Officers Suggested

White Man’S

Burden Dept.

Uniforms for Patrol Officers Suggested

DISTINCTIVE uniforms, after the style of those available to Dis trict Service personnel in the old New Guinea Administration, should be worn by present members of that De ipartment who are in contact with natives.

This opinion was expressed by Mr. Don Barrett, the member for New Guinea Islands electorate, in the recent meeting of the Papua and New Guinea Legislative Council.

Mr. Barrett went on; “The officers of the Dept, of Dis trict Services have a very grave responsibility—they have a dignity to uphold; they represent a service with a very fine tradition. Prior to the war, a field uniform could be worn by those officers, and from photographs I have seen of that uniform it was indeed a smart one and had engendered respect amongst the peoples with whom those officers were working. ‘“To-day the same cannot be said.

To say that some officers of the Public Service dress sloppily is putting it lightly. They may be few in number but the fact remains that there are some. I would like to suggest that the Administration give the most serious consideration to reintroducing a type of field uniform for the Dept, of District Services with the types of badges such as existed before the war in the Territory of New Guinea. . . If officers of the Department were issued with that uniform . . . their prestige would be enhanced.”

Mr. Barrett also had something to say about methods of com municating with natives and sug gested that officers of District Ser vices who are in close contact with these people should master the local lingua franca, be it Pidgin, Motu or, in areas of large language groups, the local dialect.

He said that he did not think that it was unreasonable to expect this—members of various Missions aid so—but it was essential that officers should not be changed frequently by the Administration from district to district as had been the case in some instances recently. (Editorial Note : Mr. Barrett is, 2 «??«», right. It matters tie what a gathering of the intelligentsia in, say, London, wear; out it matters a great deal how the Person in whom is vested Authority appears before the semi-civilised.

Sfoppy dress indicates sloppy dis cipline and lack of pride—and no one is quicker to notice it than the

native. Our colonising grandfathers had the right idea when they de cided that braid and feathers were essential in impressing the lowly savage. The uniforms of the British Colonial Service still carry on that idea and although they may not be precisely comfortable for the wearer, they are part of carrying the White Man’s burden and still regarded as part of the job. Something more modern perhaps would be more in order for Australians in Australian territories. Although grandfather’s psychology has been largely dis credited it still holds good in this department and a smart uniform on a smart officer is likely to pay bigger dividends than any amount of fraternising of the Brown Brother order).