POLICY IN SAMOA.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20964, 1 March 1930, Page 12

POLICY IN SAMOA.

Those natives who comprise the disaffected element in Western Samoa have had many opportunities of experiencing the indulgence and lenience of the Zealand Administration and a fresh proof of the forbearance of the mandatory authority is provided in the intimation that arrangements have been made for a conference this week-end between the Administrator and the New Zealand Minister of Defence on the one hand and members of the Mau on the other hand. The conference is being arranged in such a manner that the Samoans may have no cause either for failing to attend or for doubting the good intentions of the Administration, and it is to be hoped that they will appreciate this fact. By its every word and deed in the past the Administration has indicated that its purpose is not to tyrannise over a subject race, or to deprive the Samoan people of their reasonable personal liberty, but to allow them freedom of action within certain bounds which are limited only by the need for their acceptance of the principle that they are amenable to the law of the territory. Unfortunately this policy has not been productive of entirely satisfactory results, but the fact that, despite all that has occurred, the Mau has been invited to meet the Administrator in conference bespeaks a continued wish on his part to avoid recourse to force in the assertion of his authority. The Samoans have listened too long to the counsel of leaders whom they have had no great reason to trust, and have been persuaded by them that they possess grievances that call for immediate redress. A meeting such as is now proposed will probably afford them the opportunity ‘of expressing their grievances. It should at least have the effect of clearing away certain misapprehensions under which they now seem to labourj It is necessary, however, that the members of the Mau should respect the mandate over their territory which Is ew Zealand holds from the League of Nations. The only criticism which the League has directed at the policy of the Administration in Samoa is that it has not been firmly enough directed. It has now become necessary that the Samoans should recognise that the Government is determined that the Administrator’s authority shall be respected. The Samoans are to receive an admirable chance of making such representations to the Administration as they think fit. If the Administrator is able to afford relief in respect bf any of the present causes of dissatisfaction, without derogation from the authority he exercises, he will certainly be performing a service to both the New Zealand Government and the Samoan people. Should the members of the Mau realise that it is his wish to assist them they are likely to find that ho is prepared to meet them, as far as it is possible for him to do so, in respect of any complaints they may put forward in which there is really any substance.