S? academics—the**actual* Wstory of

Britain In Fiji: One Man Made

The Lands Inviolate

Frequently, in the past, one has heard it argued that the rights of the indigenous Fijians to their lands are guaranteed by Britain under the Deed of Cession of 1874, Probably, we shall hear it often in the early future, when plans are being can vassed for anew plan-for-living in Fiji.

SO, opportunely, there arrives a ?|S b ,° B s £s“g* j ri D ( Leg"ge F of

the West Australia!

On the face of it it is another

S? academics—the**actual* Wstory of

a certain period of admmisteatiom carefully assembled and documented and indexed, put into printed form by virtue of some social grant ami serving no discernible purpose in the workaday world. .

But the result is different in tnis case, as with the book revie wea above. Here we have an a PP aren J“y detailed history of the Fijian events of that time—the incidents, developments and pressures which lea to cession to Britain; the exact terms of the Deed of Cession; and tne agonies of interpretation whl c n

followed its acceptance and imple “it'if clear from this book that, on the subject o if the ‘-“ty o

)nst Deed

of Cession than appears on its sur- Tbi set of circumstances can be suprem e importance in Fiji m h vears "i js the y actual claus e of the Deed dealing with ] a nd rights: 4 7 'hat the absolute proprietor \ aW i an ds not shown to be now alienated so as to have become K ona fide the property of Europeans Qr o^er foreigners or not now in ihe actua i use or occupation of some chief or tribe or not actually re- Quired for the probable future sup (Oven

t and maintenance of some Chief ribe shall be and is hereby de ed to be vested in Her said f esty, Her heirs and successors. iccept that, in an introductory igraph, Cakobau and the High “fs say that they are “relying q the justice and generosity of said Majesty”, there is no other ; of the Deed of Cession which a bearing upon native land ts.

Whirlwind of Argument

/en a bush lawyer can see that cle 4 was likely to be a source of ble, when the various interests :ted began to seek interpreta and application. )r example, as Dr. Legge shows, numerous people who had, as r believed, acquired title to lands r to the Deed of Cession (Oc r 10, 1874) wanted to know re they stood. They claimed it the intention of the framers of Deed that lands already alien should remain alienated, it high officialdom was not so . Look at the effect of the words la fide” in the Article. It surely ns that only bona fide sales or sfers were to be recognised. ) was to decide whether any l transaction, once challenged, bona fide or not? id so, within three or four s, the Governor of Fiji (Sir mr Gordon) was involved in a •Iwind of argument, in which Secretary of State for the nies, the Crown’s solemn Law cers, the legal practitioners of and the Governor himself were ;ed to express opinions and fight challenges. the end, it seems that all rests concerned finally accepted principles stubbornly advanced Gordon, a Governor of unusual om and strength, who was de fined that the Fijians should their lands and live upon their s; that alienation —whether in past or in the future—should 'esisted to the utmost degree; that nothing to break down policy should be read into the i of Cession.

don Established Land Policy

irdon fought with various fil es t s —including the Colonial ce —for about four years before stablished what might be called ar-cut land policy, in conformity what appeared to be the idea forth in the Deed of Cession; as Dr. Legge says, “his impor ty eventually had the desired ■t of persuading the C.O. to pt the legislation he desired, :h would give the Crown-in icil the position of final court ppeal on land claims.” early one million acres were tied as having been sold abso y by the Fijians before Cession.'

under 6 MnS lil l ery created SVh .1 1 U fo s i 1 6?! i d clair ? s ad finished with them, claims to only 414,615 a r e nrdnn’<fnl«°n „ ,?i F ,? on s p i an was J. bat the Crown should assert ownership over native lands wherever possible, and then, n? 1 ?ni?/pp a fni l^£ le a H^ hority ’ to act vpnf F S J * an i S a j ld P re " ■ f tbeir lands ’ irre ' spective of their wishes. jy a ?v^ G ? rdon ,a a ctually who coated the legend of the myiolability of Fijian ownership of Fijian l and ; a nd Colonial Office policy has taught the succeeding generations to regard that plan as an undertaking which in all circumstances must be honoured.

But, as Dr. Legge himself says:

“In a controversial field such as that of Fijian land tenure it is dif ficult to establish any contribution to the subject as being beyond any doubt. It is not so much a question of establishing the facts as of in terpreting them.”

When the Deed of Cession was drawn, and the task of interpreta tion was undertaken, and Gordon fought for the establishment of certain principles, no one had any thought of Indian immigration. Must the things done between 1870 and 1880 in relation to land now be re viewed, in the light of the estab lishment in Fiji of 175,000 Indians?

If so, how—and why?

Anyone interested in those vital questions should examine this new

book, with care-

Rwr.