THE EMPIRE'S COLOURED RAGE.

Northern Advocate, 19 January 1920, Page 6

THE EMPIRE'S COLOURED RAGE.

.;;o MILLIONS. VIEWS OF yih , IJAKRY JOHXSTOX. An exuemely able and exhaustive I'onirihmiuii on this subject was made in the- ii.KrniitLoiiai Brotherhood Con-ii'it-ss l>\ ,sir Hairy liohusloa, President oi tlif African fcociely. Ho pointed out thiii in the British Empire there were 02.000,000 whites rind coloured people, 'i'he whites represented a capital wealth value of £100,000,000,OOu, as against £1,000,000,000 possessed by black, brown, and yellow. The white?, also, hud greater physical power, owing to bettor food and nilround better condition?. Then, while the degree of illiteracy was probably not more Than 15 per pent- among the whites, ii wa< nearly 90 per cent, ainoijx ihe coloured races. .Many coloured men had ability but lit lie opportunity. It was the whiles who had the machinery tiud ships. We had lit ask ourselves: "lias tin- control of the native rac. , \>y the Hrilish Kinpire lieen to the advantage of the former"'" After a wide visual knowledge, he had no hesitation in saying " Yrs." subject j;aci:s. The question for us now was: "How cfi!" we retain within iho Empire, with I heir own consent, these .°.7(i,000,000 people?" Many of them were now retained by turee: and iliis method of veituning them might become increasingly dirhVulr, especially if (lie disproportion in numbers was maintained. I'l'inld we convince them ihat it was to i heir ndvimluge to remain within the Empire, at any rate for the next hundred year-? Looking back over the past, ii was clear that we had charge of many of them because they lived in hinds which were contiguous lo our vnhiod possession-;. 15ui our policy had changed. ' Were we always going to treat them as subject race*? The niissionaiies had done much in showing the native that he was better off under British rule than in the state of anarchy he had lived in previously. But, on the other hand, the missionary had sown seeds of discontent. Some of the tilings they had taught might be as foolish as those they had sought to suppress; but (hoy had also taught the principle of brotherhood, and love of justice and truth. They had inculcated the need Cor having a healthy mind in a liealihy body. They had done I heir lies! to establish the idea of free peoples, and to foster a love of education. And (hey had also tried 10 leach the mi v; ill hi g while mnn what it wns the natives really wanted. VIt:WS ON IXDIA. >}o far as India was concerned, tho educated Indian did not stop to consider what was the condition of tho country before British rule began there. Some of the things which should be remembered concerning that time were the famines and plagues, and no wellequippod hospitals. Thcr. , was a system of caste which pressed heavily on the servile tribes; there was ravage, rapine, religion? persecution?, widowburning, and waste of money, food, and time in the name of religion. We had done for India and Africa what the Komans and the Normans did for us. If we withdrew from India, Africa, and Egypt chaos would ensue, and there would be inter-rncial and inter-tribal conflict. The military element would overthrow the commercial industrial, and student element. The thing we had to do was to train these people for self-government, so thnt ultimately they might become independent.

The speaker said he had great hope the Brotherhood Movement would -rork for the cohesion of the Thvpire. What wns wfiiitrd \\t\ u not gush r-.iiii emotion; its work must lie tin- line of soenrino- a solid and practical basis of renl education. INDIA BPEAK.-. Tti the discussion which followed Sir Harry's address a leading- part was taken by Mr Bipin Chandra Pal, a

delegate from Indiu. In forceful! language he eonipuiiiied tir-t the : c-i hud ; po];oii of in--.tirui-'. ■:.■; ''n:.-! ii\e.:.'' They • > , 'A' J > '.lod :■. iirm ;i ■< an insiili. for iL-'v w--m' 'he jiiheritors of an aiiiieut civilisation. i'oloured people had their share of eouceii as well as others. He did not consider it true to say thut India had benefited under British rule, and if would not be true to say that India had not doDO the British Empire good from tho financial point of view. He drew a a illustration of what happened in international affairs fruiH the history of Japan. Wheu that country was merely artistic and courteous ami obliging, she was "beautiful little Japau." But when Japan beat. Russia by using modern European weapons, she was raised and recognised as a modern nation and as a member of the modern brotherhood. What Japan had done lie thought perhaps India could do. His countrymen wanted to remain part of the British Empire. But that word "Empire" must be no political shibboleth. To him the word meant the larger formula for human fellowship and brotherhood. If India were allowed her place as a free nation among the free nation:? of the British Empire, it would be good not only for- India but it would also be for the good of the Empire and of humanity. If their claim in this respect were denied them, it would lead to the dissolution of the Empire. Let the reading on the wall be read. Whether England gave sympathy or not was not a matior of much moment. Sympathy played little part in the great revolving movements of history. The aim of his countrymen would b<? achieved.