Page:Report from the Select Committee of the House of Lords, appointed to inquire into the present state of the Islands of New Zealand.pdf/86

Mr.J.S.Polack

offered me by the Natives, and it was their Wish that I should purchase it;) “but I shall give you something more.” I bought the Land to trade on, instead of their coming over to me a long Distance.

What was the Quantity of the First Lot?

I cannot state that; I have no Knowledge of the Extent of the Land; it might be Seventy and it might be 270 Acres; but certainly not more; but principally hilly. My purchasing Land was in a commercial point of view, that I might have Frontage. I did not look for a large Quantity of Land.

What did you give for that?

I did not bring my Deeds To-day, being called suddenly; but the Sums are upon them; and I shall be happy to produce them. I am inclined to think that my first Piece of Land, bought in 1833, cost me 15l. only, but in Trade with the New Zealanders.

Do you mean to say that you bought the 250 Acres, or whatever it might be, for 15l.?

I did; it may be 15l. or 25l.; there was One Piece I gave 15l. and another 25l. for. The next Piece of Land was Nine and a Half Acres only; that is still more valuable than the other of 270; I gave 40l. for that.

Where were the Deeds drawn up?

In the Bay of Islands.

By whom?

By myself, with the European Witnesses, and the native Witnesses who walked over the Land. The Land is easily known by the Natives; each Native knows his Land by a Creek or a peculiar Tree, or a sort of Raoui or Monument on the Land. For example, there are Two Brother Chiefs, perhaps the Father leaves that Land to them, the one has perhaps One Child, the other perhaps Seven Children, he divides his Land among the Seven in Proportions, and each knows to an Inch the Spot of his Land; they are very particular in it.

You are to be understood to say the Land descends from the Father, and is divided among his Children?

Yes; the Right in the Land is hereditary; the Child knows that before an English Child could walk.

Does he know that it is hereditary, to be divided among him and all his Brothers?

Yes.

Are all those Children the Children of One Wife or Half a Dozen Wives?

Of more Wives, perhaps.

How many Children have you ever known a Chief have?

Polygamy is the worst thing that can be for Children; Marriage is generally made for political Purposes; the head Wife is the Principal, and much Noise and Trouble and Dissension is occasioned by this. As to the poor Last- comer, if the Husband has any Feeling for her he dare not show it, for he is sometimes under the Petticoat Government; he may be an inferior Chief, and have married a superior Chief Woman, as such he is completely under her Lash.

Do you know of any Land of any of those Natives being divided among Ten of their Children?

I do not recollect any Case; but if there were Twenty Children it would be equally divided. I do not think that the elder or younger being better behaved would get any more.

Does it go among Sons only?

The Daughters get a Portion, and even Women are allowed to be Chiefs.

Do you know an Instance of that?

I was passing a Cemetery in my Boat; I asked whose it was; they said it was such an one's, mentioning the Name of a Chieftess; that she was buried there; then they said, “Do not stay here; the Atua will come upon us.” That is, the God will lay hold of us.