Rt. Hon. J. W. WILSON, M.P. (Chairman of the Society's Parliamentary Committee), said that in all native questions it was necessary to hold a balanced mind. It was only fair that the natives should bear their share of taxation in return for the protection of life and property which they enjoyed under British rule. We give them something and we should be the last to admit that civilized government was not something which the natives ought to pay for. But it was in the true interests of our nation that it should see that the rights and the position of natives are maintained, and it was with that conviction that the Parliamentary Committee had aimed to work.

At the close of the Conference, the President invited those present to remain for a brief Service of Intercession for Divine guidance in the conduct of these momentous proceedings, which was conducted by the Rev. R. C. Gillie.

The Land Question in Rhodesia.

AFTER four years of preparation what is said to be the greatest land case in British history opened before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on April 16. Lord Loreburn presided over the Court, which was composed of Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, Sumner and Scott-Dickson. The technical reference was restricted, but the issues involved in the case went to the very foundation of Britain's Colonial Commonwealth. The original issue submitted by Lord Harcourt in 1914 briefly stated was as follows: Whether the Chartered Company owned the unalienated land of Rhodesia in its commercial or in its administrative capacity-the interpretation of unalienated land being all land not definitely alienated to white men. It will be seen from the foregoing that although there were raised questions of sovereignty and large questions of Colonial policy, the most serious. issue from the Colonial standpoint was the rights of the natives. In view of the fact that no one had appeared to represent exclusively native interests, the Committee of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society had decided that the hearing should not take place without every opportunity being taken to secure a full and complete statement of the case on behalf of the Mashona and Matabili tribes of Southern Rhodesia. There were four parties to the reference-on the one side the Chartered Company, claiming in the interests of its shareholders the whole of the 73,000,000 acres of land. The parties contesting this claim from several points of view were, first, the Crown, represented by the Attorney General (the Rt. Hon. Sir Frederick Smith, Bart., K.C., M.P.), the Solicitor General (the Rt. Hon. Sir Gordon Hewart, K.C., M.P.), Mr. J. H. Cunliffe, K.C., and Mr. G. A. H. Branson; secondly, the white settlers of Rhodesia, represented by Mr. P. O. Lawrence, K.C., the Hon. Frank Russell, K.C., Mr. J. W. M. Holmes, and Mr. H. H. Phear; and thirdly, the natives of Southern Rho

desia, represented by Mr. Leslie Scott, K.C., M.P., and Mr. Stuart Bevan. The hearing lasted eleven days, but owing to the absorption of the public in the war, Press references to the case were extremely meagre. A fuller report of the case, with 'extracts from the speeches of Counsel on behalf of the natives, will appear in special pamphlet form as soon as the Judgment in the case is issued. The main argument of counsel for the natives was that the 800,000 Mashona and Matabili people had never been dispossessed of their lands by any legal instrument, whilst under no concession nor by any act of their own had these people of Matabililand and Mashonaland lost their tribal ownership. It would be improper to anticipate the Judgment or to elaborate at this stage the case for the natives, but it is hoped that before many weeks have passed this Judgment will appear in the form of a Report, and will be before the public; then will open the next stage in this great struggle for the rights of the natives of Rhodesia.

The Former German Colonies.

THERE have been recently a number of authoritative declarations by prominent men pointing out the grave difficulties and dangers involved in a restoration of her colonies to Germany after the war. General Smuts' speech at the Royal Geographical Society early in the year was noteworthy, and Lord Selborne, with whom an interview on the subject of the African colonies was published in the Pall Mall Gazette, has spoken with equal decision of the many grounds which would make restoration impossible, both for the grave military risk involved and for the sake of the native inhabitants; in view also of the fact that Briton and Boer in South Africa would resent the handing back to Germany of territory rescued from her by their arms for the Empire.

The Bishop of Zanzibar has published a pamphlet entitled The Black Slaves of Prussia, in which he discusses the character of German rule from an experience of twenty years in East Africa. He admits the Germans are efficient, and that they have been well-disposed to the missionaries. But their treatment of the natives is systematically cruel; they rule by fear alone.

In every colony labour is a difficult problem, and while the German Government professed to' prohibit all forcing of labour, privately a regular system of forced labour was carried on which assumed that a native had no private interests and might be taken by the authorities at any moment of the day or night; in short the German way of governing African natives is described as a "splendid" system of slavery. Actual slavery, too, was a recognized condition under the German flag, the slaves being those who had been bought or stolen or taken captives, or descendants of such. No free man could become a slave, and all children were born free. Abolition

had been talked of for the year 1920, but the slavery system presented many advantages. The Bishop lays stress also upon the excessive recourse to flogging as a regular method of punishment, and even torture was common. "The German," he writes, "loves vicarious punishment, making parents and wives suffer for the faults of son or husband." Heavy vengeance was taken on the African who dared to appeal against his sentence. In case of a German restoration there is a strong probability of reprisals upon the natives who have helped the British as carriers and in other ways. Judging from what was done after the rebellion of 1905 in German SouthWest, we should expect a terrible revenge to be taken, and the Bishop goes so far as to write :

"No German will lift his head again till the country has been drenched in native blood, it is not in him even to try."

In answer to the question why the native soldiers stuck to the Germans in the later stages of the war, the Bishop refers, in answer, to the difficulties of escape from the German force, the question of rations, and the difficulties of a waterless country, as well as the fact that the Germans do not show the same colour prejudice as Englishmen unfortunately do; the Germans, moreover, fed the natives with false statements of the cruelty and brutality of the British, and of England's failure in the war in Europe.

The statements of the Bishop of Zanzibar are to a large extent supported by books and reports published in Germany, including reports of Debates which have taken place in the Reichstag from time to time when certain Deputies have shown up the cruelties and excesses committed on the natives by German officials and condemned them in plain terms. In 1914 a Deputy

wrote:

The effect of the exploiting run of capitalism is simply awful upon the natives. . . An awful decimation of the native population runs parallel with the coming to the fore of the so-called capitalistic Kultur."

It is not clear to us why the Bishop considers it "evidently quite impossible" to consult the natives, but we are glad to see that he strongly favours the colony being administered by Great Britain "with an International Board of Inspection in the background."

GERMANS IN THE PACIFIC.

SIR WILLIAM MACGREGOR, the well-known Colonial Administrator, recently gave an address on the settlement of the Pacific to the Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce, of which an interesting summary was published in the Aberdeen Free Press. After referring to the importance of the question, and the activity which Germany had displayed in annexing the most valuable islands, Sir William MacGregor said: The circumstances under which Germany became established in the Pacific, and especially on New Guinea, left an enduring and unpleasant recollection in the mind of Australia,

This rendered very welcome the expressed wish of the Government, soon after the outbreak of war, that the Commonwealth should at once seize the German wireless stations and occupy the German possessions in the Pacific. The Commonwealth now held all German possessions south of the equator and to the west of Fiji, except the civil administration of Nauru, which was connected with the British Gilbert-Ellice Colony; New Zealand took Samoa, which she was not permitted to do in 1872, and Japan had all the German islands north of the equator, amongst them being one island very rich in phosphates like Nauru. An unfortunate feature of the Pacific Islands was the steady decrease of the natives. Samoans were physically perhaps the finest race he knew anywhere in the world, and they and the Fijians, Tongans, and Tahitians were intellectually the equals of any European race. If they had possessed metals, they might have made great strides in civilization.

He had been a diligent reader of the German Press since he was a student in Berlin forty-five years ago, and he had seen again and again efforts made by the Germans to detach Australia and New Zealand from the British Crown. The German Press had said that the joints of the British Empire were creaking, and that Australia and New Zealand were only waiting for the first opportunity to break away. The war had shown how far they were mistaken. (Hear, hear.)

TRUST THE COLONIES.

In acknowledging a vote of thanks, Sir W. MacGregor referred to the treatment by Australia and New Zealand of aboriginal difficulties and his confidence that the Commonwealth would deal with native questions on right lines. The speaker said he would not support the handing over of the lands possessed by Germany to Australia and New Zealand in the settlement of the Pacific were he not perfectly satisfied in his own mind that these two Governments would mete out to the native inhabitants of the islands that came under their jurisdiction fair and just treatment. They all knew as well as he knew-and there was no use blinking the question that Australia did not enjoy a good reputation in reference to her treatment of the aborigines on the continent of Australia. But there was a great deal to be said on the other side. He knew the place well, and had been brought into contact with the remnants of the aboriginal natives. on the great territory of Queensland, which had an area of 670,000 square miles, and he had become well acquainted with the great difficulties that had to be met by Australia, but the time had come when Australia no longer required the islanders of the Pacific to work the mines and sugar plantations. Australians had decided to have a white Australia. . . . The Commonwealth, since it had obtained possession of the great dependency of British New Guinea had governed it on exactly the same lines as when

it was handed over to them. This experience taught us to have no dread as to the treatment which the Commonwealth would mete out to the different islands put under its charge. As to New Zealand, it was proof of their excellent government that the islanders had taken their place alongside the white soldiers of New Zealand in the present war.

ROYAL COLONIAL INSTITUTE.

At a recent meeting of the Royal Colonial Institute, under the presidency of Sir Charles Lucas, the following resolution was passed :—

"That the Council, in view of the coming Imperial Conference, wish to express with all respect, but in the strongest terms, their view, which they believe to be almost universally shared throughout the Empire, that, alike in the interests of the Empire and in the interests of the native races concerned, no one of the former German possessions beyond the seas should be restored to Germany."

LETTER FROM NEGROES' ASSOCIATION, PANAMA. THE following appeal, addressed to the Society, has been received from the National Association of Loyal Negroes, Panama Republic.

SIR,

CRISTOBAL, CANAL ZONE.

April 8, 1918.

I am instructed by the National Association of Loyal Negroes to approach the officers and members of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection. Society on the subject of the final disposition of the African Colonies wrested. from Germany during the course of the war. I am to explain for the information of your Society that the Association I have the honour to represent was recently formed on the Isthmus of Panama among British West Indian Negroes for the purpose of making representations to the Entente Powers, on behalf of the natives, in connexion with the aforesaid colonies. I give below a summary of the facts which we intend to urge as a basis of our claims :

(a) Germany does not now have, nor ever did have any legal title to any possession in Africa.

(b) Germany did not acquire said colonies by right of conquest, nor by cession from the natives.

(c) The treaty of cession of said colonies to Germany by the signatory powers has been invalidated on account of the war.

(d) On the principle of national self-determination as interpreted by the statesmen of the Entente Powers in their recent Peace programme.

(e) On the assumption that Africa is the natural sphere of the Negro as ordained by the Great Creator of the Universe.

(f) Aboriginal rights, and

(g) By right of conquest.