The Other Side of Milton Cato – National Hero?

Now that the issue of Milton Cato as a National Hero has resurfaced for public discussion, I am taking this opportunity to restate my position.

Robert Milton Cato, first Premier and Prime Minister of SVG is among the persons nominated for National Hero status.

It is obvious to me that the persons who are pushing a case for Milton Cato have a different concept from me of whom a National hero is or should be. As one who was a part of, and was a victim of the 1975 Teachers Strike, I well remember the tear-gassing of teachers and innocent bystanders; the dismissal and victimisation through massive transfers of Teachers after 1975. I was a member of the National Independence Committee that was so arrogantly dismissed by the ruling regime; I was a member of the Committee that met with Government representatives in the Cabinet Room to discuss the peoples’ opposition to the ‘Dread Bills’; I well remember the banning of books and of persons from this country (including persons who did not even express a willingness to come here); I remember, too, the widespread harassment of innocent people where gatherings of more than three persons were not allowed and people were hounded off the streets after certain hours; I was disgusted by the transportation in chains to Fort Charlotte of decent and law abiding citizens of Union Island and of having to live through months of a State of Emergency. I remember being informed that the Ministry of Education objected to my discussion of certain topics in my General Paper Class at the Grammar School even though these were topics set on the Cambridge examinations; I well remember the banning of calypsos and of the radio station going off the air when calypsonians were singing anything critical of government. I have, therefore, to speak out and state the other side of Milton Cato’s stewardship of the country. I am of the view that his was the most repressive and regressive since Adult Suffrage.

I state my grounds for saying so:

1. HARASSMENT, VICTIMISATION, THE ILL-TREATMENT OF CALYPSONIANS AND BANNING OF CALYPSOS.

i)The John Cato Case

One of the earliest cases that caused some concern was the dismissal of John Cato from the Public Service with no reasons given.

The FORUM of April 10, 1970, raised the issue of John Cato. It made the point that the dismissal of Cato was taken to the Public Service Appeal Board; “The Attorney General, representing the interests of the PSC, submitted that the Crown had the basic right to dismiss any Civil Servant at will and was not bound to give any reason for its action- a completely new argument to the case, and in my opinion a dangerous one.

The Appeal Board, in the circumstances, was obliged to uphold the dismissal of Bro. John on the ground that the Crown, even in the so-called advanced constitution of Associated Statehood, still had and maintained the right to dismiss a Civil Servant ( a strictly local and internal matter and not one of external affairs and defence) and such action was final.”

“Bro. John was dismissed by the PSC even though his dismissal was not requested by the Heads of Department… The PSC have consistently refused to say why Bro. John was dismissed and also to give him the benefit of a hearing, which we often take for granted in a democratic society, I am saying that some of the charges are so ridiculous that the PSC is afraid for obvious reasons to make them public…” (The John Cato Affair- A Dangerous Precedent in the FORUM, April 10, 1970)

FREEDOM, in its July 21, 1978, issue made reference to the John Cato affair but also raised the matter of Mike Browne; The caption of the piece was “Government’s Victimisation and National Independence- A History of Victimisation”; It stated, “…In December 1968, Bro. John Cato, then a member of EFP and a lecturer at the Boys’ Grammar School was dismissed without explanation…” In that same piece it dealt with the Mike Browne situation- “…Last year Cde. Mike Browne, President of the St.Vincent Union of Teachers, was reinstated to his job at the Ministry of Education by a decision of the government’s own hand- picked Public Service Appeals Board after the Public Service Commission had unfairly dismissed him. The Attorney General and his government rejected the decision and instead took the matter to court for a ruling…”

Many of our younger people would not know about the ‘hounding down of progressive persons in the community’. They were ordered to be off the streets by 9 o’clock. When some persons held a demonstration against the visit to the country of Princess Margaret, a few brothers were beaten up.

J.L Eustace then a Minister of Government was fired without any accountability to the public and especially to the persons who had elected him to office.

Advertisements were withdrawn from the Vincentian newspaper and given instead to the Star newspaper.

ii) Then there was the banning of books. FREEDOM in one of its issues made reference to a charge laid against Caspar London, then President General of the National Progressive Workers Union for having in his possession selected writings of Ho Chi Minh, which was among the list of prohibited literature. One cannot excuse all of this on the grounds that those were different times and that the rulers completely misunderstood what the Black Power issue was all about. In fact, this went up to 1984. After a search of Renwick’s home for weapons, the police eventually charged him for being in possession of three copies of Soviet Weekly and two copies of World Trade Union Report. Would you believe that this was in June 1984? (TO BE CONTINUED)

l Dr Adrian Fraser is a social commentator and historian