Administration.

Psychology In Relation To Native

By Arthur J. Vogan, F.R.G.S.

“Only when genius is married to science can the highest results be produced.” —Herbert Spencer.

IT is seldom that a great and wise man receives in his life-time the general acclamation of appreciation that has been accorded to Sir J. H. P. Murray.

The uniquely splendid success of His Excellency’s rule in polyglot Papua, has not only done much to remove the stain upon careless Australia’s escutcheon, over the horrible happenings to her de fenceless aboriginal populations of the red ’eighties, but it has shown the world what can be done with the mentally childish and primitive peoples, whom the more advanced nations have grabbed to their bosoms in greedy race for com mercial supremacy The Murray regime is now quoted by writers in both hemispheres, and the only cloud in the picture is the question: “Who can wear the mantle when the Chief lays it down?”

Like a Shakespeare, a Darwin, a Luther, or a Mussolini, the mise-en scene created by a particular kind of genius who arrives, as if sent, to in augurate a new stage in the upward trend of human affairs, will be an ex tremely difficult one to sustain; and no mere strong-jawed, political pet of an ephemeral democratic government will fit the throne where creative intellect once sat.

Yet, knowing this, how few nave asked themselves: “What was the secret of Sir Hubert’s great success?” I am old enough to remember the renaissance ot German commercial burgeoning, after a long period of political suppression, and I can recall a similar question being asked in England. Germany’s rapid advance as regards her secondary in dustries was under exact, and scientific direction, and the manufacturers of my natal-land had to awaken from the tor per of placid, non-competitive, rule-of thumb methods, and reach around for what was available of systematic and formulated knowledge. The Lieut- Governor has done exactly this for Papua—exactly what the manufacturer was forced to do by foreign competition and up-to-date exigencies.

This recognition of the educational and control value of Anthropology and Archaeology, at a long last, comes grate fully to those who have devoted a life time to studies not yet quite “under

standed of the people.” Instead of using a “Black-police” force, as in Queens land, to settle the Native Question by exterminating the native subjects of the Crown, Sir Hubert consulted his well filled library, and that brave and skilful government-anthropologist, Mr. F. E Williams —learning to avoid what might needlessly irritate the potential citizens of a new and educated community— added to the Kingdom’s moral and com mercial strength.

Those who have studied Rarey’s, or Sample’s methods of horse-training (“breaking” is the slovenly and stupid method of ignorant folk:) know what a delight to ride such steeds was. No bit required (as in Roman days), no shy ing, no bad-temper, and no tricks! The scientific treatment of our dark-skinned brethren —whose forebears we now know were ours, also, in great measure —is just that which Christian folks long ago recognised was best —hence missionary endeavour! But knowledge, instead of guess-work and emotional enthusiasms, is rendering the work of cultivating the virgin-soil of so called savagedom more in accordance with our increased ac quaintance with the laws of mental con ditions.

Anthropology, and in particular that branch of science known as pre-his toric archaeology, as the great Fallaize points out, is a study of recent growth.

A hundred years ago the discoveries at Kent’s Cavern, Torquay, began to raise doubts, in thinking minds, whether the orthodox view of the space of Man’s sojourn upon earth (five thousand years