Received

W. Samoa Under The Microscope

Chicago "Tribune's" Attentions Are Not Well Received

Prom Our Own Correspondent

Apia, Sept. 23.

IN June last, two newspaper correspon dents paid a fleeting visit to Western Samoa and, as a result, the Territory has been in the journalistic limelight in such newspapers as the Auckland Star, New Zealand, and the Chicago Tribune —widely divergent and remote in place of publication and in attitude and policy.

Mr. Clive Tidmarsh, Auckland Star representative, has in a series of four articles captioned “Western Samoa needs a new deal,” “Health and education ser vices are behind the times in Western Samoa,” “American influences in Samoa are strong,” “Native timbers in Samoa for N.Z. market?” and “New Zealanders own rich nest-egg in Western Samoa,” reviewed the present and past activities of New Zealand in Western Samoa and freely criticised the shortcomings of New Zealand Administration.

At the same time, the writer has sup plied some sensible and constructive criticism and suggestions for improve ments in Government policy. He has de served the thanks of all inhabitants of Western Samoa by impressing on the New Zealand people and Government the grievances and the needs of the Terri tory and by making it clear that West ern Samoa is absolutely self-supporting and does not owe New Zealand a penny, neither does she require any financial assistance for future development. The inhabitants of Western Samoa, Euro

peans and Samoans, should therefore certainly have the right to be consulted and considered in political, economic and financial matters affecting their interests.

WHILE Mr. Tidmarsh’s articles have earned favourable comment in Samoa, this is not the case with the articles published by the Chicago Tri bune representative, Mr. Quentin Pope.

Pope, when in Samoa, was given the cold shoulder by officials as well as by residents, as he was obviously looking for trouble and scandal in tune with the well-known anti-British attitude of his employers.

Pope accused New Zealand of exploit ing Samoa through the New Zealand Re paration Estates and through the banana trade monopoly. He also represents the Samoans as claiming that they never ceased to be an independent nation, and that New Zealand, in holding Samoa, is violating solemn pledges given by Bri tain, America and Germany. Further more, that the German surrender did not mean that sovereignty was to be trans ferred, as Germany never held Samoa.

These statements the Prime Minister of New Zealand has rightly described as “just another instance of journalistic pandering to the anti-British Common wealth complex of the Chicago Tribune Mr. Fraser also declared that New Zea land has never made one penny out of Samoa, nor is there any wish to do so.

It is true, however, that the Samoans have asked the New Zealand Govern ment to transfer the profits of the New Zealand Reparation Estates to the Samoan Treasury, to assist in public ex penditure; and so far as is known the New Zealand Government has agreed to do so.

The claims of the Samoans, of which

Mr. Pope writes, exist only in the imag ination of some irresponsible fanatics, and are not shared by the responsible Samoan leaders and the great mass of the people. They are quite satisfied with the present progressive policy of the New Zealand Administration, which aims to educate and train the Samoans gradu ally for self-government.

Mr. E. Turner, formerly Manager of the Suva Office of Cable & Wireless Ltd., has been transfered to Auckland. He left Suva early in 1946 for Britain where he spent his leave, and has just arrived in New Zealand.