Mandates Commission and Australia

Interview Wiih Mr. Coleman, M.P.

From Our Canberra Correspondent.

Mr. F. E. Coleman, M.P., has lately returned from Geneva, where he attended the Permanent Mandates Commission, as Accredited Common wealth Government representative. In this interview he tells of pro ceedings at the Commission and the impressions he obtained.

HE said at the outset that it would be a regrettable thing if the ques tion of adequate representation at im portant international conferences such as those of the League of Nations were allowed to become the target of party political criticism.

Canada, South Africa, and the Irish Free State had gone so far as to es tablish offices at Geneva and appoint permanent accredited representatives with staffs there.

“Neither Canada nor the Irish Free state possess Mandates,” said Mr. Cole man, “and to that extent at least Aus tralia is more vitally concerned in the League of Nations’ policy if she desired to retain her mandates. My attendance before the Mandates Commission was a most interesting and useful experi ence. I was materially assisted by Mr.

Chinnery, Government Anthropologist in New Guinea, who happened to be in Europe at the time.

The Mandates Commission is com posed of representatives of various na tions, including Germany, almost all of whom have been distinguished col onial administrators. Questions are asked by each Commissioner, based upon the annual reports, and the ex amination is of a very searching char acter. Following the examination, a report is presented to the Council of the League of Nations, and finally a report is made to the League Assembly.

“It is interesting to note that the Australian Government was commend ed for sending direct representatives on this occasion. Every incident and every utterance occurring in Australia or elsewhere about New Guinea are tabu lated and recorded at Geneva and be come the basis of inquiry or criticism.

“There are two schools of thought, one of which regards the ‘C’ mandates as a permanent transfer of sovereignty, whilst the other (which appears to be in the majority) regards such transfer as temporary and subject to adequate and proper administration. It will therefore, be appreciated that Australia must live up to the highest principles of administrative efficiency in regard to the New Guinea and Nauru mandates.

“One leading League of Nations dele gate said to me: ‘Of course, Australia does not really need the mandates, as she has already more than enough ter ritorial responsibility.’ I strongly pro tested against this viewpoint. I mention it here as indicating that there is an

influential body of opinion in favour, apparently, of returning certain terri tories to their former owners.”

Question Of Forced Labour.

Mr. Coleman went on to say that a matter of great importance, namely, the question of forced labour, was discussed at the International Labour Conference and a draft convention was agreed to abolishing in certain instances and modifying in others, the right of re course to this form of laoour.

“Certain colonial Powers,” he said “raised strong opposition to many of the terms of the convention, and it appears unlikely that it will secure ac ceptance. Australia does not utilise forced labour. The New Guinea Act specifically prohibits it, although the mandate permits it for public services and it is availed of in Papua for com munity services in a modified and well regulated form. In certain colonies, however, forced labour has led to gross abuses, and is only a form of slavery.”