Pacific Mandates

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XII, Issue 241, 25 September 1922, Page 5

Pacific Mandates

MISLEADING SUMMARISED REPORTS. OF COMMISSION'S PROCEEDINGS. PROTEST BY SIR JOSEPH COOK. [By Cable.—Press Association.—Copyright.] (Received 25, 9.5 a.m.) Geneva, September 23. There were a sensational twenty or thirty minutes at the Finance Committee on Friday, when the vote relatjXfg) to the permanent mandates commission came before the committee. Sir Joseph Cook complained of the misleading and inadequacy of the summarised report of the Mandates Commission proceedings in Geneva last mouth to the public by the secretariat. In this official communique everything said in the of criticism of tlie administration of Nauru was given in full, but everything said on the other side was omitted. All he and Sir James Allen said was summed up in the single statement: “Sir Joseph Cook and Sir James Allen replied.” Sir Joseph Cook went on to say that not one word of wha they said was given in the official communique, which had gone all over the world, to be made extensive use of by interested parties, particularly the Germans. He wanted no more than fair play. In the course of his repiy before the Mandates Commission he completely justified the administration and now that justification had been suppressed in the summarised report which was issued as an official communique. He contended that a false impression could be gjven just as easily by suppressing the facts as by mis-stating them. His Government had furnished the commission with an explanation which had been accepted by the commission itself as a complete answer. Sir Eric Drummond, director-general of the League, in reply, said the secretariat dealing with these matteis whereof this was only one out of many, had a certain definite duty cast upon it, which was that when an expert commission, such as the permanent mandates commission, made a report, that report should be summarised and given the press. Explanations by Australia in reply to criticism were not issued to the press officially, because they were made at a public meeting whereat newspaper representatives were present. He read an extract from the communique of August 7th., which contained the assurances given by Sir Joseph Cook and Sir James Allen that the well-being of the natives was the chief pro-occupation of their respective governments. In any summary of extended proceedings there would always be room for honest differences of opinion as to what should constitute a fair summary. He suggested the appointment of a subcommittee to enquire into and report upon the case. Sir Joseph Cook refused to agree to this proposal. His complaint was that the minutes were not an accurate record of the proceedings. They, too, were scanty, and he added that as far as he was concerned the incident was closed. Colonel John Ward. M.P., said the matter affected others besides Australia. No State would be satisfied to pay a large annual contribution to the League only to find one-sided reports issued in regard to the matters wherein they were vitally concerned. The matter then dropped.—(A. and N.Z.)