Book Reviews and Notices : Australia in New Guinea. BY L. P. MAIR. (London: Christophers. 1948. Pp. xviii, 238. 8 photographs. 18s.)
| Author | Leslie C. Green |
| Date | 01 December 1949 |
| Published date | 01 December 1949 |
| DOI | 10.1177/106591294900200441 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
657
Lord
Hailey
considered
British
colonial
administratiori
and
suggested
that,
had
a
greater
emphasis
been
placed
on
the
methods
and
values
of
self-government,
there
might
have
been
a
smoother
change
in
India.
Sur-
prisingly
enough,
he
disagreed
with
the
policy
of
indiscriminately
allow-
ing
colonies
to
achieve
Dominion
status
in
the
fashion
of
Ceylon.
He
is
of
the
opinion
that
there
should
be
a
re-examination
and
re-estimation
of
the
purposes
of
British
colonial
policy.
A
study
of
these
five
lectures
leads
one
to
the
conclusion
that
despite
the
advances
in
recent
years
there
is
still
much
to
be
done
in
colonial
administration,
and
in
too
many
cases
it
is
excessively
out
of
rhythm
with
the
trusteeship
principles
of
the
United
Nations
Charter.
University
College,
London.
L.
C.
GREEN.
Australia in
New
Guinea.
BY
L.
P.
MAIR.
(London:
Christophers.
1948.
Pp.
xviii,
238.
8
photographs.
18s.)
Dr.
Lucy
Mair
is
the
Reader
in
Colonial
Administration
in
the
University
of
London
and
her
Australia
in
New
Guinea
is
a
reasoned
study
of
Australian
administration
in
Papua
and
the
mandated -
now
trust
-
territory
of
New
Guinea.
The
general
impression
one
gathers
from
her
book
is
that
in
any
comparison
it is
Papua
that
has the
ad-
vantage.
The
reason
for
this
is
partly
to
be
found
in
the
fact
that
from
1908-1940
Papua
was
under
only
one
Lieutenant
Governor.
But
this
does
not
explain
why
the
administration
in
New
Guinea
is
less
humane
and
less
in
the
interests
of
the
native
population
than
that
in
Papua. Perhaps
this
situation
is
one
of
the
results
of
the
difference
in
administrative
ap-
proach :
in
Papua
only
experienced
officers
went
on
patrol,
while
in
New
Guinea
even
cadets
might
be
entrusted
with
this
task.
The
situation
may
improve
as
a
result
of
the
new
policy
announced
by
the
Government
of
Australia
in
1945,
although
this
progressive
program
has
met
with
great
opposition
from
the
white
population
and
the
civil
servants
responsible
for
carrying
it
out:
&dquo;one
is
forced
to
the
conclusion
that
the
tradition
of
a
Civil
Service
loyally
carrying
out
the
policy
of
whatever
party
is
in
power
is
not
strong
enough
in
Australia;
for
the
alternative
supposition,
that
sheer
inefficiency
is
responsible
for
the
delays
at
Canberra
in
action
on
urgent
requests
from
Port
Moresby,
would
be
too
uncomplimentary
to
the
officials
concerned.&dquo;
The
judicial
enquiry
that
was
held
after
the
recent
race
riots
in
Durban
was
uncomplimentary
about
the
treatment
meted
out
to
the
Maoris
during
the
settlement
of
Australia.
Dr.
Mair
points
out
that
in
To continue reading
Request your trial