A Word from New Hebrides.

[To the Editor.] Sir, —In the February issue of the P.I.M. I read a letter written by Mr.

Vogan in reply to a challenge from the General Secretary of the Methodist Mission Society of Australasia. As an old resident of 30 years’ standing in the New Hebrides and, after having had some encounters with missionaries, nothing they will do astonishes me.

Christianity, in theory, like most other ideas, may be good, if strictly adhered to and practiced and not merely preached. Many missionaries appear to believe more on commerce, and in irri tation tactics against those who will not be dictated to by missionaries.

What surprised me was that the P.I.M. dared publish anything detri mental to missionary enterprise. The writer has had experience of the Aus tralian newspaper taboo against anti mission comment. My letters were in variably rejected, with the statement that the policy of the paper was not against missions, etc. There is a tendency to pooh-pooh the planters’ or traders’ views, as simply being native talk they have heard. Allow me to try and correct that impression.

Where do the missionaries get their information? Simply by pumping na tives in their compounds, who invari ably have axes to grind and who are keenly alive to making use of the mis sionary. I might instance one mission ary who arrived recently full of self importance. He actually had the cheek to enter a certain planter’s dwelling house (while the planter was away at tending to his work) and inspect the various rooms, and when confronted later on by the planter returning to his house, who asked him where he came from, replied: “I came from Scotland!”

This same missionary informed me, be fore he had been a month on the island, that he understood natives. This type has had much to do with driving Brit ish interests out of the islands.

Twenty-five years ago I read articles in as far-away newspapers as the “Scotsman,” describing the ungodly planters, and the gin-sodden traders of the New Hebrides. That is the kind of mud we have had thrown at us by some missionaries, who pull the strings in influential quarters, including the House of Lords, and whom the planters and traders can thank for their present position in the New Hebrides.

And even to-day some of the same propaganda is doing its worst.

I take off my hat to you for having the pluck to publish articles unfav ourable to missionaries.

I am, etc.,

M. G. Wells.

Malo, New Hebrides. April 9, 1932.

EDITORIAL NOTE. —Sorry—but we must cor rect and undeceive our correspondent. We have not published any letters “unfavourable to mis sionaries.”

All that has happened is that Mr. Vogan, a traveller well-known in the Pacific, commenting upon the value of mission work generally, re marked that the Methodists somewhat weakened their good influence by engaging in trade. This brought from Rev. J. W. Burton, general sec retary of the Australian Methodist Mission or ganisation, the reply that missionaries under his supervision are not permitted to engage in com petitive trade. Following on that, there has been an interesting and quite friendly discussion con cerning Methodist missionaries and their alleged pre-occupation with trade.

So far as missionary work in the Pacific is concerned, the opinion of this writer—and it is the opinion of anyone who has studied history with an open mind —is that the missionaries have saved the name of the white man in the Pacific. European “civilisation,” wherever it has come into contact with primitive races, has had some ugly black marks recorded against it; and the ugliest and the blackest surely are those

relating to the white man’s exploitation of the Pacific Islands races. On the other side of the picture is the patient, self-sacrificing, heroic work of the missionaries of al,l denominations.

Where the early sailors and traders deaauched and destroyed, the missionaries have introduced decency and education and restored a sense of fundamental justice.

There have been some extremely foolish, bom bastic, tactless missionaries, but one no more condemns all missions for that, than one blames all planters and traders for the fact that rogues and bullies may be found in their ranks. The policy of the missions particularly in their man ner of introducing European standards of life and morals to primitive islanders, appears often ridiculous; but the immense good they actually do among the natives generally quite wipes out any suggestion that their work is useless. Simi larly, it can be said that 95 per cent, of traders nowadays are straight goers, who treat the natives fairly and decently; but that does not alter the fact that it is necessary to keep a wary official eye on the other 5 per cent., who will cheat and ill-treat natives when they can.

Trouble arises usually when a hot-headed, reasonably-decent trader joins issue with a tact less, conscience-driven missionary on the ques tion of whether a particular native is receiving a fair deal. Their respective standards are too far apart for compromise. Yet there must be compromise, because each has a certain amount of right on his side. “Exploitation!” says the missionary. “Mollycoddling!” retorts the trader.

The truth probably lies somewhere between the two. Fair-minded men recognise this, and get along together reasonably well. Fools and knaves quarrel.

Mr. Wells expresses surprise that we publish outspoken opinions. He has been unfortunate in his experiences—all well-conducted newspapers are open for honest views which are properly (that is, inoffensively) expressed—even although such views may run counter to policy.

A famous Frenchman put it admirably: “I may not agree with a word that you say—but I shall fight to the death for your right to say it.”