LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Central African Federation
SIR,—Could I be permitted to make a few belated remarks after reading Mr. Vernon Bartlett's excellent and well-balanced article on Federation? To me it seems that the essence of the matter is given in his very last sentence: " At least we have the right to hope that the Europeans in the two Rhodesias will make a compensatory effort to be worthy of their great and new responsibilities."
If everyone had Mr. Bartlett's breadth of vision a lot of bad feeling would be avoided, but it is an unfortunate fact that a few vocal left Left Wingers refuse to believe that the motives of the Europeans in Africa could possibly be anything but evil. In addition, they would depart from the principle that a job is best done by the people know- ing most about that job, believing that the African can best be governed by people who, for the most part, have never been within thousands of miles of the country. It is a most peculiar outlook when one realises that the policy of Southern Rhodesia, in particular, has, broadly speak- ing, the support of the European population. True, there are a few diehards who are convinced that the present pace will lead to disaster; equally there are others who would quicken the tenipo; but, on the whole, the Government's policy is supported by the vast majority as being a sound compromise between one extreme to the South and another to the North.
Now the population of Southern Rhodesia has doubled since the war, and just half of that increase is due to immigrants originally from Britain. In other words, the Government's policy is supported, not only by dyed-in-the-wool Colonials, but also by tens of thousands of People who, until a few years ago, were citizens of Great Britain. Not even the most rabid Socialist really believes that the average Briton completely changes his nature as his native shores fade in the distance. The answer would seem to be that there are certain practical Problems confronting one living in the country which are not obvious from a distance of 6,000 miles, and cases can be cited where people have come to the country and realised, without sacrificing their liberal ideals, that many things which seemed feasible at home just would not work in practice.
That, then, is the essential difference. The Socialist critic has merely to criticise from a distance; the European inhabitant has to get down to the practical problems, including those caused by the shortcomings of the native himself; and, in the present stage of his development, it is idle to pretend that these shortcomings do not exist. Let us admit that there is still mach to do and that the present policy is not yet Perfect, but at the same time we do recognise that the goodwill is there and that we are moving in the right direction. One has only to talk to the senior Civil Servants responsible for carrying out the electorate's Policy to realise that. They have an intimate knowledge of the native; they have his welfare at heart, know his capabilities and his limitations and are quietly carrying on the work of improving his lot. These, surely, Sir, are the people who can be trusted to realise the responsi- bilities, and not the vocal minority at home whose actions are motivated Purely by political dogma.
It should be more widely known that Southern Rhodesia does realise its duty in the matter; that a country with a white population of 145,000 is spending considerably more per head on health and education for the native than is the Colonial Office in Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland. Tens of thousands voluntarily leave the paternal care Of the Colonial Office every year to work in Southern Rhodesia; the racial troubles going on to the North and South have been avoided in Southern Rhodesia. Here, then, is the practical answer to the question of a sense of responsibility.—Yours faithfully, HARRY SMITH. 93 Baines Avenue, Salisbury, Southern Rhodesia.
Previous page
