This also separates the view of if the Maori understood what they were signing or not. I feel as though the perspective of the Maori not understanding the Treaty is what is best supported by the evidence. .
Perspective 1: The Maori people were in fact uninformed over the true meaning of the treaty, as it may have been mistranslated. This means that the Maori were almost entirely unaware of the significance the treaty would have, as the true meaning was not correctly interpreted. .
Ever since the Treaty of Waitangi was first signed it has been a continuously significant document that has fused a debate about the misunderstandings over the translation of the Treaty, did the Maori people even understand what they were signing? Despite the evolution of our society from 1840 and today many still believe that the right that were ensured for Maori promised in the Treaty display an imbalance from what the Maori have now. With regard to what was outlined in the Treaty over what the Maori would gain, it is argued from both the perspective that they knew exactly the conditions they signed for and the view that there was in fact confusion over the matter of translation. The Crown made it clear to Hobson that Britain wanted complete sovereignty over New Zealand and an establishment over Maori rights, privileges and property was made through the treaty. Many speculate that the word sovereignty in the treaty was deliberately mistranslated to secure a more welcoming response, Henry Williams himself (Henry Williams 1874) states that "In this translation it was necessary to avoid all expressions of the English for which there was no similar term in the Maori language, preserving the entire spirit and tone of the treaty" The 1835 Declaration of Independence formed by the British Resident James Busby interprets the English "All sovereign power and authority" to "Ko te Kingitanga ko te mana" in Maori.