The Press Thursday, July 18, 1918. Plain Speaking About Samoa.

Press, Volume LIV, Issue 16267, 18 July 1918, Page 6

The Press Thursday, July 18, 1918. Plain Speaking About Samoa.

Sir Joseph Ward spoke out very plainly on the subject of Samoa at the British Empire League luncheon. He' said the New Zealand delegates came to England with a positive mandate that the public would never tolerate the handing back of Samoa. He added, very bluntly 1 , that Germany would never have been there "but for the masterly "negligence of the British statesmen "regarding these oversea possessions." There are some critics who will say that talk of this kind on the part of a Dominion .Minister/ is not quite the right line to take in regard to those who are practically his hosts—that we ought not to embarrass the• British Government in the conduct of the peace negotiations and so forth. We do not agree with these criticisms. The Dominion Ministers have been invited to attend the Imperial Conference and the War Cabinet, to discuss, on an equal footing with other Ministers, the pressing problems to be solved in connexion with the war, and the future policy of the Empire. It is their duty to speak put plainly, so that there may be no shadow of misunderstanding as to the views and feelings of those whom they represent.

As to Sir Joseph Ward's outspoken indictment of past British Governments for their neglect of oversea interests, it is unfortunately only too just. Take the case of Samoa, for instance. -We know what happened as seen from this end of the world—how tho New Zealand Government, headed by Sir Robert Stout and Sir Julius Vogel, begged the British Government to forestall the Germans, and urged that the Hinemoa, commissioned for the purpose, should be despatched at once to hoist the British flag, in accordance with tho wishes of tho-Islanders. From the "life of Sir Charles Dilke," recently published, we get an insight into the methods of the British Cabinet in those days when dealing with questions affecting the colonies. Sir Charles Dilke, in his youth, wife strongly attracted to German literature and tho German people? He Baw the Franco-German War at close quarters, however, and what came under his observation then threw all his sympathies on the side of France, and made him distrust and dislike the Germans for j the lost of his life. Ho strenuously opposed the policy of "lying down" to j Germany, which was followed by Lord Salisbury, as well as by Mr Gladstone, j In Jim diary lie mentions a Cabinet meet- j in;; hold cn January 7tli, ISSS, at which he was present. There had been received, i:e. says, on the previous night, a from ihe Governor of New land, siivins the Germans had made ■

a treaty giving the whole authority of Government to the German Consul in Samoa. While Court Ministers had been telling Lord Granville that Germany would take no step hostile to Samoan independence, the Germans had sent warships there with secret orders, and hoisted their flags in various parts of the islands. No action was taken apparently by the Cabinet, of which. Mr Gladstone was Prime Minister. The next subject mentioned was that of Zanzibar, and it was decided to warn Germany that Britain would not brook interference there. "At the same "time," adds Sir Charles Dilke, "I had "much doubt whether Lord Granville " (then Foreign Minister) would act " upon the instructions of the Cabinet " in this matter, and my doubts were "justified." We recently referred to tho shocking neglect shown to the representations made by Australia and especially Queensland, in regard to New Guinea. Chamberlain and Dilko tried to get Mr Gladstone's Cabinet to stand up to Germany in this matter, and the vacillation and weakness shown, by the Ministry is pitiable to read about, even after this lapse of time. Sir Charlos Dilke mentions Count Herbert Bismarck having come over to negotiate in regard to colonial questions, and having actually tried to induce Mr Gladstone to get rid of Lord Granville and Lord Derby. As to tho cession of Heligoland, also referred to by Sir Joseph Ward, there is no question that it was one of the greatest blunders ever made by British statesmen. It was in 1890 that Lord Salisbury, determined to baso his policy on a good understanding with Germany, made a number of "graceful " concessions" to that Power, of which the surrender of Heligoland was one. Ho described the value of tho island as mainly "sentimental," and went on to point out that we had obtained a consideration for tho transfer of Heligoland to Germany "on the East Coast of "Africa," a consideration which consisted mainly in an undertaking from Germany that she would not oppose our assumption of the protectorate of Zanzibar. But as Sir Charles pointed out, the protectorate, when it included not only the island of Zanzibar, but the strip of coast now forming the maritime fringe both of British and of German East Africa, Bad been over and over again refused by the British Government.- Of course they were wrong, but this shows how little appreciation they had of interests in Africa or of the importance of Heligoland. If we were certain that British statesmen of to-day could be trusted always to take the wider view, and never to make mistakes in dealing with oversea interests, it would bo unnecessary, as well as possibly discourteous, to recall past history as Sir Joseph Ward has done. Unfortunately there have been serious cases of negligence and slackness on the part of British statesmen even during the present war, and there is grave reason to fear that a great section of the Cabinet regards the Pacific Islands taken from Germany as possible pawns to be given up in the peace negotiations. It is well, therefore, that Mr Massey and Sir Joseph Ward are in England to represent our views, and we hope they will continue to enforco them with outspoken candour and in unmistakable language.