Samoan Affairs

Mr. Nelson’s Comments

(The following letter from Mr.

O. F. Nelson, Auckland, head of Messrs. O. F. Nelson and Co. Ltd., Samoa, came to hand in September, but, unfortunately, was crowded out of the September Issue. It is published without comment).

YOUR issue of August 22 is, like all your previous publications, full of very interesting matter to the people of the Pacific Islands and to all those connected with them in commerce and other ways, as well as to students of the social, political and economic life of those beautiful islands.

Samoa has been given a liberal allocation of space. On the first page, the article “Chinese Labour,” discloses the serious menace the presence of Chinese coolies has proved to be to the people of the Territory, which more than offsets any advantages accruing to the white planters from their labour. I should like to have been able to say that the dangers and fears expressed by the writer of that article were unfounded, but they are, unfortunately, only too well founded. Unless some drastic step is promptly taken by the Administration, Western Samoa will become a race of Asiatics and half-Asiatics, such as is already the case with some of the other Pacific Islands. Your editorial (page 8) handles the situation of “Chinese in Samoa” very well. You may justifiably assume that the state ments contained in your last issue “have not presented an exaggerated view of the situation.”

The article on the Government steamer, “Maui Pomare” (page 5) plying between New Zealand ports, Niue and Samoa, clearly shows the attitude of the Government in its per sistence to continue what is known to be a serious and costly blunder.

The “Tofua” is quite prepared to make a monthly call at Niue, and this should be encouraged instead of having such a good service by a good steamer interfered with by an unre liable packet such as the “Maui Pom are” has proved to be.

The Government could materially help the trade of Samoa by inducing the Matson steamers to resume their regular service with Apia. Every student of “Samoa’s shipping service” will agree with your remark (page 8) that “it does seem a shameful thing that this rich and progressive terri tory should be treated in a shipping sense as if it were Pitcairn Island.”

Mr. G. B. L. Westbrook, one of the oldest white residents in the Islands, can write with authority on the know ledge he has acquired first hand by his long residence in Samoa and other islands. His discussion of the past and present history of Samoa, on page 11 of your issue under review, clearly shows that he knows what he is talk ing about and can do so without pre judice. I am sorry that this cannot be said of the article “Western Samoa,” on page 13, “from our own correspondent.”

Referring to “the large majority of Europeans, who are neither Govern ment officials nor Mau men, nor Nel son supporters,” he adds that “the Europeans and the planters, practic ally without exception, have from the start of the trouble, in 1926, steadfastly adhered to their policy not to take sides in the fight between the Administration and the natives.” That he is all out of step with the true facts is easily proved by the follow ing: 1. There are but few Europeans in Western Samoa who are not Govern ment officials or planters, the latter being mostly lessees of Government Estates. 2. Messrs. Gurr and Smyth, white residents of Samoa of long standing, were deported from Samoa so they could not have “steadfastly adhered to their policy not to take sides.” The writer was deported, not because he was a Samoan, but because he was said to be a European. Three other Europeans (all British-born subjects) were actually arraigned before the Administrator to show cause why they should not be deported. Many other Europeans were cautioned or actually threatened. 3. The Government have all along blamed so-called “white agitators” for the trouble in Samoa. It is claimed that the Samoans have no real grievances and there is no “fight be tween the Administration and the natives.”

Your correspondent makes a per sonal attack against me in the state ment: “It must not be forgotten that Mr. Nelson, in New Zealand, through his representatives in Samoa, has much influence with the native movement; and an unfavourable feeling was created concerning him by a recent report that his representatives tried to persuade the Mau natives to deal only with Nelson’s stores.

If this was so, the move did not succeed.

I am entitled to demand from your correspondent who the author of that report was and how he came by it. It is a base falsehood, to say the least of it. My company’s offices at Apia have already been subjected to raids by the police, and business files searched. If that search was as thor ough as some of those on the sleeping quarters of the Samoan women and children, the police would, if they are allowed to tell the truth, be able to

state on oath that the said report could have no foundation in fact. They will say that in my letters of instruc tions to “my representatives at Apia,” in respect to the matter of reported boycotts, I have definitely laid it down as a policy of the company that whereas we will not interfere one way or the other with any proposal or intention of the Samoans to insti tute a boycott on a, part or the whole of the trade, our leading - position in the trade of the Territory has been established by honest trading and we will not tolerate any movement to secure any advantage over our com petitors through any sentiment of the Samoans towards me on account of the political controversy. This was the one point which my “represent atives” were instructed to convey to the Samoans.

I might here mention that the Samoan word, “Sa,” has often wrongly been interpreted “boycott.” The “Sa” is a regular by-law of the Samoans to prohibit the making of copra dur ing the wet and off seasons, so as to prevent the making of bad copra out of immature nuts.

If for no other reason, I consider you will allow me the space required for this letter to enable me to correct wrong impressions of my trading methods which this personal attack on me might have made on your readers. —I am, etc.

O. F. Nelson.