Dr Verwoerd

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31168, 19 September 1966, Page 16

Dr Verwoerd

Sir, —You print today four anonymous correspondents, all of whom attempt to vindicate apartheid. Two of these letters, dealing respectively with communism and “socalled intellectuals,” are hysterical and irrelevant, but all four fail miserably. “A.J.8.” blames "agitators,” claiming their presence has necessitated South Africa’s police State, while “D.V.,” rather pathetically, praises the' loyalty of the African chiefs, who are effette anachronisms with minimal influences in an industrialised and would-be nationalist society. Your correspondents confuse the effect (inferior status of the blacks and their desire for freedom) with the

cause—a long, thorough history of repression and injustice, affecting all (from every race) who oppose the Government. Smith, in Rhodesia, at least pretends he is concerned with merit, but Verwoerd’s oremise—that Africans are inherently inferior —is vicious nonsense. He, with his predessors and present followers, must bear the full blame for his country’s present agony. —Yours, etc., JEREMY AGAK. September 17, 1966.

Sir, —1 spent two years In South Africa while Verwoerd and Vorster were openly supporting Hitler, but I have sympathy for the South Afri--an who has been brought up in that enviroment. Conservatism is a mental state, and, in similar circumstances, extreme supporters of our National Party would embrace the same racial views. We cannot interfere in the inter? nal affairs of South Africa, but it is significant that New Zealand supported Verwoerd’s claim to complete sovereignty over South-West Africa, originally under mandate from the League of Nations, thus irrevocably placing its unhappy natives under apartheid. Also, the Story, “African Labour,” in to-day’s item endorses my earlier contentions concerning imported labour for the gold mines, vehemently denied by the then South African consular representative.— Yours, etc., VARIAN J. WILSON September 16, 1966.

Sir, —New Zealand is not, as yet just a distant outpost of Moscow or Peking, as your correspondent “M.” seems to imagine. This country is still very British, and I am sure Christian people here were rightly horrified that Dr. Verwoerd should have been so cruelly murdered. I still maintain that “M.” has a sinister motive in recapitulating matters like Sharpeville immediately after Dr. Verwoerd’s funeral. “M.” gave no evidence to prove Dr. Verwoerd was responsible at Sharpeville. How could he have been? He was not on the spot. I do not need to read “Black Like Me” to find out about apartheid. South Africa has always had separate development, and this system was recently endorsed by Paramount Chief Kaiser Matanzima as “the onlv sensible and practical solution in this multi-racial country of ours.” I suggest “M.” lays off propaganda, meanwhile, and reads “Principles o f Anartheid,” hv Processor H. Sampson.—Yours, etc.. M. J September 16, 1966.

Sir. — It would be more relevant to say Verwoerd has done much to, rather than for. the coloured people of South Africa. His policy has made the original natural barrier of education and culture, which has diminished to a certain extent into a rigid colour bar, resulting in bitter resentment' on one side and cnnseouently fear on the other. The African Negroes would not be moved by “agitators” had they no grounds for dissatisfaction. This is illustrated by the lack of success of the Communist Party in New Zealand. A contented and prosperous people is indifferent to revolutionaries. South Africa’s coloured population has no reason to be satisfied with its lot when its “reserves” are largely confined to less fertile areas. “B” has tried to justify Verwoerd’s policy by the familiar argument of its being no worse than anyone else’s. This, merely shows that the world’s evils are not confined to South Africa, not that his policy is good.— Yours etc. E. L. TAN September 18, 1966.

Sir,—President Kaunda of Zambia has set a fine example by sending a message of sympathy to the widow of Dr. Verwoerd, the murdered Prime Minister of South Africa. In his message he said: “Although your husband and I have been irrevocably opposed, I feel it my duty as a Christian to send you a message of sympathy on this

sad occasion.” On the advice of Mr Wilson the Queen did not send any message of sympathy to Mrs Verwoerd. On the previous occasion, in 1960, when Dr. Verwoerd was shot she sent one. 1 can only agree with John Gordon, of the '‘Sunday Express,” when he said: “All England is shamed that an African Prime Minister sends a message of sympathy, but our Queen, although it is her duty, does not.”—Yours, etc., A. E. BIGG. September 16, 1966.

Sir,—“M.,” writing on apartheid, has evidently fallen into the trap of believing a lot of extreme left-wing propaganda. Garry Alligham, writing in his book, “Verwoerd The End,” says on page 216: “They (the Africans) have not a grievance left apart from their own tsotsies and gangs, but that is a job for their own authorities and the police, like any other law-breakers.” Page 226 says: “South Africa is, today, in an infinitely better condition than it has. ever been.” I have happy memories of, a visit to South Africa. 1 would suggest “-M.” pay that country a visit also—but not as an agitator, unless he wants to see the inside of their gaols.—Yours, etc., THE WALRUS. September 16, 1966.