In the 25 February 2008, I wrote to the Waitangi Tribunal requesting a copy of Tiopira Kinaki and Parore te Awha’s Deed of Conveyance to the Crown in 1876 of Maunganui that was attached to Mr Coqulhoun’s report into the Waitangi Tribunal’s Te Roroa Claim, Wai 38.

On the 4 March 2008, I received the following email from Barry Rigby, Waitangi Tribunal, Justice Department. “Dear Mr Baker, I have passed on your question regarding the 1876 Maunganui Crown purchase to Mr Colquhoun. He has replied as follows: “Looking at my Wai38 report "The Waipoua-Maunganui Claim. A Preliminary report of aspects of the claim re: Crown Purchase of Waipoua and Maunganui Blocks in 1876; Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki; and other Maunganui aspects of the claim" 12 June 1989. This is A2 in the document bank to the Wai-38 report. I state on page 32 "The deeds for Waipoua (A5:721A-D) and Maunganui (A5:718-21) were completed on 8 February 1876. They were standard deeds conveying lands and appurtenances to the Crown..." etc. There is a lot of detail about negotiations, and later dispute”. Mr Colquhoun gave evidence in 1989 as a historian commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal.

I emailed Barry Rigby back on the 10 May 2008 asking, “Could you please ask Mr Colquhoun what he meant by his comments, "and later dispute" and "appurtenances to the Crown"?

His reply on the 12 May 2008, “David left the Tribunal staff 19 years ago, and he no longer has time to enter into correspondence regarding his 1988-1989 Tribunal commissioned research. He has allowed me to answer your question regarding later disputes. David covered in his original report both the 1876 Crown purchases at Waipoua and Maunganui, and the subsequent disputes arising from them. The main disputes arising out of the Maunganui purchase were those over the Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki reserves”.

I received a copy of the Deed that was attached to Mr Colquhoun’s report on the 22 April 2008. See copy below (1).

On the 13 May I received the following email from Barry Rigby. “Ross, I am attaching jpeg images of both sides of the original 1876 Maunganui Crown purchase deed. These images have just arrived from Archives. Please note that neither the Manuwhetai or Whangaiariki areas are identified as reserves. The only reserve included within the purchase is the 250 acre Taharoa area adjoining the southern boundary”. Barry Rigby, Justice Department. See copy below.

WHAT DID HE SAY??? “Please note that neither the Manuwhetai or Whangaiariki areas are identified as reserves. The only reserve included within the purchase is the 250 acre Taharoa area adjoining the southern boundary”.

Barry, you are 100% correct!!! Why couldn't the Crown, the Waitangi Tribunal or Mr Colquhoun see this. Had the Crown put pressure on them to uphold its 1990, unsubstantiated “Agreed Statement of Fact” or did they have a hidden agenda?

The reason Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki were not identified as reserves; they were of no interest to Parore te Awha (Ngapuhi) or Tiopira Kinaki (Te Roroa) and were never mentioned by either party before, during or after the sale. There was also no mention made of either reserve at the Improper Sale Inquiry heard one month later when Tiopira felt he was paid less than Parore for his share. The inquiry went into very fine detail of the sale; the areas sold, the reserves given, prices paid and even Tiopira putting his spectacles on to sign the Deed - but no mention of Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki!!!

Barry, Te Roroa and the Crown do not have one "genuine" document saying Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki should have been cut from the sale. Not one!! Why I say "genuine" is because the Chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal at the time it was heard, Chief Judge Eddie Durie admitted, claimants were manufacturing, altering and withholding evidence unhelpful to their case. (NZ Herald 17/11/99).

It is also interesting that Garry Hooker, one of the main claimants wrote an article on Te Roroa for the Auckland Museum and Institute in 1978. He makes no mention that Te Roroa occupied or had burial grounds (wahi tapu) at Manuwhetai or a "pa" at Whangaiariki. He states, which is fully documented, that Te Roroa lived at Waimamaku and history tells us, this was under the protection of Parore te Awha!! The reason the Maori Affairs Select Committee lied that our submission into the Te Roroa Settlement Bill was not heard, it showed with documented evidence, this is a fraudulent claim and the Sale Agreement to acquire Allan Titford's property was "corrupt"!!!

Plan 3297/8 has nothing to do with Te Roroa or Parore, it was a private plan, not drawn under the rules of the day, for a third party. Because it was not drawn under the rules of the day it was never certified, it just lay on file until someone found it and used it at the 1939 Inquiry, where it was found by Chief Judge Shepherd to have no official standing or formed any part of the sale of Maunganui to the Crown, the reason Parliament rejected this claim in 1942.

After the Crown agreed to the unsubstantiated and foolish, "Agreed Statement of Fact" in 1990, the Waitangi Tribunal, its researchers and the Crown had no other option than to find in the claimants favour. Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki had to be returned to Te Roroa "at what ever cost" and cost it has in more ways than one!!!

The fact is Barry, the Deed shows Parore and Tiopira sold their complete interest in Maunganui with only one reserve, Taharoa. Anything else is just wishful thinking and very poor research by those involved. A fact stated by the late and respected Ngapuhi elder, Graham Rankin, a man who knew Te Roroa's whakapapa and history better than any one else and was not afraid to tell the truth. (Copy of letter attached)

I asked Barry Rigby to forward the above onto David Colquhoun. His reply, “Ross, as I mentioned earlier this week, David is not in a position to continue correspondence on this matter. Nonetheless, I will copy this to him”. Why? ... he’s still alive isn’t he or are there other reasons???

Mr Colquhoun, I agree there have been continuing disputes over Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki. The reason being; Te Roroa have never got over the fact that their ancestor Tiopira Kinaki was caught “red-handed” trying to steal this land from Parore te Awha in 1874/5 and have continued to try and steal it ever since. As can be seen from the 1876 Deed below, when the Crown bought this land from Tiopira Kinaki and Parore te Awha in 1876 and there was no mention of Manuwhetai or Whangaiariki.

This earlier “bad, shoddy” research, whether deliberate or just plain laziness, set up this whole fraudulent claim. From this, the Crown agreed to the “Agreed Statement of Fact” in 1990, two years before the Waitangi Tribunal had completed or presented its report, giving the Tribunal no other options than to allow the evidence to be manipulated to find in the claimant's favour.

The only way this Deed of Conveyance can be over-ruled, is by documented evidence that Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki were to be cut out of the sale, something the Crown, the Waitangi Tribunal or Te Roroa have been unable to produce for the simple fact, there are none!!

Mr Colquhoun, why couldn’t you see what Barry Rigby saw at a glance? You had a copy of the Deed of Conveyance, why didn’t you, the Waitangi Tribunal and the Crown use it and help save the country hundreds of millions of dollars, plus human suffering and sacrifice??

Ross Baker. Researcher,

One New Zealand Foundation Inc. 16/5/2008.

1. Copy of deed attached to David Colquhoun's Report to the Waitangi Tribunal

2. Copy of original Deed of Conveyance to the Crown in 1876. Note only one reserve, "Taharoa". Original document is very large (A2).

To see the above Deed page at high resolution CLICK HERE

To see the above Deed page at high resolution CLICK HERE

Deed Alleged Missing at Waitangi Tribunal.
It is interesting to note, Allan Titford and Don Harrison say they never saw these documents presented at the Waitangi Tribunal. In fact, when requested, were told they had been misplaced. When Mr Titford showed Sue Kendedine (Crown Law) and David Colquhoun (Crown Historian) a copy of the Deed he had obtained earlier from the Maori Affairs Department in Whangarei, they seemed very surprised, as did the Rt Hon Margaret Wilson, Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations some years later.

A copy of a letter to the Minister (Margaret Wilson) from a very respected Ngapuhi Maori elder, who knew the history and genealogy of his people better than anyone.

Graham Rankin,
16 Rankin St, Kaikohe.
June 4th 2001.
Minister of Treaty Claims,
The Hon Margaret Wilson.

Tena koe,
Eighteen months ago I met a man of good Bohemian stock. I have met him several times later, a young man with a terrible bile in his belly, and rightfully so.
No living person should suffer the pain he and his wife and children, at the hands of Government and Associates, Ministers in particular. From the time the Te Roroa claim took effect, I asked, "could this be the land of our fathers".
In my view, how could Te Awha Parore and Tiopira own so much land, when Maori, at some time in our history had communistic laws? The Chief only apportions a small parcel of land for family requirements, no more, no less. The land belonged to the Tribe not the chief.
Te Roroa people are only squatters, living on the edge of Waipoua Forest. They don't even know what they are!! Ngatiwhatua or Ngapuhi. Like the Israelites, driven out of the Bay of Islands to Whangaroa, then fled with Hongi Hika in chase to Waipoua.
My Ngaitu people were the earlier settlers, our Tupuna, Chief Kohuru of the funerary chests at Kohekohe. I am angry that the chests were never returned to Kohekohe, but interred in a simple ceremony at Waimamaku without permission.
I have read the Te Roroa report, also attended the findings at Waikara Marae, men and women in the finery, Ministers, Members of the Tribunal, others in country apparel, gumboots, oilskins, horses, tractors and dogs, out for a great day. The big tops, a large dining area, all at the expense of the Government of the day.
Before the seal had set, this 15th day of May 1990, the great philosophers found there was a grave mistake. Accordingly, a prompt change to the Act was pushed through by Parliament, "land that was owned by private ownership should not be challenged". The work of the claim was shoddy, unclean and destructive in the eyes of our New Zealand Society.
My question Minister, the land can never be given to Maori, sitting as a "crown jewel" when it should be returned to Allan Titford, now.
I asked Titford to bring me copies, various deeds, Court minutes, successions before writing. I am satisfied what I have witnessed, by the sequence of events, from the time the Crown purchased Maunganui lands from Te Awha Parore in successions, or lease, is compatible with the standard within the law of our country.
Also let it be known to the Tribunal and yourself, in permanent storage, Turnbull Library had "an epitome" of official documents, relative to native offers and land purchases in the North Island of New Zealand. A very useful follow up guide for claims. Compiled and edited by N.Hansen Turton. There is a large section contained about Maunganui lands.
Enclosed, is exhaustive research provided by Titford. Maps and Deeds can be supplied if required. I am a devoted protector of my Maori Peoples interests if a case is fair and accurate, same goes for Pakeha people.
I must reiterate, this must be the saddest case I have come upon. Bad research coupled by greed and inefficiency. Please have the Tribunal sight this letter. Be guided by extra care in the future.
Tena Koe Hoi ano
Signed, Graham Rankin, Ngapuhi elder.
Regards to our great Prime Minister.

Unfortunately, Graham Rankin has passed away since writing this letter to the Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations.
SHODDY, BAD, UNCLEAN, DESTRUCTIVE IN THE EYES OF NZ SOCIETY
The Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations showed little interest in this letter when she wrote, "it runs counter to the evidence presented to the Waitangi Tribunal".
Ms Wilson, this is exactly what Mr Rankin is telling you - The Waitangi Tribunal and your Crown researchers got it wrong! It was bad research, shoddy, unclean and destructive in the eyes of New Zealand Society!