SAMOAN COMMISSION

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 13 October 1927, Page 5

SAMOAN COMMISSION

EVIDENCE OF MR. NELSON.

HIS ALLEGATIONS. KEEN CROSS-EXAMINATION. (BY TKLKGRAPII—PRESS ASSOCIATION.) APIA, October 11. The Hon. O. F. Nelson gave evidence before the Samoan 'Commission of Inquiry to-day that the Administrations’s prices for copra were impossible, if all expenses were charged for. Samoa was run by a dictator, under whom the heads of departments carried out policies against the wishes of the people. lie alleged that scapegoats were made and that unnamed people who hail committed serious offences were allowed to leave Samoa.

The Medical Department did not supply a service equivalent to its cost. The Administrator had exceeded his duty when he accepted from the Faipule emblems of Samoan sovereignty. Properties in the town of Apia that should belong to the Samoan Government were actually being acquired by New Zealand estates, which vvas unfair to Samoa. The cry of “Samoa for the 'Samoans’’ was mischievous and it -could only cause dissension between the Europeans and the Sa moans. MR. NELSON AND HIS INFORMATION. The remainder of the day at the commission was spent in the crossexamination of Mr. Nelson, seeking to show that he knew the effect of the action of his committee would be to cause serious native unrest. He maintained his allegations against the Medical Department, especially the chief medical officer, in spite of favourable reports on tlie latter by Drs. Buxton and Hopkins, of the London School of Tropical Medicine, and Dr. Lambert, of the Rockefeller Institute. He still thought the department did not inspire respect and excited ridicule, though one or two of its doctors did good work. He admitted his- committee’s financial report, published to the natives and Europeans, contained -serious inaccuracies, which he might easily have detected if he had had time to check them, but he had been too busy. It was true the Teport went out to the natives and others with the undeniable influence of his name on the natives. His allegation about foreclosure of the £IOO,OOO loan was based on a statement of the late Mr. Massey to Parliament about the Crown estates’ so'-urity loan. He admitted his statements in examination in chief about Ania town properties having been taken over by reparation estates had now been ishown to be erroneous. He had based his evidence on what had been- reported to him. Sir Charles Skerrett commented that the witness seemed to be singularly lacking in the quality of being sure of his facts, which men in the position of ouhlie leaders always should strive for.