Menu
ALBUM - WEST COAST - MAORI LAND SALE.1840.
Expand/collapse
About this image
DescriptionGovernment pays Ngai Tahu 300 Pounds for 7,500,000 acres bounded by Karamea in the north, Milford Sound in the south and the crest of the Southern Alps to the East.-- Dispute over Mawhera ( Greymouth ) reserve and 12,000 acres retained for Maori ownershiDate of Photo1840.Map[1] ContributorTony Kokshoorn
Shown in this image
Location (city or town)WESTLANDEventMAORI LAND SALE.1840.
Category Information
Category TagMaori
From Facebook
Date Created23rd May 2025CommentsZee Tana
Let’s stop pretending Te Tiriti o Waitangi doesn’t apply here on the West Coast. It absolutely does. It was meant to guarantee Māori including Ngāi Tahu and the hapū of Te Tai o Poutini tino rangatiratanga over their lands, resources, and taonga. Instead, the Crown used deceit and suppression to strip 7.5 million acres for £300, fully aware of the land’s wealth in gold and pounamu. That wasn’t partnership. That was exploitation.
Colonial narratives love to twist logic comparing state-sanctioned land confiscations to personal sales, or blaming inter-iwi conflict to dodge Crown accountability. It’s dishonest. The truth is, Māori upheld their side of the agreement. The Crown didn’t. That’s not a grievance that’s a breach. Repeated. Systemic. Ongoing.
‘Get over it’? You mean ignore 180+ years of stolen land, suppressed language, broken promises, and intergenerational trauma? That’s not justice it’s gaslighting.
Those who benefit from colonisation have two choices: double down on denial, or step up and honour the promise of Te Tiriti. Because if you’re afraid of Māori truth, maybe it’s not truth you value, it’s control.
7h
Reply
Matt Vavasour
Zee Tana that wasn't the only time it was sold, from what iv read parts of the south island were sold 3 times. And that 300 pound deal was done with the cheif of Mawhera who set out his reservation over the peices he wanted to retain so knew exactly what he was doing. It's like me selling a car for a $300 then coming back next week and saying, nah I don't think that was enough, I want $10,000 now.
As for Maori truth it's a known fact Maori truth meant very little, sorry but thats a fact, when my ancestors started farming in the Flaxbourne area they were paying Ngati Toa a lease which Te Puaha failed to mention when the NZ company payed 3,000 pound for Marlborough and Nelson excluding reserves so then Clifford and weld were designated squaters had to renegotiate a lease with the NZ company.
From what I can tell any grievance Maori had over land sales was a north island problem where lands that Maori wouldn't sell were confiscated. So when Ngaitahu settled yet again with govt all tax payers payed again and yet still Govt coffs up for things like the Punakaki visitor center as a gift to a Ngaitahu tribe when Ngaitahu can completely afford to pay for these things themselves.
6h
Reply
Edited
Alan Beck
Matt Vavasour Marginally offensive. What histories? I gather the Pah and burial sites of Mawhera were desecrated. Colonials wanted to buy repeatedly, being not great at mercantilism
5h
Reply
Liz Attree
Matt Vavasour yes, they have millions, never spent housing the lower levels needing it...it stays at the top. And as for all us taxpayers "gifting" that massive building which no doubt we will have to pay the up keep as they will never have money they will spend..it's not the govt or DOC to give away! It's ours!
4h
Reply
Graeme Tucker
Liz Attree The tribal system is still at the forefront of Maori, Chiefs, Warriors, ordinary people then slaves so the money stays with the top two.
2h
Reply
Zee Tana
Some of these comments show a poor grasp of the facts and a deep reliance on colonial myths. Let’s be accurate: the 1860 Arahura Purchase was not a fair or simple sale. It was a transaction made under pressure, after years of Crown officials ignoring clear and reasonable demands from Poutini Ngāi Tahu. These included retaining sufficient land, access to pounamu, and protection of wāhi tapu. The Crown agreed to terms and then failed to honour most of them. That is not a sale. That is a breach of contract and a breach of Te Tiriti.
This was not an isolated case. The Waitangi Tribunal found that Ngāi Tahu lost over 80 percent of the land they were promised to retain. And the £300 payment? Even in the context of the time, it was a fraction of the land’s known value, particularly once gold discoveries became public knowledge. This was a deliberate undervaluing of land, with full knowledge by Crown agents such as James Mackay.
Ngāi Tahu’s settlement in 1998 was not a bonus or a handout. It was an attempt to address a century and a half of legal and moral failure. That redress was calculated at less than one percent of the total loss and came with a formal Crown apology for breaching Te Tiriti.
If that is inconvenient for some, it is not because the truth is wrong. It is because it challenges a narrative many would prefer to keep believing. But history is clear. The Crown was in breach. The evidence is overwhelming. Pretending otherwise does not change the facts. It only shows who still refuses to face them.
3h
Reply
Marilyn Hopkins
Zee Tana how can u claim land that was sold by ur ancestors, it's no longer urs
3h
Reply
Stan Hogben
Marilyn Hopkins Kai tahu came from elsewhere too. Did they pay reparations. Nope
2h
Reply
Jo Mclean
Zee Tana And what happened by Terauparaha , nothing holds sacred for them , nothing had significance except food , catching other Māori penning them up to eat , Ngaitahu have no claim to the south , did not live here for 150 yrs or more , slaughtered Waitaha and Moriori , nz history has been so butchered to portray a false Māori history .
2h
Reply
Viv Harris
Jo Mclean It certainly has and it is all about the money money. Ngaitahu have now assets etc up in the billions. When is the greed and payback behaviour going to stop.
1h
Reply
Zee Tana
Viv Harris Ngāi Tahu are not greedy. They are strategic, resilient, and rebuilding from over a century of state-sanctioned land theft, economic exclusion, and cultural suppression. That $170 million settlement was a fraction of what was taken. It amounted to less than one percent of the total value. And it came after the Crown formally admitted it had broken Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
What Ngāi Tahu have done since is called mana motuhake. They have used what little was returned to uplift future generations. That includes investment in te reo Māori, education, health, environmental restoration, and whānau development. That is not greed. That is leadership.
What is truly greedy is a system that stole almost everything, gave back a token amount, and still has people like you upset that Māori are succeeding with it.
The money you complain about is being used to repair damage caused by the very government and system that privileged settlers. If equity feels like a threat to you, maybe it is time to reflect on who actually benefits from this country’s history of injustice.
1h
Reply
Viv Harris
Zee Tana Certainly not the people who pay the most in tax. Most of your so called “privileged settlers” are ordinary people working hard to make a living and bring up their children. Most of your privileged Maori at the top are reaping the benefits. Ask Mr O ‘Regan. In this day and age this nonsense should stop. You are using the majority of NZ earners to pay for a 200 hundred year old Historic event. Enjoy what surrounds you today instead of causing dissent etc. and when it comes to an ancestry which is so important just remember to many Maori People their ancestry is two sided. Perhaps it should bd understood that many of their ancestors came to NZ from around the world. Surely if ancestors are so important their struggles deserve to be honoured too.
55m
Reply
Zee Tana
Viv Harris The reality is that Māori also make up a significant portion of today’s workforce and tax base. Pay tax. Work hard. Raise children. Build communities too. The idea that only “ordinary New Zealanders” fund Treaty settlements is a myth, and frankly, offensive. Treaty settlements are not handouts. They are legal reparations for proven breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi breaches that created economic disparities we are still working to overcome.
Ngāi Tahu’s success is not something to resent. It is something to learn from. They received less than one percent of what was taken and have used that to uplift entire generations. Mr O’Regan himself has consistently advocated for all New Zealanders to understand that justice, not grievance, is at the heart of settlement kaupapa.
As for ancestry, Māori absolutely honour both sides. Many of us are of mixed heritage and carry that with pride. But unlike others, we do not use it to erase our Indigenous rights. We honour all our tūpuna including those affected by colonisation and those who came here under different circumstances. But shared ancestry is not a justification for ignoring Treaty obligations. It is a reminder that we all have a responsibility to uphold justice, not bury it under discomfort.
This is not about only looking backwards with cynicism. It is about moving forward with integrity. If that feels like dissent to you, perhaps what you are really feeling is the end of unchecked privilege. And that is ok but it is also long overdue.
31m
Reply
Zee Tana
It is important to correct these claims with actual history, not recycled prejudice.
Ngāi Tahu are tangata whenua of Te Waipounamu. Their whakapapa connects directly to Waitaha, Kāti Māmoe, and older iwi of the region through intermarriage, alliance, and succession not eradication. These were not simple wars of conquest but complex transitions of whakapapa, recognised through tikanga. The idea that Ngāi Tahu are outsiders is not supported by any credible historical source, and the Crown itself recognised continuous occupation during the settlement process.
Moriori were never from the South Island. They are the Indigenous people of Rēkohu (Chatham Islands), and their story deserves respect, not misuse to undermine Māori. That myth has been repeatedly debunked by scholars, Moriori descendants, and even the Waitangi Tribunal.
As for the tribal system it was based on whakapapa and collective responsibility, not slavery or hoarding. Modern iwi structures are democratic and mandated by whānau and hapū. Ngāi Tahu reinvest in scholarships, health, housing, reo, and environmental restoration. The idea that wealth sits with ‘chiefs’ is not only outdated it is false.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi is the foundation of this nation. It promised Māori the retention of their lands and authority over them. That promise was broken. The land was not sold fairly. It was taken through a system designed to benefit settlers.
Ngāi Tahu have no need to pay reparations. They are the ones who received reparations, because the Crown was found to be in breach of its own promises. That is not opinion. It is the outcome of decades of evidence, hearings, and formal acknowledgment by the government.
Repeating colonial myths will not rewrite history. But it does reveal who is still afraid to learn it.
Jack Tehan
Zee Tana grave u only been in Westland since May 6
Jason WA
You left out the bit where there was approximately 500 nga Tahu left after being slaughtered by Ngati Toa for shits and giggles
Bailey Davis
Deals a deal, maori chiefs could have turned it down. Atleast it was a legal sale.
Alan Beck
Bailey Davis I only thought Matt was suggesting the same land was sold consecutively.
Lynne McKenzie
1998 $170 million settlement.
On the 29 September, 1998, O’Regan and a group of Ngāi Tahu resplendent in kahu huruhuru and other precious taonga made their way to parliament for the third reading and passage of Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Bill. This, the end result of 150 years of trauma and struggle, guaranteed Ngāi Tahu compensation of $170 million, as well as the vesting of all pounamu in their rohe, the return of the sacred maunga Aoraki, and mechanisms by which the iwi could guarantee their economic future, including the right of first refusal on numerous Crown properties and utilities.
Alan Beck
Lynne McKenzie To think the trouble I got into as a kid saying 'they should at least have the Arahura'.
Matt Vavasour
That will be the 3rd time it was sold to the colonialists. And depending on whose history large parts of it weren't thiers to sell anyway but the NZ company didn't care about actual title as long as it looked like they had title.
Karen Beaumont
So much land was available back then so wasn't worth much
Jim Lewis
What's two bites of the cherry ? worth?
Jack Tehan
They well endowed since
Grant Vickers
That was the price on the day so suck it up and move on. I sold a farm years ago at a price that by today’s standards was way too low. I deserve a top up too?
Jim Birch
Whoops
Micky Jordan
fair deal init
David John Lester
Ripped off
Dave Lyes
David John Lester my father sold his Model TT truck for 10 quid in about 1954/5. Today I consider that a ripoff but he was happy. Should I go and see the descendants of the purchaser of that truck and ask for another $15-20,000?
David John Lester
Dave Lyes comparing apples with oranges.....
Dave Lyes
David John Lester EXACTLY the same.
Liz Attree
Dave Lyes exactly. It's time this carry on stopped. We live as one. But looking at the millions given every few yrs I doubt they will ever agree to others being treated as equal...then we have that fiscal envelope every yr govt has to give...and it's time we know howuch is in it the select few keep.
Michelle Tangi
Dave Lyes comparing apples with oranges.....
Michelle Tangi
Liz Attree what does living as one mean?
Dave Lyes
Michelle Tangi not at all but you would say that wouldn't you?
Michelle Tangi
Dave Lyes a vehicle sale to land purchase lol of course you would think they are the same
Dave Maitland
Your point being Tony Kokshoorn ?
Alan Beck
Dave Maitland Don't you get it? Is Tony, in your view, causing unrest by posting histories?
Tony Kokshoorn
Author
Dave Maitland No point.Just History
Geoff More
Around 1855 while loading at Nelson Mr Routs bullock onto the ship, the bullock swung his head and the horn knocked out the captains eye, Mr Rout gave the captain a soveriegn but suspected the captain kept it instead of going to the doctor.
Peter Robertson
James Mackay. Interesting how we all mis-pronounce his name. Why we say Mackky I don't know. He was Mack-kye. The family always pronounced it so. We laugh when a visitors say M'Kye,but they are right.
John Flattery-donohoe
that figures.did mawhera sign the treaty
Jo Mclean
Remove Ngaitahu effective immediately , it’s outright theft of crown assets .
Let’s stop pretending Te Tiriti o Waitangi doesn’t apply here on the West Coast. It absolutely does. It was meant to guarantee Māori including Ngāi Tahu and the hapū of Te Tai o Poutini tino rangatiratanga over their lands, resources, and taonga. Instead, the Crown used deceit and suppression to strip 7.5 million acres for £300, fully aware of the land’s wealth in gold and pounamu. That wasn’t partnership. That was exploitation.
Colonial narratives love to twist logic comparing state-sanctioned land confiscations to personal sales, or blaming inter-iwi conflict to dodge Crown accountability. It’s dishonest. The truth is, Māori upheld their side of the agreement. The Crown didn’t. That’s not a grievance that’s a breach. Repeated. Systemic. Ongoing.
‘Get over it’? You mean ignore 180+ years of stolen land, suppressed language, broken promises, and intergenerational trauma? That’s not justice it’s gaslighting.
Those who benefit from colonisation have two choices: double down on denial, or step up and honour the promise of Te Tiriti. Because if you’re afraid of Māori truth, maybe it’s not truth you value, it’s control.
7h
Reply
Matt Vavasour
Zee Tana that wasn't the only time it was sold, from what iv read parts of the south island were sold 3 times. And that 300 pound deal was done with the cheif of Mawhera who set out his reservation over the peices he wanted to retain so knew exactly what he was doing. It's like me selling a car for a $300 then coming back next week and saying, nah I don't think that was enough, I want $10,000 now.
As for Maori truth it's a known fact Maori truth meant very little, sorry but thats a fact, when my ancestors started farming in the Flaxbourne area they were paying Ngati Toa a lease which Te Puaha failed to mention when the NZ company payed 3,000 pound for Marlborough and Nelson excluding reserves so then Clifford and weld were designated squaters had to renegotiate a lease with the NZ company.
From what I can tell any grievance Maori had over land sales was a north island problem where lands that Maori wouldn't sell were confiscated. So when Ngaitahu settled yet again with govt all tax payers payed again and yet still Govt coffs up for things like the Punakaki visitor center as a gift to a Ngaitahu tribe when Ngaitahu can completely afford to pay for these things themselves.
6h
Reply
Edited
Alan Beck
Matt Vavasour Marginally offensive. What histories? I gather the Pah and burial sites of Mawhera were desecrated. Colonials wanted to buy repeatedly, being not great at mercantilism
5h
Reply
Liz Attree
Matt Vavasour yes, they have millions, never spent housing the lower levels needing it...it stays at the top. And as for all us taxpayers "gifting" that massive building which no doubt we will have to pay the up keep as they will never have money they will spend..it's not the govt or DOC to give away! It's ours!
4h
Reply
Graeme Tucker
Liz Attree The tribal system is still at the forefront of Maori, Chiefs, Warriors, ordinary people then slaves so the money stays with the top two.
2h
Reply
Zee Tana
Some of these comments show a poor grasp of the facts and a deep reliance on colonial myths. Let’s be accurate: the 1860 Arahura Purchase was not a fair or simple sale. It was a transaction made under pressure, after years of Crown officials ignoring clear and reasonable demands from Poutini Ngāi Tahu. These included retaining sufficient land, access to pounamu, and protection of wāhi tapu. The Crown agreed to terms and then failed to honour most of them. That is not a sale. That is a breach of contract and a breach of Te Tiriti.
This was not an isolated case. The Waitangi Tribunal found that Ngāi Tahu lost over 80 percent of the land they were promised to retain. And the £300 payment? Even in the context of the time, it was a fraction of the land’s known value, particularly once gold discoveries became public knowledge. This was a deliberate undervaluing of land, with full knowledge by Crown agents such as James Mackay.
Ngāi Tahu’s settlement in 1998 was not a bonus or a handout. It was an attempt to address a century and a half of legal and moral failure. That redress was calculated at less than one percent of the total loss and came with a formal Crown apology for breaching Te Tiriti.
If that is inconvenient for some, it is not because the truth is wrong. It is because it challenges a narrative many would prefer to keep believing. But history is clear. The Crown was in breach. The evidence is overwhelming. Pretending otherwise does not change the facts. It only shows who still refuses to face them.
3h
Reply
Marilyn Hopkins
Zee Tana how can u claim land that was sold by ur ancestors, it's no longer urs
3h
Reply
Stan Hogben
Marilyn Hopkins Kai tahu came from elsewhere too. Did they pay reparations. Nope
2h
Reply
Jo Mclean
Zee Tana And what happened by Terauparaha , nothing holds sacred for them , nothing had significance except food , catching other Māori penning them up to eat , Ngaitahu have no claim to the south , did not live here for 150 yrs or more , slaughtered Waitaha and Moriori , nz history has been so butchered to portray a false Māori history .
2h
Reply
Viv Harris
Jo Mclean It certainly has and it is all about the money money. Ngaitahu have now assets etc up in the billions. When is the greed and payback behaviour going to stop.
1h
Reply
Zee Tana
Viv Harris Ngāi Tahu are not greedy. They are strategic, resilient, and rebuilding from over a century of state-sanctioned land theft, economic exclusion, and cultural suppression. That $170 million settlement was a fraction of what was taken. It amounted to less than one percent of the total value. And it came after the Crown formally admitted it had broken Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
What Ngāi Tahu have done since is called mana motuhake. They have used what little was returned to uplift future generations. That includes investment in te reo Māori, education, health, environmental restoration, and whānau development. That is not greed. That is leadership.
What is truly greedy is a system that stole almost everything, gave back a token amount, and still has people like you upset that Māori are succeeding with it.
The money you complain about is being used to repair damage caused by the very government and system that privileged settlers. If equity feels like a threat to you, maybe it is time to reflect on who actually benefits from this country’s history of injustice.
1h
Reply
Viv Harris
Zee Tana Certainly not the people who pay the most in tax. Most of your so called “privileged settlers” are ordinary people working hard to make a living and bring up their children. Most of your privileged Maori at the top are reaping the benefits. Ask Mr O ‘Regan. In this day and age this nonsense should stop. You are using the majority of NZ earners to pay for a 200 hundred year old Historic event. Enjoy what surrounds you today instead of causing dissent etc. and when it comes to an ancestry which is so important just remember to many Maori People their ancestry is two sided. Perhaps it should bd understood that many of their ancestors came to NZ from around the world. Surely if ancestors are so important their struggles deserve to be honoured too.
55m
Reply
Zee Tana
Viv Harris The reality is that Māori also make up a significant portion of today’s workforce and tax base. Pay tax. Work hard. Raise children. Build communities too. The idea that only “ordinary New Zealanders” fund Treaty settlements is a myth, and frankly, offensive. Treaty settlements are not handouts. They are legal reparations for proven breaches of Te Tiriti o Waitangi breaches that created economic disparities we are still working to overcome.
Ngāi Tahu’s success is not something to resent. It is something to learn from. They received less than one percent of what was taken and have used that to uplift entire generations. Mr O’Regan himself has consistently advocated for all New Zealanders to understand that justice, not grievance, is at the heart of settlement kaupapa.
As for ancestry, Māori absolutely honour both sides. Many of us are of mixed heritage and carry that with pride. But unlike others, we do not use it to erase our Indigenous rights. We honour all our tūpuna including those affected by colonisation and those who came here under different circumstances. But shared ancestry is not a justification for ignoring Treaty obligations. It is a reminder that we all have a responsibility to uphold justice, not bury it under discomfort.
This is not about only looking backwards with cynicism. It is about moving forward with integrity. If that feels like dissent to you, perhaps what you are really feeling is the end of unchecked privilege. And that is ok but it is also long overdue.
31m
Reply
Zee Tana
It is important to correct these claims with actual history, not recycled prejudice.
Ngāi Tahu are tangata whenua of Te Waipounamu. Their whakapapa connects directly to Waitaha, Kāti Māmoe, and older iwi of the region through intermarriage, alliance, and succession not eradication. These were not simple wars of conquest but complex transitions of whakapapa, recognised through tikanga. The idea that Ngāi Tahu are outsiders is not supported by any credible historical source, and the Crown itself recognised continuous occupation during the settlement process.
Moriori were never from the South Island. They are the Indigenous people of Rēkohu (Chatham Islands), and their story deserves respect, not misuse to undermine Māori. That myth has been repeatedly debunked by scholars, Moriori descendants, and even the Waitangi Tribunal.
As for the tribal system it was based on whakapapa and collective responsibility, not slavery or hoarding. Modern iwi structures are democratic and mandated by whānau and hapū. Ngāi Tahu reinvest in scholarships, health, housing, reo, and environmental restoration. The idea that wealth sits with ‘chiefs’ is not only outdated it is false.
Te Tiriti o Waitangi is the foundation of this nation. It promised Māori the retention of their lands and authority over them. That promise was broken. The land was not sold fairly. It was taken through a system designed to benefit settlers.
Ngāi Tahu have no need to pay reparations. They are the ones who received reparations, because the Crown was found to be in breach of its own promises. That is not opinion. It is the outcome of decades of evidence, hearings, and formal acknowledgment by the government.
Repeating colonial myths will not rewrite history. But it does reveal who is still afraid to learn it.
Jack Tehan
Zee Tana grave u only been in Westland since May 6
Jason WA
You left out the bit where there was approximately 500 nga Tahu left after being slaughtered by Ngati Toa for shits and giggles
Bailey Davis
Deals a deal, maori chiefs could have turned it down. Atleast it was a legal sale.
Alan Beck
Bailey Davis I only thought Matt was suggesting the same land was sold consecutively.
Lynne McKenzie
1998 $170 million settlement.
On the 29 September, 1998, O’Regan and a group of Ngāi Tahu resplendent in kahu huruhuru and other precious taonga made their way to parliament for the third reading and passage of Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Bill. This, the end result of 150 years of trauma and struggle, guaranteed Ngāi Tahu compensation of $170 million, as well as the vesting of all pounamu in their rohe, the return of the sacred maunga Aoraki, and mechanisms by which the iwi could guarantee their economic future, including the right of first refusal on numerous Crown properties and utilities.
Alan Beck
Lynne McKenzie To think the trouble I got into as a kid saying 'they should at least have the Arahura'.
Matt Vavasour
That will be the 3rd time it was sold to the colonialists. And depending on whose history large parts of it weren't thiers to sell anyway but the NZ company didn't care about actual title as long as it looked like they had title.
Karen Beaumont
So much land was available back then so wasn't worth much
Jim Lewis
What's two bites of the cherry ? worth?
Jack Tehan
They well endowed since
Grant Vickers
That was the price on the day so suck it up and move on. I sold a farm years ago at a price that by today’s standards was way too low. I deserve a top up too?
Jim Birch
Whoops
Micky Jordan
fair deal init
David John Lester
Ripped off
Dave Lyes
David John Lester my father sold his Model TT truck for 10 quid in about 1954/5. Today I consider that a ripoff but he was happy. Should I go and see the descendants of the purchaser of that truck and ask for another $15-20,000?
David John Lester
Dave Lyes comparing apples with oranges.....
Dave Lyes
David John Lester EXACTLY the same.
Liz Attree
Dave Lyes exactly. It's time this carry on stopped. We live as one. But looking at the millions given every few yrs I doubt they will ever agree to others being treated as equal...then we have that fiscal envelope every yr govt has to give...and it's time we know howuch is in it the select few keep.
Michelle Tangi
Dave Lyes comparing apples with oranges.....
Michelle Tangi
Liz Attree what does living as one mean?
Dave Lyes
Michelle Tangi not at all but you would say that wouldn't you?
Michelle Tangi
Dave Lyes a vehicle sale to land purchase lol of course you would think they are the same
Dave Maitland
Your point being Tony Kokshoorn ?
Alan Beck
Dave Maitland Don't you get it? Is Tony, in your view, causing unrest by posting histories?
Tony Kokshoorn
Author
Dave Maitland No point.Just History
Geoff More
Around 1855 while loading at Nelson Mr Routs bullock onto the ship, the bullock swung his head and the horn knocked out the captains eye, Mr Rout gave the captain a soveriegn but suspected the captain kept it instead of going to the doctor.
Peter Robertson
James Mackay. Interesting how we all mis-pronounce his name. Why we say Mackky I don't know. He was Mack-kye. The family always pronounced it so. We laugh when a visitors say M'Kye,but they are right.
John Flattery-donohoe
that figures.did mawhera sign the treaty
Jo Mclean
Remove Ngaitahu effective immediately , it’s outright theft of crown assets .
Editing is temporarily disabled
Cancel Edit
Click on the image to add
a tag or press ESC to cancel
a tag or press ESC to cancel
West Coast New Zealand History (23rd May 2025). ALBUM - WEST COAST - MAORI LAND SALE.1840.. In Website West Coast New Zealand History. Retrieved 22nd Mar 2026 02:34, from https://westcoast.recollect.co.nz/nodes/view/34780