Māori Status in New Zealand Law · Part 02 · 1840
Did Article 3 make Māori British subjects, or promise the rights of British subjects?
Article 3 is often used as the starting point for British-subject status. The English and Māori texts need to be read separately before that conclusion is stated.
The English text of Article 3 says the Queen extends royal protection to the “Natives of New Zealand” and imparts to them the rights and privileges of British subjects.
The Māori text does not use the expression “British subjects”. It says the Queen will protect ngā tangata Māori katoa o Nu Tirani and give them ngā tikanga katoa rite tahi to those of the people of England.
Article 2 is equally important to this investigation because its Māori text still speaks expressly to ngā Rangatira, ngā hapū and all people of Nu Tirani and guarantees tino rangatiratanga over whenua, kāinga and taonga. Article 3 therefore sits alongside, not in place of, the rangatira/hapū terminology of Article 2.
What Article 3 proves
There is a treaty promise of Crown protection and equivalent rights/tikanga. The English text expressly uses the rights and privileges of British subjects as its comparator.
What Article 3 does not settle alone
It does not answer whether each Māori individual became a natural-born subject by the treaty itself, by annexation doctrine, by later legislation, or by some combination of those propositions.
That uncertainty matters because Parliament did something much more explicit twenty-five years later: it enacted that every person of the Māori race would be deemed a natural-born subject of Her Majesty.
A promise of the rights of a subject and a legislative declaration that a person is a subject are related propositions, but they are not textually identical.
Primary textNZHistory — English Treaty text; Māori text.
Official interpretationWaitangi Tribunal — Article 3 overview; DPMC Treaty guidance.