Maori Religion and Mythology / Illustrated by Translations of Traditions, Karakia, &c., to Which Are Added Notes on Maori Tenure of Land

by Edward Shortland

MANA.

The chief of any family who discovered and took possession of any unoccupied land obtained what was called the mana of the land. This word mana, in its ordinary use, signifies power, but in its application to [pg 90] land corresponds somewhat with the power of a Trustee. Thus mana gave a power to appropriate the land among his own tribe according to a well recognized rule which was considered tika or straight. Such appropriation, however, once made, remained in force, and gave a good title to the children and descendants of the person to whom it had been thus appropriated. The mana of the acknowledged representative of the tribe had then only power over the lands remaining unappropriated, which power was more especially termed the mana rahi or great mana—the mana over appropriated land being with the head of the family in rightful possession. In course of time quarrels and wars arose between different tribes, so that tribes nearly allied to each other united for mutual defence and protection; and all the Maori of New Zealand came to be divided, for this purpose, into a few large tribes, each representing generally the crew of one of the various canoes composing the migration from Hawaiki. These being frequently at war with each other, it came to pass that every man who did not belong to a particular tribe was considered in respect to it as a tangata ke or stranger.

It has been affirmed by many on presumed good authority that no member of a tribe has an individual right in any portion of the land included within the boundaries of his tribe. Such, however, is not the case, for individuals do sometimes possess exclusive rights to land, though more generally members of families, more or less numerous, have rights in common to the exclusion of the rest of the tribe over those portions of land which have been appropriated to their ancestors. Their proverbs touching those who wrongfully [pg 91] remove boundary-marks show this, if other evidence were wanting.

The lands of a tribe, in respect to the title by which they are held, may be conveniently distinguished under two comprehensive divisions.

1. Those portions which have been appropriated, from time to time, to individuals and families.

2. The tribal land remaining unappropriated.

Whenever land is appropriated formally by native usage, it descends in the family of its first owners according to well recognized rules, and the mana of the representative of the tribe ceases to have any control over it. Their laws as to succession naturally tended to render the greater part of such lands the property of several of the same family as tenants in common; but an individual might and did frequently become a sole owner.

The tribal lands never specially appropriated belonged to all under the mana[⁶⁴] or trusteeship of the tribal representative.

[pg 92]

Long before our colonists came to New Zealand land was of great value in Maori estimation, and was given and received as a suitable equivalent or compensation in certain cases.

Thus when a peace was concluded between two tribes land was sometimes given up as a sort of peace offering, but in a remarkably equitable spirit, it was always the tribe that had suffered least who, in such cases, gave some land to compensate the greater losses in war of the other party.

Such a mode of making peace seems to have been adopted in case of civil war between divisions of the same tribe, especially when waged with no prospect of either party completely mastering the other, and with the consideration of preventing both suffering such serious loss as would render them unable to cope with a common foe.

Also, in cases of adultery a piece of land would be demanded by the injured person; and his demand would be respected, for such was the proper compensation for the injury—land for the woman. But then a stratagem was sometimes employed, for when the injured man went to take profession, he might find his right opposed by some of the owners of the land who had purposely absented themselves from the conference whereat it was [pg 93] given up. And this unfair practice has sometimes been seized on as a precedent in their dealings with the Pakeha; for they have too often shown a readiness to sell lands to which they had only a joint right with many others, knowing well that those others would repudiate their act.