THE Thames Star. MONDAY, MARCH 26, 1928. A QUESTION AWAITING AN ANSWER.

Thames Star, Volume LXII, Issue 17386, 26 March 1928, Page 4

THE Thames Star.

MONDAY, MARCH 26, 1928. A QUESTION AWAITING AN ANSWER.

"With malice towards none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right."—Lincoln.

"With the Labour Party the real issue is not copra," says the New Zealand Worker of March 14, 1928. The organ of the New Zealand Labour Party, in publishing the above pronouncement, has. travelled some distance from tiie stand taken by its leader in 1918., In" that year Mr H. E. Holland published a pamphlet with the title "Samoa: A Story that teems with Tragedy." In that pamphlet he had something to say with respect to trading in Samoa, and, of course, such trading relates more particularly to copra than to any other commodity. Here is what he then wrote: "It is well to note that most of the conflicts which have torn Samoa during fhe past 50 years or so —and emphatically all of the struggles between the natives and the whites — have grown out of the fact that the interests of the traders demanded conformity on the part of the people with the conditions imposed by the necessities of modern capitalism." When that first appeared in print the "revolt in Samoa" had not arisen, the Mau had not been established, and the Hon. 0. F. Nelson was not in the limelight as he has been recently. Mr Holland was then more free to condemn the exploitation by capitalist traders in Samoa of the poor natives than he appears to he now. Whether- his association with at least one of these traders in a common cause has made him more charitable, .or the hatred of political - opponents has blinded him to all things else, is hard to determine. At any rate, his style of writing in reference to these Samoan capitalists has undergone a striking change since his first pamphlet was issued. In his second pamphlet, but.recently published, he writes thus:—"As to the charges against the traders: I have no doubt whatever 'that private capitalism in Samoa would not greatly differ from capitalism in New Zealand or any other country; it would probably exploit the native copra producers with the same avidity that it expects the working farmers and wage-earners here." So we find that in his first writing he directly charges the traders that their interests are the root cause of all the struggles between the natives and the whites, producing, as he shows, many serious tragedies over a period of 50 year's. This is toned down in his second publication to an abstract condemnation of capitalism in general. He docs not even positively charge .the traders with exploiting the native copra producers but contents,.himself with saying they would "probably" treat them as wo.'k-ing-farmers and wage-earners are dealt with in New Zealand. It may well be asked what are the reasons for this tenderness on the part of Mr Holland towards the capitalist traders whom he formerly regarded as the root cause of all the tragedies the Samoans have suffered from ? It is true that Mr Holland adds that "an easy and common-sensible way" out of the difficulty is to nationalise the marketing of copra. "Let the Administration," he writes, "constitute itself the sole purchaser of copra from the natives, and the sole wholesale distribution to purchasers abroad." Apart from the fact of his having-also declared that "the only course open to New Zealand is to return the mandate to the League of Nations," which render it impossible for the Administration to nationalise anything for there would be no Administration, Mr Holland knew this proposal could not be entertained. It was a safe course to put forward an academic proposal and refer to the copra traders in abstract and guarded language. Such proceedings would not offend the susceptibilities of Mr Holland's friends amongst the traders as they would know it means nothing to be put in practice. If, as Mr Holland first declared, copra trading is the prime cause of all the trouble, why does his party not make it the issue? As a Socialist party, the members prof ess a deep concern f or the, interests of the workers and pro- :

ducers. Wherein have they shown their concern for the exploited native producers of Samoa? The party's journal says. "To impute that the (Labour Party objects to the Government's policy of buying copra is deliberately to thrown dust in the eyes of the people, and "to" falsify the issue." That, however, is not the imputation. It is not that the party objects to the Administrator making advances on copra in order to secure a fairer price to the natives. It is that they have damned the scheme •not "with faint praise," but no praise at all. They have indeed sought to 'belittle it whilst i\pt formally objecting. It is known that the traders 'are fully combined for the purchasing of copra from the Samoans, that they pay just what they think right and the natives have no option but to take what is given them. When the Administrator entered into competition so as to ensure the natives a fairer deal it might have, been expected that these Socialist Labourites would be the first and most persistent in backing him up. Instead of this the party declares "copra is not the issue." The leader of the party has been most friendly to the Mau organisation as far as his speeches go, whilst the Mau, in its statement of complaints put before the Royal Commission, makes - the interference of the Administrator with the copra traders its first ground of complaint. "With the Labour Party the real issue is not copra," •we are told. Why, we ask, is it not? That it was to the fore is demonstrated by the Mau making it the first of its charges. What are the reasons for the New Zealand Labour Party's great care and tenderness in :' dealing with this subject? Why does '. the Party and its leader show such evident anxiety to get away from this issue? It is not usual for Mr Holland to treat a question of exploita- . tion of the workers so lightly as he , has .done in this instance. It is not [ the usual practice of the party's , organ to write of such a subject so , mildly. Certainly the party could 1 viiake no political capital out of baek,/ing the Administrator against the . Mau on the copra question, but of [ course the party would not admit , that as a reason. There are many . people in New Zealand who are . puzzled over the Labour Party's attitude and are asking the one craesi tion —why?