The Press Thursday, July 28, 1927. Samoa.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 19064, 28 July 1927, Page 8

The Press Thursday, July 28, 1927. Samoa.

The House of Representatives having remained deaf to the arguments against the Samoa Bill, we may expect that the Legislative Council will follow suit, and that the Bill will become law without any delay. It will be a waste of time, therefore, to state afresh the case against the Bill, but we may notice one or two points that arose in the course of the Committee discussion yesterday morning. Amongst the safeguards of justice which were proposed by the critics of the Bill was the provision that persons accused by the Administrator-4-the Administrator is to act as accuser and judge—should have' the right to be represented by counsel. The Prime Minister agreed that this proposal was just, and said the Administrator would receive instructions, but when it was proposed that this provision should be included in the Bill itself, the Government flatly refused to listen to it. Nor was any kinder hearing given to any other of the proposals which were made with the purpose of making the Administrator's edicts subject to revision by such tribunals as make justice secure in our own country. Everybody in New Zealand must be wondering why the Reform and Liberal Parties voted solidly for a measure which is not selfevidently necessary and which in any case violates alike the principles of government in the Mandatory State and the social traditions of the mandated territory. That is all that need now be said concerning the contents of the Bill. But something must be said concerning the effect which the Bill may have upon the reputation of New Zealand. It is true that, as Mr Coates pointed out, the League of Nations cannot take away the mandate from New Zealand, which received its appointment from the Associated Powers, and the Associated Powers are not likely to lift a finger. Yet the methods by which the Dominion is discharging its trust will be very freely discussed wherever men are interested in the problems of government, and it is hardly likely that the discussion will have a colour pleasing to the eyes of New Zealanders. The best that we can hope is that the new Act will be no more than an interim measure, and that its passage will be the prelude to a thorough overhaul of the Samoan Administration. We have said before, and it must be repeated, that the circumstances make it obvious that our Government and Parliament ought to be worrying at least as much about the Administration as about its critics. New Zealand has been in control of Samoa for several years, and the result of it has been a state of feeling which, according to the Government, calls for the establishment of a severe dictatorship and the application of a policy which one of Mr Coates's own colleagues says will fill the Samoan mind with doubt concerning the honesty ana justice of New Zealand. A wise and tactful Administration would long ago have won the goodwill of the Samoans and made them proof against the operations of self-seeking conspirators, it such people really exist in Samoa. That is the main fact, and it cannot be got rid of by legislation the effect, and indeed the purpose, of which is to make impossible any criticism of the-Admin-istration, or, which is the same thing, to make any critic liable to imprisonment and deportation without trial. The Administration must, of course, have power to enforce its authority. Now that it has got that power, and greater power than it ought to have, the Government and Parliament should enquire fully into the manner in which the Administration is doing its work.