PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE 61
Reference :-
C.O.885
18 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
BRITISH
INTERESTS IN THE PACIFIC.
(Mr. Deakin.)
120
Fourteenth Day. that during all these years, before even land titles were recognised, there 9 May 1907. were British settlers in that group; there were British missionaries; and that whatever was being done in the way of trade or to inculcate the principles of Christianity was undertaken by Britons, including a certain number of Australians. I am not delaying for exact dates, but think it was in consequence of our fresh representations made in 1902 that a British Resident was appointed, a gentleman without real status or legal authority of any effective kind, who was to keep a general oversight of British interests and to advise. He had no real power; he was not authorised to keep records, and has not even the means of necessary transport which would familiarise him with the various islands and villages of the group. Under all these difficulties it is not surprising that he has accomplished little. During this earlier period, the New Hebrides had been dealt with by the individual Australian States and New Zealand; and among the very first resolutions passed by Conferences which were then held at which six or seven Colonies independent of each other were represented they passed strongly worded resolutions about the New Hebrides, with which I do not desire to detain you. Never at any time has this matter been out of the view of Australian public men, and of the Australian public. It has always been within their horizon. On January 1st, 1901, the present Commonwealth came into being, and within two months one of the first despatches ever directed from the new Government of the whole of Australia, addressed to this office, related to the New Hebrides. Consequently, statements which have recently been made in Parliament, here and elsewhere, that the New Hebrides have been the subject of correspondence for the last 20 years, and that some persons here were saturated with the views we have expressed, have very good foundation. We have kept on protesting and urging action without any cessation for the last 24 years. Before that there were frequent and spasmodic outbursts of complaints as we saw the islands slipping away, but for the last 24 years there has been systematic agitation, yet practically there has been nothing to show for it until this last.
Sir WILFRID LAURIER: Are you asking for any special action or protesting in general terms against the supineness of the Government?
Mr. DEAKIN Let me first get on record an explanation of the Australian attitude expressed in both special and general protests and now approach my second subject, the Convention recently concluded. That I do not propose to discuss in detail here. As to the merits or demerits of the convention made, we have said our say and I have since had the opportunity of communicating with Members of His Majesty's Government here in reference to it. I feel it would be idle to criticise that Convention now; but I do feel in justice to ourselves, and to meet some statements to which I must presently refer, that we are entitled to have it understood why, and with good reason, we have an exasperated feeling. I do not know of any series of public incidents that have sown more discord in Australia and created more discontent than those dealing with the Pacific Islands. They have caught and kept the popular eye and inflamed the popular mind. I think that after all our unfortunate experiences these years we were entitled to expect that in any dealings with the New Hebrides, Australia and New Zealand would have been consulted, kept in close touch with the Colonial Office, and afforded every opportunity of assisting to bring about_a_fair settlement. The trade of the New Hebrides, such as it is, is with Sydney and Auckland, and consequently the best information available is to be obtained
121
"Your
in them. There was first of all a fair title of our people and their Govern- ment to be consulted, and there was next the possession of an intimate knowledge of their local conditions possessed by our missionaries and our traders. On both these grounds we, as representatives of the British people in those seas and deeply interested ourselves, were entitled to be heard." The fact is, however, that this Convention was arrived at without us in a most extraordinary manner. It will be remembered that we have been for the last 21 years corresponding, passing resolutions, and protesting; and when it appeared impossible to make any further advance on the lines that we had been following, about the middle of 1905 I addressed two despatches to this office. The first was in consequence of one of the many deputations which waited on the Government from missionaries and people interested in the islands, asking, as they have asked a score of times, for some settlement of the issues connected with them. My first despatch conveyed their complaints and representations, but from all the information I had been able to obtain I had become persuaded at last that comparatively little could be hoped for British supremacy in those groups at that time. I con- sequently wrote another despatch, in which I suggested that a permanent joint protectorate under representatives of both countries and founded upon conditions giving security for investment and settlement, might be worth considering. This is given at page 3 of the Blue Book already alluded to. That suggestion was prefaced in these terms:
Excellency's advisers, though most reluctant even to appear to relax "their efforts to secure annexation, are so discouraged by the inter- minable postponements, and the uncertainties of the present position "that they feel constrained to inquire whether a proposal for such a "protectorate is favoured by His Majesty's Government and the Republic of "France, and if so, upon what terms." At the conclusion of that despatch we pointed out that the sentiment of the people of the Commonwealth is so adverse to anything resembling a sacrifice of the great Imperial possibilities of the New Hebrides, that this inquiry was tentative only in order to ascertain the prospects of such an arrangement, and afford an opportunity for its consideration in the event of no better alternative being open to us.
That was the end of August 1905. I do not think anything could be clearer or more explicit than those despatches. We made an inquiry. We wanted to know on what terms a joint protectorate would be possible, and pointed out that our inquiry was tentative only to afford an opportunity for further consideration. To that letter we received no reply that is to say, no reply for months afterwards, months during which a great deal was happening. This Blue Book renders it unnecessary for me to follow the whole course of the subsequent proceedings in detail. It commences with a letter from the Foreign Office to the Colonial Office of September 1905. The Foreign Office then forwarded a memorandum from the French Minister in London with reference to an examination of title deeds in the New Hebrides. correspondence which had been conducted between the Imperial Government and ourselves had two or three different lines. One was the main corre- spondence asking for annexation, another and quite distinct correspondence was being carried on in reference to the titles to land claimed by British or French settlers with the object of getting these in some way settled, in order to avoid the quarrels which were springing up between the settlers and the natives, or occasionally between nationals, either British or French, over their transactions in land. There was a third line of correspondence which related to the occasional disturbances in the island or minor squabbles. This despatch containing the complaints of the deputation was written before my despatch of August 29th, 1905, touching upon a possible protectorate. The negotiation in London differs from both
I 49146.
I h
The
.
Fourteenth Day. 9 May 1907.
BRITISH INTERESTS IN THE PACIFIC. (Mr. Deakin.)