SIR,—I have not yet had the chance to see the
full text of Dr. Purcell's letter published in the Spectator last week but write in reply to extracts which were republished in the Straits Times. Dr. Purcell does not deny that his suggestion that General Templer is anti- Chinese is dangerous. Yet he continues to make it and now supports it by the unusual method of 'quoting in public a number of statements which he alleges the High Com- missioner made in a private conversation with him and Mr. Carnell on August 28th, 1952. Even if his memory for phrasing is accurate these statements no more display anti-Chinese bias than Mr. Justice Douglas's statement that the Chinese, like many other commercial communities, sitempt to evade income tax. To refuse to tamper with the Federation Agreement in order to simplify a specific issue —in this case it was land tenure—for the benefit of one community, is no more than any High Commissioner's plain duty. No one but Dr. Purcell would regard it as evidence of bias against that community. To say that the country relies at present ‘over- whelmingly on its Malay Armed Forces and Police is no more than the melancholy truth; but no one has tried harder than the present High Commissioner to persuade the reluctant Chinese to enter these services. Since Dr. Purcell admits the dangerous nature of his allegations and yet continues to press them by such questionable methods and on such inadequate evidence one is driven to the con- viction that Raja Uda, writing in the Manchester Guardipn, was right, and that Dr. Purcell is more interested in promoting his personal vendetta against the High Com- missioner than in preserving communal har- mony in Malaya. And that I imagine is roughly what Strix was suggesting.—Yours faithfully, Kuala Lumpar [By Cable]
A. D. C. PETEMON
Previous page
