title: Maori land in Hauraki

authors: Hart, Philip

abstract: Imagining the Hauraki Peninsula to contain payable goldfields and knowing that land to the south of Thames had great agricultural potential, Pakeha were determined to acquire it, and were frustrated by what was considered to be ‘Maori intransigence’. For their part, Maori landowners were justifiably concerned about losing their land, and hindered and delayed opening it to settlement for as long as possible. A major difficulty for officials seeking to acquire land was how to determine boundaries between different blocks and how to identify the true owners when there were rival claims put forward by hapu and individuals. Land purchase agents used a variety of means to get blocks through the land court and then to individualize the title, notably the controversial ‘raihana’ policy, which benefited some landowners at the expense of others. The expensive legal process involved often forced those who had proved their ownership to sell land to pay for their success, a success which resulted in grantees treating the land as their personal property rather than tribal property. Some Pakeha as well as many Maori protested at the unfair process; even James Mackay, the most effective practitioner of raihana, came to lament his success and its consequences for the younger generation of Maori (he blamed the system, not himself). When far too late, it was urged that land should have been leased rather than sold and that proceeds from sales should not have been squandered.
Instead of having commissions of enquiry, as some suggested, the land court system meant that judges determined ownership on the evidence presented to them, even though some owners were not present nor had their interests represented. Sometimes the evidence was false, as was admitted by some witnesses when their perjury was exposed. And in the case of the Ohinemuri district, for which the records survive, when the land was sold to the Crown some Maori received too much money, some too little, and some missed out altogether. The struggles to open Ohinemuri to miners and settlers is examined in detail, revealing that some rangatira expected economic gain and that Te Hira’s party, who opposed the opening, were undermined by some of Te Hira’s followers: being ‘Hauhau’, they refused to take money from the Crown but instead took raihana, meaning goods which were charged against their land in a way they did not understand. Nor did anyone fully understand the system apart from Mackay, whose policy was eventually repudiated by the politicians who had encouraged it previously. Not all land was lost, but because the government did not assist landowners with advice and finance until well into the twentieth century what land that was retained could not be developed adequately.

text: Maori land in Hauraki Imagining the Hauraki Peninsula to contain payable goldfields and knowing that land to the south of Thames had great agricultural potential, Pakeha were determined to acquire it, and were frustrated by what was considered to be ‘Maori intransigence’. For their part, Maori landowners were justifiably concerned about losing their land, and hindered and delayed opening it to settlement for as long as possible. A major difficulty for officials seeking to acquire land was how to determine boundaries between different blocks and how to identify the true owners when there were rival claims put forward by hapu and individuals. Land purchase agents used a variety of means to get blocks through the land court and then to individualize the title, notably the controversial ‘raihana’ policy, which benefited some landowners at the expense of others. The expensive legal process involved often forced those who had proved their ownership to sell land to pay for their success, a success which resulted in grantees treating the land as their personal property rather than tribal property. Some Pakeha as well as many Maori protested at the unfair process; even James Mackay, the most effective practitioner of raihana, came to lament his success and its consequences for the younger generation of Maori (he blamed the system, not himself). When far too late, it was urged that land should have been leased rather than sold and that proceeds from sales should not have been squandered.
Instead of having commissions of enquiry, as some suggested, the land court system meant that judges determined ownership on the evidence presented to them, even though some owners were not present nor had their interests represented. Sometimes the evidence was false, as was admitted by some witnesses when their perjury was exposed. And in the case of the Ohinemuri district, for which the records survive, when the land was sold to the Crown some Maori received too much money, some too little, and some missed out altogether. The struggles to open Ohinemuri to miners and settlers is examined in detail, revealing that some rangatira expected economic gain and that Te Hira’s party, who opposed the opening, were undermined by some of Te Hira’s followers: being ‘Hauhau’, they refused to take money from the Crown but instead took raihana, meaning goods which were charged against their land in a way they did not understand. Nor did anyone fully understand the system apart from Mackay, whose policy was eventually repudiated by the politicians who had encouraged it previously. Not all land was lost, but because the government did not assist landowners with advice and finance until well into the twentieth century what land that was retained could not be developed adequately.

year: 2016

title: Images of Pakeha-Māori: A Study of the Representation of Pakeha-Māori by Historians of New Zealand From Arthur Thomson (1859) to James Belich (1996)

authors: Bentley, Trevor William

subjects: Pakeha-Maori

abstract: This thesis investigates how Pakeha-Māori have been represented in New Zealand non-fiction writing during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The chronological and textual boundaries range from Arthur Thomson's seminal history The Story of New Zealand (1859) to James Belich's Making Peoples (1996). It examines the discursive inventions and reinventions of Pakeha-Māori from the stereotypical images of the Victorian era to modern times when the contact zone has become a subject of critical investigation and a sign of changing intellectual dynamics in New Zealand and elsewhere.

This thesis is about the history of attitudes to culture-crossers in New Zealand, the use of the term 'Pakeha-Māori', and the images that underlie the thinking of Britons and Pakeha about them. It explores the motives and backgrounds of specific authors and the ways in which they frame New Zealand history. It elucidates the ambiguous and contradictory perspectives of Pakeha-Māori in the literature and analyses its impact on changing public perceptions about them. The study critiques the literature with emphasis on theoretically informed research, historical analysis, and literary insights. Discussion is confined to published texts, with the aim of exploring the multiplicity of Pakeha-Māori images and the processes that gave rise to them.

This study is essentially an investigation into how and why historians and other scholars try to draw boundaries between cultures in order to create a satisfactory metanarrative or myth of the 'settlement' of New Zealand and thus to forge a sense of New Zealandness. The cultural and racial categories of 'Māori' and 'Pakeha' are very unstable, however, and a consideration of the 'in-between' or 'culture-crossing' category of 'Pakeha-Māori' can reveal the way in which 'Māori' and 'Pakeha' and a sense of New Zealand and New Zealanders have been constructed. More particularly, consideration of representations of those culture-crossers or race-crossers called Pakeha-Māori can reveal the hopes and fears of Pakeha writers regarding Pakeha, Māori and New Zealand and how Pakeha-Māori have frequently been a barometer or litmus test of public perceptions of relations between Māori and Pakeha in different historical periods.

text: Images of Pakeha-Māori: A Study of the Representation of Pakeha-Māori by Historians of New Zealand From Arthur Thomson (1859) to James Belich (1996) This thesis investigates how Pakeha-Māori have been represented in New Zealand non-fiction writing during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The chronological and textual boundaries range from Arthur Thomson's seminal history The Story of New Zealand (1859) to James Belich's Making Peoples (1996). It examines the discursive inventions and reinventions of Pakeha-Māori from the stereotypical images of the Victorian era to modern times when the contact zone has become a subject of critical investigation and a sign of changing intellectual dynamics in New Zealand and elsewhere.

This thesis is about the history of attitudes to culture-crossers in New Zealand, the use of the term 'Pakeha-Māori', and the images that underlie the thinking of Britons and Pakeha about them. It explores the motives and backgrounds of specific authors and the ways in which they frame New Zealand history. It elucidates the ambiguous and contradictory perspectives of Pakeha-Māori in the literature and analyses its impact on changing public perceptions about them. The study critiques the literature with emphasis on theoretically informed research, historical analysis, and literary insights. Discussion is confined to published texts, with the aim of exploring the multiplicity of Pakeha-Māori images and the processes that gave rise to them.

This study is essentially an investigation into how and why historians and other scholars try to draw boundaries between cultures in order to create a satisfactory metanarrative or myth of the 'settlement' of New Zealand and thus to forge a sense of New Zealandness. The cultural and racial categories of 'Māori' and 'Pakeha' are very unstable, however, and a consideration of the 'in-between' or 'culture-crossing' category of 'Pakeha-Māori' can reveal the way in which 'Māori' and 'Pakeha' and a sense of New Zealand and New Zealanders have been constructed. More particularly, consideration of representations of those culture-crossers or race-crossers called Pakeha-Māori can reveal the hopes and fears of Pakeha writers regarding Pakeha, Māori and New Zealand and how Pakeha-Māori have frequently been a barometer or litmus test of public perceptions of relations between Māori and Pakeha in different historical periods.

year: 2007

title: Purification and properties of a stable beta-glucosidase from an extremely thermophilic anaerobic bacterium.

authors: Patchett, Mark L.

subjects: biology

abstract: A beta-glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21) was purified to homogeneity from cell-free extracts of an extremely thermophilic anaerobic bacterium. The enzyme has an Mr of 43,000 as determined by molecular-exclusion chromatography, has a pI of 4.55 and shows optimum activity at pH 6.2. The enzyme is active against a wide range of aryl beta-glycosides and beta-linked disaccharides, with beta-galactosidase activity only slightly less than beta-glucosidase activity, and significant beta-xylosidase activity. Lineweaver-Burk plots for p-nitrophenyl beta-glucoside, o-nitrophenyl beta-glucoside and cellobiose substrates are biphasic concave-downwards. Inhibition of the beta-glucosidase by substrates and glucose is negligible. Thermal inactivation follows first-order kinetics, with t1/2 (65 degrees C) 45 h, t1/2 (75 degrees C) 47 min and t1/2 (85 degrees C) 1.4 min and a deactivation energy of 380 kJ/mol at pH 6.2. At pH 7.0, which is the optimum pH for thermostability, t1/2 (75 degrees C) is 130 min. At 75 degrees C, at pH 6.2, the thermostability is enhanced about 8-fold by 10% (w/v) glycerol, about 6-fold by 0.2 M-cellobiose and about 3-fold by 5 mM-dithiothreitol and 5 mM-2-mercaptoethanol.

text: Purification and properties of a stable beta-glucosidase from an extremely thermophilic anaerobic bacterium. A beta-glucosidase (EC 3.2.1.21) was purified to homogeneity from cell-free extracts of an extremely thermophilic anaerobic bacterium. The enzyme has an Mr of 43,000 as determined by molecular-exclusion chromatography, has a pI of 4.55 and shows optimum activity at pH 6.2. The enzyme is active against a wide range of aryl beta-glycosides and beta-linked disaccharides, with beta-galactosidase activity only slightly less than beta-glucosidase activity, and significant beta-xylosidase activity. Lineweaver-Burk plots for p-nitrophenyl beta-glucoside, o-nitrophenyl beta-glucoside and cellobiose substrates are biphasic concave-downwards. Inhibition of the beta-glucosidase by substrates and glucose is negligible. Thermal inactivation follows first-order kinetics, with t1/2 (65 degrees C) 45 h, t1/2 (75 degrees C) 47 min and t1/2 (85 degrees C) 1.4 min and a deactivation energy of 380 kJ/mol at pH 6.2. At pH 7.0, which is the optimum pH for thermostability, t1/2 (75 degrees C) is 130 min. At 75 degrees C, at pH 6.2, the thermostability is enhanced about 8-fold by 10% (w/v) glycerol, about 6-fold by 0.2 M-cellobiose and about 3-fold by 5 mM-dithiothreitol and 5 mM-2-mercaptoethanol.

year: 1987