February 2015 Māori Law Review
Professor Alan Dudley Ward – he poroporoaki – a farewell
Alan Dudley Ward, Professor Emeritus of the University of Newcastle in New South Wales, passed away in December 2014 after a brief illness. His career as a historian spanned half a century, in the course of which, among his many other achievements, he made major contributions to the Treaty settlement process in New Zealand.
What follows is an outline of these contributions, not a comprehensive bibliography or an exhaustive appraisal of his work. The first will no doubt be compiled before long: the second will take much longer, as part of an ongoing evaluation of the Treaty settlement process and its outcomes.
Alan was born in Gisborne in 1935 and raised in Tūranga/Poverty Bay, where many of his family still reside. In the 1950s he began his academic career at the University of New Zealand in Wellington, and received and graduated Master of Arts with first-class honours from Victoria in 1958. His thesis was entitled “The History of the East Coast Maori Trust”. As a piece of research and analysis it still holds up well today.[1] After several years in other pursuits, Alan moved on to the Australian National University, where in 1967 he completed a PhD on relationships between the Crown and Māori during the latter half of the 19th century. Entitled “Towards one New Zealand: the government and the Maori people, 1861–93”, his thesis is best known today as the study which was subsequently expanded in his landmark book A Show of Justice: Racial ‘Amalgamation’ in Nineteenth Century New Zealand (1974). A Show of Justice was described by the late Dame Judith Binney in her review for the New Zealand Journal of History as “undoubtedly the best book on nineteenth-century New Zealand racial policies” then available, consisting of “judicious and carefully documented evidence from which Alan Ward’s cogent and unequivocating conclusions derive”.[2] The latter description can be applied to all of Alan’s historical output, and a good argument can be made that A Show of Justice is still the best single-volume work on the subject of race relations in NZ during the 19th century. It continues to occupy a prominent position on the bookshelves of all those interested in the subject, and is probably the historical source most often consulted by those working in the field of Treaty settlements. In all likelihood this book has been cited in every major report on historical claims issued by the Waitangi Tribunal – I can’t find one where it hasn’t.
On completion of his PhD Alan was appointed as a lecturer at La Trobe University in Melbourne, where he taught until 1987. During this period he expanded his fields of interest and expertise into the Pacific. As well as lecturing in history at the University of Papua New Guinea in 1971, from 1973 he acted as consultant to the Commission of Inquiry into Land Matters in Papua New Guinea. After research in New Caledonia in the late 1970s he became Director of Rural Lands in Vanuatu 1981-82 – an appointment which ended in an early resignation after forthright criticisms of government policy. From 1987 until his retirement in 1996 Alan Ward was a Professor of History at the University of Newcastle, subsequently becoming Professor Emeritus.[3]
Although the Pacific beckoned, Alan maintained an ongoing interest in 19th century New Zealand history, and produced a number of insightful articles, beginning with contributions to the first two issues of the New Zealand Journal of History in 1967.[4] His “Origins of the Anglo-Maori Wars. A Reconsideration” was particularly notable, as was his “Law and Law-enforcement on the New Zealand Frontier, 1840-1893”.[5] Numerous other articles and reviews followed, such as his “Documenting Maori History: The Arrest of Te Kooti Rikirangi te Turuki, 1889”.[6]
With the passage of the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985, the Waitangi Tribunal moved into a new era of operations. The Crown’s actions and omissions in its dealings with Māori from 1840 onwards came under close scrutiny. Within two years the first large-scale historical inquiry was underway, with the Ngai Tahu claims in the South Island. Someone suffering from a severe case of common sense decided that Alan Ward should be closely involved in this process, and in July 1987 he signed the first of what would prove to be almost two decade’s worth of contracts with the Tribunal for the provision of historical advice and the preparation of historical evidence. For the Ngai Tahu inquiry his role was to review the historical evidence presented by the Crown and the claimants – as he described it,
[T]o study and comment on the evidence adduced as to its historical reliability and completeness, to draw attention to deficiencies and omissions, to draw attention to alternative interpretations, and to assist the Tribunal to summarise and evaluate the data.[7]
This task required the assembly and supervision of sizeable team of historians to assist in the arduous exercise. His 1989 “Report on the Historical Evidence: The Ngai Tahu Claim”[8] generated much debate and argument among the various historians involved, but also provided the Tribunal with an excellent foundation for their final report on the claim, which appeared in 1991. Many commentators consider this to have been one of the best historical reports produced by the Waitangi Tribunal, with the Hauraki report a close second. It is no coincidence that Alan played an important role in the production of the latter as well, in that case as one of the principal report writers.[9]
In the aftermath of the Ngai Tahu inquiry, Alan produced the first of several incisive commentaries on the role of history and historians in the Treaty process, and on the process in general. His “History and Historians Before the Waitangi Tribunal: Some Reflections on the Ngai Tahu Claim” (1990)[10] was later followed by “Historical Method and Waitangi Tribunal Claims” (1996).[11] The article on “Maori Land Law and the Tribunal Claims Process” coauthored with Andrew Eruiti in 2001 demonstrated his continuing interest in the way in which historians approached ‘Tribunal history’.
Many observers in the early 1990s were quite appalled by the apparent magnitude of the gulf which lay between the Treaty claims pouring into the Tribunal and their settlement.[12] How best to organise inquiries, hearings and evidence so as to expedite the process of researching and hearing claims was a burning issue. Alan played a central role in putting this process into a manageable (or, at least, more manageable) form. His first such foray was his involvement, from 1992, with the Crown/Congress Joint Working Party (CCJWP). One part of this experiment in cooperation between the Crown and the Māori Congress over railway land settlements was the production of historical reports on various areas. These largely relied on readily-accessible sources to outline the main issues which might need to be addressed for settlements. Alan once again assembled and supervised a team of historians, and also had a hand in writing the series of reports which they produced in 1992-1993, covering (among other places) Wellington, Whanganui, the Main Trunk Railway district, Central and South Auckland and the Ngāti Kahungunu rohe.[13]
The next step was the Rangahaua Whānui project. The idea here, as with the CCJWP, was to expedite research into claims, but this was a much more ambitious exercise. Alan played a central role in its design, assisted by a mentor group of historians, and supervised its execution. During the mid-1990s a large number of overview reports were commissioned, within two series. The first were “national theme” reports, of which 15 were produced.[14] These dealt with subjects arising in most inquiries, such as “surplus lands”, Crown pre-emption, reserves and Public Works takings. A number of additional reports on 20th century Māori land administration were later commissioned by the Crown Forestry Rental Trust (CFRT).[15] The second series were outlines of the historical experience of Māori in 11 Districts in the North and South Islands, with an emphasis on the effect of various Crown policies and particularly on land alienation.[16] Had the necessary time and resources been made available, a good deal more could usefully have been done,[17] but Rangahaua Whānui was nonetheless a very successful and productive exercise in its own right, not least in the opportunities which it gave to the historians involved to exercise their skills in this new forum. Although the District reports have largely been superseded by the voluminous evidence produced for claims, and by the Tribunal’s subsequent reports, many of the National Theme reports are still standard sources for their subject areas.
The Rangahaua Whanui reports paved the way for Alan’s National Overview, which appeared in three volumes in 1997 after a year of concerted effort on his part.[18] This was much more than a summary or condensation of the Rangahaua Whānui material. Additional research was carried out to bridge some of the remaining gaps, and Alan then carried out a critical examination of each national theme (Vol. 2), and an appraisal of the principal “Treaty issues arising” for each District (Vol. 2). On top of this he added a discussion of “Optional Strategies for Dealing with Historical Treaty Claims” (Vol.1).
The appearance of the National Overview coincided, and in large measure laid the groundwork for research for, the introduction of the “casebook method” by the Tribunal as its model for hearing claims. This involved (among other things) the production of all the principal customary and historical evidence for a specified district before formal hearings of claim began. The casebook model has been followed since the mid-1990s, and abetted by very large increases in the resources available, made possible the relatively rapid progress which has occurred in hearing and settling claims since that point. After completing the National Overview, Alan produced his Unsettled History: Treaty Claims in New Zealand Today (1999).[19] This book is principally an overview of the National Overview, as far as the underlying research goes, but also offers a very readable look at the historical context of the Treaty claims process and its development to that point. In the same year, in the New Year Honours List, Alan received the New Zealand Order of Merit “For services to New Zealand History”. He also delivered the Waitangi Rua Rautau lecture at Parliament in February, on “A Social Democrat’s Perspective on the Treaty of Waitangi”, and in May “An Unsettled History” was the subject of the Stout Annual Lecture which he gave at Victoria University of Wellington.
To the surprise of many of his friends and colleagues, Alan was not appointed to the Waitangi Tribunal at this juncture. It is difficult to imagine a more appropriate person to hold such a position, and the rapid escalation in the number and pace of inquiries at the turn of the century surely meant that his unique expertise could have been put to very good use. During the following decade he remained involved with the Tribunal in various ways, assisting with the writing of various reports. He later provided the Office of Treaty Settlements with critical appraisals of draft Historical Accounts for a number of settlements. He also carried out a number of research commissions for the Tribunal, claimant groups and the Crown. These included a series of reports on Māori customary interests around Cook Strait,[20] and one on “the pressures of modernity on customary land tenure” which drew on Alan’s knowledge of developments elsewhere in the Pacific.[21] Later he prepared a brief of evidence on Crown and Māori understandings of the Declaration of Independence and the Treaty for Stage One of the Northland Inquiry,[22] and another for the High Court in relation to the case of Proprietors of Wakatū Incorporation & Others v Attorney General. In addition to evidential material, Alan continued to produce scholarly articles such as a study of Crown-Kingitanga relations in the lead up to the Waikato War,[23] and was heavily involved with the writing of the 19th century chapters of Tangata Whenua: An Illustrated History.[24] The last appeared within weeks of this death.
Alan Ward played a central role in the development of the system for hearing and settling Treaty claims which has emerged over the last quarter-century. His contribution was also unique in many ways. None of the other historians involved has had a comparable influence on that process, and on the historians involved in it. One contribution which Alan will not be making, unfortunately, is one that I was very much looking forward to reading – his own appraisal, once all the large historical inquiries and the main Treaty settlements were completed, of how well the whole thing has worked, and what could have been done better. Part two of Unsettled Histories would undoubtedly have been a very interesting and illuminating read.
Dr. D.M. Loveridge
Historical Consultant, Wellington
February 2015
Notes
[1] As reflected in Michael Macky’s report “Trust Company Management by Wi Pere and William Rees” (2002, Wai 814 #F11).
[2] Review of “A Show of Justice” by Judith Binney, in NZJH 9#2 (1975) pp. 194-197.
[3] For an insightful summary of his early career see Peter Hempenstall, “Tasman Epiphanies: The ‘Participant History’ of Alan Ward” (Journal of New Zealand Studies 4/5 2006 pp. 65-80).
[4] “Unpublished Parliamentary Papers: A Comment on Untapped Source Material on New Zealand History” (New Zealand Journal of History 1#1 April 1967, pp. 93-94 Notes), and “The Origins of the Anglo-Maori Wars. A Reconsideration” (New Zealand Journal of History 1#2 1967, pp.148-170).
[5] New Zealand Journal of History 5#2 (1971), pp.128-149.
[6] New Zealand Journal of History 14 #1 (1980), pp.25-44.
[7] As he describes it in “A Report on the Historical Evidence: The Ngai Tahu Claim” (1989, Wai 27 #T1 p. 1).
[8] The Ngai Tahu Report (1991, Wai 27).
[9] The Hauraki Report (2006, Wai 686).
[10] New Zealand Journal of History, 24#2 (1990) pp.150-67.
[11] Alan Ward, ʻHistorical Method and Waitangi Tribunal Claimsʼ, in Miles Fairburn and W.H. Oliver, eds, The Certainty of Doubt: Tributes to Peter Munz, Wellington, 1996.
[12] On which see Alan Ward, “Interpreting the Treaty of Waitangi: The Maori Resurgenceʼ, The Contemporary Pacific, 3, 1 (Spring 1991), pp.85-114.
[13] I have never seen a comprehensive bibliography of the CCJWP’s reports, but many of them were subsequently submitted to various Tribunal inquiries e.g. Alan Ward, Robyn Anderson, Suzanne Cross, Michael Harman. “CCJWP Report on Whanganui Land; research report commissioned by the Crown/Congress Joint Working Party, 1993” (Wai 145 #A44 Wellington Tenths Inquiry).
[14] See http://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/waitangi-tribunal/publications/rangahaua-whanui-national-theme-reports. Three more such reports on Māori land administration in the twentieth century were produced in a supplementary project funded by CFRT.
[15] See D.M. Loveridge, intro., Twentieth Century Māori Land Administration Research Programme (Wellington: CFRT, 1998).
[16] See http://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/waitangi-tribunal/publications/rangahaua-whanui-district-reports. Fourteen reports were published, but two reports were written for three of the districts (Auckland, Rohe Potae and Northern South Island).
[17] Alan noted in his National Overview introduction Vol. 1 p. XVI that “Because of staff and funding limitations at the time the project was launched, wholly new reports were not commissioned on raupatu, the Native Land Court in the nineteenth century, and native committees, given the amount of research already available or emerging from claims research, or in view of work being done in other agencies”.
[18] Wellington, GP Publications, 1997 (3 Vols).
[19] For an short overview of the overview, see Alan’s 1999 Stout Annual Lecture (Victoria University of Wellington, 24 May 1999 “An Unsettled History”), which was published in New Zealand Studies, 9#2 (1999), pp. 30-37 http://ojs.victoria.ac.nz/jnzs/article/view/322/246.
[20] “Maori Customary Interests in the Port Nicholson District, 1820s to 1840s: An Overview” (research report commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal, 1998; Wai 145 #M1 Wellington Tenths Inquiry); “Te Atiawa in Te Tau Ihu” (research report commissioned by CFRT on behalf of claimants 2000; Wai 785 #D4 Northern South Island Inquiry); and “Brief of Evidence of Professor Alan Ward”; (research report commissioned by Te Rununga o Ngati Toa Rangatira in association with CFRT 2003; Wai 785 #P9 Northern South Island Inquiry).
[21] “Ngati Pikiao Lands: Loss of Tribal Ownership and Control” (research report commissioned by Waitangi Tribunal 2001 Wai 1200 #A9 CNI Inquiry).
[22] “Brief of Evidence of Professor Alan Ward”; Report on Crown and Maori Understandings of He Whakaputanga (The Declaration of Independence) and Te Tiriti, commissioned by the Crown Law Office, (2009 Wai 1040 #A19 Northland Inquiry Stage 1).
[23] “‘A Savage War of Peace’?: Motives for Government Policies Towards the Kingitanga, 1857-1863”,pp. 67-109 in Richard Boast and R.S. Hill, eds., Raupatu: The Confiscation of Maori Land (Wellington: Victoria UP, 2009).
[24] Atholl Anderson, Judith Binney and Aroha Harris (Wellington: Bridget Williams Books, 2014).
