THE CHURCHES' INDICTMENT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1824, 9 August 1913, Page 2

THE CHURCHES' INDICTMENT.

THE CONDOMINIUM. "DEPLORABLE CONDITION OF THINGS." Tlio following resolutions were passed hy a conference of tho Protestant churches held at Paama, New Hebrides, on June -1, 1918:— , Phis conference of Protestant missionaries and others interested in the weltare of tho New Hebrides resolves'as follows 1. Wo are of opinion that a time has como when we can no longer refrain from willing the attention of tno people of tho British Jiinpire to the deplorable condition. of things existing in this group of islands. 2. Evidenco has been accumulating for some considerable timo of tho inequality of the administration of justico in the Now Hebrides, The proceedings of the Joint Court reveal tho fact that breaches of tho convention by subjects of tho F'rench Kepublic havo been so dealt with as rather to tend to lawlessness than its suppression; tho Frcnch National Court is singularly ineffective in tho punishment of crime; tho delays in bringing natives charged with oil'cnces against each other nre both a Eourcc of injustice and a niouace to the good order of the group; whilst the general condition of things calls for immediate and radical readjustment.

J. Owing to what seem to us serious deficiencies in the articles of th& Convention itself, it would appear that, after a trial of nearly six years, this instrument of government has been proved unworkable from the standpoint of British justice. To illustrate only one phase of this, 'wo quote article 19, subsection 2, which enacts: "The authority charged with the execution of tho penalty in a criminal or police case may reduce or remit such penalty." It is obvious that grave abuses aro possible under this clause, and wo havo reason to know that such abuses havo actually occurred. To theso we shall rofer later. As exemplifying the true liaturo of the Convention as it is interpreted by tho officers whose duty it is to see it carried out in its true intent and meaning wo submit:—(a) That there is a lamentable defect in tho legal process by which offenders belonging to the French nation aro dealt-with by the authorities of their nationality. Heports of their alleged misdemeanours aro frequently ignored; whereas British subjects are dealt with promptly and strictly according to tho terms of the Convention.' As an examplo of this, wo quote the case of a labourer, employed by M. Mathieux, of Jlele, named Allait, of Tomman Island, Malokula. This boy complained on March 2, 1913, that, as 'his employer hail left him in charge of a ship in Vila lllirbour for a week without food, and aB, in eonsequcnce ho begged eonio rico from a local storekeeper (who thereupon is alleged to havo sent in a bill to M. Mathieux), 11. Mathieux Hung a bottle at his head.- w'hich broko and inflicted dangerous cuts on tho head. Tho boy appeared covered with blood from head 'to loot. His caso (after ho had been discharged from hospital) was duly reported to tho French llesident Commissioner, but uo prosecution has followed. * Practically 90 per cent, of the prosecutions of French subjects before the Joint Cojirt for breaches of tho Convention, and tho regulations made uuder tho Convention, are brought about through' tho instrumentality not of tho French Commandant of Police, but by tho British, who, according to tho traditions of tho army, takes his duties seriously. (b) When brought to trial this invidious distinction still continues. In the first place tho constitution of tho Court is distinctly unfavourable to tho securing tho ends of justice, particularly in eases where French and native interests clash. Two out of the -three Judges and '. the Public Prosecutor know, for all practical purposes, no English, and henco the evidence of natives has often to undergo a double translation before,' through the medium of the French tongue, it becomes intelligible to the majority of tho Bench. Tho advantage of the Frenchman over tho liativo is difficult to express, whilst tho British subject, who is before the Court, is also placed in a position of decided inequality with his French fol-low-citiaen. Tho interpretation provided for by tho Convention is frequently inadequate, not through any fault of the interpreter, but bocauso passages between the Judges themselves and between Judges and counsel are often not translated; into English. The general French atmosphere' of tho Court is intensified by tho limited acquaintance with English legal procedure of a majority of tho Bench. (c) It is when wo come to the results of the trials of Frenchmon that tho most glaring inequalities aro exhibited. Sentences imposed on the conviction of accused persons depend for their execution upon the will of the liesident Commissioner of the country to which tho nonnative party belongs. And there is room to believe that the ends of justice havo been entirely defoatod either by a'remission of tho penalty or more frequently by a failure to cxeouto the sentence of the Court. This cannot ,be said of tho British resident, for thero has not been a sing!, 3 instance of the remission of a penalty, and with perhaps a single exception (in a caso of destitution) every fino imposed by tho Court has boon collected.4.,Thero are two serious results ensuing from the foregoing anomaly in tho administration of justice. (1) That the natives'themselves havo littio chance of justico when involved in litigation with a Frenchman. (2) That British settlers who are compelled by their'own authorities to keep tho law aro placed at a serious disadvantage as compared with their French neighbours. 5. The Joint Court has only jurisdiction over breaches of the Convention, and enough has been stated to show what a travesty of justice its often are. It is when we come to tho French National Court, which has jurisdiction over criminal cases, that we see tho extremes to which maladministration may go. In the solitary caso which this Court has judged out of many which should havo como before it tho miscarriage of justice is as flagrant as imagination can picture. Wo desire to direct special attention to this case, which wo thus summarise: A Frenchman named Le Clorc was indicted before thp French National Court on July 18, 1912, -for th?_ murder of a Santo native named Nip at Big Bay, Santo, in tho month of October, 1911. It ! appeared from the evidence of six natives and one -white mail that Le Clc-rc, who was the captain of a small recruiting ship called "tho St ( Joseph, was nt anchor near the shore. Several natives eamo on board for the purpose of trading or partly out of curiosity. Le Clwc suddenly pulled up anchor and hoisted sail. There was then a scene of some disturbonce, the seven natives protesting against being taken away. The boy Nip jumped overboard, apparently with the object of swimming ashore. Le Clerc then fired two shots at him with his revolver. Blood was seen by six of the witnesses -on tho boy's neck. lie was seen to struggle for a moment, and then disappeared from view, and has never been seen again. The accused, in his evidence, stated that he considered tho boys as recruits, and not as mere traders. He admitted fir inn one shot at tho boy in a moment of excitement, but denied that the shot had touched him; Ho also admitted that ho gavo orders for a volley to bo fired at natives on the beach, but states that no ono was hit, and that no shots wero fired in reply. The Court found tlio accused guilty of common assault, and under Article 311 of the French Penal Code, ho was sentenced to one year's imprisonment, with the benefit of the First Offenders Act, and walked out of the Court a free man. It is worthy of remark that the Judge who presided in this case was Judge Colonna, who made a well-known anti-missionary speech some years ago, and that ono of the_ two os-f-cFFOrs was a If. Gabriel Frouin, who was himself tried sonic years ago for murder, and that tho bailiff of the Court— a ST. Jianslois-riimlenvent a similar.trial on <i similar accusation. The wliito man (a Mr. Young) referred to in tho abovo statement was subsequently prosccined in tho British Court, convicted, sentenced to six months' imprisonment, and seryixl his sentence. In contrast to all this, the. cases brought under the cognisance of the British National Court havo been dealt with according to British procedure, nnd where convictions have been obtained pcnaltips hove duly followed. 0, We are of opinion that tho infrefluoncy of tho mooting of tho Joint Naval

Commission is a just ground of complaint', seeing that natives who aro accused of committing crimes against their fellows aro often kept in tho oondition of convicted persons for long periods previous to trial, a state of tilings utterly incompatible with British justice. It may be stated generally that tho Joint Naval Commission', which is tho only liody having jurisdiction over inter-native offences, had met on an average ainci- tlie Convention came into force three or four. times per annum. The men-of-war leave tlie station in or alwut November of each year, and tlio British man-of-war does not return till some sis months later, *it the expiry of tlio hurricane season, l'ho Joint Naval Commission is composed of officers of tho two men-of-war, and can only sit when the two men-of-war aro present at one time in tho same place. It follows that any native arrested niter the departure of one of the mcn-or-war from the group in November remains conlineii in Vila, where ho is subjected to precisely the same regime as convicted prisoners, for the best part of six months. There is at tho present moment actually confined in the gaol at Vila a l»y named Harry, of Lamonu Island, Epi, who has been thus confined sines last November, a nil is still awaiting trial. There is also another caso of ft Bano man who has been confined since November for the same reason. Besides these there aro cases from 'ether islands. 7. With regard to tho general condition of the natives, wo feel bound to confess that the Condominium as an instrument of government has utterly failed to express the sense of our, responsibility as a. British people to native races. It has been tho glorv of Britain that wherever tho flag flies the native-born has in course of time been brought under elevating influences. , Horo, on the contrary, the things that make for degradation and oppression are still operative. Grog-selling, illegal recruiting, and kidnapping aro as rifo as ever, and there is no improvement of the moral situation so far as governmental initiative is conccrned. As instances of grog-sellmg wo quote the following cases:— (a) Owing to the laTge number of complaints regarding the illegal sale of liquor to natives in the northern islands of tho group, tho steamship Tathra.was chattered by tho Condominium Government in tho month of November, 1911, to convey the Joint Court to the necessary places in order that these cases should bo determined. A largo number of cases was heard, and a number of convictions secured, and fines. amounting to about ,£l6 imposed. Of tho £16 wo believe that wo are correct in stating that only the sum of Bs. has been collected, llie total cost of tho charter and other expenses amounted to over .£7OO. ■ lhis trip of tho Tajthro. gave a great impetUß to tho 6 (b) Oi? November 13, 1912, Leon Montaigne was convicted on 16 separate charges of selling intoxicants to natives., The charges were all tried together, ana tho accused was oonvicted and fined J.B and costs. Wo understand that Montague lias been pardoned by tho French Resident Commissioner. As instances'of kidnapping, wo quote tho following oases:— (1) A French subject named Lo Plattinnier was charged on March 15, 1913, with tho kidnapping of seventeen Malekulans, natives of South-west Bay. In the case of one, who was a woman, a conviction was secured. This woman had tyo husbands. The woman admitted that sao went on board willingly to nccoropaiiy her husbands, and tho husbands state that they gave their consent to their wile accompanying them as a rccruit after they found that they _wero to bo taken away themselves, and tfiat they could not escape. Tho Court held that the ponsent of the husbands had been obtained under duress, and that, therefore, a breach of Part 33 of the Convention had been committed, and imposed a fino of £i, with compensation to tho woman. In regard to tlio sixteen other natives; tho Court held that, as it could not be said that the crime, if any committed, by accused was mere illegal recruitment, but kidnapping, it had no jurisdiction to determine the matter. The only Court competent would bo the French National Court. "Wo understand that tho followiiig day all these natives were, returned to "work on tho plantation of which M. Lo Plattinnier is in charge, and that thej are there: at tjie present;.moment, and that neither tho woman <iior tho boys have been returned, noither Has there been any prosecution in tho French National Court. _ _ (2) In or about October, 1910, a French recruiter named Gustavo Patient abducted 12 natives from the coast of Santo, near Tangoa, under tho ■ following circumstances: Ho found them sitting on. tho shore, and' asked them what they were doing. They replied that they were on their way to seek-work with a settler at the Saigon Channel. Ho then ?aid that he, was going there himself-with his cutter, and offered them a freo passage. After having thus induced • them to go on board tho ship ho brought them first to Malekula, where ho compelled them all to make a written agreement to recruit by the expedient of holding a .loaded musket at their heads, and threatening to shoot them if they did not do so. Thence ho went to Epi, wliere he landed two of them, including the only one of tho twelve who could express himself in pidgin English, and thence he took the remainder to Vila, whero' they were taken up to the French Resident and engaged to a French settler named Devambez, wlio Is now the Bailiff of tho Joint Court. They remained in his service for several months, until tho native who had been landed on Epi, and who knew pidgin English, succeeded in effecting his escape from M. Beaulieu's, and, coming to Vila, complained at tho British Residency. The boys were subsequently withdrawn from •M. Devambez by the French Resident, • and were detained at the French deiiey for several nioro months. They wero then, almost exactly one year from the time they lind been seized, returned to their homes, having received no payment whatsoever for the work done cither with M. Dovambez or tho French Resi dent, and no'compensation for what they had suffered. No prosecution lias taken place of M. Gustavo Patient. Tlieso two cases are specimens of a very largo number .which might be adduced. As instances of land troubles, wo quoto tho following caso:-On September 24, 1912, it was brought to tho notice of tho ' Joint Court that a French subject named Courtois had recently established himself on a CO-acro block of land at Vila Harbour under concession granted him by the French New Hebrides Company, •which land had been from lime immemorial ill possession of the local natives, and which they had never sold. It appears that when tho French. company's surveyors placed landmarks on this and neighbouring ground after survey tho local natives removed tho same, and were thereupon ordered by the French Resident to replace, them. When, howover, tfce natives applied to the French Resident for protection against M. Courtois's encroachment upon their land juntil such timo as the! Joint Court should be in a position to determine the matter no answer ™ s vouchsafed; but M. Courtois was left to continue his planting oppr-flticns unclicck* ed bv the French authorities. 8. The difference in' (lie French and British ideas as regatds the treatment of native races is apparent when the case of native labour, is brought into view. Whilst on British plantations fair conditions of life and work and payment are generally maintained, tlio majority of French plantations furnish examples of an exploitation .which can only be denominated slavery. Therefore, inasmuch -ns Hie Governjiirint of tlio country is a conjoint responsibility, our nation must tako its 'share in the dissraeo attached to this' shameful condition of affairs unless the strongest measures are taken bv the British authorities to induce their French coCleagues to deal justly with each case of complaint. As an example of non-repatriation, wo quote the following case:—lt is the usual practice of tho French Residency, in spite of tho provisions of art. 51, 1, 3, and art. 40 of the Convention to tako no steps to ensure tlm repatriation of native labour on French plantations on the exniry of their terms of engagement. In tho case of a .toy named Snefitc, of Amljrip, engaged to' M. Gabriel Frouin for a period of'three years, the engagement was cancelled seme short timo before its expiry, and a new eneagement of fliree years authorised by tho French Commissioner.

A case of i\ lwy named tjevlor nut] eipht other A.mbvin boys, who had been engaged at the French Residency for vnryins' periods, and whoso tinio of engagement had expired in somo eases fivo months and in some 17 months nrevionsly, \ras brought to tho notice «f the French' ■Resident in the month nf May last year. The- lw.ra came into Vila to coik-nlt .1 lawyer as to the host means of "M:\illin? their repatriation and When the attention of tho French [Resident was draira to the caso ho dispatched tho

French labour inspector to Mole, who, instead of repatriating tho boys, reengaged them. In regard to flogging by an employee, tho extraordinary decision was (riven last year by tlio Joint Court, in an accusation brought against a French subject named 1,0 Plattinnier, of Kpi, that while an employer of indentured labour could bo convicted of physical ill-treatment of his' labour under Article 44,1, of the Convention, ,il-trealmont by such employer's whito agent or manager does not como within the scoiie of jurisdiction of tho Court. Tliti only competent Court would l>e tho French National Court.

Without further elaboration of statement or marshalling of much available material, wo desire to express in the most emphatic manner possible our strong sense of the iniquity of further experimenting upon Ihe lines which have been followed for tlio past five and a half years, and therefore declare our conviction that either—(l) The Convention which is tho basis of the operations of tho Condominium, must bo honoured in every part equally by the French as by tho British; or (2) some other arrangement regarding tho status of this group should be arrived nt by which the Condominium as such should l>o brought to an eiid, and tho islands brought under the British flag. Wo lay tiriS matter before tlio British' people in nil parts of the Empire, believing that once tho true state of affairs is fully realised it will no longer bo tolerated.

Signed on behalf of tho conference by Clias. F. firunling. representing {he Melanesinn Mission ; Frank G. Filmor, representing the Church of Christ; Fred J. Paton (Moderntor), representing the Presbyterial Mission,