[?]mily Groups In Samoan

[?]Tter To The Editor

[?]mily Groups In Samoan Politics

your May issue you publish a letter by Mr. C. Gardiner captioned “Samoa faces con utional changes—and seethes a e”. ccording to Mr. Gardiner the >ent “set-up” in Samoa dominated by the Nelson lily and “connections”. It is well-known fact that, as is iral in a small country like >tern Samoa, the leading opean-Samoan families, Stowers, bam, Meredith, Nelson, mussen, and others —are all »ugh several generations related e or less remotely to each :r. But that does not mean * these families have formed tical “set-ups”, or support each :r. To the contrary, in many s they oppose each other ?rly. If, for instance, one lam is related to the Nelson ily, another is a strong >orter of Mataafa and his .oan Planters’ Union for whom Gardiner acts as publicity it. irdiner states that my daughter married Tualaulelei, presumably Hon. Tualaulelei, member of Executive Council and of the slative Assembly. Actually, a oan girl whom I brought up married a son of the Hon. aulelei and, regardless of this, ve strongly opposed the policy the Hon. Tualaulelei in the slative Assembly—during the session particularly, over the malisation of the copra stry. lalaulelei is not related or ected with the Nelson family, present there is a court case ing between the firm of Nelson Tualaulelei. ie Hon. Mr. Plowman is not remotely related to the Nelson ly. I know of none of the Dan members of the Legislative aibly who are related to each i the other hand, Mr. R. p. ing has married into the ley family which is closely ed to the Nelson family, much for the accuracy of the ments made by Mr. Gardiner, has also failed to indicate actually the “dominance of Tamasese-Nelson connections” s as a big difficulty in the try’s political future. far as the directors of the ern Samoan Trust Estates □ration are concerned, Mr. K. r will certainly be surprised arn that he is regarded as a ber of the “Tamasese group”. . K. Meyer was appointed a tor of the Corporation by the Zealand Minister of Island

Territories as his personal repre sentative, and he was the logical choice for the position as he is a pioneer cocoa planter of long experience.

It may also be pointed out that Mr. Gardiner’s statements based on irresponsible beach talk of threatened civil war, and of the unhappiness of the Samoan people, only prove his ignorance of the Samoan people.

That there is a lot wrong in the Administration of the Territory nobody will deny, but the fault lies mainly with the present Executive Government and not with the duly elected leaders of the Samoan people.

Your correspondent boosts Mataafa and his proposed Samoan

Planters’ Union. Increase of agri cultural production and improve ment of quality of agricultural products are the declared policy of the Government and though assist ance of Mataafa and anybody else in this important aim would be welcomed, the establishment of another agency with the same aims seems to be wholly superfluous.

While Gardiner charges New Zealanders with lack of proper appreciation of the ancient social systems upon which Samoan life as a whole is built, he himself is entirely devoid of such appreciation

and understanding.

I am, etc.,

A. M. Gurau.

Apia, W. Samoa, June 19, 1957