THE PACIFIC ISLANDS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVI, Issue 17112, 18 March 1919, Page 7

THE PACIFIC ISLANDS.

NATURE OF THE MANDATES-

RIGHT OF FORTIFICATION.

RIVAL CLAIMS TO NAURU.

United Service.

PARIS, Mir. 16.

An important discussion has begun regarding the Pacific Islands. The general interpretation of the mandatory theory is that three classes of mandates will be prepared, the first the governing of intelligent peoples, as instance Arabia, the second cannibalistic natives, including East Africa, and the third territories where internecine warfare prevails. The Australian and New Zealand mandates for the South Pacific fall under the last head.

The main points of discussion are g the wisdom of permitting fortifica- jj tions in the South Pacific Islands, c in view of the certainty of similar (■ rights being strongly claimed for the jNorthern Islands; secondly, should a Britain insist on the promised clause providing that the territories shall become integral parts of the mandatory countries whenever the inhabitants choose to present a petition claiming union; thirdly, should Japan be given identical mandates for the Caroline and Marshall Islands. Delicate Situation, In view of the strong and clamorous Japanese demand, the position is too delicately poised for comment. New Zealand seems pre- ( pared to forego point one, but Mr. , Hughes is vigorously pressing point two. Considerable feeling has been | aroused over the violence of his re- • presentations. The delicacy of the i situation lies in the fact that the , British believe if the right of fortification be given over Samoa and the - southern islands the same right must 1 be given to Japan. On the subject of Mr. Hughes' claim the view held by Mr. Lloyd George, Mr. Balfour and Lord Milner is that it is better to accept a general agreement not to fortify than to grant a similar concession to Japan for the northern islands. Should Mr. Wilson insist on the incorporation of the league covenant in the peace terms, the preliminary i discussions may come to a head, but I otherwise the points will not be decided for a considerable time. The second class mandate rigidly applies the principle of the open door; the third the closed door. Rival Claims to Nauru. Nauru Island, for which Australia wants the mandate, possesses al- ' most unlimited suDDlies of the phosIphates most valuable for Australian I agriculture. It will be rememj bered that Mr. Hughes and Mr. Massoy each presented a separate memorandum claiming the mandate. Lord Milner's memorandum puts the strong British view, statins: that there are ample supplies of sulphuric acid, which is necessary for making phosphates into superphosphate fertiliser, which is growing more pre- ' cious to British farmers. It is true > an Australian garrison is now on tho ■ island, but it is paid for from local 1 revenues, supplemented from tho 1 1- Imperial funds. Lord Milner urged ; [ that the island be attached to the • British groups administered by the ' High Commissioner for the Pacific. ! This course appears to be most 1 j likely of adoption, unless Mr. ; [ Hughes and Mr. Massey can reach a reasonable agreement whereby Aus- ;' tralia will get the mandate on conf dition that New Zealand gets stated 1 quantities of phosphates yearly. Mr. Hughes uncompromisingly presented a further memorandum setting out that Australia wrested the island from the enemy and maintained the garrison throughout the war. This has not impressed the delegates, who declare that the "wresting"' consisted in merely 5, landing from a whaleboat. It is to be hoped that Mr. Hughes and Mr. 0 Massey will agree to a joint repre- !" sentation. The Australian mandate certainly includes a proviso that 6 German properties be taken over l " and the value added to Germany's 6 reparation fund and counted as part y jof the Australian share of the reparation.