Chorus From The Solomons

Demands for Reforms—Chinese Traders Over-running the Group

THE Editor of the “Pacific Islands Monthly” has on hand no less than 11 letters from residents of the Solo mon Islands, in which the Administra tion of that Protectorate is sharply cri ticised. Some of the letters are abusive and some are clearly reasoned —but all are biting in character. It is evident that a considerable section of the resi dents of the Solomon Islands are dis satisfied with conditions there, and are more or less unfriendly to the Adminis tration.

We should like to publish these letters because, apparently, they represent genuine grievances; but space considera tions make that impossible. We wish to serve two purposes—namely, to give fair publicity to the views of Pacific Islands residents; and we do not wish to do anything of an irresponsible character which may embarrass Administrators who already have serious problems on their hands.

Therefore, in the following article, we have briefly outlined the points made by our several correspondents, and we bring the criticism under the notice of the High Commisioner of the Western Pacific, in the belief that these matters will have his attention.

Perhaps we may say that we have re ceived information that many matters, more or less directly relating to the Solomons, have been brought formally under the notice of the British Colonial Office by the High Commissioner in re cent months, and it may be expected that certain reforms will follow.

“Anti-Apathy,” under date of July 4, says he had recently procured a verba tim report of the recent sitting of the Council. He had regarded the latter body as semi-moribund and useless; therefore he was agreeably surprised to find that the non-official members had vigorously and eloquently placed before the Administrator a statement of most of the residents’ grievances. Those non official members had not passively accepted everything the Government pro posed—on the contrary, they had stated their case clearly, tersely, and effectively yet with courtesy and restraint. “I am left with the clear impression that the members of the Council are performing their voluntary duties very ably, and with obvious sincerity.” This writer very strongly urges his fellow residents in the Solomons to give active moral and material support to their representatives.

“Stet,” in a lengthy letter, vigorously challenges certain statements made by the Resident Commissioner (Mr. F. N.

Ashley) to the Australian newspapers.

“Stet” says that the natives do not

“willingly” pay their poll tax —on the contrary, non-payers are sent to gaol every year in every district. He criticises sharply the system under which the employer of natives is forced to col lect the tax from the natives, which works out unfairly and anomalously. The natives, he says, benefit nothing from the tax. The Government maintains a numerous and expensive medical per sonnel, but the writer, during his 25 years’ residence in the group, has seen the population dwindle in a tragic manner.

This writer says “the medical attend ance which the natives receive in some of the districts is deplorable and for all useful purposes non-existent.” He gives two striking instances to prove his con tention. One was in the Western District, on the Marovo Lagoon, where people were dying rapidly from a serious and fatal

epidemic, without any medical attention; and the other case was on Savo Island, only 24 miles from Tulagi, where he saw many natives suffering from very bad skin complaints and was informed that they rarely, if ever, saw a medical officer. This writer adds that employers of native labour in the Solomons may depend upon very frequent regular visits from medical officers, who insist upon conditions which sometimes are absurd.

In other words, the indentured labourers get too much medical attention, while their unfortunate brethren in the villages get little or none. Yet the average em ployer looks after his labourers care fully; while the villagers have little or no knowledge of how to resist or treat disease.

“Stet” also challenges Mr. Ashley’s statement “that there is not th 6 slightest danger of the natives injuring any of the white people.” The writer very pointedly reminds Mr. Ashley of several bad cases of attacks by natives on white women, which were tried in Mr. Ashley’s own court.

“Men of the West,” in an open letter

from Gizo, dated July 16, directed to the High Commissioner, spiritedly reminds his Excellency that he visited them three years ago and that they, in response to his invitation, laid before him special

requests for amelioration of their condi tions. They sought relief concerning; 1. Reduction of native wages; 2. Cancellation of tobacco issue to labour; 3. Relief in connection with rents of Native Leases; 4. Restoration of three years’ labour contract; 5. Payment of Native Tax by native labourers.

These things were all designed to re duce planters’ costs, to meet the collapse in the copra industry. From that day to this, not a single item of that relief programme had been granted. The High Commissioner is reminded that meeting he resented the criticism that the British Solomon Islands Administra tion was “unsynrpathetic, callous, and in different.” The writer now, in view of what has happened (or not happened), repeats the criticism. He asks pointedly why Suva repeatedly sends Commission ers, etc., to the Solomons to carry out investigations when Suva inevitably ignores the representations of the planters and traders, and accepts the official point of view ‘‘A penny stamp would achieve the same result at a fraction of the cost.”

This letter continues: “Tulagi is an isolated self-centred colony of officials interested in little save their salaries, pensions, and golf handicaps, and of whom none have any practical knowledge

of Islands affairs, and who have made a tragic mess of governing one of the finest groups in the Pacific. ... It should be a bitter reflection to your Excellency to realise that what the planters fore told at that meeting has, in fact, eventu ated. The present sad state of the group is in a large measure due to the fact that you preferred Tulagi’s academic advice to that of practical men.” The writer continues in most emphatic language and assures the High Commis sioner that unless drastic steps are taken to relieve the situation the European planters and traders must leave the group and Chinese will take their places. This movement, in fact, has become definite during the last three or four years.

The following statements are made by a planter in one of the northern islands: The Administration has allowed land rentals on Crown leases to be reduced or suspended, but it will not allow native rentals to be interfered with in any way.

There is great dissatisfaction with this, because many native rentals were fixed when the price of copra was very high.

The old argument that Chinese traders represent “a check against exploitation of natives by white traders” now does not hold water. The natives who trade are completely sophisticated and know to a penny the value of most things in common use; it is impossible for white men to exploit them. Furthermore, natives are not compelled to use European goods; the natives can be completely self-supporting without using European goods at all. Despite the depression there has been no reduction whatever in the Ad ministration salaries —the officials enjoy completely the conditions they had in the boom years. There is complaint of overstaffing generally. It is contended, for instance, that the maintenance of three full-time customs or boarding officers at Tulagi is absurd. There are two entomologists maintained in the Group—both believed to be investigating a disease peculiar to the Solomon Islands, known as nut-fall. Mr. Lever (the original entomologist) stated the trouble was caused by a peculiarity in B.S.I. soil. The Agricultural Committee would not accept this and brought a special man on loan from Malaya. He reached the same conclusion —that nut fall is caused by a peculiar soil condi tion —but the Committee still refuses that viewpoint, and insists that nut-fall is caused by a beetle or something.

“Old Resident” writes: “Solomon Islands residents are literally praying for the day when the Group may be put under Australian rule. They compare conditions in the Solomon Islands with conditions next door, in New Guinea and Papua, where Australian rule is regarded as efficient and sympathetic, giving every possible encouragement to the people who have settled there to carry out the de velopment of these valuable territories.

“Solomonoo” writes: “We do not want foreign labour, but we certainly do wan. a little more, or, rather, a great deal more, thought and action in the matter of conserving and increasing what labour we have.” This writer states that he visited a mission station recently and saw about 70 native children undergoing religious training. Their physical condi tion was very poor and he is strongly of opinion that the Administration does not do nearly enough to induce these people to mike use of suitable foods. The native population is dwindling in numbers and stamina.

“Ysabel Planter” writes on “the sense lessness of our trying to produce copra

on a native wage of 20/- per month and ample findings, in competition with New Guinea, which has wages of about 6/per month and much poorer findings.” He urges that the whole relationship be tween employers and employed in the Solomon Islands be revised, with a view to giving some sensible concessions to the men who are in danger of being driven off their plantations by conditions oyer which they have no control, and which are being accentuated by Government in difference.

“One of the Pioneers” declares: “The small European traders and settlers are being ruined by the pro-Chinese policy of the Administration.” He says that the individual officials are quite sympathetic, but they take their instructions “from much higher up,” and that “Tulagi shelters behind Fiji, and Fiji behind the Colonial Office.” This writer challenges the viewpoint that it is necessary to maintain Chinese traders in the Solo mons in order to protect the natives from unscrupulous white traders. There may have been cases of callous exploitation in the past, he says, but those conditions certainly do not apply to the present day.

The Administration’s pro-Chinese policy is breaking the hearts of the men who pioneered the Solomons, and who, since the fall in copra, are beginning to trade for a bare livelihood: and unless some thing is done the Protectorate inevitably will pass into the hands of the Chinese.

The attitude of the British planters in the group is “if British pioneer settlers cannot now look to their own flag for protection, then God help the British Empire.”

This writer continues: “Fiji has de creed that Chinese must be given the same facilities to trade as whites and that the few restrictions hitherto im posed must be discontinued. The re sult has been a mad rush by Chinese to obtain trading licences, and they are spreading through the group, establishing stores in the native villages, with stocks financed by Chinese merchants in the main ports. Prior to this, Chinese trad ing establishments were confined to the principal ports of Tulagi and Gizo. . . .

A European cannot compete with Chi nese. The Chinese has a much lower standard of living, and the Chinese apparently has a closer racial affinity with these Melanesian natives. Prices being equal, the Chinaman obviously will get the business every time. . . . Can nothing be done to check this lunatic policy and give the British settlers a chance to live in this corner of the Em pire?”

An article describing a clash between a European trader and a Chinese itiner ant trader in the Solomons is published elsewhere in this issue.