Chinese Labour In Fiji

Is Called Uneconomic

Written for The Pacific Islands Monthly by Trevor J. Casling-Cottle

I SHOULD like to comment, in your, meritorious paper, on the subject of Asiatic labour in the Pacific Islands.

I have recently returned from a two years’ sojourn in Fiji where, according to your paper, Asiatic labour is an in teresting experiment.

In the article in the November issue of the P.I.M., you state that Chinese and Japanese make admirable emi grants. Now the question is, do they?

My opinion is, No. I am writing from knowledge gained through actually be ing in charge of Chinese tradesmen, and I am certain that anyone holding my position would see that they do the country no good at all.

Your article says that the Chinese are, “Mostly storekeepers and trades men, and generally speaking are very good citizens.” As far as their be haviour goes, they are good citizens; but that is not all that counts.

Take, for instance, the question of finance. The skilled Chinese trades man draws from 7/- to 10/- per day.

Of that money, which is taken from the colony, how much goes back? Not a cent, except the annual poll tax. The Chinese store contains nothing but what is Chinese-made, and the China man wfio draws the wages will not spend a penny on anything which is British-made. Therefore, the wages paid to these men are absolutely lost to the colony, and that is doing more

harm than good, because every penny will be used against us before many years are over.

It cannot be said that it is cheap labour, because an European drawing 16/- per day would do better work in half the time, and the money he was drawing would be circulating in the colony instead of going out of it. Any one with a little foresight, and a sense of loyalty, can see what is going to happen ere long—especially since the recent Manchurian dispute, The Chinese have had their eyes on the Pacific Islands for years, and we, by the methods previously mentioned, are inadvertently giving the Islands to them. Why should foreigners such as these be allowed to work in a British colony, drawing wages in British money, when there are hundreds of Britishers in Australian and New Zea land who could, and would, do the work better and quicker, and the wages they drew would be doing the colony good instead of harm, There is also the matter of the sex relationship between the Chinese and the Fijian women. In 1921 there were 910 Chinese in Fiji; to-day, there are over 1,500, and this without their half castes who are fairly numerous. What will become of these half-castes when the Chinamen have saved enough of our money—which is five times as valu able to them as Chinese and return to

their own country? What can this mean for the future?

The same trouble has occurred in Samoa recently. Why cannot the people responsible look to the future good of the country, instead of think ing of the immediate financial gain.

Why bother with Asiatics at all?

The Fijian, if trained properly, can be turned out as good a tradesman as anyone else, and he is one of our fel low subjects, and belongs to the coun try, yet those responsible ignore him.

I have known instances where Fijian boys, who with a little tuition would have made excellent tradesmen, have been put aside in favour of the quiet, cunning Chinaman. Why not encour age and help our own loyal natives?

The Chinaman is getting the mon opoly all round, where-ever you look.

In New Zealand he has control of fruit shops and vegetable gardens, and I am ashamed to say that the European population patronise him to the neglect of their own white man. Is this going to do any good in the future? In Fiji the native of the country is practically left in the background. Why should he not be brought forward, trained and encouraged, instead of the foreigner?

Certainly, the natives as a whole are independent, but if trained in the right way they would soon learn that not only was it a benefit to themselves, but to their country also.

Unemployment is a serious problem in Australasia to-day. Thousands of efficient, able-bodied Britishers want work, and cannot get it, and yet Chinese are doing a Britisher’s work in a Brit isher’s country. Is that the spirit which has made Britain what she is to-day?

It is a pity that those responsible do not go to the Islands and gain first hand information. They would get many surprises. People who call them selves loyal Britishers will tell you that the Chinaman is a quiet, peaceful, law abiding citizen. This is the opinion formed by the way he walks through the main street of a big city. But go to the place where he predominates, and under the shelter of British jus tice he will call you “white dog,” or any other epithet which suits him. A few months close association with the “peaceful” Chinaman will soon alter one’s opinion.

Working with Asiatics for a couple of years in the Islands, as I have, will soon show you that the Asiatic problem is far from an interesting experiment.

It is up to every man who calls him self a Britisher, and is in an appro priate position, to play the game to his fellow countrymen, and to do his duty to his country, by doing all in his power to abolish Asiatic labour.