Bruce Moon

So there it is, pretty much the whole story, now unrecognizable in the false accounts of women and children being burned alive in the church, too readily believed by our part-Maori revisionists and their white fellow-travellers.  It was not long before such stories began to circulate.

“At the great Maori meeting at Kopua, twelve months last May, Captain Wilson met two gentlemen – Wesleyan ministers – who informed him that there was but one thing the natives were sore about; namely, the kohuru [murder] (1) at Rangiaohia. The captain replied, ‘I can explain all about that affair, for I was present. It was I who sent the man whom the Maoris shot into the hut to make prisoners. Our man was dead inside the hut before the attack commenced.'” (2)

What really enraged the rebels was that they were completely out-witted by General Cameron whose name has been falsely blackened.  The church-burning lie gave them a ready excuse for their failure and spread like wildfire amongst them, interpreted by O’Malley as “Maori oral histories from the time of the raid consistently refer to women and children being killed.” 

A lie repeated a hundred times does not become true, even if the hundredth teller is Dame Susan Devoy, too ready to believe it without checking genuine sources.(3)  One of her minions, Pele Walker, has chimed in with

“History is often contentious and debatable. There are many historical sources, including accounts from Waikato-Tainui and the NZ History website, which give different accounts from your sources as to what happened in Rangiaowhia in 1864.” (4)

So there you are – more hypocrisy from her office from one who does not want to know the truth.

Rusden, for example, makes the outrageously false statement that the official account of the fight at Ihaia’s house

“was the official method of telling, or concealing, that women or children were burned to death. … Their rage at being outwitted by the flank movement which left them idle, and destroyed their food and plantations, was exaggerated by the burning of their wives and children.” (5)

The review of Rusden’s book in the “New Zealand Herald” for 4th August 1883 is scathing about the flagrant bias in what he writes. This is readily available online by entering “G W Rusden History” and selecting the entry: “Rusden’s History of New Zealand – Papers Past.“

It may be the first of a long line of so-called histories which give grossly falsified accounts of the story of early New Zealand.  It was when Potatau found this out that he came forth to say what he knew.  A key witness, he was clearly a man of integrity.

In fact, Cameron’s brilliant and humane action at Rangiaowhia was the beginning of the end of the rebellion in the Waikato.  As historian Chris Pugsley has observed, it was the decisive action of the entire conflict, a severe economic setback for the Kingitanga and a major blow to its morale.  From then on the end of resistance in the Waikato basin was only a matter of time.

So, compare the real account with O’Malley’s lurid claim that “the assault on Rangiaowhia was an almost incomprehensible act of savagery”.

Put plainly,  the outwitted rebels in their rage concocted the dastardly lie about the burning of a church full of women and children – which was all too readily repeated – as their descendants continue to do today. The Tainui tribes are one such source, a 2014 example under the heading “The Latest Tainui news from Eraka’s Blog” being the following.

“150 years ago during the New Zealand wars at Rangiaowhia, near Te Awamutu, … a … massacre of innocents took place.  Local Maori folk took refuge from the fighting in St Paul’s church.  The church was surrounded by British soldiers.  Some Maori who attempted to flee were either shot or bayoneted.  The soldiers set the church ablaze, a horrific war crime took place, the non-combatants consisting of mostly women and children were burned alive.” [Her emphasis]

It would be difficult to imagine a more foul lie than this.

At the site of its old mission, the Catholic church has erected a sign which says:

“It was one of the most prosperous areas in New Zealand. But on Sunday 21st February 1864, the Imperial forces attacked the undefended settlement which was inhabited by women, children and the elderly.  … After the event, the Crown had confiscated and redistributed the land.” 

This is a clear example of where telling a selected part of the truth is worse than lying.

One Tommy Wilson has repeated a tale that General Cameron

“gave orders to wipe them out.  His troops herded all the local Maori up like cattle and locked them in the church and then set it alight – killing all 144 inside … only one three-year-old girl escaped … The fearful tale when told by the granddaughter sent down a veil of deep sadness that settled across our wharenui.”  (6)

This tale which he says he heard from “whakapapa” is yet another monstrous fabrication.  Note his concocted tale of 144 deaths to give a spurious appearance of accuracy.

O’Malley concludes his piece with an admonitory:

“Acknowledging this difficult history is not a recipe for endless division and recrimination, as some critics like to allege … Owning up to our troubled past requires guts and maturity.” 

But! Recognizing and dealing with the multitude of lies current in New Zealand today, amongst them those related by O’Malley, is an urgent and desperately needed prerequisite. 

As long ago as 1815, J L Nicholas observed that “amongst the moral vices to which many of the New Zealanders are prone, may be reckoned the odious practice of lying, in which they too frequently indulge … [it is]seldom of a harmless nature … to serve their own interested purposes”. (7) Quite evidently, this practice continues today.

So, shame on the “Listener” for being party to this dastardly story; shame on Susan Devoy and Vincent O’Malley for repeating the lies.  My O’Malley forebears of Galway who survived the “Great Hunger” would turn in their graves if they knew.

  1. “Kohuru” can also mean “ambush” which would be a better translation
  2. Glen, op. cit., gives more details about McHale.
  3. Susan Devoy, “Learning Nation’s Past A Way To Safeguard Future“, “Bay of Plenty Times”, 4th January 2017
  4. Email to C. Lee, 14th February 2017
  5. GW Rusden, “History of New Zealand”, London, Chapman and Hall, 1883
  6. T Wilson, “Kapai’s Corner”, “Bay of Plenty Times”, 12th August 2009
  7. JL Nicholas, “Narrative of a Voyage to New Zealand”, Vol. I., 1817, pp 384-5

Acknowledgement: I am obliged to private communications for the material from Brett’s’ “Early History of New Zealand” and some other material.

Postscript: To give some credit where it is due, “The New Zealand Wars: A History of the Maori Campaigns and the Pioneering Period: Volume I,(1845-1864)”, Victoria University of Wellington, gives an account substantially in agreement with what we have written though it wrongly entitles the chapter “The Invasion of Rangiaowhia”, a false nomenclature we have pointed out and it fails to give the real reason for General Cameron’s move, while for “Wars” one should read “Rebellions”.

  • Paul Moon, “This Horrid Practice”, Penguin, 2008, ISBN 978 014 300671 8, quoting other authors, pp 143 & 151
  • “History and Traditions of the Maoris of the West Coast, North Island of New Zealand prior to 1840, Victoria University of Wellington
  • Assisted by Thomas Power.
  • Michael King, op. cit, p. 203
  • Charles Heaphy, “Appendix to the Journals of the House of Representatives – 1861 Session”, p.5
  • “Proceedings of the Kohimarama Conference, Comprising Nos. 13 to 18 of the “Maori Messenger.”, available online in both English and Maori from Victoria University of Wellington.
  • John Robinson, “The Kingite Rebellion”, Tross Publishing, 2016, ISBN 978 1872970486.  Robinson quotes other sources extensively and where they are quoted here, references to them may be found in his book.
  • Robinson, op. cit, p.219
  • What was once called the “Wairau Massacre” in 1843, is now described at the site as “The Wairau Affray”.  Since on that occasion, Te Rangihaeata slaughtered more helpless prisoners that the entire number of rebels who died at Rangiaowhia, “Affray” is a more than adequate description for it.
  • F Glen, “Australians at war in New Zealand, Christchurch, 2011, ISBN 987-1-87742-739-8, p. 146
  • “Brett’s Historical Series, ed. Thomson W Leys & H Brett, Auckland 1890
  • J Cowan, “The New Zealand Wars”, Vol. 1, Chapter 37
  • “One who was there”, Brett, op. cit.
  • Cowan, op. cit.
  • Cowan, op. cit.
  • Cowan, op. cit.
  • “One who was there”, op. cit.
  • Known as “John the Baptist” or “Hoani Papita” 
  • Potatau, Brett, op. cit
  • Glen, op. cit., gives more details about McHale.
  • Potatau, op. cit.
  • “One who was there”, op. cit.
  • Cowan, op. cit.
  • “NZ Herald”,2, 24, 6th April 1864
  • “Petition of William Thompson Tarapipipi”, 1865.
  • Cowan, op. cit.
  • “NZ Herald”,1, 96, 4th March 1864.
  • “One who was there”, op. cit.
  • “One who was there”, op. cit.
  • Susan Devoy, “Learning Nation’s Past  A Way To Safeguard Future“,  “Bay of Plenty Times”, 4th January 2017
  • Email to C. Lee, 14th February 2017
  • GW Rusden, “History of New Zealand”, London, Chapman and Hall, 1883
  • T Wilson, “Kapai’s Corner”, “Bay of Plenty Times”, 12th August 2009
  • JL Nicholas, “Narrative of a Voyage to New Zealand”, Vol. I., 1817, pp 384-5

If you enjoyed this BFD article please consider sharing it with your friends.

Guest Post content does not necessarily reflect the views of the site or its editor. Guest Post content is offered for discussion and for alternative points of view.