PAPUA.

Hokitika Guardian, 3 April 1926, Page 4

PAPUA.

No one knows more about Papua, and its in habitants than Sir Hubert Aturra'y. His annual reports contain u wealth of varied information and possess a real value as literature into tho bargain. His book, “Papua or British New Guinea,” is regarded as the standard authority on tho subject. But it was published in 1912, and, as Sir Hubert remarks in the preface to " Papua of To-day,” which is in some respects a continuation of the earlier work, the territory is now a very different place. Up to 1912 there was nothing especially distinctive about Papuan administration or history. It is only since that date that the Government has I teen able to define and develop the native policy which is the cardinal feature of tlio Australian regimen and by which the latter will bo judged a success or a failure. How far has Australia fulfilled Iter colonial responsibilities? The reader of this book will feel that thanks to the efforts of a devoted hand of officials wc have no reason to be ashamed of our record.

Many years ago, .Sir William MacGregor. who had Iliad experience of other tropical dependencies, wrote of Papua as offering “administrative difficulties that are probably unique in the history of the Empire. . . Never lielore has any systematic attempt been made to bring into the paths of civilisation and industry a race covering so large an area and so far behind other aboriginal races in civilisation, and political organisation.” Our task in

Papua is sui generis. No comparison between conditions there and in other colonies is possible. The native belongs to the stone age. Between him and the white population there is no “ intermediate ” class, which is to bo found in nsanv oilier colonies, mu! supplies the skilled and semi-skilled labour. Moreover the white element <1 it -

I'er.s in conifmsition from that in most of the Crown colonics, where there is virtually no demand for white labour, and where the white men are officials, traders, and planters. An English artisan, for example, does nut dream of going to the Gold Coast or the Barbadocs to look for a job. Hut in Papua there is still a cusiderable demand for white labour. Men come to work in tlie mines and elsewhere; in consequence many of tile whites are of rather a different: type from those who are to he found in the Crown colonies. Sir Hubert diseretly refrains from saying which is the better of the two. Hut lie thinks that “as regards his relations with the natives, the Englishman has, perhaps, the advantage, as he is farther removed from the class who have to fear the Mack man’s rivalry.” On the other hand he has less i .linaradcrie than the Australian, is less socialised, and possesses “ less power of combination and mure individuality.” The Australian never stands ahum. He always has a League or a Lodge or an Association from which he cun seek assistance in emergencies.

1 The welfare of the native is the paramount consideration. To this everything else is subordinated, even the material progress of the territory. Nothing in the shape of forced labour i-, countenanced. The Oriental is excluded because bis presence would be inimical to the interests of the Papuan. The Administration has been accused of carrying its solicitude for the natives too far. and pampering them. The answer is that it acts upon the , principle, embodied in the covenant, of |I he League, that the well-being and I development of weaker and backward j peoples ” form a sacred trust of civilij sation.” A more robust and loss senI silive school of thought might argue I that the weaker peoples should be allowed to go to the wall. Hut not only is that political philosophy discredited now, Imt on practical grounds the preservation of the Papuan is worth while. He can never lie a itien- ! ace to Australia economically, or from I any other point of view. If the Commonwealth were to acquiesce in the disappearance of the Papuan as “ unI fit." and in the substitution of an j Asiatic more fit to survive, the very : fitness of tlm latter might make him a j possible danger.

I One of the problems of tlu* Administration is to provide the Papuan with “interests” in the absence of which primitive peoples arc apt to lose all zest in existence, and to die out. The impact of civilisation has materially I affected his mode of life. In tile old j days he indulged in head hunting and j tribal wars—now forbidden. He had | plenty to occupy him. lie had slowly ;to hollow out his canoe or build his j lint, or cultivate his plot with the | crudest of implements. Xow he ncoomI plishes the task in a fraction of the time villi the while man’s tools. Tt i would he an excellent tiling for him , and for the territory if lie could nej quire habits oT industry, and the en- ' doavours of the Administration are | directed to this end. But money is easily gained, and lie has little imlueej meat to toil in mine or plantation. | However, the missions are doing valuable work in educating him. Sir Hubert pays a tribute to their activities, which, quite apart from any question of religion, have a. most beneficial influence upon the Papuans. Sir Hilbert observes that even were lie to become an atheist to-morrow he would hold the same view.

The author has much to say about ‘ the necessity of keeping up th© old ■ customs as far as possible, and of the ' importance in administration of an- ’ thropologienl knowledge which enables one to understand native psychology. ’ But tilings do not always turn out as they theoretically should, and occasionally customs, harmless and even admir--1 able in themselves, prove to ho a bar > to progress. For instance, the solidarity of the men’s communal houses or clubs in the Gulf of Papua has un--1 (loubtedly been an advantage in the past, hut in some places it is found to ■ he an obstacle to co-operation on any substantial scale. The men of an ' “ eravo,” as the- communal house is called, will work together, but there is ■ difficulty in getting one eravo to work with another. Hence “anthropology should lie applied to administration with discretion and with constant reference to surrounding circumstances.” There is nothing to fie gained in attempting to preserve a native custom in an environment in which it has no longer any reason for existence. In the economic field the development of Papua lias been handicapped by the joint operation of the Australian tariff and the Navigation Act. Here Papua lias a genuine grievance, which the author discusses with great moderation and restraint. He seeks no concession for Papua which would he injurious for Australia, hut thinks that certain modifications of existing practice would be for their mutual benefit. Since . he wrote Papua has j been removed from the application of! the Navigation Act. but it is too soon jto say whether increased prosperity j " ill result. Sir Hubert also alludes to j the disastrous effect upon Papua of [ , strikes on the Australian waterfront: ! “ A shipping strike in Australia is to i jus in the nature of a blockade—if it i j lasts long enough we must give in.” On the resources of the territory Sir 1 Hubert writes guardedly hut hopefully. He disposes of the idea that Papua is a Garden of Eden; estimates of its richness have been exaggerated, a common occurrence where tropical countries are concerned. Gold-mining is rather under a cloud at present but there should be a. revival, T&§ pros-

pects of agriculture are quite encouraging. Altogether “it is possible that in tho years to come Papua and the mandated territory may be of far greater importance to Australia than they are to-day. It is probable that in time they may supply practically all the tropical requirements of the Commonwealth, and it is even possible that certain trades which may lie unable to carry tho high wages of Australia may find a refuge -in the territories.”