THE FUTURE OF SAMOA

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 193, 4 May 1918, Page 8

THE FUTURE OF SAMOA

MR, FIELD IN TiEPLY. , Sir,—Prom the tone of Mr. Mntheson's Inst letter he- appears to be feeling.very sorry for himself. At the risk of again ruffling his temper I must point out (hat Ids last letter consists of another attempt at ovßsibn. and an interesting challenge to a public debate. The challenge is interesting, as it is a confession of defeat. Mr. Malheson appeals to have had enough of letter writing, where he can be kepi to the point, and now wants to shift the discussion to the public plat-

form where it would be much mote diS» cult to pin him tlown to his statements. Let me again pin Mr. Afatlieson down. Hi* statement which. I challenged wai not "tho position 1 have taken up favouring the restoration o» S-imoa to t>ermany, unless some other nation ia aplioinled'lo control it by mi award based on international law, ae Iwd down by the growing lcagiio of nanuus, as Mr. Matheson said in his first attempt at evasion. Nor was it "tn show authority for my statement flint our fjatesmen reiterated' with our approval that- we irero not out for conquest of territory, as llr. Matheson said in his second attempt at evasion. But it ivas-ns you. pointed out in your footnote to his let(ov—his statement that s return to the Pacific would bo an ugly met for \is to face; but not so ugly as for the nations of the world to justly feel that the British Empire had gone back on its word." That is the statement ot Mr. Mathcson whic,a I challenged, ami which he has twice attempted to evade by saying I challenged him on something else. Mr. Matheson poses as: a gentleman of lofty sontiments, and it is surprising to find how making these weak attempts at evasion instead of straightforwardly admitting that his assertion that if Samoa is not handed back to Germany "the nations of the world would justly feel that the British Empire had gone back on its word," was incorrect, and that tho promise to hand Samoa back to Germany, which he is 60 anxious the British Empire'' should not break, exists only in his own imagination. The challenge to a public debate is ton foolish to be worth seriously discussing. Mr. Matheson must forgive me if I think that he must have o very exaggerated idea of the importance of his opinions and his letters' when he proposes a "public- debate on them.—F am, etc., T. A. H. FIELD.