Review of Reviews, 1/10/13. 



TOPICS OF THE MONTH. 



775 



by the reluctance of the French side of 

 the administration to carry out its share 

 of the obligation. The British admin- 

 istration, on the other hand, appears to 

 have done its part faithfully, and en- 

 deavoured to secure justice for native 

 and foreigner alike. 



S.LAVERY AND DEATH. 



Mr. Frank Paton, son of the great 

 missionary of the Pacific, has just re- 

 turned from the New Hebrides, where 

 he has collected convincing proof to 

 support his denunciation of the French 

 part of the administration. He shows 

 that French settlers appear to break the 

 laws made to protect the natives with 

 impunity. They sell drink — which is 

 prohibited — to such an extent that un- 

 told mischief is being wrought amongst 

 the natives. They and their agents 

 kidnap not only men, but women and 

 children, trick the natives into signing 

 on as labourers for long terms, and 

 while many cases of fearful cruelty 

 have been brought to light, they have 

 gone unpunished. What comes out in 

 the neighbourhood of towns gives some 

 idea of the ghastly conditions in distant 

 plantations. In many of these a state of 

 practical slavery exists. Slavery under 

 the British flag ! The death rate on the 

 French plantations has been kept a 

 secret by the French administration, and 

 it is only when these come into English 

 hands that the appalling conditions ob- 

 taining there are made known. Patient 

 investigation puts the death rate at be- 

 tween 30 and 40 per cent. A horrible 

 sacrifice to the greed and cruelty of the 

 settlers, not a few of whom are ticket- 

 of-leave men from the French Penal 

 settlement in New Caledonia. 



No one would think for a moment of 

 accusing the Government in France of 

 knowingly countenancing such doings 

 French settlements throughout the world 

 are excellently administered, though in 

 our eyes French law unduly favours 

 officials, which, with other differences, 

 makes a joint rule under both codes un- 

 workable. French settlers are not, as a 

 rule, the sort of men to take undue 

 advantage of the power their laws give 

 them over the natives, but in the New 

 Hebrides we need go no further than the 



records of the Court to find that French- 

 men do break those specially designed 

 to protect the natives. The supineness, 

 or worse, of the French Administration 

 in enforcing the rare judgments ob- 

 tained against their nationals by natives 

 is the most distressing feature in the 

 whole situation, and ought not to be 

 condoned by the authorities in France. 

 French visitors have themselves written 

 very strongly in this matter. 



A FRENCH COURT. 



Native rights are clearly unscrupu- 

 lously trampled upon, and the Condo- 

 minium is powerless or unwilling to pro- 

 tect. The Britisher, too, compelled as he 

 is to keep the law, is at considerable dis- 

 advantage as compared to the French- 

 man, who appears to be allowed to 

 break it. The grievance of the 

 British residents that the Joint Court 

 is a French Court is only too well 

 founded. It is supposed to be bilin- 

 gual. English or French can be 

 used before it, and everything is sup- 

 posed to be translated from one lan- 

 guage into the other by the official in- 

 terpreter. Theoretically it is all right, in 

 practice everything is carried on in 

 French. Neither the President nor the 

 French judge can speak English, but 

 the British judge understands French. 

 Consequently to be understood directly 

 by the Court everyone who can, includ- 

 ing the English, talk French. The Bri- 

 tish regard the Court as essentially 

 French — French procedure, French law, 

 everything French. The Court is sup- 

 posed to try cases where English sub- 

 jects are defendants by English law, 

 and cases by French law where French 

 subjects are on trial. Yet in the famous 

 Jacomb case recently, half the sittings 

 seem to have been taken up by the re- 

 tirements of the Bench for consultation 

 on points of law. 



A British judge is a member ^\ the 

 Court Presumably he 1- there to inform 

 the ( ' iurt what is i 1 law in rela- 



tion to the matter in hand. The rights 

 ol British subjects in the New Hebrides 

 should not ho n the opinion 



I rench judge or the President of 

 I iourl on 1 .1 ;] I he British 



judge is there to lay down the principles 



