SAMOAN COMMISSION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19753, 28 September 1927, Page 11

SAMOAN COMMISSION.

CITIZENS' CASE OPENED. BUSINESS MAN'S EVIDENCE. ADMINISTRATION CRITICISED. UNFAIR TRADING ALLEGED. By Telegraph—Press Association- Copyright. (Received September - 27, S.IS p.m.) A. and N.Z. APIA. Sept. 26. At the sitting of the Roy a! Commission on Samoari affairs to-day counsel for the Citizens' Committee, Mr. Baxter, in frus address, outlined the matters to be dealt with by him. He said he would deal with matters fairly and fully, and would show the commission that the Mau movement was entirely law-abiding and constitutional. Mr. Baxter next dealt with matters preceding the holding of meetings of Europeans in Apia, in which Samoan natives also took part, and step by step he touched upon the affairs which led up to the banishment of certain natives. He then traced the various events which culminated in an acute political position in Samoa, and the subsequent events in the New Zealand Parliament and elsewhere. Questions put by the chairman. Sir Charles Skerrett, and Judge MacCormick elicited the statement that the citizens wished the Minister, Hon. W. Nosworthv, to investigate complaints along the beach. Their purpose, said counsel, was not to put forward any general scheme for tho reform of the Administration of the islands. Mr. T. B. Slipper, who is also counsel for the citizens and the natives, followed and gave an outline of the evidence to be given as to prohibition, the cancellation of trading licences, and the banishment of natives. The first witness was Mr. Brady, the manager in Samoa for Messrs. Burns, P'nilp, Limited. He said he had taken no part in the political agitation, but. he objected to the action of the Administration in buying copra from the natives. The prices which the Administration paid were higher than the merchants could give. The merchants had worked out their prices on the London returns, and all paid the same rates. Tho establishment of a trading station and the purchase of stock cost £IOOO or more. For the Administration to compete with the

merchants, who were charged substantial licence fees, was, he said, unfair. He submitted figures to show that the merchants paid fair prices. The Crown counsel, Mr. V. R. Meredith, in cross-examination, sought to show from the witness' figures that the profits of the merchants were greater than the witness had contended. The net cost f.o.b. in Apia varied, but the purchase price was not varied. The witness said the advances made by the Administration were practically a purchase, as it was improbable that there would be any surplus from the London sales. His firm paid taxes and licence fees to the Administration and was, he contended, entitled to protection. CHIEFS IN PRISON. BANISHMENT ORDER BREACH APPEAL TO FULL COURT. [BV TELEGRAPH.- —OWN CORRESPONDENT. ] WELLINGTON. Tuesday. When the Court of Appeal was making j fixtures to-day, Sir John Findlay, K.C., asked for permission ti> mention two cases from Samoa—appeals from the Samoan Court which had convicted two chiefs for breaches of a banishment order. Sir John said he was appealing against the Samoan Act of New Zealand, of 1921. Mr. Justice Herdman asked if the Court had jurisdiction. Sir John said that if the Samoan Act was ultra vires, the Court might desire to know whether it had jurisdiction to discuss the appeals at all. Mr. Justice Sim said what counsel wyuited was a fixture to enable the cases to be discussed. The Solicitor-General, Sir. A. Fair, K.C., said they were cases which it was desired should be heard before the Full Court. Sir John said the argument, on the constitutional question was difficult mnd elaborate, and concerned the question of the validity of the Act under which the appeals were being made. Mr. Justin Ostler: If you show that the Act is invalid you destroy your own • case. Sir John: That is the case. If the Court takes the view that the legislation is ultra vires, the two chiefs who are in prison would bo released. In answer to a question put by Mr. | Justice Reed, Srr John said that, very shortly, his point was that no power hod j been given to the New Zealand Legisla t turo by the British Parliament. Mr. Justice Adams Raid counsel was inviting a decision that ths Act was ultra v:res, but he was not suggesting that the court had no power to decide that. A fixture was made for October 10. • '■ L. ,