THE FUTURE OF SAMOA

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 161, 27 March 1918, Page 8

THE FUTURE OF SAMOA

Sir,—Your correspondent, Mr. Wills B. Mathieson, in his letters on "Tho Future of Samoa," appears to be floundering wide of > the mark. He assumes, without giving any proof, that Great Britain has given a definite promise that she will not retain any conquered territory, and then states that unless Germany is allowed to return to the Pacific "the nations of the world would justly feel that the British Empire had gone back on its word." Am examination of Mr. Lloyd George's recent speech on British war aims, when, he stated "what Britain was not fighting for" and "what Britain was fighting for," fails to discover any reference to any such promise, which appears to be a figment of Mr. Matlueson's imagination. Mr. Mathieson's whole contention appears to rest on his own exceedingly vague statement, which is: "They (our statesmen) reiterated with our approval that we were not out for conquest of territory." Surely in an important matter like this, when Mr.. Mathieson is attempting to influence, public opinion, he should give the exact, words used, the date when they were, uttered, and the name of the statesman who spoke authoritatively for thoBritish nation. Instead of this we have Mr. . Mathieson's own words, "They reiterated with our approval that 'we were not out for conquest of territory." This is a mere statement of fact, • and it is straining even Mr.. Mathieson's own words to read into' them a promise. Yet on this very I slender foundation Mr. Mathiesotii makes most positive statements, such, as: "Germany's return to the Pacific would be an ugly fact for us to face when fighting stops, but not so ugly aB for the nations of the ,world to justly feel that the British Empire had gone back on its word." When wo leave Mr. Mathieson El dogmatic assertions and turn to _ Mr.. Lloyd George's speech we meet with a. different atmosphere. Mr. Lloyd George on January 3 this year, when addressing the delegates of the trade unions at Westminster, made the following statement regarding the German colonies: "With legard to the German colonies, I have, repeatedly declared that they are held; at the disposal of a conference whose, decision must have primary regard to' tho wishes and interests of the native inhabitants of such colonies." Then ho proceeds to give the reason for hid statement: "None of those territories are- inhabited by Europeans." After stating the reason he goes on to say"The governing consideration, therefore, in all these cases must be that, the inhabitants should be placed under the control of an Administration acceptable to themselves, one of whose main purposes will be to prevent their exploitation for the benefit of European capitalists or Governments.- The natives live in their various tribal organisations under chiefs and councils who* are competent to consult and speak for their tribes and members, and thus torepresent their wishes and interests nt regard to their disposal." Mr. Lloyd George then sums it up as follows:—"The general principle of national self-determination is therefore as applicable in their cases as in thoso of occupied European territories." In Mr. Lloyd George's speech there is no hint of any promise to hand backto Germany her conquered coloniesThere is no sickly sentimentality in it. about Germany's feelings; no "dont. hurt poor Germany or there may.be another war," or as Mr. Mathieson puts it: "But to insist at the same time that we retain such of her territory as we have now control of is to> plan not for the lasting peace we and! our Allies hope for, but is talking w the very spirit which breeds hatred revenge and makes war probable." Mr. Lloyd George gives no consideration to the point that. Mr. Mathieson appears so concerned about— Germany s feelings—hut considers only the welfaro and wishes of the native inhabitants | of the Gorman colonies. ; Many may I consider that Mr. Lloyd George does; not take a firm enough stand about the. German colonies, but, he that as it v may, his position appears to be based. on the statement that "none, of these, territories are inhabited by Europeans." Our point about Samoa is that from its proximity to New Zealand and its geographical position its disposal is as important to us as it it was occupied by New Zcalanders. If it is returned to Germany, tor all practical purposes Germany might as well have a naval and a military base m New Zealand waters. In tne interests of. future peace and-of our children s. children—tliat they may he spared the horrors of another war-we have a right to demand-to .insist-that tlio unspeakable German may never again be allowed to have a fortress at our front te.-I^, aim