I.—Genealogical Table

II.—Report On Land Claims.

III.—Natural Religion Of The New Zealander.

The ancient religion of the New Zealander taught him that anything, if placed in contact with a sacred object, acquired the sacred nature of that object; and that it was his first duty to guard whatever had been thus rendered sacred by contact from being eaten, or used for the purposes of cooking or eating.

The greatest injury one man could inflict on another being to eat him, it was a natural idea that to eat anything which had become sacred by contact would be offensive to the person whose sacredness it had acquired; and—as every New Zealand gentleman, in former times, was more or less sacred, and his head and back-bone especially so—to carry a basket of food on his back would have been to render it unlawful for any one but himself to eat of it.

So sensitive, indeed, were they on this point, that the dish of food destined for a person of the sacred class was carried to a little distance from his house, and from the spot where he and his friends usually reclined, and there set on the ground, in order that he might eat his meal by page 293 himself; and, as no one else dared to eat of what he left, if any food remained it was preserved for his future use in a small safe or roofed box, which formed a conspicuous object stuck on top of a pole, in a particular part of the court yard surrounding the family dwellings.

In conformity with their singular religious belief, although murder might, in many cases, be a meritorious act, it was a heinous crime for a sacred person to leave his comb or his blanket in a cooking house, or to suffer another person to use a drinking cup after it had been rendered sacred by touching his lips. For this reason a chief—unless a Christain—never drinks from a cup, but holds up his two hands close to his lips, in order that water may be poured into them, and thence run into his mouth; and if he wants a light for his pipe, burning embers must be brought to him, for his pipe is sacred from having been so often in contact with his mouth, and transmits sacredness to the live coal; so that, if a particle of sacred cinder were to be replaced on the common fire, it would render that fire sacred, and by consequence no longer serviceable for cooking food.

For similar reasons, a slave or other person not sacred would not enter a “wahi tapu” or sacred place, without having first stripped off his clothes; for the clothes having become sacred the instant they entered the precincts of the “wahi tapu,” page 294 would ever after be useless to him in the ordinary business of his life, since they would be liable to be brought frequently into contact with food intended for the use of the family.

In short, the most marked peculiarities in the social habits of this people can be traced to the influence of the same pervading principle, that food which has once touched a sacred object becomes itself sacred, and therefore must not be eaten except by the sacred object. For this law was not a mere idle belief, but was enforced by dread of their “atua.” The “atua” or spirits of their ancestors who had died—such being, indeed, the only sort of divinities supposed to take an interest in human affairs—were believed to be very jealous of any neglect of the duties enjoined by their religion, and seldom to fail to take speedy vengeance on a delinquent by sending some infant spirit, or a “kahukahu,” to enter into his body, there to feed on a vital part till sufficient punishment or death had been inflicted.

It is somewhat strange that the “atua” was not supposed to seek redress directly from the person who ate the food to which sacredness had been imparted—and who, as one would imagine, should naturally have been looked on as the principal offender—but from his own living relative, whose duty it was to prevent the occurrence of such an indignity. Hence we cease to wonder that a chief should have been moved to anger even to kill a slave, who through carelessness caused him to offend the dreaded spirits, by such an act as that of leaving any article of his dress within the limits of the family cook-house; although, while ignorant of the peculiarity of the New Zealander's superstitious belief, we must have regarded his doing so as wanton barbarity.

From what has been said, it will readily be understood why carrying food on his back was a page 296 labour in which a New Zealand gentleman could take no part before he embraced Christianity. Then if, as was often the case, he had not thrown aside all dread of the “atua” of his tribe—for though a Christian he still believed in the reality of their existence—he had faith that they were but inferior spirits, who had no power to harm a believer in Christ.

In relation to the subject under consideration, it may be here stated that the “atua” of one tribe are not believed to meddle with the members of another tribe; and that, when a person was taken prisoner, his connexion with his own tribe was severed, and its “atua” ceased to care for him. Hence, as a captive had no dread of offending the “atua” of his own or of his adopted tribe by cooking or by carrying food on his back, every sort of work having to do with cooking was performed by this class of persons, aided by those females of the tribe, who were not supposed to be regarded with peculiar interest by the “atua,” and were therefore unworthy to be ranked among the sacred.

Slavery was, in New Zealand, a necessary consequence of the superstitious belief of its inhabitants. The captive was, however, in some respects more free than his master: he entered into conversation with him fearlessly, he fed well, was not expected to overwork himself, and seldom cared to return to his own tribe—which circumstance in page 297 itself is a satisfactory proof of his being generally well treated: and if eventually he obtained a wife from the females of his adopted tribe, his children inherited their mother's position, and became objects of care to the spirits of her ancestors. Any one, therefore, would be led into error, were he to form an idea of the condition of this class of persons from a knowledge of what slavery has been generally, or is now, in other countries.

IV.—Ko Te Mea I Kai-Kino Ai Te Tangata Maori.

Na Kai i timata—Ko Tutunui, he tohora. Titiro ana nga tamahine a Tinirau, ko Kai ka patua: na Tinirau i patu, kai rawa. Muri iho ko Tuhuruhuru ka patua hei utu mo Kai: ka ea te mate o Kai. Ka utua e Wakatau; ka mate ko Mangopare, ko Mangawaho. Na—titiro ana a Wakatau, ka tahuna te whare o Te Tiniomanono. Ka tahi ka tupu mai ki nga uri: katahi ka kaigna te tangata. No te whitinga mai, o Tainui, o Te Arawa, o Te Mataatua, ki tenei motu ka timata ai te kai-tangata.— Na Hoturoa tenei korero.

V.—Captain Cook's Method Of Making Spruce Beer.

“We at first made our beer of a decoction of the spruce leaves; but, finding that this alone made it too astringent, we afterwards mixed with it an equal quantity of the tea plant (a name it obtained in my former voyage, from our using it as a tea then, as we also did now), which partly destroyed the astringency of the other, and made the beer exceedingly palatable, and esteemed by every one on board. We brewed it in the same manner as spruce beer, and the process is as follows. First make a strong decoction of the small branches of the spruce and tea-plants, by boiling them three or four hours, or until the bark will strip with ease from the branches; then take them out of the copper, and put in the proper quantity of molasses, ten gallons of which is sufficient to make a ton, or two hundred and forty gallons of beer. Let this mixture just boil; then put it into casks, and to it add an equal quantity of cold water, more or less according to the strength of the decoction, or your taste. When the whole is milk-warm, put in a little grounds of beer, or yeast if you have it, or page 299 anything else that will cause fermentation, and in a few days the beer will be fit to drink.

“Any one who is in the least acquainted with spruce pines will find the tree which I have distinguished by that name. There are three sorts of it: that which has the smallest leaves and deepest colour is the sort we brewed with, but doubtless all three might safely serve that purpose.”—Cook's Second Voyage towards the South Pole, 4th edit. vol i. pp. 99 and 101.

[The three sorts here referred to were probably the Rimu, the Kahikatea, and the Mai or Matai, which are different species of Dacryds.]

VI.—Statistics Of Whaling Stations South Of Banks's Peninsula.

VII.—Copy Of A Letter To Commodore Berard.

“I send you, as well as I am able, the information you desired respecting the natives principally interested in this place (Hakaroa). But I am aware that my present knowledge on this subject is but imperfect, and I must therefore caution you not to rely on it otherwise than as a foundation for further inquiry.

“The principal persons residing at Hakaroa, who have a right in the land, I believe are—Te Ruaparae, Hakaroa, Tuauau, Mautai, Parure, and others, all of the family Katiruahikihiki.

“It must be understood that, whereas a great number of persons have a joint claim to those parts which have never been resided on, individuals and families have a peculiar claim to those parts, which are in the occupation, or have at any time been in the possession of an ancestor.

“I mention this that you may perceive how complex a matter it is to traffic with natives for their land, so as to prevent future disputes; and how, consequently, former European purchasers, from having an imperfect knowledge of the language and customs of this people, have fallen into error.

“The form of any Deed of Sale appears to be of little importance provided it is written in the native language, and in simple terms, so as to be easily understood; but it is essential to embody in it the name of every native place, taking care to have the signature of its acknowledged claimants attached to the Deed.

“Enclosed is a simple form of conveyance. Should I return to this place, I shall always be happy to give you any information in my power on the subject.