The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1929. THE SAMOAN JUDGMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 45, 22 February 1929, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1929. THE SAMOAN JUDGMENT.

For the cause that lacks assistance, For the wrong that needs resistanotf For the future in the distance t And the good that we can do.

To criticise the decision of a Judge of the Supreme Court is always a rather hazardous proceeding. For the average layman is ignorant of law, and even the trained lawyer may well hesitate to express opinions that may tend to lessen the dignity and authority of our highest judicial tribunal. But while we have no intention of contesting a point of law on which only experienced members of the profession are competent to argue, Mr. Justice Blair's decision in the Tamasese case involves certain inferences which are of very grave importance to the constitutional rights and privileges of this Dominion and its people, and we think it a public duty to make these clear.

It is not for lis to pronounce authoritatively upon the guilt or innocence of Tamasese, or even upqn the application of the Habeas Corpus Act to his special case. What wo are concerned about is Mr. Justice Blair's opinion that New Zealand received its mandatory power over Samoa not from the King, but from the League of Nations, and that therefore the Government of New Zealand is answerable only to the League of Nations for the methods that it adopts in dealing with the Sanioans. In this instance it was urged by Mr. Hall Skelton that the Habeas Corpus Act has been virtually ignored in Tamasese's case. Mr. Justice Blair answers that the Imperial Parliament, on Mr. Skelton's own admission, could abrogate the Habeas Corpus Act, and he infers that the League of Nations therefore can do the same. It follows that the Habeas Corpus Act and, we presume, other laws embodying the fundamental principles of British constitutional and political liberty are of no avail against our own Government engaged in enforcing the League's authority.

Our readers may have observed that Mr. Justice Blair's view on the delegation of this mandatory power is hardly in keeping with the decision of our Appeal Court in the Tagaloa case, cited during these proceedings. In fact, Mr. Hall Skelton holds that Mr. Justice Blair's opinion has reversed the decision of the Full Court on this point. But whether Mi\ Justice Blair is l'ight in law or not, we find it difficult to believe that the conclusions which he has drawn have been accepted or even understood by the Government or the Parliament of New Zealand. For his judgment means that by accepting the mandate over Samoa New Zealand transferred its allegiance, for the purposes of the mandate, to an external sovereign authority and abdicated its right to enforce its laws in accordance with the fundamental principles of British constitutional liberty. We need hardly enlarge upon the danger to our own political freedom here involved, and if this is the real meaning and effect of our mandatory power the sooner we surrender it the better.

MUNICIPAL APATHY.

It may be argued that the fact that only a sixth of those entitled to vote at the loan poll on Wednesday exercised that right shows that the Auckland Power Board enjoyed the confidence of ratepayers. Silence gave consent. This, however, is a poor argument. The explanation is almost wholly to be found in one word, "apathy," a disease that afflicts the whole local body politic. It is true that little opposition to the loan proposals was expressed, but £650,000 should be sufficiently large a sum to touch the interest of ratepayers. Ttfo other large loan proposals will be submitted to the people of Auckland before long; will they be received with similar apathy 1 The local bodies concerned should take special steps to arouse public interest. In the immediate future, too, are the municipal elections. It is to be hoped that something out of the ordinary will be done to induce citizens first to make certain that they are on the roll, and then to vote. Two years ago only 54 per cent of electors voted.

SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHING.

This week a report on the training of teachers was laid before tbe Auckland Grammar Schools Board by the principals of five of our leading secondary schools. They had been asked to express an opinion on a scheme for the introduction of Training College students into the secondary schools submitted by the Director of Education, and their report was decidedly adverse to Mr. Strong's proposals. The defects of this scheme are very clearly set forth in the report. To introduce into secondary schools teachers in training for the primary schools would be open to the objection that there would be no co-ordination between the theoretical and the practical sides of their training. Further, it would throw an additional burden of supervision and direction upon our already overworked secondary school teachers, it would involve serious difficulties in regard to timatables and space considerations, and the pupils would suffer through lack of continuity m their instruction. We sympathise strongly with this view of the case. Moreover, there is no justification for assuming that the methods of teaching which are most successful in our primary schools are equally applicable to the smaller classes in the secondary schools engaged in more advanced work and more intensive forms of study. Undoubtedly a defect in our secondary school system is the lack of training and practical experience from which most of the junior teachers suffer when they start work. There is a great deal to be said for the proposal put forward in this report for the establishment of a secondary | training college and normal school through which teachers intended to enter secondary schools should pass. But there is very little to be nrged in support of Mr. Strong's proposals, or for any other sch«m« which ignores fundamental difference in methods.