti Toa and the New Zealand Company representatives broke out led to a bloody affray known as the Wairau Affray.
In the early 1840s, a large influx of British settlers began to buy land and moved to New Zealand. The rapid increase of British settlers in such a short period meant that The New Zealand Company deemed that there was a land shortage to meet demands. Their solution to this problem was to extend Pākehā settlements to the Wairau Valley, which was presumed to be part of the dubious 1.2 million hectare land purchase of the Cook Strait region in 1839, led by The New Zealand Company Chief Negotiator, Colonel William Wakefield.
Meeting retaliations from Ngāti Toa during their land surveys, Magistrate Thompson was unhappy and consequently issued a warrant for the arrest of Ngāti Toa chiefs Te Rauparaha and Te Rangihaeata for arson. Magistrate Thompson was notorious for being "a man with a known temper and no knowledge or interest in tikanga Māori" (Owen, 2022), showing the evident prejudice of the colonial system which impacted Magistrate Thompson's decisions against Ngāti Toa.
On June 17th 1843, an armed group of 47 mostly unskilled Europeans, along with Magistrate Thompson and Arthur Wakefield, New Zealand Company agent, arrived by the Tuamarina stream. The details of the party's movement and the interaction between the group and Ngāti Toa is depicted on the map Wairau Affray: site plan.
The discussions between Te Rauparaha and The New Zealand Company was heated: it was recorded that "Thompson slaps [Te Rauparaha]'s hand out of the way" when Te Rauparaha extended his hand, potentially as a gesture of peace. What happens next in the event is heavily disputed between historians. A stray shot was fired, and it killed Te Rongo, Te Rangihaeata's wife. Though unrecorded whether or not it was fired by Ngāti Toa troops or by the surveyors group, many sources agree that the shots was likely fired by an untrained European surveyor. Consequently, violence broke out from both parties, and 4 Europeans and from 4 to 9 Māori died on the spot. Wanting utu (revenge) for the death of his wife, Te Rangihaeata executed the 18 European men who surrendered.
The event had insurmountable historical, social and political influence that defined the rocky Māori-Pākehā relationship of colonial New Zealand and the effects colonisation had on not only Māori lives and constitutional rights, but also the public's knowledge and understanding of Māori-Pākehā conflict, in the past and present.
RNZ. (2023, January 6) NZ Wars: Stories of Wairau. [Documentary] YouTube.
Fry, S. (2023, March 2). Wairau Affray: Site Plan. [Map.] Blenheim, New Zealand.
There were various long-term and direct political causes which led to the Wairau Affray. But the two most important causes of the Wairau Affray, and often most overlooked by the public, were the contentious land deals made by The New Zealand Company, and the fundamental cultural and political differences between Māori and Pākehā settlers. These two causes contributed significantly to the conflict of the Wairau Affray and how the public preceived the event, directly after the event and further along in the future.
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.
Detail showing Te Rauparaha's moko from the Blenkinsop Indenture. (October 1832) [Photo]. Retrieved from Baker, M. (2015, July 10). Dirty deeds done dirt cheap! Part two. Museum of New Zealand - Te Papa
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.
(October 1843) Church Hill fort (Fort Arthur) [Image]. Retrieved from https://teara.govt.nz/en/artwork/28820/church-hill-fort-october-1843
(n.d.) Governor Robert Fitzroy. [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.ruapekapeka.co.nz/cast-of-characters/robert-fitzroy/
— Robert Fitzroy
The Wairau Affray caused shock over the region as the first severe Māori-Pākehā conflict after the Treaty of Waitangi, and it significantly severed the already fractured Māori-Pākehā relations over land ownership at the time. The response from a large part of the settlers community was hostile and guarded against Māori, as seen by the militarisation of Pākehā settlements such as the fortification of Fort Arthur, and the negative backlash against Māori in news coverage at the time.
After meeting with Te Rauparaha and Ngāti Toa members for testimony in Feburary 1844, Governor Robert Fitzroy concluded that the settlers team of The New Zealand Company was at fault for the events of July 1843. Fitzroy emphasised that The New Zealand Company "had no right to survey the land.", admitting that Māori had full land rights to the Wairau Valley and therefore could legally protect it. This verdict was significant for the narratives of Wairau Affray as it was a statement from an authority figure of the Crown, which puts accountability on the New Zealand Company and their wrongdoings which lead to the conflict.
It was agreed in many sources that the majority of Pākehā community was outraged by the verdict Governer Fitzroy provided, as they were influenced through Eurocentric news coverage and narratives which believed that Ngāti Toa were fully at fault for the Wairau Affray. A local settler commented on the verdict: "Our fellow colonists have been cruelly murdered... we have too much reason to regard their unhappy fate only as the beginnings of still greater troubles unless our newly appointed governor... averts the ruin that must otherwise inevitably follow." Following the immense outcry from settlers who claimed that Pākehā were vindicated by Fitzroy's judgement of the Wairau Affray, Governor Fitzroy was removed from the office, and Governor George Grey was appointed. Influenced by the demands of the British Crown, Governor Grey held the opinion that Ngāti Toa was to blame for the Wairau Affray. He pushed for the arrest of Te Rauparaha, forced Te Rangihaeata and Ngāti Toa into exile, and proceeded a land claim over the Wairau Region.
At the end, the immense retaliation against Māori, and the loss that Māori faced as a result of biased judgement made by Pākehā of influence, shows the how colonialism disregarded Māori rights through pressure, leaving substantial consequences for Māori of the Wairau region. At the same time, Eurocentrism and colonialism also formed a dominant narrative around the Wairau Affray which continued to affect how New Zealand society views the event to this day.