The Treaty of Waitangi; or, how New Zealand became a British ColonyBuick, Thomas Lindsay
History
The Treaty of Waitangi; or, how New Zealand became a British Colony
Buick, Thomas Lindsay
New Zealand -- Politics and government; Treaty of Waitangi (1840)
he requested their assistance in effecting the negotiation with which
he had been entrusted. The Missionaries at this time, the Committee
pointed out, had not read Captain Hobson's instructions, for they had
not then been published, but they fully understood the claims of the
natives upon the soil of New Zealand, and the point upon which they
had to satisfy themselves was whether the proposed treaty was designed
to admit and confirm those claims in the full and unqualified sense in
which they were made. The Missionaries knew that the Maoris claimed
the _entire_ soil of New Zealand.[189] They knew that the entire
country was divided amongst the several tribes, that the boundaries of
every property were accurately defined, and the proprietorship so
vested in each tribe that all the members of the tribe had a
beneficial interest therein. They therefore knew that at the time the
Treaty of Waitangi was signed there was no land in New Zealand without
an owner, and which would under the principles of public law, be
automatically transferred to the Crown.
"In the view, therefore, of both the Missionaries and the natives,"
they said, "the sovereignty and the land were two entirely distinct
things, and to preserve the latter intact, while they surrendered the
former, was the great solicitude of the natives. From Captain Hobson
the Missionaries received the most satisfactory explanation of the
terms of the treaty. It dwelt explicitly on both the sovereignty and
the land, and the interpretation which the Missionaries were
authorised to give of it was that, while the _entire_
sovereignty should be transferred to the British Crown, the
_entire_ land should be secured to the natives. Most certainly
the Missionaries received the fullest assurance that, in surrendering
the sovereignty, the natives would not by that act surrender their
original claims upon any part of the soil. In this sense the chiefs
themselves understood the treaty, as it was propounded to them. They
clearly comprehended its two main features as explained in their own
figurative style, that 'the shadow of the land,' by which they meant
'the sovereignty,' would pass to the Queen of England, but that the
'substance,' meaning the land itself, would remain with them."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account