COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21308, 13 April 1931, Page 8

COLONIAL DEVELOPMENT

NECESSITY FOR STEADYNESS

VISITING JOURNALIST’S VIEWS

“In my study of economical and political conditions in Australia and New Zealand I have been struck by the marked contrast between the two countries,” said Mr W. J. Grant, acting' editor, of the Rangoon Times, to a representative of the Otago Daily Times on Saturday. “There is a strident note in Australia’s loyalty to the Empire which to my mind is not found in New Zealand. In Western Australia, where J. was given a very kindly reception ami came into touch with the leading economists and political thinkers, the sense of pride in Australia’s wonderful achievement during the past 100 years is healthily evident, and so far as I could judge, no other State in Australia comes so near the spirit of New Zealand as Western Australia. But there is just that lack of caution, or sound judgment rather, which I find so predominant in New Zealand. In New South Wales, where I spent a considerable time, the Australian zeal for development appears to have been pushed to the point of disaster. It is neither rny business nor my intention to criticise either Australia or New Zealand, for I arn only a humble student who has visited vour country for information which may help Burma to tread the path of Empire development now that she is on the brink of Dominion status, but so deeply have I been impressed by the depression and chaos of New South Wales that henceforth 1 shall always advise steadiness rather than recklessness in colonial development. What I have seen of Now Zealand, particularly of Dunedin, leads me to the view that you arc more staid on this side of the Tasman Sea. You have built more slowly and, I think, more surely. These are difficult times for all countries of course, but especially so for those which are in the process of realising their industrial potentialities. And so Austalia and New Zealand have been overcome by world depression at, for them, a most critical stage.” Asked for his impression of Dunedin Mr Grant said that, being a Scotsman, lie might be prejudiced, but he was convinced that in no place outside the Highlands of Scotland had he been made to feel so thoroughly at home. He had already made a number of sound friendships. He liked the simple ncighbourliness of the Dunedin people. To his mind neighbomiiness comprehended the whole social outlook of Dunedin. “ I have yet to see Auckland, continued Mr Grant, “ but I feel sure that it has not the natural beauty of Dunedin displayed so tastefully on these glorious hills of yours. I have had a look at your University and Art Gallery, among your other institutions. I am told that the University i,s the most important in the Dominion. The building expresses the solid common sense which, to me, is so closely embraced bv New Zealand. I was deeply impressed by some of the gallery pictures. Those by I. Van der Veld, with their Rembrandt tradition, arc striking in their freshness and strength. ‘Old Jack’ (I think that is the name of it) held me in front of it for a long time. The painting of that hand, not to speak of the face, is masterly to a degree. I have seen most galleries in Europe and the East, but never have I seen a human hand so powerfully treated artistically.” Such a work gave him confidence in New Zealand’s artistic future, he added. Mr Grant explained that Burma was anxious to relate herself to the rest of the Empire in view of the fact that she was in process of being separated politically from India. She, too, was a young country with great potentialities, and it was evident that she could trade extensively with Australia and New Zealand provided the facilities were forthcoming. Eor instance, there was an eager market in Burma for cheese, frozen meat, and butter, while rice, carving work, petroleum, etc., could be more extensively exported. Burma, indeed, was looking for new outlets tor her prodigious production of rice, now that such countries as Italy, etc., were growing their own rice Politically the position was very inucn improved in India, Mr Grant added, owing to the comparative success of the Round Table Conference and especially on account of the fact that Mr Gandhi, the loader of the extremists, had agreed to the Viceroy’s request for a further Round Table Conference to be held in India. This further conference was designed to settle the outstanding questions which the London Conference had failed to solve. 1 • of the very vital questions was the , ; ilenient of the representative differencea between the Hindus and the Moslems. These two communities had always formed the basic problem of India and had made Britain very cautious m carrying out her declared policy of giving India dominion status. Once this problem had been removed the whole question, to his mind, would be solved. Lherc were other details which the conference would have to tackle, such as the reserve powers of the Viceroy and the provincial governors and particularly defence and the problem of finance. These could easily bo adjusted by a compromise and the exercise of common sense and statesmanship. Although he was not a pessimist he could not see that the Hindu-Moslem problem could be solved politically until both communities had advanced educationally. The leaders of both communities were edi ated men, but the vast matses were completely illiterate. As would have been seen from recent cable messages the bitterness between the two sections existed in a religious sense. Religion throughout India was never divorced from politics. The religious antagonism between the Hindus and Moslems would exist for many years. Only about 12 per cent, of the people of India could read or write. Therefore, in comparison with such dominions as Australia and New Zealand, India had no real right to demand self-government, even although Britain was quite willing to grant it so long as a capacity for peaceful democracy was shown.