We feature each week Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books.
“AT THE MARGIN
OF EMPIRE” by Jennifer Ashton (Auckland University Press, $NZ49:99)
By one of those
odd coincidences, this is the second time in the last month that I have found
myself reviewing a book about a forceful Scotsman who had an impact on New
Zealand in the nineteenth century. Three weeks ago, it was Matthew Wright’s Man
of Secrets (look it up on the index at right), his account of the
controversial Donald McLean. This week, it is a book about a rather more
obscure figure.
Jennifer
Ashton’s At the Margin of Empire
(which began life as her doctoral thesis) is subtitled John Webster and the Hokianga, 1841-1900. Unlike Donald McLean, a
sometime government minister who features in every history of nineteenth
century New Zealand, John Webster (1818-1912) has been at best the type of
person who has received a few fleeting mentions when historians deal with early
Pakeha days on the Hokianga and in the Bay of Islands. Webster never achieved
national political status (though he went through a phase of desiring it) and
was never a national figure. After youthful adventures, he spent most of his
working life as a timber merchant on the Hokianga before retiring to Auckland
in old age and dying there.
So why should
this obscure figure merit a whole thesis – or book?
Basically
because Jennifer Ashton wants to use him to argue a case.
The book opens
with a vignette of the author seeing the impressive, but now run-down, house John
Webster had built in Opononi. At once a theme is suggested, as Ashton asserts:
“Webster’s life on the Hokianga over the more
than 60 years he lived there was characterised by commercial success, but it
was also shaped by accommodation and compromise. The economic influence that he
enjoyed and the political power that he wanted to claim were both circumscribed
by the daily realities of the area in which he lived. Unlike settlers in some
other parts of New Zealand, Webster found that Maori were a constant presence
in his life right up until the time he finally left to live in Auckland, making
him a useful window through which to view shifting relationships and social
boundaries between Maori and Pakeha in Hokianga during the second half of the
nineteenth century.” (p.2)
Throughout
Webster’s long sojourn there, the Hokianga (divided between Nga Puhi and Te
Rarawa hapu) was an area where Maori remained numerically dominant for longer
than in other areas of Pakeha settlement, and hence more capable of showing the
persistence of cultural interdependence.
Clearly this is
not going to be a book about an heroic Pakeha pioneer, but about the
interaction of Maori and Pakeha, and the patterns of interracial patronage and
co-dependency. Once upon a time, says Ashton, the likes of Webster would have
been presented as an “old identity” who formed the New Zealand we now enjoy.
But since the 1980s especially, such Pakeha settlers are more likely to be seen
in a negative light as people who inflated their own importance (especially
when they wrote their own memoirs, as Webster did) and underestimated the
agency of the people they were colonising. Therefore, this biography presents
Webster not as an heroic figure, but as part of the social and economic force
that changed the relationship and power bases between the races:
“Webster was one of the untold thousands of
Britons who went into the world as the foot soldiers of empire, determined to
spread its influence across the face of the earth. His personal experience can
illuminate the ways that the empire shaped individuals, but also how those
individuals and the empire itself, were in turn reshaped by their experiences
at the far corners of the world. As an imperial man, Webster confidently viewed
himself as someone who ought to enjoy ascendancy over the indigenous peoples
with whom his travels brought him into contact. The counter to this was an
identity formed in Hokianga which served the economic and social demands of his
day-to-day dealings with Maori, and which undermined his expectations of
superiority. The interplay and tension between these two identities are central
to the portrayal of Webster offered here, and are used to trace the shifting
relationships between Maori and Pakeha.” (p.8)
Thus
the thesis that the rest of the book argues. Webster, far from illustrating
early Pakeha overlordship of Maori, really represents a world of endless
compromise and accommodation to Maori customs and imperatives.
At the Margin of Empire presents this
argument so emphatically (and repetitively) that we realise we are dealing with
a case study rather than a true biography. Jennifer Ashton is quite frank about
this in her introduction. She tells us she has deliberately left out many
aspects of the man’s life (especially domestic and family matters) so that she
can concentrate on Webster as an exemplar of a certain sort of race relations.
This is evident
in all the book’s eight chapters.
John Webster was
born in Montrose in Scotland in 1818 to a comfortable merchant family (Chapter
One, “The Making of an Imperial Man”). Educated in mercantile Glasgow, he was
trained to the view that imperial expansion offered personal opportunities for
betterment. Aged 20, he emigrated to Sydney in 1838. As he recorded in the
diaries he edited much later, he undertook a trek in Australia in which he and
his party skirmished with, and killed, Aborigines. His account is interpreted by
Jennifer Ashton as evidence of a shift in his thinking, from seeing Aborigines
has a harmless element of the landscape to seeing them as a force to be
subdued. She sees him as bringing this attitude towards indigenous peoples to
New Zealand (Chapter Two - “Hokianga and the River Trade) when he arrived here
1841, joining some of his brothers and establishing himself in the timber
trade. But in 1841 there were a mere 104 Pakeha as compared with 3,600 Maori on
the Hokianga. Hence, slowly and with some false starts, Webster had to learn
how dependent he was on Maori goodwill and on a rangatira’s willingness to gain
prestige through Pakeha enterprise. Webster formed a client-patron relationship
with the prosperous George Russell. It is clear from his diary entries that he was
involved in back-breaking work in the early phases of his involvement in the timber
trade (a dawn-to-late night schedule is laid out at p.34). It is also clear that
he looked down on Maori traditional customs as in his reaction (p.42) to hahunga ceremonies, where the bones of a
recently-deceased chief were reinterred.
How does the
author situate Webster in relation to the Maori world?
Webster could
speak te reo and formed strong and sometimes equitable working relationships
with many Maori, such as Papahurihia (Te Atua Wera) who had founded a
synchronistic sect and acted as Hone Heke’s tohunga. But Webster was in no way
a “Pakeha-Maori” like those of a slightly earlier generation who were absorbed
into Maori tribes and survived there at the rangatira’s pleasure. He saw clear
boundaries between his European and their Maori culture, even if his trading
activities often put him on a footing of affability with Maori. Ashton gives an
account of Webster’s role in a potentially violent dispute between two rival Maori
parties who arrived at his house, seeking satisfaction for goods one group had
stolen from the other. In the way Webster dealt with this situation, Ashton
claims to see him treating Maori quite differently from the way he treated
Aborigines in Australia – that is, knowing he had to negotiate tactfully.
Webster joined the
forces of Tamati Waka Nene, fighting against (his fellow Nga Pui) Hone Heke (Chapter
Three - “Among the Queen’s People: The Northern War 1845-46”). Pakeha like
Webster interpreted Nene as being for the Queen and protecting the idea of a
British colony as opposed to a reversion to traditional tribal rule. For Nene,
however, it was a matter of protecting his mana and of hoping to revert to the
situation in which land was not pre-empted to the Crown but was the iwi’s to
dispose of. Webster was directly involved in the fighting when Heke’s men
attacked one of Nene’s positions. Says Ashton of the “battle” of Te Ahuahu: “His role as one of Nene’s fighters took him
into the midst of one of the most significant and desperate engagements of the
war, and arguably the only battle in which Heke and Kawiti were clearly
defeated” (p.70). But Ashton insists that Webster and a few other Pkeha
acted as mere foot soldiers for Nene, on the understanding that Nene was acting
in settler interests. She once again presents the Pakeha settlers as being the
ones taking commands, not dominating the scene.
For three years
(Chapter Four - “A Voyage Through the Pacific, 1848-1851”) there was a break in
Webster’s New Zealand sojourn when he was involved in an unsuccessful business
enterprise with a commercial voyage to California. As he voyaged around the
islands of the Pacific, Ashton accuses him of cultural misperception: “He became part of the anthropological
attempt to classify the peoples of the world and measure their perceived degree
of ‘civilisation’ against Northern Europeans, placing them within the
developing Eurocentric, intellectual context of the time” (p.84). She is
most reproving of Webster’s part in a retribution attack on a village in
Guadalcanal, where the crew of the ship Webster was on destroyed a village,
killed some villagers and ripped up their plantation. Some of the ship’s crew
had been attacked and “Webster [without
considering local taboos] took the
suddenness and ferocity of the attack as signs of barbarity” [p.89]. Further, “Without
a clear understanding of the environment in which he was operating, and
genuinely frightened by the events that had taken place, he ended up telling a
one-sided story of technologically superior Europeans ultimately meting out
justice to savages. This was similar to what had taken place in Australia,
where threat had turned to violence and where distance and lack of interaction
meant that Aboriginals had remained shadowy figures” (p.90]. Webster had
grandiose imperial schemes for thr colonisation and exploitation of Pacific
Islands, but they all came to nothing and he returned to New Zealand
permanently.
He still had
some extraneous activities. He was involved in having the distinguished artist
Angas help him produce a version of his sketches from nature, which he got
published. This allowed him to have an audience with Queen Victoria when he was
visiting England. But (Chapter Five, “Hokianga’s Timber Baron, 1855-1870”) by
his mid-thirties he was settling down in Hokianga. He married his prosperous
patron George Russell’s daughter Emily. He now had some Maori relations by
marriage. Yet he deliberately chose not to become immersed in Maori society and
was careful to have all his many children educated in the English style. By the
1860s, in early middle age, he had become dominant in Hokianga’s timber trade.
He ran his own small fleet of timber-carrying ships between the Hokianga and
Sydney. Ashton undercuts any sense of achievement in this, however, by
remarking: “He may have wanted to
distinguish himself socially from those Maori who provided the bulk of his
labour force during this period, but by deriving his wealth from the timber
trade, he virtually guaranteed that such separation was in some ways
unachievable” (p.110). For example, Webster had to resign himself to the fact
that the cutting and dragging of timber came to a virtual standstill during the
tribal planting season. Webster was one of those who sought the
individualisation of Maori land titles, to ensure that it was easier to break up
tribal ownership of land and also to break his own dependence on Maori patrons.
He was also one of those who were happy to see Maori go into debt in order to
make them more ready to sell land. And yet his relationship with old Nene still
remained one of dependence.
Like those of
his sometime friend and colleague Frederick Maning, Webster’s attitudes during
the 1860s wars (Chapter Six - “War and Politics in the 1860s”) were that the country
would only be at peace if Maori submitted to Pakeha government. However, in the
history of an intertribal set-to in the north, in which both Webster and Maning
both claimed to have major roles as conciliators and peacemakers, Ashton
deduces that the decisive factor in settling the dispute was the mana of some
rangatira. She remarks: “Instead of
relying on men such as Webster, political collaboration between Maori and
Pakeha, and particularly between Maori and the Crown, was a matter of
negotiation, as Maori chose on some occasions to engage with Pakeha
institutions and officials, while the Crown admitted the limits of its powers
on others.” (p.150)
Webster managed
to sell his timber business in the mid-1870s when he believed Hokianga’s timber
resources are running out (Chapter Seven - “Hokianga Old and New, 1870-1890”).
By now, the older Maori figures upon whom he had once relied are dying out. At
this stage, Pakeha were the great majority of New Zealand’s population, but the
Hokianga still had a Maori majority and therefore did not have the type of European-dominant
“civilization” which Webster craved. Webster settled in his house (or mansion)
in Opononi, and travelled much (Chapter Eight - “Unquiet Retirement 1880s-1900”).
In recounting the trader’s old age, Jennifer Ashton still insists on Maori
agency in Hokianga affairs. In this northern region, the “Dog Tax” was greatly
resented by Maori, especially in 1898. Once again, when there was a real
possibility of armed conflict between and the constabulary and those Maori who
protested at the tax. An account furnished by Webster (and endorsed by the
popular historian James Cowan) presented Webster as the active and wise
peacemaker who prevented a pitched battle. But Ashton’s view is that there was
no fighting because of the fortuitous arrival of the prestigious MP (“MHR”)
Hone Heke.
To the very end,
then, Ashton gives us a man whose ideas of imperial and Pakeha dominance were
always trumped by the reality of Maori power and numbers. Webster was able to
extend his (and Pakeha) influence only by commerce in which he had endlessly to
negotiate and compromise with his Maori neighbours. Before her brief re-capping
epilogue, Jennifer Ashton concludes: “The
incremental extension of empire through commerce, rather than tall tales of
courage in the face of savagery and a collection of interesting artefacts
stored in an imperial showcase, was Webster’s real legacy.” (p.204)
So this is how
John Webster stood “at the margin of empire” – as somebody who had to
relinquish his youthful heroic self-image and admit to his frequent dependence
on a non-European people.
Does Ashton make
her case? I think she does, but I am still troubled that a man is reduced to a
case like this. It may have been necessary for her argument, but I have the
abiding impression that much of the man has been lost in the (largely
reproving) case.
No comments:
Post a Comment