The Future Of Samoa.
pp. 37-38 · Read in the full issue
Should New Zealand Surrender the Mandate?
Letter to the Editor.
I read with great interest your stimu lating article in your March issue, “Brawl About Mandates.”
You certainly put forward a very strong case for the retention of the Man dated countries by the Mandatory Powers—allowing, of course, that Ger many was guilty of causing the Great War. Once the question of Germany’s guilt is settled, there can be little dis pute as to the justice of the punishment —though in justice to the inhabitants of the various territories concerned, it should be added: “Providing the Man datory Power concerned was capable of governing as well as the Germans.”
Immediately after the war, one of the main reasons given for the annexation of the former German colonies was that the Germans were unfit to govern back ward races. As Britain went to war to defend weaker races, it naturally fol lowed that the seized German colonies would be handed over to others more capable than the Germans, and to fur ther protect the interests of the various populations concerned, they were given as Mandated Territories, the Mandatory Power being required to report progress yearly to a committee of the League of Nations. The main principle was that those receiving the Mandates over these territories (which we now admit were admirably governed) should be more capable than the Germans.
It is acknowledged that the Germans are one of the most cultured and cap able races. So we can assume that in giving out the Mandates, the Powers were desirous of giving the Mandates to people whose sense of justice was more highly developed, or at least who were thought to have a more developed sense of justice, than the Germans. How, otherwise, can we account for the hand ing over of Samoa to a parcel of inex perienced politicians in New Zealand, who only desired to control the terri tory, as one means of, as it were, enter ing international politics.
Small though the territory is, the Ger mans never made the mistake of sending down second-rate officials. Whom has N.Z. sent here who could compare with that scholarly German gentleman, Doctor Solf, or the various medical specialists who were sent to Samoa at no expense to the Territory? Or even the agricul tural scientists Germany sent to Samoa to investigate Samoan soils and products and to assist both native and European cultivators? The Park-Berendsen-Ver chaffeld report justified the frequent complaints from Samoa that N.Z. re garded the territory as a dumping ground for second-rate officials and pro fessional men, with the narrow, unsym pathetic views of their class —all of them full of self-importance and country-town limitation of outlook. The sooner this type of person is removed, the sooner will N.Z. regain some measure of respect from the population of Samoa, and, in cidentally, the sooner will the Territory be again self-supporting, and the ter rible drain on the N.Z. taxpayer cease.
Prominent New Zealanders have fre quently expressed the view that N.Z. had not the right type of men to send to Samoa to administer the Territory. This is not correct; for what is really wanted are capable and, above all, gentlemanly business men. If the right types do not
exist in N.Z., why does not the N.Z.
Government act on the suggestions of its own citizens and ask Great Britain to relieve it of the Mandate. This frank admission of failure would go a long way towards restoring New Zealand’s honour in the eyes of the world.
In your March issue, you say that the end of the League of Nations is in sight, and this inevitably will lead to argument among the Powers concerning the dis posal of the territories affected by the Mandatory system. Would it not be a very desirable solution to the Samoan problem to accede to the Samoans’ pre vious request, asking Britain to take over the countrv as a Crown Colony?
If this solution is not acceptable to New Zealand’s rustic statesmen, what other solution have they?
Even as I write I see irrefutable evi dence that the Samoans have in no way
changed their views. Vast crowds, both men and women, in the Mau uniform, are congregating in certain centres, ready to meet their representative, Mr.
Nelson, who is expected to arrive here on Sunday, May 14. When one considers the general poverty of the Samoans to day, one must realise that the expenses incidental to this gathering of people, pro bably means that they are going without the simple necessities of life, such as soap, kerosene, etc., in order to be able to buy uniforms for this occasion. Surely these people are sincere. Yet for years past we have heard New Zealand’s rep resentative at the League of Nations re iterating the statement that the Mau is dying and that all was quiet in the Ter ritory.
New Zealand cannot be blind to the fact that the Samoans realise that they can carry on indefinitely a policy of pas sive resistance, without the tragic oc currences of the past being repeated.
New Zealand will have to face the issue sooner or later, and it is certainly not desirable to leave matters until the dis solution of the League of Nations, when there will be arguments concerning the disposal of the various territories con cerned. New Zealand, in such circum stances, might be forced to undertake the impossible task of justifying her claim to Samoa, on the grounds of good government and the desire of the in
habitants to remain under N.Z. control!
I am sure your opinion on the probable course of events after the final dissolu tion of the League would be much ap preciated by your numerous readers, especially in Samoa.
I am, etc..
Dirigo.
Apia, Samoa. May 11.
EDITORIAL NOTE. —This writer sets us a pretty conundrum! If the League of Nations collapses, and the former German Colonies were to be disposed of without Germany coming into the picture, what would be the fate of Samoa?
It is certain that Samoa would remain under the Union Jack; but, although the logic of ten years’ events, and plain commonsense, suggest that Samoa would be happier as a direct charge of the British Colonial Office, it is most un likely that the Territory would be removed from New Zealand jurisdiction. It must be remem bered that Whitehall regards New Zealand as the “whiteheaded boy’’ among all the Dominions, and it is most unlikely that Britain would take any step likely to wound N.Z. sus ceptibilities, or weaken Imperial sentiment in N.Z. The official representations of the N.Z.
Government will always carry more weight in London than any outcry or agitation in Samoa.
It is a fact that the N.Z. Parliament discloses the same bankruptcy in statesmanship as do the seven Parliaments of Australia; yet Aus tralia has been able to create, for her tropical Territories, a most capable and successful admin istrative corps. New Guinea and Papua and Norfolk Island actually are far better governed than any Australian State.
The only way in which Samoa can get away froin N.Z. is for N.Z. to voluntarily surrender the charge. And we may trust Officialdom to see that that never will happen!
The main trouble in Samoa is psychological.
Samoa is possessed of an aggressive national pride and spirit and, if it is not to be indepen dent, it would like to feel that it is of sufficient importance to be governed from one of the great wmrld capitals. Consciously or consciously, it resents the suzerainty of New Zealand, which is by far the smallest and most isolated of the British Dominions. N.Z. aggravated this feel ing at the beginning by sending to Samoa a wrong type of administrative official —and, in these later years, when it has realised that Samoa is a heavy responsibility, rather than a happy hunting-ground for Incompetent and
boDibastio job-seekers, it has found it difficult to remove the harm of the unfortunate 1923-31 era. The position has been rendered worse by the economic miseries of the Depression period, for which the uninformed masses invariably blame their governments.
The obvious and correct thing is to place Samoa directly under the British Colonial Office.
Since that is unlikely—officialdom will usually prevent the politicians from doing the obvious and correct thing—Samoa should seek a com promise : and that should take the form of a substantial measure of self-government. Strong, well-sustained agitation would secure something of the kind; and it is the only change in Samoan administration that the present genera tion is likely to see. New Zealand is per manently in the picture.
Later.
(Since the foregoing was written, we have information that the Administrator (General Hart)—whose inactivity since his appointment has caused much disappointment—has made a definite move at last towards reconciliation. Every friend of New Zealand and Samoa will hope for suc cess. The development is dealt with elsewhere.)