Maorification, Ross Baker, Treaty of Waitangi


This is the first of a series of posts designed to bust the myths created by the Treaty of Waitangi grievance industry — myths shamelessly presented as truths by your government. 

If you think it rude of me to expose these facts, tough. If conmen are going to tell lies about my forefathers, I’m going to tell the truth about theirs.

Much of what you see below is distilled from New Zealand in Crisis by Ross Baker of the One New Zealand Foundation

In the plainest English I could muster, here is the boiled-down background to the drafting and signing of the Treaty:

c.1350 — Maori meet the tangata whenua

  • Maori history tells of seven canoes arriving from Hawaiki in around 1350AD.

  • They find New Zealand already inhabited by people they call the tangata whenua.

  • Maori historian Dr Ranginui Walker confirms: “The traditions are quite clear: wherever crew disembarked there were already tangata whenua (prior inhabitants).”

  • These first inhabitants are either driven into extinction or merge with the tangata Maori (just as the tangata Maori have merged with the Pakeha). 

  • Ranginui Walker: The canoe ancestors of the 14th century merged with these tangata whenua tribes.

  • Thus Maori are not indigenous to New Zealand. 

  • Nor are they the tangata whenua — the first people here. 

  • Indigenous means here from the start — like the aborigines who’ve been in Australia for 40,000 years.

  • Maori have been here only about 650 years — only 300 years longer than Europeans.

  • Maori have never been a united people, with a long history of inter-tribal bloodletting.

  • Ranginui Walker: From this time on [the 14th century] , the traditions abound with accounts of tribal wars over the land and its resources”.

1771 — fighting with Frenchmen

  • In 1771 in the Bay of Islands, Maori kill Marion du Fresne and 24 of his party for ignoring wahi tapu when fishing.

  • In retaliation, du Fresne’s crew kill 250 Maori and torch their village.

  • Ever since, the Maori are afraid of the French.

1820-30 — Maori slaughter 20-60,000 fellow Maori

  • By 1820, the Maori v Maori Musket Wars have been raging for around 15 years. They will go on for about another 25 years.

  • There are around 500 battles in all.

  • In 1820, Ngapuhi chief Hongi Hika sails to England.

  • He asks the King for muskets. The King declines, but presents him with other gifts.

  • In Sydney on the way home, he trades all the King’s gifts for 300 muskets and gunpowder.

  • He then leads his tribe on a rampage south. They slaughter 20-60,000 of their defenceless countrymen, out of a total Maori population of 100-120,000. With up to half the population wiped out, it has been called the world’s worst holocaust.

  • In one attack on the Tamaki pa, Ngapuhi kill more men, women and children than are killed in the whole 27 years of the 1845-72 Land Wars.

  • By 1830 the southern tribes have armed themselves with muskets and are planning to head north for revenge.

1831 — Waikato annihilate Taranaki, who slaughter the Moriori

  • The Waikato travel south and attack the Taranaki tribes.

  • They kill one-third and enslave another third. The remaining third flees south to the Wellington area.

1831 – Northern chiefs ask King for protection 

  • In 1831, it’s rumoured that the French naval vessel La Favourite intends to annex New Zealand to France.

  • The French would have two reasons for doing this: as further payback for the killing of du Fresne and his crew; and to protect the French now living in Hokianga.

  • The natives decide to place a British flag on the mission flagstaff. They reason that if the French tear it down, the missionaries will appeal to Britain for protection.

  • Thirteen northern chiefs write to the King of England, asking him to protect them.

  • They tell the King they only trust the British: “It is only thy land which is liberal towards us”.

  • They reveal their fear of the French: “We have heard that the tribe of Marian [the French] is at hand, coming to take away our land”.

  • They ask the King to guard their lands from other tribes and nations: “Therefore we pray thee to become our friend and the guardian of these islands, lest the teasing of other tribes should come near us, and lest strangers should come and take away our land”.

  • At the time there are no property rights. To the Maori, might is right — they hold their land only as long as they can defend it.

  • The King acknowledges the chiefs’ request by sending a British Resident, James Busby, to New Zealand in 1833.

1835 – Declaration of Independence

  • New Zealand-built ships are sailing to Sydney.

  • These ships are not registered, so have no flag to sail under.

  • So James Busby introduces to the northern tribes a Declaration of Independence.

  • This gives them a form of identity, and a flag under which New Zealand ships can be registered.

  • In 1835, thirty-four Ngapuhi chiefs sign the Declaration of Independence.

  • This declares their territories independent states. It states they will meet in Congress each year.

  • The annual Congress is meant to make laws to dispense justice, preserve peace and good order, and regulate trade.

  • But, as always, inter-tribal fighting takes precedence over political co-operation.

  • The Declaration is abandoned without one Congress meeting being held.

  • The Declaration can’t give full sovereignty, as the chiefs can’t form a united working government.

  • Tribes only have power over their territories as long as they can defend them.

  • No united political structure exists in New Zealand at this time.

What historians say about the Declaration of Independence

Claudia Orange:

“Even though the declaration asserted sovereignty, Maori, who saw themselves as tribal rather than as members of a nation, would have been unable to exercise full rights as an independent state, there was no indigenous political structure upon which to base a united congress.

“However, it did introduce Maori to the idea of a legal relationship with Britain and therefore, five years later, to the Treaty of Waitangi”.

Michael King: 

“The Declaration had no reality, since there was in fact no national indigenous power structure within New Zealand”.

King also pointed out that some of the United Tribes were at war with one another within a year of signing the Declaration.

Paul Moon:

“The Declaration represented a regional goodwill agreement rather than a national document of truly constitutional significance”.

1835 — Maori massacre Moriori in Chathams.

  • In 1835, 900 of the Taranaki (Ngati Mutunga and Ngati Tama) who flee to Wellington, want to avoid being harassed further.

  • They commandeer the brig Rodney and sail in two trips to the Chatham Islands.

  • Many are sick when they arrive, and are nursed back to health by the peace-loving Moriori.

  • When they recover, and for the next seven years, the Maori slaughter or farm the Moriori to near-extinction.

  • Historian Michael King: “They were laid out touching one another, the parent and the child. Some women had stakes thrust into them; they were left to die in misery. The rest farmed like sheep over the next few years into virtual extinction”.

1837 – Call for better government 

  • In 1837, inter-tribal fighting worsens in many parts of New Zealand.

  • Busby can do little to stop it, as he has no forces.

  • The settlers, traders and 192 chiefs want more official commitment. They appeal to Britain for a better type of Government.

  • As inter-tribal fighting worsens, the Maori population plummets.

  • Musket- and goods-hungry Maori are selling vast tracts of their land to land-hungry Europeans.

  • Britain is twice asked (in 1831 and 1835), and twice promises, to protect the people and their property.

  • To bring law and order to both Maori and non-Maori, Britain is obliged to take more control.

  • To do this legally, they need to make New Zealand a British Colony.

  • To make New Zealand a colony, Britain has to get the chiefs’ consent to sovereignty over the whole land.

  • For two years, the Colonial Office debates the best way to become involved in New Zealand. The British don’t really want another colony.

  • With extreme reluctance, the Colonial Office sends out William Hobson, a highly ranked Officer in the British Navy.

  • Hobson’s job is to negotiate a treaty with the chiefs that will give Britain sovereignty over the whole land.

  • That treaty will give Britain the legal right to set up a government.

  • A government will bring law, order and protection. It may investigate and settle land sales, titles and disputes.

  • The government will act for all the people of New Zealand, settler and Maori alike.

Next: the drafting and signing of the Treaty.

UPDATE: It’s taking me longer than expected to gather my evidence for Part 2. (There’s just so much of it, and I’m also contending with a family illness.)

For now, I urge you to click on the Comments thread below. It has attracted some experts in the field who have spent decades studying this subject. I’m finding their contributions enlightening.


  1. Wow, how prophetic Winston Peter’s can be.

    Peters: They’re marching us into apartheid

    By Audrey Young
    5:00 AM Monday Oct 29, 2007


    Protestors march to Mt. Eden Prison on Saturday afternoon against the recent raids and arrests. Photo / Janna Dixon.
    New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has launched a scathing attack on racial separatism, accusing protesters marching against the police terror raids a fortnight ago of supporting apartheid.

    He also accused Labour and National of not having the courage to confront separatism.

    Mr Peters said the hundreds of people protesting against the arrest of Tuhoe activist Tame Iti were not marching because he was guilty or innocent. That was not yet known.

    “They are marching because he is brown,” Mr Peters told his party’s annual convention in Taupo.

    “We once marched against apartheid, now they are marching for it.

    “What type of country do we live in when it is not the malcontents with the guns that get turned on by society, but the police?”

    Mr Peters said Labour and National tolerated separatism.

    “We have been warning them for more than 20 years and yet they still can’t accept the blight of separatism – because they do not want to cause offence,” he told delegates at the conference.

    Article continues below

    “They have become indifferent. They have no idea how to handle it.”

    Mr Peters would not speak to reporters after his speech to explain how the two main parties had encouraged separatism.

    But he said his party would fight it wherever it found it.

    He said gangs were flourishing because National and Labour lacked the courage to confront separatism.

    New Zealand had groups calling for separate nations within a nation, and which were prepared to use guns and violence.

    That was the result of behaviour that had been “excused, condoned, nurtured and even encouraged” over the past 20 years.

    New Zealanders were sick of being called racists “by those who are clearly the most militant racists in the country”.

    Militant separatists were also taxpayer-sponsored, “rejecting all our values excepting collecting the dole each fortnight”.

    In a clear reference to the Maori Party, he wondered why a political party based on race was held up as “the moral compass” for the country.

    In a likely taste of some of New Zealand First’s election themes next year, Mr Peters’ speech touched on asset sales – “no means no” – and immigration.

    Migrants to New Zealand, he said, “must understand our values, not expect us to adopt theirs”.

    And he made a play for the recreational fishing lobby, saying New Zealand First would introduce a “middle tier” of marine reserves that allowed recreational fishing but banned commercial fishing.

    By Audrey Young | Email Audrey

  2. Three years later and no action yet. Perhaps he could use this speech again this year and save writing another! I guess a few would fall for it again! If they really wanted to fix it they could – but they don’t! They had a golden opportunity in 1990, but all ran for cover with Palmer and Lange.

  3. To give you more recorded history of early NZ In 1862 workers from the Bone Mill in Karangahape Road Auckland came to the Kaipara region and worked their way up the coast collecting as recorded by the skull count done by a Armed constabulary officer at Te Kopuru some 70000 skulls and skeletons were collected and taken to Auckland and ground up as bone dust fertiliser. This is the population of Palmerston North exterminated
    These skeltons of human beings were from the earlier races of people in NZ slaughtered by the maori a genocide that no one wants to talk about.
    In 1869 when the Govenor of NZ came to Tekopuru he assembled all the known maori chiefs and asked them who are these people.
    Their reply was we do not know they were here before us and do what you like with them.
    If you do not beleive this do a search into the recorded history of NZ.
    This was passed onto me by my grandparents who were there at the time.
    Noel Hilliam

  4. Thank you for that information Noel. I had read about this in Martin Doutre’s site.
    Do you have a reference for the original record of this taking place?

  5. Look in early history publication,s of Auckland and the Onehunga Borough council publication,s also -Armed Constabulary record,s where the worker,s were payed 3 pennce a sackful.
    Also a 1/64 maori friend told me the other day that most of early NZ history book,s have been cleansed from our library,s and institution,s in this country.Also I never forgot what my grandparent,s told me.
    Over the last half century I and others have seen many remains of these peoples which were never cleared they are still around which Forensic pathlogist,s have examined and declared of European origin.
    Noel Hilliam

  6. When they found that these people originated in Wales over 3000years ago it was all shut down and the antropologist archeaologist was asked to leave the university
    Noel Hilliam

  7. Do you know the name of the anthropologist/archaeologist who did this? Did he/she do any reports at all? How did you find out about this?

    There was a small write up in news papers some months back, about carbon dating proving Maori being in NZ only 300 years before European contact which is contrary to the 800 plus years that they keep telling us that they were here. It was very briefly discussed and shoved under the carpet. I was surprised NZ’ers did not make more of an issue of it.

  8. I worked with this man who was from Ireland –I have a printed copy of the report on the skull which was not published for obvious reason,s in New Zealand NH

  9. He certainly is qualified and very experienced with hands on work in various continents around the world –The so called people who claim to be maori were about the fourth or fifth peoples to be brought to NZ from all around the Pacific Basin by various explorers The Greek who brought what is known as the Turehu originating from Wales others by Chinese Portuguese Spanish Dutch and that order The Waitaha who were living in harmony with the Turehu in this country have by DNA and blood typing originated from Chile

    In 1530 there were recorded 120 Spanish Ships that sailed in and out of HAO atoll exploring the Pacific.Once they had deciphered Greek and Portuguese charts -followed by the Dutch who also cracked the code in 1638-Cook also had a copy of the portuguese chart he new NZ was here befor he discovered it- The Greeks from what we have been able to establish were amongst the earliest Mapping New Zealand complete with Lake Taupo prior to the eruption in 182 AD of which there is a map — NH

    1. Hi noel you wont remember me but we met back in 2000 when myself and martin were on a expedition up north dargavile waipoa forest and potu point.
      hope all is well and great to have your excellent and valuable input,


  10. Where I live there is a local magazine called ‘e-local’ that has had articles for the last few years on the question of whether Maori were here first. The latest one focuses on the infamous ‘stone city’ in the Waipoua Forest that no one (not even TVNZ or the Listener) has been allowed to visit, I guess for what the Maori fear might be found there.

    There are reports concerning the ancient stone city that have been embargoed until 2063, and why? Some reports show evidence of midden dumps with ‘rubbish’ that predates Maori, among other things.

    You can read the article online here –

    1. This is not the first time I’ve heard of this embargo for 75 years, courtesy of Chris Carter. It really beggars belief that we are not allowed to research all of this information. Surely it is our birthright to know exactly what our history is all about without all this secret subterfuge. There must surely be something to hide which makes it all the more imperative that we INSIST on knowing all about these sites. I feel deeply suspicious about the whole affair.

  11. MMMmmm!!!!….History ??? written history ???? can never be accepted as TRUTH. Isnt it easy to leave a paper trail of written assumptions with no substance to validate the Britsh Crowns Criminal Agents actions , whom enforce English law on Maori and publish false History so the next person seeking qualifications can simply gain false knowlege .The real TRUTH….Is ..YOU colonisers have committed HIGH TREASON… ATROCIOUS INHUMANE crimes committed against all Indigenous peoples IS FACTUAL HISTORY quit the bull ( papal Bull) excuses on earth will justify these wrongs..

  12. Kathleen, there is a huge amount of absolute factual information out there to show exactly what went on in our history. Just Google Papers Past for a start and you will read it all. An enormous amount of research has been done over quite a period of time and it is plain to a blind man that we are being fed a whole lot of rubbish which is ‘justifying’ fraudulent claims at the cost of us all and weak appeasing politicians are allowing it to happen just so they can hang onto power. It is time we were all Colourblind and got on with life together as New Zealanders instead of a certain section being in constant Griever mode and standing there with there hands continually held out.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s