House of Commons
Thursday, April 5, 1906
The House met at Two of the Clock.
Private Bill Business
Private Bills [Lords] (Standing Orders Not Previously Inquired into Complied With)
laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bill, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, and which are applicable thereto, have been complied, with, viz:—?
Sheffield Assay Office Bill [Lords].
Ordered, That the Bill be read a second time.
Watford Gas Bill. Read the third time, and passed. [New Title.]
London County Council (Electric Supply) Bill. Mr. Chance, Mr. Joseph Nolan, Mr. James Parker, Mr. Watson Rutherford, and Mr. Luke White were nominated Members of the Select Committee on the London County Council (Electric Supply) Bill.—( Mr. Whiteley. )
Provisional Order (Marriages) Bill, "to confirm a Provisional Order made by one of His Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State under the Provisional Order (Marriages) Act, 1905," presented by Mr. Herbert Samuel; read the first time; to be referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, and to be printed. [Bill 147.]
Shrewsbury Corporation Water Bill, "to authorise the Corporation of Shrewsbury to construct additional Waterworks; and for other purposes." Read the first time; and ordered to be read a second time.
Macclesfield and District Tramways Bill; New Mills Urban District Council Bill; Uxbridge Gas Bill. Reported, with Amendments. Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.
Wallis' Divorce Bill [Lords]. Reported from the Select Committee, with Minutes of Proceedings.
Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 114.]
Bill to be read the third time.
Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence and Proceedings in the House of Lords on the Second Reading of Wallis' Divorce Bill [Lords], together with the Documents deposited in each case, be returned to the House of Lords; and that the Clerk do carry the same.—( The Lord Advocate. )
Message from the Lords
That they have passed a Bill, intituled, "An Act to establish Limited Partnerships." [Limited Partnerships Bill [Lords].
Also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to revive and extend the powers for the purchase of land and the time limited for the completion of the railway authorised by the Wirral Railway Act, 1898; to extend the time for the sale of surplus lands of the Wirral Railway Company; and for other purposes." [Wirral Railway (Extension of Time) Bill [Lords.]
And, also, a Bill, intituled, "An Act to authorise agreements betwen the Manchester Ship Canal Company and the owners of or persons interested in the minerals under or adjacent to the Bridgewater Canal; and for other purposes." [Bridgewater Canals Bill [Lords.]
Wirral Railway (Extension of Time) Bill [Lords]; Bridgewater Canals Bill [Lords]. Read the first time; and referred to the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills.
Petitions
Diseases of Animals Act (1896) Amendment Bill
Petitions in favour:—From Burnley; Devonport; Forfarshire; Gillingham; Glasgow; Ramsgate; St. Helens; and, West Bromwich; to lie upon the Table.
Justices of the Peace Bill
Petition from Wandsworth, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
Land Values (Assessment and Rating Bill
Petition from Rosemarkie, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Local Authorities (Qualification of Women) Bill
Petition from Chertsey, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Metropolitan Borough Councils Association Bill
Petition from Wandsworth, for alteration; to lie upon the Table.
Public Elementary Schools (Religious Teaching)
Petitions against alteration of Law; From Abingdon; Ailsworth; Ashton-under-Lyne (two); Audlem; Batheaston; Birmingham; Blackburn (three); Blaisdon; Bolton; Bulford; Cantref; Castor; Chichester; Clifton; Crookbank; Croughton; Darwen (four); Deddington (two); Devonport; Dover (two); Eartham (two); East Chiltington (two); East Clevedon; East Harptree; Edlington (two); Edmonton; Ewood Bridge; Fallowfield and Ladybarn (two); Fatfield; Fawley (two); Funtington; Garstang (two); Gayton; Gerrard's Cross; Glodwick; Goosey; Great and Little Bourton (two); Ham (two); Hampstead; Hansworthy; Hanwell (two); Harome; High Wycombe; Hoath; Hoddlesden (two); Holton St. Mary: Hook Norton (two); Horncastle; Horwick; Kew; Keynsham (two); Kirby Misperton; Lamesley (two); Langsley; Leire; Little Brickhill; Little Stanmore; Little Whittingham; Llan-fihangel; Longridge (two); Mansel Lacy (two); Marcham (two); Medomsley; Mellor; Merthyr Cynog (two); Milton (two); Moulsoe (two); Musbury; New-bottle; Northampton; Norton (two); Nursling; Old Bewick; Oldham; Patching; Pattingham; Peel; Pelton; Perworth (two); Portishead; Poulshot; Quidgely; Rackham; Reculver; Richmond; Ryburgh (two); Ryde; St. Jude's, Southwark; St. Peter, Sowerby; Salford; Shenington (two); Silkstone; Silverstone; Sonning; Stainborough (two); Stanford in the Vale; (two) Stowe Nine Churches; Taunton; Temple Ewell; Thorpe; Tickenham (three); Timsbury (two); Tudhoe (two); Uploadon; Upton (two); Walmersley (three); Walshaw; Wandsworth; Wark on Tyne; Weedon (two); Wellingore (two); Westmeston (two); Whittlebury; Winchester; Windlesham (two); Withybrook (two); Wittenham; and, Wotton; to lie upon the Table.
Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on Sunday
Petitions for prohibition; From Bilston; Birmingham; Chorley; Crewkerne (two); and, Lumb in Rossendale; to lie upon the Table.
Sale of Intoxicating Liquors on Sunday (Monmouthshire)
Petition from Burnage, for prohibition; to lie upon the Table.
Sale of Whisky Bill
Petition from Wandsworth, in favour; to lie upon the Table.
Returns, Reports, Etc
Trade Reports (Annual Series)
Copies presented—of Diplomatic and Consular Reports, Annual Series, Nos. 3545 to 3548 [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Shop Hours Act, 1904 (Borough of Burton-Upon-Trent)
Copy presented—of Order made by the Council of the Borough of Burton-upon-Trent, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for the Home Department, fixing the Hours of Closing for Hairdressers' and Barbers' Shops within the Borough [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
Summary Proceedings (England)
Copy presented—of Rule dated 20th March, 1906, made by the Lord Chancellor in substitution of Rule of No. 18 of the Summary Jurisdiction Rules, 1886 [by Act]; to lie upon the Table.
Irish Land Commission (Proceedings)
Copy presented—of Return of Proceedings during the month of February, 1906 [by command]; to lie upon the Table.
Colonial Reports (Miscellaneous)
Copies represented—of Reports Nos. 32 (Northern Nigeria, First Report on the Results of the Mineral Survey of Northern Nigeria, 1904–5, by Professor W. R. Dunstan, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.), 33 (Southern Nigeria, Reports on Mineral Survey for 1903–4 and 1904–5, by Professor W. R. Dunstan, M.A., LL.D., F.R.S.), 34 (Montserrat, Report on the Agricultural Industries, by Mr. F. Watts, C.M.G., D.Sc.), 35 (Antigua and St. Kitts-Nevis, Report on Sugar Industry, by Mr. F. Watts, C.M.G., D.Sc.), 36 (West Indies, Reports on the Working of the Imperial Department of Agriculture) [by Command]; to lie upon the Table.
Uganda Railway Acts, 1896 and 1902
Account presented—showing the Money issued from the Consolidated Fund under the provisions of the Uganda Railway Acts, 1896 (59 and 60 Vic, c. 38), and 1902 (2 Edw. 7, c. 40), and of the Money expended and borrowed, and Securities created under the said Acts, to 31st March, 1905, together with the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General thereon [by Act]; to lie upon the Table, and to be printed. [No. 113.]
Trees (Ireland)
Return ordered, "showing the number of Trees registered with the clerks of the peace in the different counties in Ireland (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 253, of Session 1883)."—( Mr. Jeremiah Mac Veagh. )
Tramways and Light Railways (Street and Road)
Return ordered, "of Street and Road Tramways and Light Railways authorised by Act or Order showing the amount of capital authorised, paid up, and expended; the length of line authorised, and the length open for public traffic down to December 31st, 1905, in respect of companies, and March 31st, 1906 in respect of local authorities; the gross receipts, working expenditure, net receipts, and appropriation of net receipts; the number of passengers conveyed, the number of miles run by cars, and the quantity of electrical energy used during the year ended on the foregoing dates respectively; together with the number of horses, engines, and cars at those dates (in continuation of Parliamentary Paper, No. 322, of Session 1905)."—( Mr. Lloyd-George. )
Oral Questions to Answers
Questions and Answers Circulated With the Votes
Derelict Steamer in the Atlantic
To ask the Secretary to the Admiralty whether the attention of the Admiralty has been drawn to the fact that the derelict steamer "Dunmore," which was abandoned by her crew several weeks ago, is drifting in the Atlantic on the direct route between this country and North America, to the danger of vessels trading between these countries; and whether steps will be taken by the Admiralty to have her destroyed as soon as possible.
( Answered by Mr. Edmund Robertson. ) The reports recently received have shown that the "Dunmore" is in the track of Atlantic traffic and is drifting rapidly eastwards, and, though the Joint Committee of the Admiralty and Board of Trade of 1894 came to the conclusion that the number of well-established casualties from collisions with derelicts in the open sea is very small, in this case it is thought desirable to take action, and the Fourth Cruiser Squadron is at once to receive orders to search for the "Dunmore."
Importation of Scotch Carts into Ireland
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will explain why the manager of the agricultural farm at Athenry, acting under instructions received from the Agricultural Board, is importing newly-made cars and carts from Aberdeen, while articles of the same shape and pattern, but of a better and cheaper make, are sold and manufactured in the neighbourhood.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that it is not the case that the manager of the agricultural station at Athenry is importing newly-made cars or carts from Aberdeen. Only one such cart was imported last year; and it was brought over with the object of affording the apprentices at the station an opportunity of comparing a Scotch type of cart with those in use in Ireland and England. Of the six carts at Athenry, four were made in Ireland, one in Scotland, and one in England. The latest cart brought to Athenry came from, and was made in, the King's County. Three carts made in the neighbourhood of Athenry are in use upon the farm.
The Post Office Servants Inquiry
To ask the Postmaster-General whether he will include the established sub-postmasters (head office scale) in the inquiry as to pay and promotion.
To ask the Postmaster - General whether he will distinguish the class of head office system sub-postmasters from that of sub-office system sub-postmasters, the latter of whom are shopkeepers, and designate the farmer as postmasters (second class).
To ask the Postmaster - General whether he will raise the established sub-post offices in towns with a population over 10,000 to the rank of head post offices, so as to give greater scope for promotion to head postmasterships.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) I had perhaps better answer together the hon. Member's three Questions in regard to sub-postmasters paid on the head office scale. It is for the Select Committee on Post Office servants to decide whether they will consider such officers as falling within the terms of their reference. The duties of such sub-postmasters are not parallel with those of head postmasters, nor would the alteration of title which the hon. Member proposes describe their status more accurately than their present designation; but it has been decided that two classes of sub-offices will be called by the more convenient names of "salaried sub-offices" and "commission sub-offices." It is not the population of a town which is the ruling factor in deciding whether or not to institute a head office there, but the amount and character of the post office duty to be performed; and it is not possible in any case to create superior appointments with the view of stimulating promotion.
Pay of Dublin Mail Cart Drivers
To ask the Postmaster General whether he is aware that the mail cart drivers in Dublin complain that the Fair Wages Resolution of the House is violated in their employment, and also that their conditions of labour are unusual; and whether he will make inquiries into the matter with a view to having this alleged grievance remedied.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) On receiving complaints in regard to the matter I caused inquiry to be made on the subject. The inquiry is not yet complete; but I am glad to learn that an improvement has already been effected in the conditions of employment, both in regard to hours and wages of some of the men referred to.
Site of Post Office at Bangor (County Down)
To ask the Postmaster-General whether he has received the resolution adopted with only two dissentients at a public meeting of the inhabitants of Bangor, county Down, on the subject of the site selected for the new post office; and whether, before proceeding further with the contemplated arrangements, he will take care to ascertain whether they are likely to be productive of great public inconvenience.
To ask the Postmaster General whether his attention has been called to a meeting held in Bangor, county Down, on the 23rd ultimo, in reference to the selection of a site for the post office in that town; whether he is aware that the resolution in favour of the proposed site was carried at the district council by the chairman, who is the vendor of the site in question, giving a second or casting vote in its favour; and whether, as the site is in an inconvenient district and objected to by a large number of the inhabitants, he will take these facts into account before deciding between the various sites.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) In reply to the hon. Member's Question; and to the unstarred Question of the hon. Member for Tyrone (South Division) j which I may, perhaps, answer at the same time, a report of the public meeting referred to has been sent to this Department, and I have also received a copy of the resolution carried at that meeting. I am not aware of the circumstances under which the resolution in favour of the site which has been selected was carried at a meeting of the district council. It is reported that the resolution was finally carried by seven votes to five. The question of a site for the new post office was very carefully considered, and the position of the proposed new office, at the corner of Main Street and Castle Square, is deemed on the whole the most suitable. But under the circumstances I have called for a further Report in the matter.
Imports of French Motor Cars
To ask the President of the Board of Trade how many motor cars were imported into this country from France during each of the months of January, February, and March, and the value of them; and how many were exported from this country into France during the same months and the value of them.
( Answered by Mr. Kearley. ) The following figures give the information asked for—
Statement showing the number and value of Motor Cars imported into and exported from the United Kingdom in its trade with France during the months of January, February, and March, 1906.
Number. Value. Motor cars imported from France in— £ January 343 128,128 February 385 143,934 March 443 157,470 Motor cars of British or Irish manufacture exported to France in— January 5 3,300 February 2 1,100 March 3 1,700 Motor cars of Foreign or Colonial manufacture exported to France in— January 10 4,570 February 12 7,700 March 13 9,675
Registration of School Teachers
To ask the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to Section 4 of the Board of Education Act of 1899, under which provision is taken for the setting up of a register of teachers to contain the names of the registered teachers arranged in alphabetical order, with an entry after the name of each showing the date of registration, and giving a brief record of his qualifications and experience; whether, under this section, Orders in Council were adopted on March 6th, 1902, and August 11th, 1902, providing for the setting up of a register of teachers in two columns, one confined to teachers eligible for service in public elementary schools, and the other to teachers eligible for service in schools other than elementary; and whether, in view of the difference between the terms of the Act and the terms of the Orders in Council, he proposes to take any steps in the matter.
( Answered by Mr. Birrell. ) My attention has been called to the discrepancy referred to. I am satisfied that the register in its present shape, even if legal, which seems to be doubtful, gives justifiable dissatisfaction to various branches of the teaching profession. Further, no alterations which would remove these objections have been found possible, and it has therefore been decided that a clause should be inserted in the coming Bill which, if passed by Parliament, will have the effect of bringing the register to an end. Arrangements will be made for returning the fees.
Action of the Police against John Brown, at Ballickmoylar
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland if his attention has been called to the case of the King v. John Brown, at Ballickmoylar, Queen's County, petty sessions, on the 16th instant, the defendant being charged with assault; whether he is aware that when Brown was brought before a local magistrate, the doctor certified that the person assaulted was not seriously hurt; that substantial bail, offered for Brown's appearance at petty sessions, was refused by the magistrate, on the application of the policeman who brought the charge; and that Brown was handcuffed and driven a distance of twenty-two miles, without an overcoat, to Kilkenny Gaol, and kept there for nine days; can he say how many magistrates were present at the hearing of the case; did the doctor swear that the wound was caused by a blow of the hand, and that he did not consider it dangerous; was the accused discharged by unanimous decision of the bench; and whether, in view of the irritation in the district caused by the conduct of the acting sergeant in charge at Doonane station, steps will be taken to prevent the law being strained to magnify simple offence into serious crime; and what are the costs incurred in the case, and will the costs be charged on the county rates.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that in this case the accused was charged with a serious assault. The local police opposed bail in the first instance because the injured person was confined to bed, suffering from an incised wound in the head, and the doctor would not certify that his life was not then in danger. I am informed that Brown was handcuffed and driven twenty-one miles to Kilkenny Gaol without an overcoat, but that he had ample time and opportunity to provide himself with one. After a week's remand the accused was admitted to bail, as the doctor then certified that the injured man was out of danger. The case was eventually heard by six magistrates, who unanimously convicted the accused, but, as he had already suffered a week's imprisonment they ordered him to be kept in custody until the rising of the court only. The doctor's evidence was that the wound was of an incised nature, but might have been caused by a blow. He also stated that he did not consider the wound to be dangerous. The Inspector-General is not aware that any irritation has been caused in the district, and he is of the opinion that the local police were justified in the action taken by them. The cost amounted to £2 12s., none of which is chargeable to the county rates.
Irish Land Purchase—Table of Redemption Annuities
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners will arrange to have printed on the back of the paying-in orders a table of redemption amounts, showing the redemption annuity of multiples of £10 up to £200.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Land Commission that the proposal contained in the Question is not practicable, having regard to the provisions of Section 46 of The Irish Land Act, 1903. The amount to be paid for the redemption of an annuity in any particular case depends upon the price of Guaranteed 2¾ per cent. stock at the date of the application for redemption.
Irish Land Purchase Premiums
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state what amount per cent. of premium a tenant purchaser would have to lodge in cash to redeem his holding on the date of commencement of his advance; to what credit such premiums are placed; and whether, having regard to the fact that the premium discourages tenants from redeeming, it is intended to continue the existing practice.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) This Question appears to be based upon a misapprehension. I am informed by the Land Commission that tenant purchasers are not required to pay a premium on redemptions. Having regard to the provisions of Section 46 of the Act of 1903, a purchase annuity may be redeemed by payment of the difference between the amount of the accumulated sinking fund and the sum sufficient to purchase the requisite amount of stock to replace the amount of stock issued to provide the purchase-money for the advance. The amount to be paid, therefore, depends on the price for which stock was issued at the time of the advance, and the price at which it can be purchased at the date of the redemption.
Constable Fired on at Moorpark
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that on Saturday night last, when between Athenry and Moorpark, Constable Gaffney, of the Royal Irish Constabulary, and a herd named Broderick, who is in the employment of Mr. Frank Shawe-Taylor, were fired upon by a person or persons concealed in a wood by the side of the road; whether the constable was wounded; and whether any arrests have been made in connection with the matter.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have received a police report as to this occurrence, which indicates that the fact is as stated in the first part of the Question. Both the constable and Broderick were injured in the legs by pellets of small shot, but not seriously. No arrests have yet been made.
Dromore Urban Councillors and Dromore Gas Company
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that four of the nine urban councilllors of Dromore, county Down, are shareholders in the Dromore Gas Company, who are contractors to the urban council; and, if so, what action the Local Government Board proposes to take.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Local Government Board understand that the facts are as stated. Article 12 (5) (c) of the schedule to the Local Government (Application of Enactments) Order, 1898, provides that a person shall not be disqualified for being a member of a council by reason of being, by himself or his partner, interested in any contract with the council as a shareholder in any joint stock company.
Cattle Outrage at Blackslea
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he is aware that on Sunday, the 25th March, at Blackslea, Churchill Derrygonnolly, county Fermanagh, an outrage was committed on the cattle of Mr. James Corrigan, by cutting off the tails of three of his cows; is he aware that Mr. Corrigan is a respectable and inoffensive citizen; if he can say whether this and other offences lately perpetrated in that locality have arisen out of the late election in North Fermanagh; and what steps he proposes to take in reference to such displays of intimidation and violence in this district.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the police authorities that, on the date mentioned, the hair was cut off the tails of three cows, the property of Mr. Corrigan, and in one of the cases the flesh also was slightly cut. I do not doubt that Mr. Corrigan is a most respectable citizen. The data at my disposal do not enable me to say positively whether the motive for the injury was a political one, connected with the recent election. It is the fact that Mr. Corrigan took a prominent part in the election. The district in question is in a generally peaceful state, and it does not appear to be necessary to take any special steps for the preservation of the peace.
Suggested Monthly Payment of Irish School Teachers' Salaries
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the system of quarterly payments causes much inconvenience to many national school teachers in Ireland; how often are English and Scottish teachers paid; and could a system of monthly pay-days be established for teathers in Ireland.
( Answered by Air. Bryce. ) I believe that the system of quarterly payments does cause inconvenience to many teachers. In England and Scotland teachers are paid by the local authorities. The Board of Education inform me that, though they have no direct knowledge, they believe that as a rule teachers are paid monthly by those authorities. The payments made by the Board of Education itself to the local authorities are made annually. The National Board, as I stated two days ago, think that it would be very difficult for them to institute the monthly system in Ireland without enormously increasing their staff. With such an increase the change could no doubt be made. The question is really one of expense.
Suggested Removal of Police Hut from Dromod
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, having regard to the crimelessness of the district, as evidenced by the recent charge of the judge of assize, and to the fact that the reasons for its erection have ceased to exist, he will suggest to the Inspector-General of the Royal Irish Constabulary the advisability of having the police hut removed from Dromod, near Ballybay, county Monaghan.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the police authorities that the police hut in question was erected nearly twenty years ago for the purpose of protection. It is the case that the immediate purpose, for which the hut was erected no longer exists, but as the nearest police station is five miles distant the hut has been retained as a temporary police station. The locality is very peaceful, and the Inspector-General will at an early date consider the question whether the hut may be abolished.
Delay in Publishing Results of Examinations of Intermediate Education Board
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will press upon the Intermediate Education Board the desirability of completing the publication of the results of their annual examination within a shorter period than six or seven months from the beginning of the examination, as was the case for 1905, and the necessity of annually publishing not later than April, as was originally the practice, its rules and programme for the school year commencing in the following August, seeing that the publication in 1905 was later than it had been before.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Intermediate Education Board that both the pass lists, and the exhibition, and prize lists were published in a little over two months from the conclusion of the examinations in 1905. The hon. Member probably refers to revised exhibition and prize lists which were subsequently issued as the result of the award by the Board of additional exhibitions. The Board expect to publish the rules and programme for 1907 in the course of the present month.
Sir Antony MacDonnell
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what is the salary of Sir Antony MacDonnell; what is the designation of his present office; what is the patronage at his disposal; is he a Minister of the Crown or a civil servant; and when are his services likely to be dispensed with.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The salary and designation of Sir Antony MacDonnell's office will be found at page 200 of the Estimates for Civil Services, Class 2, for the present financial year. No patronage is at his disposal except the post of his own private secretary, and it is intended to retain his services as long as possible.
Irish Main Roads
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland how many, and what, counties in Ireland have no main roads; in what counties has the no-main-roads declaration been reversed by the Local Government Board; and whether, seeing that the county council and the majority of the rural and urban councils are dissatisfied with the Board's action in the matter, he will ask for a re-consideration of the whole matter.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that in twenty-two counties declarations have been made by the county councils that there should be no main roads. In sixteen of these counties, the names of which I will communicate to the hon. Member, there were no formal appeals, and the provisional declaration of the county councils, therefore, became absolute without any decision of the Local Government Board. Six cases came under the jurisdiction of the Board. In the case of Antrim, Down, and Waterford the no-main-road declaration was reversed after inquiry and full and careful consideration of the evidence and circumstances in each case, while in the case of Meath, Monaghan, and Tipperary (North Riding), the no-main-road declaration was upheld.
Flogging in Irish Prisons
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether flogging is permitted as a disciplinary measure in Irish prisons; and, if so, how many cases have taken place during the year 1905, and with whom rests the power of authorising this punishment.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that corporal punishment with the cat or birch rod is legal, and is permitted in the case of male convicts, but not of local prisoners. One case of corporal punishment took place during the year 1905, namely, at Maryborough convict prison. The power of authorising such punishment is vested by statute in the General Prisons Board.
Sale of Estates in County Clare
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can state how many estates have been sold, or are in process of being sold, in county Clare under the Land Act of 1903.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that agreements between landlords and tenants have been lodged in respect of seventy-seven estates in county Clare. In the case of twenty of these estates advances have been made, and the holdings vested in the tenants. In addition, the Commissioners have had inquiries made into the circumstances of five estates in the same county, with a view to their purchase under sections 6 and 7, and they have, so, far, agreed to purchase one of these estates.
Irish Land Sales on First-term Rents
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that an estate sold under the Act of 1903, where the price ranges between eighteen and a-half years and twenty-four and a-half years' purchase on first-term rents, and between twenty-one and a-half and twenty-seven and three-quarters years' purchase on second-term rents, there is no inspection by the Government for security of advance, when the price ranges between ten and eighteen years' purchase on first-term rents, prices at which many estates were sold under the Ashbourne and Balfour Acts, the holdings must be inspected to ascertain if there is security for the advance; and whether the Estates Commissioners will be instructed not to sanction sales on first-term rents until an inspector of the Land Commission reports on the question of security for the advance.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the figures given in the Question as to the limit of the operations of the zone system under the Act of 1903 appear to be correct. The Commissioners are of opinion that they are bound under the statute to make advances within the zones on lands declared by them to be fit to be regarded as an estate. The matter, being regulated by statute, is not within the sphere of action of the Irish Government.
Police Evidence
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a circular has recently been issued to the Metropolitan Constabularly of London, warning the members of the force against allowing personal considerations of any kind whatever to affect their sworn testimony, and pointing out to them that it is their duty to give not only the facts which tell against the accused, but also to give the facts which tell in his favour, and further stating that a grave view will be taken of any failure in this respect; and whether he will consider the advisability of issuing a similar circular to the members of the Dublin Metropolitan Police Force and the members of the Royal Irish Constabularly.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I understand from the newspapers that the fact is as stated in the Question. I have communicated with the heads of both the Royal Irish Constabularly and the Dublin Metropolitan Police, and I learn that, in both cases, the official regulations contain explicit instructions to the effect indicated in the Question. I have seen these instructions, which deal fully with this very important matter. I am informed that it is it not considered necestary to issue fresh instructions on the subject.
Irish Land Purchase
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in the case of the estates where sales take place under the Land Act, on the basis of the current gale of rent, the hanging gale and arrears being added to the amount of the purchase-money, the bonus of 12 per cent. is paid on all such additions, as if they were part of the purchase-money; and, if so, will he consent to amend the Act in this particular in any future amending legislation which may be deemed necessary.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) As stated in an Answer to a similar Question, which I gave on the 27th March,† the bonus under the Act is payable in the case put. Whether the law ought to be changed on this point deserves to be considered but I am not at present able to deliver the view of the Government on this subject.
Tullaroan Estate
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will state the number of years' purchase asked by Mr. Thomas Scully for the estate at Tullaroan which he recently offered for sale to the Estates Commissioners, and also the number of years' purchase offered by the said Estates Commissioners and which was refused by Mr. Scully.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have already informed the hon. Member that the Estates Commissioners made an offer for this estate which the owner was not prepared to accept. The Commissioners do not think that it would be proper for them to disclose the particulars asked for, which they regard as confidential.
Cultivation of Flax in Ulster
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the great falling off in the acreage under flax in Ulster, due to the increasing difficult—in procuring a sufficient number of hands, within forty-eight hours, to steep, spread, and gather it, with the result that the fibre was often deteriorated in quality if not entirely lost; whether he will suggest to the authorities in Ulster, who are entrusted with the carrying out of the Labourers Act, the necessity, in the interest of flax cultivation, of planting on the land the labourers who have been driven off it; and whether he will bring under the notice of the Congested Districts Board and the Agricultural Board the advisability of trying flax growing in the congested districts of Connaught, where female labour is cheap and abundant.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Department of Agriculture that prior to the year 1897 there was a considerable falling off in the production of flax in Ulster, but that since that year the production has been practicaily constant. The Department are of opinion that scarcity of labour is a cause, though not the chief cause, of the decline of flax growing in Ulster. The Department's scheme for improvement of the flax-growing industry is in operation in two counties, of which portions are congested, namely Mayo and Donegal. In these-two counties shows of scutched flax have been held for several seasons, and prizes awarded to the growers and scutchers of the best lots, and also to the owners of mills in which the best lots were scutched. The Congested Districts Board do not now carry out general schemes for the improvement of agriculture, their operations in that respect having been transferred to the Department. I trust that the policy of providing better houses for labourers may result in securing a greater supply of labour in the agricultural districts referred to.
Sales of Irish Estates
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that the agricultural tenants on the estate of Lamberts Minors, Athenry, county Galway, have been negotiating with the Receivers to the Lord Chancellor for the purchase of their holdings for the past eighteen months; that the negotiations have broken through owing to the demands made by the Receiver; and will he say if a memorial has been received from these tenants asking for a reduction of 20 per cent., which they would have received if the sale had gone through; and, seeing that there is no possibility of an agreement being arrived at as between the Receiver and the tenants, and that legal proceedings have been taken against them, will he request the Estates Commissioners to interfere, in the hope that an amicable arrangement may be arrived at for the sale of this estate.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I beg to refer to my Answer to the hon. Member's Question of 22nd March.† As I then stated, the estate in question is being managed by the Land Judge on behalf of the Lord Chancellor. The registrar of the Land Judge's Court informs me that he has no further information upon the subject than has already been given, but that he will make additional inquiries in the matter. I have already indicated that the case does not appear to be one in which the Estates Commissioners could intervene, having regard to their statutory powers.
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether the Estates Commissioners have refused to treat the estate in county Cavan, known as the Morley estate, as an estate for the purposes of the Land Act of 1903; whether the syndicate who purchased the property from the late Earl Morley are now proceeding against the tenants for the full rent due, although the rent had been subject to a voluntary abatement of 6s. 8d. in the £.; and whether, under all the circumstances of this case, arbitration and proposed sale having proved abortive, he will represent to the Land Commission the advisability of sending at once a special Commissioner to hear the applications for fair rents which have been lodged by the tenants.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I understand that the estate mentioned is the same estate which was the subject of Questions put to me on 28th March and 3rd April by the hon. Member for West Cavan; and I beg to refer to my replies to those Questions.! It will be seen that only very few applications to fix fair rents on the estate remain undisposed of; that these have been but recently lodged; and that they will be heard at the next sitting for the district. The Land Commission do not think it necessary to hold a special sub-Commission court for these cases, and I have no power to interfere with their discretion in the matter.
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in making new appointments to the Irish Land Commission, now contemplated by the Government, or any additions thereto, in future, he will consider the desirability of seeing that some of the appointments would be given to applicants having a knowledge of the Irish language; whether he is aware that inconvenience has been caused to Irish-speaking tenants in these courts in the West of Ireland, where Irish is the spoken language of the people; and whether steps will be taken to remove this inconvenience.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am obliged to the hon. Member for the suggestion he has made. Although I am informed that there are comparatively few tenants who speak only the Irish language, I think it desirable that if possible, and I assume it would be possible, there should be among the Assistant Land Commissioners one or more persons having a knowledge of the Irish language, and this will be borne in mind, subject of course to the prime obligation on the Government of securing the men most competent by their knowledge of land for the work of assistant Commissioners.
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland can he say whether the average number of years purchase tinder the Ashbourne Act of 1885 for Cork County is 15·1, and for county Limerick 15·4; whether the average number of years' purchase for these counties under the Acts of 1891 and 1896 is Cork 16·5 and Limerick 16·8 during the period ended 31st March, 1903; what is the average number of years' purchase in counties Cork and Limerick sanctioned by the Estates Commissioners under the Purchase Act of 1903 up to the 1st January, 1906; and how many years' purchase does the bonus of 12 per cent. on these sales amount to.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the prices under the Ashbourne Acts will be found in the annual reports of the Irish Land Commissioners. The prices sanctioned by the Estates Commissioners up to 31st March, 1905, will be found in their report for the period ending on that date, and the figures for the year now ended will appear in the next annual report, now in course of preparation. The Estates Commissioners inform me that it would cause serious delay in the carrying out of their regular work to detach members of their staff for the purpose of compiling statistics piecemeal, the greater part of which has already appeared.
Importation of Canadian Cattle into Ireland
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been drawn to the Resolution passed by the rural district council of Strokestown, county Roscommon, protesting against the removal of the existing restrictions on the importation of Canadian cattle to Ireland; and will he say what action, if any, he proposes to take in the matter.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have received the Resolution referred to. I have already pointed out that the interests of Ireland in this matter will be duly considered. The existing prohibition against the importation of cattle cannot be removed without legislation.
Extra Police at Tulsk, County Roscommon
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will say at whose instance, and for what reason, on the 11th March a body of police under a county inspector and two district inspectors was drafted into Tulsk, county Roscommon; whether this action of the authorities will entail additional expense upon the district; and whether, seeing that the number of police stationed at Tulsk barracks has been increased from five to eleven, he will state when this number will be reduced, in view of the peaceable state of the district.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) A force of police was assembled, at the instance of the police authorities, on the occasion mentioned for the preservation of the peace in connection with a meeting which it was feared would result in intimidation. No additional expense will be entailed upon the local authorities. It is the case that the police force at Tulsk station has been increased to the number mentioned. This increase is considered by the police authorities to be for the present advisable, but a reduction will be made as soon as the circumstances warrant it.
Trinity College (Dublin) Estates
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether his attention has been called to the paragraphs in the report of the Trinity College (Dublin) Estates Commissioners in which it is stated that what is known as the Provost's estate was not included in any return made to them by the College, although the Government valuation of the lands comprising that property was stated in 1851 to be over £2,600, and that no information was furnished to them in any other form in reference of this particular source of the college revenue; and whether, in view of this statement, the terms of reference to the proposed new Commission of Inquiry into matters connected with Trinity College will be so framed as to secure that full information shall, if possible, be obtained as to the nature and value of the so-called Provost's estate and the objects to which the profits of the estate are devoted.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The terms of reference to the proposed Commission of Inquiry have not yet been definitely settled, but I have announced in general terms that the inquiry will deal with the revenues of Trinity College and the manner in which they are applied. I am not aware whether the revenue from the property known as the Provost's; estate forms part of the college revenues, but if it does the Commission will, of course, deal with the matter.
Sale of Grazing Farm at Mile Hill
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware of the fact that a man named Martin May, a shopkeeper living in Ballinrobe, took a grazing farm at Mile Hill, in the parish of the Neale, county Mayo, some years ago, that this farm is now before the courts for sale, and that there are a number of persons in that district who are forced to live on the uneconomic holdings; and whether he will immediately instruct the Estates Commissioners to have the place inspected and taken over from the courts, with a view to having it split up in such a way that some of the holdings of cottier farmers in the locality may be enlarged.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed that the estate in question cannot; be identified from the particulars given either by the Estates Commissioners or by the officers of the courts. If the hon. Member will furnish the name of, the owner of the estate further inquiries will be made.
Inscription on a Cork Monument
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, if he is aware that on the 17th March last a monument, erected in honour of certain Irishmen, was unveiled in a public street in Cork by the Rev. Patrick Kavanagh, P.P., on which an inscription stated that it was erected in memory of certain men who fought and died in the wars of Ireland to recover her independence, and to inspire the youth of Ireland to follow in their footsteps and imitate their example; and whether it is the intention of the Government to allow this inscription to remain.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I was not aware of the facts stated in the Question, but am willing to believe that they are so if the hon. Member states them. It is not to be assumed that such of the youth of Ireland as may read the inscription mentioned will, under the happier conditions which now prevail, conceive that the welfare of Ireland is to be promoted by any such methods as were resorted to by those whom the monument commemorates. I hope that the time may soon arrive when conflicts and enmities that belong to the past may cease to excite passions disturbing the minds of the present generation.
Application for Reinstatement by Tenants on Lord De Vesci's Estate
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord - Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many evicted tenants on Lord De Vesci's estate, Abbeyleix, Queen's County, have made representation to the Estates Commissioners for reinstatement to their holdings; whether he can state what is the extent of untenanted land upon the De Vesci property let on the eleven months' system; and whether the Commissioners have approached the owner with a view to the purchase of the same; and, if so, with what results.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) The Estates Commissioners inform me that they have received nine applications for reinstatement from persons claiming to have been evicted from this estate. No proceedings for the sale of the estate have come before the Commissioners, nor have they sought to purchase it. They have no knowledge of the extent of un-tenanted land on the estate.
Cost of Battalion Stationed at Maritzburg
To ask the Secretary of State for War what is the total annual cost of the British battalion now stationed at Maritzburg, including a due allowance for the cost of training and provisioning of the troops; and how much of that total is contributed by the colony of Natal.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) The battalion now stationed at Pieter-maritzburg is the remnant of the Royal Garrison regiment, and the cost may be estimated at about £13,000 a year, towards which Natal pays £4,000.
Tactical Survey of Coast Line of United Kingdom
To ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is to be understood that the tactical survey of portions of the coast line of the United Kingdom have already been completed, but that the survey of the probable lines of advance from the likely landing-places along that coast line, and of the defensive positions commanding those lines of advance, have not been, and are not to be carried out, although forming an integral and essential part of the original scheme; and whether he will consent to modify his decision to suspend this survey, at any rate to the extent of permitting the scheme of work already commenced to be completed.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) The tactical reconnaissance of some portions of the coast line and the country in its immediate vicinity has been completed. It has been decided that the remainder of the original scheme, including the reconnaissance of the principal lines of advance, should be modified and concluded by next 1st December, by which date the work should be finished, so far as the more important positions are concerned. This decision was reached after full consideration, and I am not prepared to recede from it.
To ask the Secretary of State for War if he can state how long it would take the staff hitherto employed upon the tactical survey of the United Kingdom to complete the work of surveying the probable lines of advance from the likely landing places along the coast line, and of the defensive positions commanding those lines of advance; and what total sum of money would be required for this purpose, excluding the regimental pay of the officers and men employed.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) I am afraid that it is not practicable to give an accurate estimate of the time and money required for the completion of the original scheme.
To ask the Secretary of State for War if he will state under what votes and sub-heads in the Army Estimates for 1906–7 is the provision for the expenses of the tactical survey of the United Kingdom to be found.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Haldane. ) The provision for the expense of this tactical reconnaissance has been taken under Vote 1, Sub-head C, Vote 6, Sub-head E, and Vote 13, Sub-head A.
Examination for the Consular Service
To ask the Secretary for State for Foreign Affairs, whether nominations for the next examination for appointments in the General Consular Service will be limited to candidates actually engaged in business; or, if nominations will not be so limited, whether such candidates will be given an advantage in the conditions of the examination when placed in competition with those who have had their time free, as recommended in the Report, dated July 1903, of the Committee appointed to inquire into> the constitution of the Consular Service.
( Answered by Secretary Sir Edward, Grey. ) At the next examination for the general consular service, a proportion of the vacancies will be reserved for competition amongst candidates who have had actual commercial experience.
Import Duties on Cotton and Woollen Goods Entering Cape Colony, Natal and the Transvaal
To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, what are the import duties in Cape Colony, Natal, and the Transvaal on cotton goods and woollen goods, including Kaffir blankets.
( Answered by Mr. Churchill. ) The item of the Customs Union Convention which appears to cover the Question of the hon. Member, runs as follows:—37. Blankets and sheets or rugs, cotton or woollen, or manufactures of cotton and wool, commonly used as cotton or woollen blankets or rugs, the single article, in pairs or in the piece; and coats, jackets, or other apparel made of blanketing or baize, per £100, £25. Other cotton or woollen goods would come under the general 10 per cent. ad valorem rate.
Action of Mr. J. M. Sarbah at the Office of the Gold Coast Aborigines Newspaper
To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that Mr. J. M. Sarbah, an unofficial member of the Legislative Council of the Colony, accompanied by a servant, trespassed on premises in the occupation of the Gold Coast Aborgines newspaper, and did damage to the printing press thereon; and whether he proposes to make any representations to the Government of the Colony on the subject.
( Answered by Mr. Churchill. ) The Secretary of State has received no information with regard to this matter.
Martial Law in Natal-Exclusion of Undesirables
TO ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether the same power of excluding undesirables during martial law can be exercised in Natal as was used during the War in the Transvaal; if so, does this power reside in the Imperial Government or in the local authorities; does the same right of press and telegraphic censorship exist in Natal during martial law as was the case in the Transvaal, and in whom does its exercise rest; and can the names of recent transmitters of press messages be ascertained, or a description of their status or character be given.
( Answered by Mr. Churchill. ) 1. Such a power is undoubtedly exercisable during martial law; but the Secretary of State has no reason for supposing that it is being exercised at present in Natal. 2. The power resides with the local authorities. 3. The right exists under martial law for this as for any other arbitrary proceeding, but the Secretary of State understands that it is not being actually exercised. 4. The Secretary of State is not able to give this information.
Names and Places of Birth of Civil Service Commission Examiners, etc
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he can give the names and places of birth (as furnished to the Civil Service Commissioners on appointment) of all examiners, assistant examiners, and occasional examiners, and assistant examiners, if any, at present employed by the Civil Service Commission.
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can give the names, places of birth, and education (as furnished to the Civil Service Commissioners on appointment), and special qualifications of all technical officers nominated, appointed, and at present employed by the Board of Public Works, Ireland.
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, whether he can give the names, places of birth, and education (as furnished to the Civil Service Commissioners on appointment), and length of service of all officers in the Board of Public Works, Ireland, in receipt of salaries of not less than £500 a year.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) For a reply to these three Questions I must refer the hon. Member to the Answer which was given to him last Thursday.†
Overtime Pay of Assistant Clerks
To ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he is aware that, whilst second division clerks on entry into the Civil Service with a salary of £70 per annum are paid for overtime at the rate of 1s. 6d. per hour, assistant clerks (new class), who are in receipt of salaries varying between £85 and £100 per annum and who have served between nine and twelve years, receive only 10d. per hour for overtime; that under the present regulations an assistant clerk when he arrives at his maximum salary will be receiving a much lower rate of overtime pay than does the new entrant to the second division, although the latter would be in receipt of less than half the salary of such an assistant clerk; and whether he will consider the advisability of paying the overtime of the assistant clerks (new class) at one and a quarter times the rate awarded for ordinary work as was laid down by the Tweedmouth Commission of 1896 with respect to postal servants, and acted upon by the Government.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) The overtime rate of 1s. 6d. an hour is applicable to all second division clerks with salaries between £70 and £190, and was fixed at a time when there was only one rate for the whole of that division. It is no doubt excessive in the case of clerks drawing salaries at the lower end of the scale, and ought in strictness to be reduced. I am not, however, prepared to level up the overtime rate of the assistant clerks.
Parochial Rates in Scotland
To ask the Secretary for Scotland, if, pending the introduction of a Bill dealing with local taxation in Scotland, resulting from the Report of His Majesty's Commission published in 1902, he will introduce this session a short Bill repealing the provisions of the 37th section of The Poor Law (Scotland) Act, 1845 (8 and 9 Vic., c. 83), so that parochial rates, like other assessments, may be levied on the annual value appearing in the valuation roll, without the deductions required by that Act, such repeal having been recommended by the Royal Commission and repeatedly urged upon the Government by parish councils, as, owing to the present state of the law, confusion is caused both to ratepayers and local authorities, and expense in litigation is hereby caused.
( Answered by Mr. Sinclair. ) No, Sir. I regret that I cannot at present give any such undertaking.
Hour of Closing of Donegal Square Post Office, South Belfast
To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the post office at Donegal Square, South Belfast, closes every evening at six o'clock; and whether, in view of the fact that this is the only office in Belfast that closes so early, and the inconvenience caused to business people in the locality, he will make inquiries, with the view of keeping this office open till the same hour as other sub-post offices.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) No complaint has been received in regard to the office in question. The district is not a residential one, but chiefly consists of warehouses, and specially those of the linen trade. The warehouses do not open before nine and are closed at six p.m.
Promotion of Post Office Adult Night Messengers
To ask the Postmaster-General whether, in the event of an adult night messenger receiving an established appointment, his service as messenger will be recognised towards stripes and increments.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) Adult night messengers are not included in the classes to whom good conduct stripes are awarded. Unestablished service does not count towards stripes or towards increments.
Postal Delay at Lahardane
To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the inconvenience and expense suffered by Mr. Thomas Moran, of Linenhall Street, Castlebar, county Mayo, owing to the delay in the delivery of a postcard to a man in his employment who resides at Lahardane postal district, near Castlebar: whether he is aware that, on Sunday 7th January, Mr. Mo ran posted a card in Castlebar, and it was not delivered at Lahardane until Tuesday, 9th January, and that Mr. Moran posted a card on 14th March to the same man and it was not delivered until 16th March; and could he give the cause of the delay in both cases.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) My attention had not previously been drawn to the matter; but I have now called for a Report, and on its receipt I will communicate with the hon. Member.
Pay of John Condon Postal Messenger of Ballyhahill
To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that John Condon, a postal messenger at Ballyhahill post office, in the county of Limerick, does an average of six miles every day, and that his hours of duty are from 8.30 a.m. to 10.40 a.m.; that his wage is 4s. 6d. per week; and, in view of the fact that he cannot find other work to do in the interval owing to the hours he has to spend in the service, whether he will consider the advisability of increasing his wage to enable him to live.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) I will have inquiry made on this subject and will acquaint the hon. Member with the result.
Allowance of Head Messenger at General Post Office
To ask the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the head messenger in the Secretary's Office at the General Post-Office was appointed by the then Postmaster-General (the Duke of Norfolk) with an allowance of 4s. per week, in addition to his wages, and that the allowance was withheld from October, 1900 to October, 1905; and whether he will consider the advisability of making, these arrears good.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) I have already had this case under my consideration. The allowance of 4s. a week is being granted, but unfortunately the allowance cannot be made retrospective.
Pay of Adult Night Messenger in Scotch Post Offices
To ask the Postmaster-General will the conditions of employment and rates of pay of the adult night messengers, particularly in the provincial towns in Scotland, be considered by the Select Committee, and evidence on their behalf be laid before that Committee.
( Answered by Mr. Sydney Buxton. ) As I informed the hon. Member for the College Green division of Dublin on the 28th ultimo, † it is for the Select Committee to decide whether they consider that this class should be included in their inquiries.
Broken Axles on the Metropolitan District Railway
To ask the President of the Board of Trade in how many cases on the Metropolitan District Railway have the axles of vehicles in use on trains for the conveyance of passengers broken since the commencement of electric traction power; have any inquiries been held into the cause of the failure of such axles; and can he say what is the cause of the breakages.
( Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George. ) Eight cases have been reported to the Board of Trade of broken axles of vehicles running on electrically-worked trains on the railway in question. As stated in a reply given to the hon. Member for Fulham yesterday, an inspecting officer of railways has been appointed to hold an inquiry in this matter, and when his Report is ready for issue I will forward a copy to my hon. friend.
Continental Shipping Rates
To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will cause inquiries to be made of the Conference Shipping Lines in this country, with regard to the rates quoted by the Continental Shipping Lines, which are in the Conference, as to the freights charged on cement to ports in Cape Colony; whether he is aware, that, up to the end of July last, the rates from England and the Continent, by all the lines in the Conference to ports in Cape Colony, were on the same level, but that on the 1st August, 1905, the Conference raised the rates on this side by 2s. 6d. per ton, which is equivalent to about 5½d. per cask, although the Continental shipping lines, whilst being in the Conference, refused to raise their rates; and whether he will point out to the Conference lines on this side how they are hampering our export trade in cement by not reducing their freights to the level of the Continental rates, and thus endeavour to secure such reduction.
( Answered by Mr. Lloyd-George. ) Yes, Sir. I will make the inquiries of the Conference Lines as suggested by my hon. friend.
Betting Prosecutions in Ireland
To ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the difficulty experienced by the justices in Ireland in dealing with persons arrested in betting or gaming houses, the Acts of 1845, 1853, and 1854 providing penalties only for the keeper of the house and his assistants; and if he will call the attention of the authorities to the 33 Henry VIII, Cap. 9, Section 9, as being applicable to the offence.
( Answered by Mr. Cherry. ) The Statute of Henry VIII. referred to does not, in my opinion, extend to Ireland, having been passed between the date of Poyning's Law, 10 Henry VII, and the Legislative Union?
Irish Local Authorities Return
To ask the President of the Local Government Board, if he will grant the Return relating to local authorities standing on to-day's Notice Paper.†
( Answered by Mr. John Burns. ) I am not able, at present, to answer this Question. The notice for the Return only appeared in the Notice Paper this morning, and the matter is one which needs consideration.
Vaccination Exemption Certificates
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the Department will consider the advisability of issuing a circular letter to clerks to justices informing them whether, in the opinion of the Department, an applicant for a certificate of exemption, who satisfies two justices in petty sessions that he has a conscientious objection, so as to entitle him to such certificate, can be refused it on the ground that the majority of the justices present are not so satisfied.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) I am advised that where a majority of the justices sitting in petty sessions are not in favour of granting a certificate of exemption from vaccination it would not be proper for any minority to grant the certificate unless the other justices present abstained from adjudicating in the case. The point is not one that I can decide, and I am not prepared to issue a circular on the subject.
Police Pensions
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he has received a statement prepared by the Association of Municipal Corporations, showing the increased burden thrown upon police authorities outside the Metropolis, in consequence of the increase in the number of pensioners chargeable to the pension funds created under The Police Act, 1890; and whether he will take into consideration the desirability of increasing the present annual grant of £150,000 fixed by Parliament in the year 1890 to an amount which will bear the same proportion to the total payments out of the pension funds as the amount granted bore to those payments in the year 1892.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Gladstone. ) I have received the statement, and will give it my best consideration, but the question forms part of the far larger question of the incidence of local taxation, and I can hold out no hope of its being treated separately. I may perhaps add that when the present grant was fixed, in 1890, it was fully understood that a large and rapid increase of the pension charge was to be expected, and it was with that increase in view that the grant was settled.
Revenue derived on Import Duty on Preserved Fruits
To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state what has been the revenue derived during the last financial year from the import duty on fruits preserved in syrup, and the estimated cost of collecting the same; and whether he will consider the advisability of abolishing this tax upon this article of food.
( Answered by Mr. Asquith. ) The revenue from the duty on fruits preserved in syrup collected during the calendar year, 1905 (the figures for the financial year 1905–6 are not yet available), was as follows:—
Fruit, including fruit pulp, not liable to duty as such, preserved in syrup £19,125 Fruit, liable to duty as such, except currants, preserved in sugar or syrup 3,612 £22,737
No estimate can be framed of the cost of collecting the duties on these fruits as distinct from other heads of revenue. The cost of collection of the Customs revenue as a whole is about £2 10s. per cent. The repeal of these duties could only be considered in connection with the question of the repeal of the fruit and sugar duties of which they form a part.
Flooding of Lough Neagh and River Bann
To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider the desirability of devoting a portion of any surplus he may have to deal with when he introduces his Budget statement in carrying out the recommendations of Sir Alexander Binnie as to relieving the flooding caused by the overflowing of Lough Neagh and the river Bann.
( Answered by Mr. Asquith. ) I am unable to consider the suggestion that a special grant from the Exchequer should be made for this purpose. The service is one which must be provided for, if at all, out of the Ireland Development Grant.
Salaries of Chaplains of Lawrence Asylum
To ask the Secretary of State for India what salary and emoluments do the Catholic and Protestant chaplains respectively receive from Government for their services in connection with the Lawrence Asylums; whether the Catholic chaplain resides on the premises; and, if not, how far is his residence from the asylum, and what carriage allowance is given in each case.
( Answered by Mr. Secretary Morley. ) I have not in my possession such information about the management of the Lawrence Asylums as would enable me to answer the hon. Member's Question, but I will refer it to the Government of India.
Pensions for Irish Board of Works Officials
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that the Port and Docks Board of Dublin and the Corporation grant pensions to their worn-out employed, he will arrange a similar method, instead of a compensation allowance, to the worn-out employees of the Board of Works.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) I am not aware what the pension schemes of the local bodies referred to may be, but I am not prepared to make the alteration proposed, which could not be done without affecting several other public departments and involving heavy expenditure.
Dredging of Kingstown Harbour
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he can state how many days in the year the dredger works in Kingstown Harbour; whether he is aware that the dredger has been removed from the west pier to Carlisle Pier, and what is the reason; and whether he is aware that a ship which came for coal recently went aground at the Victoria Wharf owing to the want of dredging; and whether he will arrange that the necessary amount of dredging work will be done in future.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) There is no fixed number of days to be worked in the year. The number depends partly on the weather and partly on the programme of work for the year. The moorings at which the dredger lies when not working have been changed to a more convenient part of the harbour. The change has no reference to or effect on her programme of work. The reference in the latter part of the Question appears to be to a steamer which went aground in the harbour (not at the Victoria Wharf) through not having a pilot on board. She drew twenty-one feet of water and the point at which she grounded is marked on the chart as having a depth of sixteen feet at low water.
New Year's Day as Public Holiday
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether New Year's Day has been struck off the list of holidays for the employees of the Board of Works in Kingstown; and, if so, whether facilities will be allowed to the men to attend mass on the holidays of obligation in future, and during the time of a retreat, without stoppage of pay.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) St. Patrick's Day has been substituted for New Year's Day as a holiday at Kingstown Harbour Works. It is understood that the men can attend to their religious duties during the breakfast hour. In other cases, although considerable inconvenience arises from alterations of settled hours of work, the Board in 1905 instructed the superintendent in the case of men presenting themselves at 7 a.m. instead of 6 a.m. to record them as absent with leave, subject to a deduction of pay for one hour. I am informed that this goes beyond the practice of private employers, who give no special facilities.
Dublin Box Contract
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will explain why the contract for the supply of boxes, hitherto given to the Bookbinders and Machine Rulers Consolidated Union, Dublin, has been taken away and granted to another firm.
( Answered by Mr. McKenna. ) Formerly there was no contract for the supply of these boxes. When it was determined to resort to contract, tenders were invited in the usual way, and the contract was placed with the firm that offered the most favourable terms.
Tenants of Labourers' Cottages as District Councillors
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether a tenant of a labourer's cottage to the district council, under the Labourers' (Ireland) Act, can become a district councillor of the union to which the cottage is situate.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Local Government Board that, according to a decision of the King's Bench Division in 1901, no legal disqualification for the office of councillor attaches to a person by reason of his being a tenant of a labourer's cottage.
Teaching of Irish in Irish Schools
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he is aware that a great part of the teaching of Irish as an extra subject in the national schools is performed by extern teachers whose sole occupation is the teaching of Irish, and who, to qualify themselves for this work, have attended the Munster and Connaught Gaelic Training Colleges, where instruction is given in the most modern methods of language teaching; and whether, in dealing with the question of Irish in the national schools, he will see that nothing is done which will deprive the schools of the services of these specially trained expert teachers.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Commissioners of National Education that, in the year 1905, Irish was taught in 2,408 national schools, but in 209 cases only was the teaching performed by extern teachers. The commissioners are not aware whether the teaching of Irish is the sole occupation of these teachers, but most of them hold certificates from the commissioners, obtained at the July examinations. The present system will remain in operation until the 30th June next, and matters have not yet reached a stage at which I can make a definite statement as to what change may then be made.
Irish Commissioners for Fixing Fair Bents
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he can say whether legal and lay Sub-commissioners have been appointed for the purpose of fixing fair rents in connection with the Land Law (Ireland) Acts, 1881 and 1887; if so, what are their names and qualifications, and the counties to which they belong; whether they have been appointed in substitution for Sub-commissioners whose tenure of office has expired; and, if so, whether he will state the names of the latter.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I have fully dealt with this matter in the reply which I gave to-day to a Question put by the hon. Member for Mid Armagh.† Of the temporary assistant land commissioners whose terms of office had expired, two legal and twenty-one lay commissioners have been reappointed. Their names were published in the Dublin Gazette of the 3rd inst. Five temporary lay assistant commissioners have not been reappointed, namely, Messrs. J. Clarke, L. Croasdaile, R. Donovan, T. L. Esmonde, and P. H. Grierson. Five gentlemen have been newly appointed as lay assistant commissioners, namely, Messrs. Mathew Flanagan, J.P., farmer, county Roscommon; John Gill, J.P., farmer, and member of agricultural committee, county Down; Jeremiah J. Howard, J.P., farmer and land valuer, county Cork; Patrick Lafferty, J.P., farmer, county Down; and Thomas Linehan, farmer, county Cork.
Salaries of Irish National School Teachers
To ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland whether he will see that, in the enforcement of Rule 127b in Irish national schools taught by two or more teachers, the vested interests of such teachers are safeguarded by recommending that the future promotions and increments of principals, and the retention and emoluments of assistants, is based on the average in attendance for the year 1905, or the mean of the averages for the last three years.
( Answered by Mr. Bryce. ) I am informed by the Commissioners of National Education that, in the case of national schools taught by two or more teachers, Rule 127b is not enforced if the probable effect of the rule would be the loss of an assistant to the school. So long as the rule is not applied all the existing interests of the teachers are, of course, secure. When there is no danger of the loss of an assistant by the application of Rule 127b the vested interests of the principal, in whatever grade salary he is receiving, are also secure. In one case alone, viz., the case of a principal who is a candidate for the first division of the first grade, the application of Rule 127b may imperil the teacher's chances of promotion to that grade. In such case, also, the residual capitation grant accruing to both principal and assistant may be somewhat decreased, but the teacher of the school to which pupils under seven are transferred, under the operation of Rule 127b, will benefit in a corresponding degree. The Commissioners do not think it necessary to introduce any additional safeguards in connection with Rule 127b. and they cannot consent to the proposal to base future promotions and increments of principals, and the retention of emoluments of assistants on the average attendance of pupils for the year 1905, or on the mean of the averages for the last three years.
Pay of Labourers at Enfield and Waltham Abbey Factories
To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether the increase in wages from 21s. to 23s. weekly to labourers in the Royal Arsenal, Woolwich, may be taken to include all such men in the ordnance factories, including Waltham Abbey and Enfield Lock.
( Answered by Mr. Buchanan. ) The increase applies to all labourers in the employ of the War Department at Woolwich, both in the Royal Arsenal and the ordnance factories, but does not include those at Waltham Abbey and Enfield Lock.
Irish Firms and Army Contracts
To ask the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether there is a receiving depot at Island Bridge Barracks or at Mountpellier Hill, Dublin, where supplies for the Army are largely stored; whether, if so, arrangements will be made to enable Irish contractors to have their goods inspected and delivered in Dublin instead of sending them to Woolwich; and whether he is aware that the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland stated to a deputation from the Parliamentary Committee of the Irish Trades Congress that he considered this a reasonable request.
( Answered by Mr. Buchanan. ) There is an ordnance depot at Island Bridge Barracks where stores for the Army are stored. It is proposed to initiate tentatively a system of local inspection for such stores as it is considered can be advan- tageously obtained and passed into the service at Island Bridge, and the necessary buildings for this purpose will be commenced in the present financial year. I have no knowledge as to the statement in the third part of the Question.
Voting of Absent Electors
To ask the First Lord of the Treasury, in view of the fact that this House, upon 8th March, 1904, unanimously resolved that means should be afforded to fishermen, seamen, railway servants, and others to record their votes at Parliamentary elections, when by reason of their calling they will be absent on duty on the day of the poll, whether the Government will, in their Plural Voting Bill, or on other suitable occasion, endeavour to give effect to this Resolution.
( Answered by Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman. ) This is not a matter which can be dealt with in the Plural Voting Bill; but it is one which deserves favourable consideration in a further measure dealing with registration and qualification.
Questions in the House
Wei-hai-Wei Chinese Regiment
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the decision to disband the Chinese Regiment at Wei-hai-Wei, he will ascertain whether employment as police at Singapore and other Colonies, where Chinese form a large portion of the population, could be found for some of those men trained at public expense.
I am advised that there is no likelihood of being able to employ the disbanded men of the Chinese Regiment in the manner suggested.
Northern Nigeria
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies what steps, if any, are being taken to open up the Munshi country, in Northern Nigeria, to trade; and what steps are being taken to bring to justice the natives who, last January, sacked the Niger Company's station at Abinsi; and whether Papers will be laid upon the Table.
With regard to the earlier part of the hon. Member's Question, I have to refer him to the Answer which I gave yesterday to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Mid. Armagh.† The correspondence is not yet complete, as the Secretary of State has asked Sir F. Lugard for certain further information as to the origin of the disturbance; when this is received, Papers shall be laid.
Premier Diamond Mine—Kaffir Compound
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Kaffirs working on the Premier Diamond Mine are strictly confined to compounds, and, if so, whether this is the only mine in the Transvaal where the compound system is enforced; whether, in view of the declaration of Ministers relating to the compound system in South Africa, and that the Transvaal Government hold six-tenths of the claims, and are entitled to 60 per cent. of the profits of this mine, he will instruct Lord Selborne to abolish the compound system, and work the mine for the future entirely with white Labour; whether he is aware that the chairman of this company, at the annual meeting held in Johannesburg on February 27th, 1906, stated the working costs per load were 3s. 9d. and the profit 10s. per load, and that the net profit for the mine for the year 1905 was £622,633, and that additional profit was anticipated when the new washing plant was completed in June next; and whether he will instruct Lord Selborne to obtain from the State mining engineer a Report of what diminution of profit, if any, would be lost to the Government if the mine was worked entirely with white labour.
Kaffirs working on the Premier Mine are, I understand, confined to compounds under the Ordinance of 1903, which enacts inter alia that no coloured person shall be kept in
† See (4) Debates, clv., 497.
any compound except under a contract voluntarily entered into by him and not running for a period exceeding three months at a time. I am not aware whether this system exists on the other I diamond mines. The Secretary of State is not prepared to give the instructions suggested. I have not received any official report on the financial working of the Premier Mine, but I have seen the report in the local Press of the annual meeting. The Secretary of State will ask Lord Selborne to obtain from the mining engineer the report which the hon. Member desires.
Illegal Flogging of Coolies
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies in how many cases Chinese coolies who have been illegally flogged in the Transvaal were subsequently informed by the Superintendent of Foreign Labour, or by the inspectors, that they had a right to recover damages for assault.
I am not able to say, but the Secretary of State will make inquiry.
South African Committee
I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies whether it will be within the instructions of the Committee about to proceed to South Africa to inquire what would be the effect produced in the composition of the representative assemblies of the new Colonies by the substitution for single-member districts of larger districts returning three, five, or more members, with provisions for securing the representation of the diversities of parties within each enlarged constituency; how far such substitution would affect the importance of the issue which has been raised between distribution of seats according to population, and according to voters; whether the Committee will have power to ascertain how far such substitution would be acceptable to the several political parties in the Colonies, or would tend to diminish the animosities between them, or would allay the anxieties of those classes of residents who are afraid they may get no representation in the new assemblies; and whether, for the purpose of facilitating the execution of their duties, the Committee will be furnished with the latest information as to the operation of the different methods of electing representative assemblies which have been tried and are in practice in European countries, the United States of America, and our own Colonies.
* : The terms of reference have been so drawn as to allow the Committee to include the matters raised in the hon. Member's Question within the scope of their inquiry. It will be within the discretion of the Committee to furnish itself with all such available information as it finds it necessary to obtain for the discharge of the duty imposed upon it.
The Kaffir Troubles
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies on what specific charge warrants were issued to the police for the arrest of the natives at Byrnetown, Natal, whose attempted rescue led to the recent affray.
* : The warrants of arrest of these natives were, the Secretary of State is informed, issued for being armed in breach of the law.
Penalties on Natives
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies how many cattle and how much land have been taken from native tribes in Natal, in fines or otherwise, during the period of martial law; how the cattle and the lands taken have been disposed of; and what has become, or is likely to become, of the natives who were living on the land which has been taken away.
The Secretary of State is not yet informed as to the total number of cattle and the exact amount of land taken from the natives. He has not learned the manner in which the cattle have been disposed of. As regards the land of Gobizembe and his tribe, I would refer to the Answer I gave to a written Question on 29th March.† The natives residing on the land will not necessarily, I understand, be removed in consequence of the deposition of Gobizembe. Those who are removed will be in the position of other natives not living in locations, who are the majority of the
† See (4) Debates, cliv., 1247–8.
native population. There are about 250,000 natives living in locations and mission reserves, and over 400,000 natives living on private farms, where they pay rent from £1 upwards.
Flogging by Sentence of Court Martial
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies how many men have been flogged by sentence of court-martial, or otherwise by sentence of magistrates, during the period of martial law in Natal.
* : The Secretary of State is not yet in possession of this information.
Ceylon Pearl Fisheries
I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state who were the persons with whom Mr. Lyttelton negotiated the lease of the Ceylon pearl fisheries to a syndicate for twenty years; and whether the intention to lease these fisheries was notified in either the London or the Colonial Gazettes, or otherwise, so that tenders might be made by capitalists in general.
In answer to the first part of the Question, the matter was first brought to Mr. Lyttelton's notice by Sir West Ridgeway. Subsequent negotiations both in this country and in Ceylon were with representatives of Messrs. Derenburg and Company, and Sir West Ridgeway only joined the syndicate at a later stage. The Answer to the second part of the Question is in the negative.
Who are the members of the syndicate?
I cannot say, but if my hon. friend will put down a Question, I will inquire.
The Natal Executions
I wish to ask if it is true that at the execution on Monday of twelve Kaffirs the natives of the surrounding districts were compelled to come in and witness—
* : Order, order! The hon. Member must give notice of that Question.
But there may be more of these murderous scenes.
India-Education of Deceased Warrant Officers' Children
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether a regulation has lately been made by the Indian Government, whereby the children of a school-going age of deceased warrant officers, in destitute circumstances, are compelled to seek admission to a Lawrence asylum in order to draw the maintenance grant, even though they belong to the Catholic Church; if so, for what reason has the sanction for maintenance grant for such children been withheld from Catholic institutions which, until such regulation was made, had been permitted to entertain such children and to receive the maintenance grant from the military authorities for their support.
I have no information regarding the withdrawal of a maintenance grant for children at Catholic institutions. I will address an inquiry to the Government of India.
Slavery in Morocco
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the British delegate at Algeciras was able to bring the question of slavery in Morocco before the Conference ; and, if so, can he state the decision arrived at.
At the suggestion of the British delegate, the Conference resolved to make a communication to the Sultan, expressing the earnest hope that His Majesty would take into consideration the question of slavery in his Empire, and would adopt such measures as he might deem suitable with the view to limit and gradually abolish the system of slavery, and especially with a view to prohibit the public sale of slaves in the towns of his Empire.
Governorship of Harrar
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he can state who has been appointed to succeed Ras Makunan as Governor of Harrar.
His Majesty's I Government have as yet received no information as to the appointment of a successor to Ras Makunan.
Tabah
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can now give any information as to the negotiations with the Sublime Porto with reference to Tabah.
I am unable to add anything to the reply given to the hon. Member on March 28th.† The negotiations are still proceeding.
Macedonian Gendarmerie
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any answer has been received from the Porte to the Note delivered on 5th March, containing proposals for the increase of the powers of the Gendarmerie in Macedonia; and whether, in the event of an unsatisfactory reply, His Majesty's Government will take steps to secure their acceptance.
No answer has yet boon received. In case it should be unsatisfactory, His Majesty's Government will consider, in consultation with the other Powers, what steps can be taken.
British Consular Courts in China
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether offences committed by Chinese against British subjects in the British concessions of Hankow and certain other British concessions in China are tried in the British consular courts presided over by a Chinese magistrate, sitting with a British consular officer as assessor; whether the Chinese prisoners tried before these courts are dealt with according to Chinese law, the punishments including flogging with bamboos and torturing with the cangue, being sanctioned by the assessor before the prisoners are handed over to the Chinese authorities for the infliction of the sentences imposed.
These cases are not tried in British consular courts.
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the cangue with which, according to the report of the superintendent of police of Hankow, seventy-six persons were punished by the magistrate sitting in the British consular court at Hankow during 1905, is a square wooden collar from twenty pounds to sixty pounds in weight, and measuring three or four feet across, with a round hole for the neck, rendering the convict unable to reach his mouth or defend himself from insects; whether the British consular agent sat with the Chinese magistrate as assessor in the court when the sentences of the cangue were imposed; and whether he sanctioned those sentences.
I have nothing to add to previous Answers. These sentences are not given in the consular court, but in the Chinese court, by a Chinese magistrate, who is not under British authority.
Arising out of that Question, may I ask whether it is not the fact that under the agreement between the Government of China and the British Government, made at Chifu in 1876, specific authority was given to the assessor sitting in these courts to take exception to these proceedings or the details of the proceedings?
The duty of the assessor is to see that the trial is properly conducted. He cannot control the court or the sentences. As a matter of fact, there was the other day at Shanghai a case in which the assessor did interfere beyond what had been the usual practice, and the Chinese magistrate thereupon closed the court, and there were riots in which several persons were killed and injured. It would be most unsuitable at the present time to try to infringe on what has been the established Chinese usage.
Is it not in the power of the Government under the right hon. Gentleman's direction to give instructions to our Consuls not to assent to these sentences, which are against British sentiment and practice?
* : May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not the fact that these punishments are the same as those inflicted on Chinese coolies in, Africa?
These punishments are inflicted under Chinese authority. If the hon. Member opposite can bring me any evidence that the British authorities are responsible for these sentences being inflicted, I will, of course, inquire into the matter. I have made inquiry of the Government at Peking, and I have been informed that these sentences are inflicted by Chinese magistrates.
Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the propriety of giving instructions to the British consular agents sitting as assessors in these courts not to give their assent to these sentences?
The sentences are inflicted whether they assent or not. I cannot give instructions to interfere with the Chinese magistrates.
gave notice that he would call attention to this matter on the Estimates.
May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is not the fact that those Chinamen are taken into custody by British police?
They are taken into custody by the municipal police—the police of the municipality of the British community—but there is no power to have thorn tried except by Chinese magistrates acting under the Chinese law. I would suggest that before these Questions are repeated hon. Members should get some evidence that it is in the power of the British community to alter the law or the sentences, because to repeat these Questions without making such inquiry is to reflect unjustly on the British communities in these foreign settlements.
Congo Government—Rev. Mr. Stannard's Case
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if His Majesty's Government proposes to be represented at the trial of the action for libel which an officer of the Congo Government is taking against the Rev. Mr. Stannard; and whether the Government intends to instruct any representative who may attend the trial on its behalf to furnish a full report of what takes place to the Government.
Vice-Consul Armstrong has been instructed to attend the hearing of the case, to watch the proceedings carefully, and to report anything in connection with the trial which should, in his opinion, be brought to the notice of His Majesty's Government. We have also telegraphed to inquire whether Mr. Stannard has been arrested, but have not yet had a reply.
Income-Tax
To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the Report of the Income-Tax Commissioners, and to the fact that British investments in foreign industrial enterprises have more than doubled during the last ten years; and whether, in his approaching Budget, he can see his way to submit proposals whereby the income-tax shall be so graduated that the profits upon such investments may be made to pay income-tax upon a higher scale than will be charged upon the profits of similar investments in this country.
I have not been able to trace the source of the hon. Member's information, and I cannot say whether it is, or is not, correct. In either case, I see no sufficient reason for differentiating for income-tax purposes in regard to persons residing in the United Kingdom between incomes earned in this country and incomes earned abroad.
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, having regard to the fact that foreign investors in this country when domiciled abroad are exempted from income-tax, and that foreign manufacturing concerns whose wares are imported free of duty in competition with those of our manufacturers are exempted from income-tax upon their own profits made in this country, and pay only in respect of the remuneration of their resident representatives, he will, in his approaching Budget, submit proposals for the removal of these exemptions.
Foreigners resident abroad are not exempt from income-tax upon income derived from money invested in the United Kingdom, unless their total income from such investments is less than £160 per annum, nor are foreigners carrying on trade in the United Kingdom exempt from income-tax on the profits from such trade. It would not, in my opinion, be practicable to extend the scope of the tax in the manner suggested.
asked whether it was not the case that foreign holders of British railway stocks did not pay, and that foreign manufacturers carrying on business with this country paid only on their manager's salary.
No, Sir. That has been very carefully investigated.
I am sure the right hon. Gentleman is wrong.
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in the forthcoming Budget, he will take into consideration the case of married persons with small incomes, with a view to affording them greater relief from income-tax by extending the limit on which exemption or abatement would be granted.
I cannot make any statement in anticipation of the Budget.
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if, when he is in a position to remit a portion of the income-tax, he will consider the claims of persons residing in this country who derive their incomes from trade and industry in British Colonies and Dependencies; and whether he will grant a substantial rebate on all such incomes which have already been mulcted in income-tax in the country of origin.
I will certainly consider the claims of any class of taxpayers who can make out a case for special relief, if and when I am in a position to remit a portion of the income-tax. But I am, as at present advised, by no means certain that the incidence of the tax is unfair to the particular class of investors to which the Question refers.
Fiscal Questions
I beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the increasing burden of local and other taxation now borne by the food-producing and manufacturing industries of this country; and whether, in his approaching Budget, he can see his way to submit proposals whereby foreign importations of competing productions which at present escape taxation in this country shall be made to contribute in like proportion to the revenue.
I am aware that the burden both of local and of general taxation has greatly increased of recent years, but what effect this increase may have had upon the cost of production of commodities is too complicated and controversial a topic to discuss within the limits of a reply to a Question. As regards the second part of the Question, I cannot make any statement in anticipation of the Budget.
Examinations for Factory Inspectorships
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether, in view of the inconvenience caused to intending candidates by the present uncertainty regarding qualifying examinations for factory inspectorships, he will state when and under what syllabus the next examination will be held; and whether he proposes to fill any of the impending vacancies in the staff of inspectors with assistants, for whom special examination papers will be set.
The next examination for factory inspectorships will be held under the new scheme and will take place probably early in the month of June. I do not think that any inconvenience or uncertainty can have been caused with regard to the syllabus, because as soon as the new scheme of examination had boon settled copies of the now syllabus were at once issued to all the candidates whose qualifications gave them any prospect of receiving a nomination. A note was attached to each of these copies stating that this new syllabus was to be substituted for that hitherto in use. These candidates were also invited to furnish any further particulars as to their qualifications which they might desire to make known, and a fresh form of application was enclosed for the purpose. The proposals made by the hon. Member in the last part of his Question shall have my careful consideration.
Prison Officials—Rights of Combination
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he can now say what he proposes to do in regard to Standing Order No. 727 of His Majesty's Prison Regulations, and what rights of combination, if any, he is prepared to grant to prison officers.
Perhaps I may be allowed to answer at the same time the Questions put to me on March 15th by the hon. Members for Stockport and for East St. Pancras.† I have decided to cancel Standing Order 727 and to replace it by a now order which will allow prison officers, with the sanction of the Governor or of the Prison Commissioners, or on appeal of the Secretary of State, to moot and discuss among themselves questions relating to their duties and position in the prison service. I have modified certain others of the Standing Orders in the same connection.
Flogging in English Prisons
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether flogging is permitted as a disciplinary measure in English prisons; and, if so, how many cases have taken place during the year 1905, and with whom rests the power of authorising this punishment.
Corporal punishment is inflicted in English prisons under the restrictions imposed by Section 5 of the Prison Act, 1898, and the rules made thereunder, to which I beg to refer the hon. Member. An order for such punishment can only be made by a Visiting
† See (4) Debates, cliii., 1410 ("Prison Warders' Grievances.")
Committee or the Board of Visitors of a prison after an inquiry on oath, and cannot be carried out until it has been confirmed by the Secretary of State. The number of cases during the year 1905 was: in local prisons twenty-seven, in convict prisons sixteen, total forty-three.
Commutations of Death Sentences
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will state in how many cases has the clemency of the Crown been exercised on his advice in regard to persons sentenced to death by the courts of the United Kingdom.
The Answer is eleven.
Suppressed Public House Licences
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is in a position to make a statement as to the number of public-houses of which the licences have been discontinued under the Act of 1902.
The figures are not yet quite complete; but I believe that about 500 licences will be found to have been extinguished for the year 1905 under the compensation provisions of the Licensing Act, 1904. The volume of Licensing Statistics, which I hope to publish very shortly, will show the operation of the Act during last year.
Aliens
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many aliens arrived in England in the last two weeks; how many of these were allowed to land; and how many were refused admission as undesirable.
The statistics covering the first two sentences of the Question are not yet available: when they are I doubt whether it will be worth while to select a particular fortnight and show the figures separately. As regards refusals of leave to land, the figures have not yet been finally checked, but I believe that in the two weeks ending March 31st, nine aliens failed to obtain leave.
Burial of a Jew in a Christian Burial Ground
I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the death of an Austrian Jew, named Nathan Cohen, who died in the Mill Road Infirmary at Liverpool, and was buried by the Poor Law authorities in a Christian burial ground; and whether, in view of the fact that the deceased was on his way to Austria from the United States, he can say why the custom of recognising the religious beliefs has boon disregarded in this case.
My right hon. friend has asked me to reply to this Question. I understand that the deceased was admitted to the infirmary from the steam ship "Merion," that he was unable to give any information, but that the ship's steward who brought him to the relief office stated that he belonged to the Church of England. I am informed that one of the nurses who had been in Russia was able to converse a little with the patient, and that this led to a communication being sent to the Rabbi of the Hope Street Synagogue, Liverpool, but that no reply was received until a fortnight after the man's death. I am further informed that the body was kept in the mortuary for five days before interment, and that it was not until some days after the funeral that the minister of the Princes Road Synagogue called at the infirmary and stated that he had received a letter from the wife of the deceased and that the man was a Hebrew.
Audit of Local Funds
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he has made, or will make, arrangements for the district auditors throughout England and Wales to count and certify the net cash balances in the hands of all treasurers and accounting officials whose accounts are subject to the District Auditors Act, 1879, and its applied provisions, on March 31st in each year, or upon such other date, if any, as the accounts are made up to and balanced.
I am afraid that it would not be practicable to give effect to the arrangement suggested.
District Auditors
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will state the number of district auditors employed under the Board, and the number of districts assigned to each district auditor, distinguishing between the areas of the administrative county of London and the rest of England and Wales.
I beg also to ask the President of the Local Government Board if he will furnish the names of the municipal corporations complete accounts of which are subject to audit by auditors appointed by the Local Government Board, the number of auditors assigned to the work thereof, with the names of their respective audit districts.
The complete staff of district auditors and assistant auditors consists of fifty auditors and twenty assistants. The names of the municipal corporations, all the accounts of whom are now or will at the expiration of the present financial year be liable to audit by district auditors are Bournemouth Cheltenham, Merthyr Tydfil, Plymouth, Poole, Southend-on-Sea, Swindon and Tunbridge Wells. The particulars asked for as to the number of local authorities in the districts assigned to the auditors respectively, and as to the arrangements for the audit of the accounts of the corporations above mentioned would be too lengthy to be given in reply to Questions, but I shall be happy to send the hon. Member a statement on the subject if he desires it.
Motor-Car Commission Report
I beg to ask the President of the Local Government Board whether he can state the reason of the delay in the presentation of the Report of the Royal Commission on Motor-Cars.
I am informed that the draft Report is in course of preparation.
Lascar Seamen on British Ships
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state how many Lascar seamen died on British ships in consequence of smallpox during the year 1905.
* : The number of Lascars reported to have died from smallpox during the year 1905, in ships registered in the United Kingdom, is five.
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state how many Chinese and Lascar seamen committed suicide on board British ships during 1905; and whether any medical inspection of Chinese and Lascar seamen takes place prior to their being engaged on board British ships.
* : The numbers of Lascars who were reported to have committed suicide, or were supposed to have committed suicide, or were missing during the year 1905, in ships registered in the United Kingdom, are as follows:—Suicide, seventeen; supposed suicide, twenty-six; missing, twenty-one. The Board of Trade have no information with regard to the medical inspection of Asiatic seamen at ports in the East. Facilities are provided in this country for such inspection under Section 203 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894.
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state how many Lascar seamen died in consequence of heart failure and apoplexy on British ships during the year 1905.
* : The number of Lascars reported to have died from affections of the heart and apoplexy during the year 1905, in ships registered in the United Kingdom, are as follows:—From heat apoplexy, ten; from diseases of the heart, fifty-two.
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state how many Chinese and Lascar seamen died on board British ships during the year 1905 in consequence of beriberi; and whether he is aware that this disease is largely due to insufficient feeding and bad accommodation.
* : The number of Chinese and Lascar seamen reported to have died from beriberi during the year 1905, in ships registered in the United Kingdom, is sixty. From a recent Report of a Committee of the Royal College of Physicians it appears that while the cause of beri-beri has not been definitely ascertained the best precautions against the disease are good food and good hygiene.
Will the right hon. Gentleman take into consideration, when the Shipping Bill is in Committee, the question of improving the food and accommodation for Lascars and of securing proper inspection.
* : No doubt these things will be considered, but I cannot give a definite pledge.
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade how many Asiastic seamen died on British ships during the year 1905 in consequence of bronchitis, asthma, pneumonia, and other chest diseases.
* : The number of Asiatic seamen reported to have died from bronchitis, asthma, pneumonia, and other chest diseases during the year 1905, in ships registered in the United Kingdom, are as follows:—bronchitis, five; asthma, none; pleurisy, two; pneumonia, thirty-two; phthisis, thirty-two.
Seamen's Rations
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can state whether there is any inspection now made of the weights and measures used on board British ships in connection with the provisions supplied to the crews.
* : The Board of Trade have issued a special caution to owners and masters with regard to the inspection of weights and measures. The local authorities who appoint the inspectors of weights and measures are about to be communicated with on the subject.
Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a similar order was sent out by the late President of the Board of Trade and that inspections have taken place up till now?
* : I am not aware of that. The matter shall be inquired into.
The s.s. "Fenay Lodge"—Crew's Rations
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that on the last voyage of the British steamer "Feeny Lodge" it was stated in the articles of agreement that the crew were to receive a certain allowance of butter per week; whether he is aware that instead of the crew being supplied with butter they were supplied with margarine; whether he can state if there are any powers under the Merchant Shipping Bill which would allow of his taking proceedings against owners who supply ships' crews with margarine instead of butter; and whether he is aware that recently a shopkeeper at Aston was fined £50 and costs by the magistrates for selling as butter a mixture containing fifty per cent. of foreign fat.
I have ascertained that the facts as to the "Fenay Lodge" are as stated in the Question. If the articles of agreement stipulated butter and margarine was supplied it was a breach of contract and the men have their legal remedy. In the Merchant Shipping Bill now before Parliament butter is one of the articles comprising the statutory scale, and no substitute will be permitted. I have no information with regard to the case at Aston to which the hon. Member refers.
Will the Board of Trade consider the desirability of giving seamen the right to sue for breach of contract in those cases, and of imposing a penalty on any shipowner who supplies margarine instead of butter, I in the same manner as a small shopkeeper I is treated?
I think the Bill now before Parliament will safeguard seamen in that respect.
Is it not the fact that the margarine is often much better than the butter?
Would the hon. Gentleman, who is, I believe, a judge of butter, like to taste a sample of this abominable stuff which is supplied as butter?
Foreign Sailors on British Ships
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been called to a case tried at Ramsgate police court on March 30th, when two foreign sailors, serving on board a British ship, were charged with theft; whether he is aware that the case had been adjourned from a previous hearing in consequence of the two seamen not being able to speak or understand the English language, and that it was with difficulty an interpreter could be found who could understand the language spoken by the men; and whether he can state the name of the vessel and the port at which the two seamen in question were engaged and their rate of wages per month.
The case to which the hon. Member refers is, I believe, that of the "Vivid," with regard to which I answered a Question put to me by the hon. Member for the Isle of Thanet yesterday. The seamen (whose names are Singi and Lood) were engaged at Sunder-land at £2 10s. and £1 10s. per month respectively. They are natives of the Baltic provinces and spoke Esthonian. As no one available knew both English and Esthonian, two interpreters had to be made use of.
Register of Seamen
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will furnish a Return showing the form of the register of seamen stated to be kept by the Registrar-General of Shipping and Seamen, how each seaman's service is entered, and the cost of maintaining the register.
The lists of crews delivered into the custody of the Registrar-General constitute the register which he is required to keep of all persons who serve in ships. The lists vary in form according to the employment of the vessel; but they contain the description and; service of all seamen the cost of I maintaining the register is not separately assessed from the total cost of the work of the Registrar-General's staff.
General Register and Record Office of Shipping and Seamen
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that it is proposed to again remove the General Register and Record Office of Shipping and Seamen to old buildings at the Mint; that a sum of £8,000 has been placed on the Estimates as a preliminary expense for the purpose of altering the buildings; and whether, seeing that the office was removed to its present address at Westminster in 1903, and in view of the convenience of the present site to the Marine Department and of the fact that a branch of the office is established in the City, will he take steps to prevent the removal and the outlay contemplated.
* : The arrangements under which the Registrar-General of Seaman and his staff are at present located at the West End are merely temporary. The first suitable opportunity will be taken to remove the office back to the City, as the Merchant Shipping Act requires it to be in the Port of London. A sum of £8,000 has, as stated by the hon. Member, been placed on the Estimates.
Will the hon. Member say whether there has been any request made by seamen for the removal of these offices, which were only recently put up at a cost of some thousands of pounds? Why are they to be shifted?
* : The staff of the Registrar - General were temporarily moved from the Custom-House because the rooms they occupied there were urgently required for Customs purposes. The house at the West End, to which they were moved, is one that happened to be vacant.
When are they to be removed?
* : In a year's time, I think.
General Register Office Clerks
I beg to ask the President of the Board of; Trade how many vacancies have occurred by death or retirement, since the Reorganisation Committee of 1888, amongst clerks in the General Register and Record Office of Shipping and Seamen in receipt of salaries of £250 and upwards; how many clerks have been advanced to classification of £250 and upwards as a result of such vacancies; how many clerks in that office are now over sixty years of age in receipt of their maximum salary of £400 and upwards, with full pensionable service; and whether, seeing that in July, 1904, the late President of the Board of Trade admitted that promotion was stagnant, it is his intention to take any action in the matter with a view of facilitating promotion.
* : A Committee of 1888 reported that the staff of the Registrar General of Seamen was greatly in excess of the requirements and much too expensive. Since that date eleven clerks of the old establishment in receipt of salaries of £250 a year and upwards have been retired. Of nine clerks of the old establishment still in the office five are over sixty years of age, have served forty years, and are in receipt of their maximum salary. A further Committee of 1898 recommended an establishment of twenty who stated in his defence that he was on duty from fifteen to eighteen hours a day, and that his horse on the day of the alleged offence had been in harness for twelve hours; and will he state the hours usually worked by this man, and the hours worked on the day in question.
Furious Driving of Mail Carts
I beg to ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Robert Eyres, a mail-van driver, charged, on Monday, April 2nd, at the Central Criminal Court with furious driving, one persons above the rank of abstractors, which is the present number. As stated in my reply to the hon. Member for Middlesbrough on March 26th, the matter is now under review.
Imports and Exports of Motor-Cars from and into France and the United Kingdom
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade how many motorcars were imported into this country from France during each of the months of January, February, and March, and the value of them; and how many were exported from this country into France during the same months and the value of them.
Owing to the length of the Answer required to this Question, I propose to have the particulars printed and circulated with the Votes.
The following Figures give the information asked for:—
Statement showing the number and value of motor-cars imported into, and exported from, the United Kingdom in its trade with France during the months of January, February, and March, 1906. Number. Value. Motor cars imported from— France in— £ January 343 128,128 February 385 143,934 March 443 157,470 Motor cars of British or Irish manufacture exported to France in— January 5 3,300 February 2 1,100 March 3 1,700 Motor cars of Foreign or Colonial manufacture exported to France in— January 10 4,570 February 12 7,700 March 13 9,675
It appears on inquiry that this man's duty covered a period of fourteen hours a day from 7 p.m. to 9 a.m.; and although he was not actually at work all the time, there being somewhat prolonged intervals between different journeys, I propose to look a little further into the matter. As regards the horses, it is stated they only work on alternate days.
Register of Teachers
I beg to ask the President of the Board of Education whether his attention has been called to Section 4 of the Board of Education Act of 1899, under which provision is taken for the setting up of a register of teachers to contain the names of the registered teachers arranged in alphabetical order, with an entry after the name of each showing the date of registration, and giving a brief record of his qualifications and experience; whether, under this section, Orders in Council were adopted on March 6th, 1902, and August 11th, 1902, providing for the setting up of a register of teachers in two columns, one confined to teachers eligible for service in public elementary schools, and the other to teachers eligible for service in schools other than elementary; and whether, in view of the difference between the terms of the Act and the terms of the Orders in Council, he proposes to take any steps in the matter.
My attention has been called to the discrepancy referred to. I am satisfied that the register in its present shape, even if legal, which seems to be doubtful, gives justifiable dissatisfaction to various branches of the teaching profession. Further, no alterations which would remove these objections have been found possible, and it has therefore been decided that a clause should be inserted in the coming Bill which, if passed by Parliament, will have the effect of bringing the register to an end. Arrangements will be made for returning the fees.
The Turner Bequest
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury how long the Ruskin paintings, now being restored at the Gallery of British Art, have been the property of the nation; who is responsible for their having been withheld from public view; and whether means will be taken to ensure that any other works of art in the possession of the country will be either exhibited or disposed of.
My hon. friend doubtless refers to the paintings and drawings by Turner known as the Turner Bequest. These were placed in the custody of the National Gallery Trustees in 1856, and the responsibility for not exhibiting them rests with the Trustees and Director of the Gallery for the time being from that date onwards. I could not give a pledge which would involve interference with the discretion of the Trustees and Director in deciding whether works of art entrusted to them should be immediately exhibited.
Can the hon. Gentleman say what the value of these pictures is supposed to be?
I will find out if a Question is put down.
St. James's Park
I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether he could see his way to opening the new road across St. James's Park into Piccadilly.
This road was not constructed to carry wheeled traffic, and I there is no intention of opening it for that purpose either now or in the future.
New Government Buildings
I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works if special foundations have been laid in the new Government offices with a view to erecting the towers as designed by the late Mr. Brydon; and what would have been the saving if the special foundations in question had not been completed.
The reply to the first paragraph is in the negative.
I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works what is the estimated cost of building the towers for the new Government offices in Whitehall: and what sums have already been expended upon the materials and the necessary preparation of stone and scaffoldings.
the cost of building the towers is not separately stated in the Estimate, and cannot therefore be given without considerable calculation. As regards the second part of this Question, the measuring surveyors have the matter in hand, but some time must elapse before any figures are available.
Scottish Police Grievances
I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland if he will consider the claims of the Scottish police to be treated more on an equality with their English comrades with regard to pay and pensions than is now the case.
I have duly considered the hon. Member's Question. Any claim for improvement of conditions of service put forward on behalf of the Scottish police generally, is, I understand, restricted to the matter of pensions and does not apply to rates of pay. The actuarial investigations made in 1901 at the instance of the Select Committee on the Police Superannuation (Scotland) Bill of that year show that, if the desired improvement of pension scales is granted, the increased charge can only be provided for by considerably augmenting the present revenues of the pension funds; and having regard to the very large proportion of these revenues represented by the existing Exchequer Grant, it would appear that any such increase must come from local sources. If, in the light of the conclusions arrived at by the Select Committee of 1901, and of the further consideration which they have given to the subject since the Report of that Committee was published, the county and borough police should see fit to submit proposals to me upon this subject, I shall be happy to consider them.
Seine Fishing in Scottish Waters
I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether his attention has been drawn to the prohibition of seine or drift-net fishing in the Forth and other rivers of Scotland, and the numbers of fishermen who are therein thrown out of employment; and whether he is prepared to take any action in the matter.
I am informed that hang or drift-net fishing for salmon in estuaries in Scotland is now illegal, in consequence of a decision of the House of Lords. I am not aware to what extent this has had the effect of throwing fishermen out of employment, and with the information before me I am not satisfied of the necessity for action.
Lord Longford's Westmeath Estate
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland what stage has the sale of Lord Longford's Westmeath Estate reached; will the Estates Commissioners, notwithstanding the zones, exercise their power of revising prices in the cases on that estate in which tenants who had got second-term rents fixed signed, under duress and under protest, agreements based upon their first-term rents; and what provision has been made or will be made for the occupants of uneconomic holdings on that estate, including the cottagers at Rathwire.
I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that advances in respect of the estate mentioned were made, and the holdings vested in the tenants, on July 27th, 1905. I have no information as to the concluding part of the Question.
Untenanted Lands at Oldcastle
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners have received a memorial or resolution from the Oldcastle District Council relative to the distribution of untenanted lands in that district; what stage has the proposed purchase and resale of the Rotherham and Kearney untenanted estates reached; has any draft scheme for the distribution of them been drawn up; and will the draft scheme, when ready, be submitted to the district council, or to any person on behalf of the applicants, before its final adoption.
The Commissioners have no record of the receipt of the resolution referred to. Their inspector has reported on the Rotherham Estate, and is about to report on the Kearney Estate, and the Commissioners will consider both reports in due course. The distribution of the untenanted lands has not yet been decided upon. The Commissioners will duly consider any suggestions submitted by the district council or by any person on behalf of the people of the locality.
Tighe Estate
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if the Estates Commissioners have received a memorial from the Delvin District Council relative to the distribution of untenanted land in that district; what stage has the sale of the Tighe Estate, in that and the adjoining parishes, reached; will the Commissioners, before approving of that sale, require the estate to be sold in its entirety, including the untenanted lands of Lisclogher, for the relief of congestion; and will the draft scheme for this latter purpose be submitted to the district council or to any person on behalf of the people, for its final adoption.
I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that they have received the memorial referred to. They have received, but not yet dealt with, an originating application in respect of the sale of the Tighe Estate. The Commissioners will carefully consider all the circumstances before deciding on the mode in which the untenanted land is to be dealt with, and they will also consider any suggestions submitted by the district council or by any person on behalf of the people of the locality.
Irish Land Commission
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if, in view of the want of confidence in the impartiality of the Irish Land Commission, and the belief that the decisions to which this is due are the re suit of the forms, rules, methods, procedure, and practice now in force, he will, at an early date, in the interest of the Commission itself, and of the parties before it, afford Parliament an opportuinty of discussing those forms, rules, methods, procedure, and practice, with a view to their amendment.
Criticisms from both sides are passed on the Land Commission as they are passed upon other public bodies, but I am not aware of any ground for the statements contained in the Question. For a discussion of the matters which the hon. Member desires to discuss-opportunities can no doubt be found during the present session of Parliament.
Colonel Gascoigne's Limerick Estate
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland is he aware that for some time negotiations for sale and purchase have been going on between Colonel Gasgoigne and his tenants, in and around the town of Kilfinane, in the county of Limerick; can he say how matters stand with the agricultural tenants, and have their cases come before the Estates Commissioners; have the cases of the town tenants been brought under the notice of the Estates Commissioners, although Colonel Gasgoigne professed his intention of allowing a sale to them also; and will he use his influence to induce the Estates Commissioners to move in that direction, so as to effect an arrangement on behalf of the town tenants, whose interests, if the rural tenants will purchase by themselves, shall be materially injured and imperilled.
The Estates Commissioners inform me that proceedings for the sale of this estate have been instituted before them. They have also received a memorial from town tenants in Kilfinane asking to be included in the sale, and this memorial will be duly considered by the Commissioners when they are dealing, with the estate in its order of priority.
Lord Clonmel's Doon Estate
I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland has Lord Clonmel as yet brought before the Estates Commissioners the sale to his tenants of his estate in Doon, county Limerick; are the town tenants of Doon included in the arrangement; and, if not, can he take steps to bring about such an issue.
I am informed by the Estates Commissioners that the originating application in respect of the sale of this estate includes a few of the plots in the village of Doon, but the majority are; excluded. The Commissioners have not yet declared the lands comprised in the application to be an estate. They will. I have no doubt, consider any application which may be made to them by the tenants of town holdings.
Mrs. Hartigan's Case
I beg to ask the: Chief Secretary to the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland if he will recommend the Estates Commissioners to move in the direction of making an arrangement for the restoration to Mrs. Hartigan, of Clorhane, Croom, county Limerick, the farm hold by her late husband, Patrick Hartigan, of the same address, from Mr. Smyth, of Ballinantry, Bruff, county Limerick, which farm belonged to the Hartigan family for the last hundred years, but owing to an increase of rent was surrendered a few years ago, seeing that an amicable settlement can the more easily be effected by the fact that the landlord, Mr. Smyth, through his agent, works the farm himself.
The Estates Commissioners inform mo that, at the request of Mrs. Hartigan, they have approached the landlord with the object of assisting in her restoration to the farm formerly occupied by her deceased husband. In reply, the landlord has informed the Commissioners that Hartigan was not evicted, but surrendered the holding nearly twenty years ago, and that he, the owner, is now farming the lands himself and does not intend to sell them.
Land Commission Appointments
asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether, in connection with the appointment of temporary assistant Commissioners in the Land Commissions for the ensuing year, five officers of standing and approved capacity and experience have been dismissed without reason assigned, and although no fault had been found with their work; whether to the vacancies thus created five gentlemen have been appointed who were all Nationalists, prominently identified with political movements, and whether this principle of officially rewarding political services was to govern all future appointments to the Land Commission?
I thank the hon. Member for giving me the opportunity of correcting a misstatement. It is not the fact that any officers have been dismissed from the post of assistant Commissioner under the Land Act, or that the action of the Government has created any vacancies. The fast is that out of twenty-nine temporary assistant Commissioners who bad been appointed for a term of three years only, that term being expressly stated in the warrants issued to them, and who had, therefore, no vested interest or other claim of any kind entitling them to re-appointment, five have not received fresh warrants on the expiry of their term of service, and other gentlemen have been appointed in their place. I know nothing whatever as to the political opinions or political action, or as to the attitude in land questions, either of any of the five gentleman who have not been reappointed or of the five who have now been appointed. The new appointees have been selected out of a very large number of candidates solely because they were found upon a careful examination of their capacity and experience, as compared with the capacity and experience of those whose terms were expiring, the qualifications of all of whom were similarly examined, to be better fitted for the important work they have to do than the five gentleman who have not been reappointed. No person has been rewarded for political services, and the only principle which will govern future appointments to the Land Commission is that of endeavouring to secure the services of the most capable men. That principle, and that only, is the one which has been followed in the present instance.
asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was responsible for the appointment of these five gentleman.
* : Order, order. That does not, arise out of the Answer.
Irish Local Loans
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what is the total amount of loans to Ireland from the Local Loans Fund since the passing of the Local Loans Act, 1887; what rate of interest is the Treasury compelled to pay for the money thus loaned; what interest does it charge borrowers; what is the profit made during this period by the Treasury; and whether this profit is used for the benefit of the English borrowers from the same fund.
The Loans to borrowers in Ireland from the Local Loans Fund between March 31st, 1887, and March 31st, 1905, amounted to £19,087,755, advanced partly by the Commissioners of Public Works and partly by the Land Commission. The average rate of interest at which money has been raised for the Local Loans Fund during that period is £3 0s. 4d. per cent. The rates of interest chargeable on loans made by the Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland range between 2¾ and 4¼ per cent., according to the date at which each loan was advanced and the period in which it is repayable. The Land Commission loans bear interest at 3⅛ per cent. After deduction of expenses, it is calculated that the average net yield from the Board of Works loans is at present £3 3s. 10d. per cent., from the Land Commission loans £2 18s. 6d. per cent. The surplus income of the Local Loans Fund is carried by the National Debt Commissioners to a separate fund which, as provided by Section 3 of the Public Works Loans Act, 1904, is applicable to make good the deficiency in the capital account of the Local Loans Fund caused by the issue of Local Loans Stock at discount the rates of interest charged on loans to local authorities in Great Britain are the same as those charged on loans to local authorities in Ireland.
I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury what is the total annual charge for the repayment of the loan of £95,000 for the construction of the Fenit pier; what is the total sinking fund annually paid, and whether this is a fixed or a variable amount; whether he is aware that although 4 per cent. interest is paid for the loan the Treasury raises this money at 3 per cent.; and whether, seeing that in the Treasury Minute of May 4th, 1887, it was recommended that collaterally secured on rates, as in the case of the Fenit pier should be given at 3¼ per cent. interest, and that the profit made by the Treasury on loans of this character has to-be paid by ratepayers already overburdened and living in poor, congested districts, he proposes to take any action in the matter.
The Answer which I gave the hon. Member on the 22nd ultimo† and that which I have just given him contain, I think, all the information which he now asks for.
Bangor (County Down) Post Office
I beg to ask the-Postmaster-General whether he has received the Resolution adopted with only two dissentients at a public meeting of the inhabitants of Bangor, county Down, on the subject of the site selected for the now post office; and, whether before proceeding further with the contemplated arrangements, he will take care to ascertain whether they are likely to be productive of great public inconvenience.
In reply to the hon. Member's Question and to the unstarred Question of the hon. Member for Tyrone (South Division)‡ which I may perhaps answer at the same time, a report of the public meeting referred to has been sent to this Department and I have also received a copy of the Resolution carried at that meeting. I am not aware of the circumstances under which the Resolution in favour of the site which has been selected was carried at a mooting of the district council. It is reported that the Resolution, was finally carried by seven votes to five the question of a site for the new post
† See (4) Debates, cliv., 590–1.
‡ The unstarred Question of the hon. Member for South Tyrone was as follows:—
"To ask the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to a meeting held in Bangor, county Down, on the 23rd ultimo, in reference to the selection of site for the post-office in that town; whether he is aware that the Resolution in favour of the proposed site was carried at the district council by the chairman, who is the vendor of the site in question, giving a second or casting vote in its favour: and whether, as the site is in an inconvenient district and objected to by a large number of the inhabitants, he will take these facts into account before deciding between the various sites."
office was very carefully considered, and the position of the proposed new office, at the corner of Main Street and Castle Square, is doomed on the whole the most suitable. But under the circumstances I have called for a further Report on the matter.
Was not the Resolution carried by the casting vote of the actual vendor of the site?
A most improper observation!
On a point of order, Sir, I asked a Question with a view to getting information, and the hon. Member declared it a most improper observation. Would it not rest with you, Sir, to call me to order?
* : Expressions very often escape hon. Members in all quarters of the House.
May I explain.
* : The incident is closed.
asked if they might take it that the site had not been definitely decided upon?
said he was having further inquiries made.
Athy Post Office
I beg to ask the Postmaster-General if he can give the date on which the post-office authorities advertised for sites on which to build suitable premises for a post-office in Athy; whether three offers of sites have boon made, and on what date were they offered; what difficulty, if any, has arisen to prevent the choice of site being made; and whether, in view of the inconvenience which the delay has caused to the public and to those who desire to utilise some of the sites for building purposes, if not taken for the post office, he can say approximately when the post-office authorities will definitely decide.
Sites were advertised for in March, 1904, but as stated in my reply to the hon. Member on the 21st ultimo, no offers were received at the time. Possible sites were brought under notice in February and May, 1905. One of these is suitable in most respects, but certain restrictions are imposed by the owner in connection with a right of way and there is also a difficulty in connection with a head rent. The consideration of the matter has undoubtedly taken a long time, which I regret, but which was unavoidable. I am now, however, advised that the restrictions referred to may safely be left to be dealt with at a later stage, and I propose, therefore, to take steps to acquire the site, provided, of course, that the title proves to be satisfactory.
The Judge Advocate-General
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury what member of His Majesty's Government would be responsible for the dismissal of the Judge Advocate-General; whether Mr. Milvain was appointed under any contract; if so, with whom was the contract made and what were its terms; and will he lay a copy of it upon the Table of the House.
In reference to any question of dismissal the Secretary of State for War would be responsible for the advice given to His Majesty. The Judge Advocate-General was not appointed by any formal contract. The terms of the appointment were as follows:—(a) The salary to be £2,000 a year; (b) The devotion of his whole time to the duties of the post; (c) The retention of the post, subject to continued efficiency, to the ago of seventy, without claim to pension or gratuity on retirement.
asked if this meant that the Judge Advocate-General held office at the pleasure of the Crown and of the Secretary of State for War.
I do not know what is the proper phrase to use. I hesitate to commit myself.
Plural Voters Bill
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether ha will fix a day before the Easter holidays for the introduction of the Plural Voters Bill.
No, Sir, I am afraid I cannot give any pledge that the Bill will l>e introduced before Easter.
Privy Council-Kaffir Appeal
I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury if he can lay upon the Table an authorised Report of the proceedings before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with reference to the petition for leave to appeal in respect of the twelve natives recently executed in Natal.
Yes, Sir, I am prepared to lay upon the Table a Report of the proceedings in this case, that is to say the petition, the affidavit in support of the petition and the judgment.
Vicar and Passive Resister
I desire to ask the Home Secretary whether he has any official information as to the case of the Rev T. T. Anderson, Baptist minister at Kirkby Stephen, who was on Monday last sentenced to ten days imprisonment for non-payment of the education rate by the local justices under the chairmanship of the vicar of a neighbouring parish; and whether, in view of all the circumstances of the case, he can take steps to secure Mr. Anderson's release.
This is a question which refers to a civil debt, and I regret to say that I have no power whatever to interfere.
Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to see that reverend gentlemen do not adjudicate in these cases in the same way that employers of labour are prohibited from adjudicating in factory cases.
* : Notice is required of that Question.
Business of the House
May I ask as to the business for next week.
said the Motion for the adjournment for the holidays would not be the first order on Wednesday. There might be a few Bills before it. There was no desire to take contentious Bills. The discussion on the Second Reading of the Workmen's Compensation Bill would be resumed on Monday night if the conversation on the introduction of the Education Bill was concluded. If not, the Workmen's Compensation Bill would be taken on Tuesday.
said they would have to go back many years to find a precedent for taking anything but the Motion for adjournment on the day the House rose for the holidays.
I think two years ago the right hon. Gentleman, who was then Home Secretary, introduced the Aliens Bill on a similar occasion.
* appealed to the Prime Minister not to again take the Workmen's Compensation Bill till after Easter, on the ground that the Bill had only just been printed and that the seaports interested ought to have an opportunity of considering its provisions and instructing their Members.
No, Sir, I cannot do that. Had it not been for the hon. Member the Second Reading would have been taken yesterday.
Selection (Standing Committees)
reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had nominated the following Fifteen Members to serve on the Standing Committee on Law and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, in respect of the Seed Potatoes Supply (Ireland) Bill:—Mr. James Bryce, Mr. Long, Mr. T. W. Russell, Mr. Hayden, Mr. Mooney, Mr. Abraham (Cork), Mr. O'Malley, Mr. John O'Connor, Mr. Nolan, Mr. Jeremiah Mac Veagh, Mr. Glendinning, Mr. Patrick O'Brien, Captain Craig, Mr. Attorney-General for Ireland, and Mr. Barrie.
further reported; That they had nominated the following Fifteen Members to serve on the Standing Committee on Law, and Courts of Justice, and Legal Procedure, hi respect of the Marine Insurance Bill [Lords]:—Mr. Beauchamp, Sir Seymour King, Mr. Gibb, Mr. Hooper, Mr. Robert Balfour, Mr. Robinson, Mr. John Johnson, Mr. Jenkins, Mr. Gibbs, Mr. W. H. Davies, Sir William Bull, Mr. Mitchell-Thomson, Mr. Bertram, Mr. Maclean, and Mr. Charles Roberts.
Reports to lie upon the Table.
Selection (Standing Committees.)
reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had discharged the following Members from the Standing Committee on; Trade (including Agriculture and Fishing), Shipping, and Manufactures, in respect of the Land Tenure Bill:—Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Idris; and had appointed in substitution; Mr. Rowlands and Mr. Winfrey.
Report to lie upon the Table.
New Bills
SALMON FISHERIES (IRELAND) (No. 2) BILL
"To amend the Law relating to Boards of Conservators of Fisheries in Ireland," presented by Mr. Joyce; supported by Mr. Boland, Mr. Flavin, Mr. Halpin, Mr. O'Shee, Mr. Cullinan, Mr. Lundon and Mr. Kendal O'Brien; to be read on Wednesday May 2nd, and to be printed. [Bill 148.]"
Drunkenness (Ireland) Bill
"To amend the Law relating to Drunkenness in Ireland; and for purposes connected therewith," presented by Mr. T. W. Russell; supported by Mr. Glen dinning, Captain Donelan, Mr. Jordan, and Mr. Sloan; to be read a second time on Tuesday, April 24th, and to be printed. [Bill 149.]
Foreign Trawlers (Regulation) Bill
"To provide for the better prevention of fishing by foreign Trawl vessels within areas closed to British Trawl vessels," presented by Mr. Alexander Black; supported by Mr. Crombie, Mr. John Do war, Mr. Weir, Mr. Cathcart Wason, Mr. Ainsworth, Mr. Sutherland, Mr. Williamson and Mr. Murray; to Inroad a second time upon Friday, June 1st, and to be printed. [Bill 150.]
Small Holders (Scotland) Bill
"To amend the Law relating to the tenure of Small Holdings in Scotland, presented by Mr. Alexander Black; supported by Mr. Crombie, Mr. John Dewar, Mr. Weir, Mr. Cathcart Wason, Mr. Ainsworth, Mr. Sutherland, Mr. Williamson, and Mr. Murray; to be read a second time upon Friday 1st June, and to be printed. [Bill 151.]
AGED PENSIONERS (No. 2) BILL
"To provide Pensions for the Aged deserving Poor," presented by Mr. Samuel Roberts; to be read a second time upon Friday, May 25th, and to be printed. [Bill 152.]"
Post Office Sites Bill
"To enable His Majesty's Postmaster-General to acquire lands in London, Birmingham. Blackburn, Bromley, Torquay, Carnforth, and Walton-on-Thames for the public service; and for other purposes," presented by Mr. Sydney Buxton; to be read a second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 153.]
SUPPLY [5th ALLOTTED DAY],
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
Civil Services and Revenue Departments Estimates 1906–7
Class II
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £29,050, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, including a Grant-in Aid of certain Expenses connected with emigration."
* : I have put down a notice for a reduction of the salary of the Under-Secretary of State, but I understand that it would be more convenient that I should say what I have to say upon a Motion for the reduction of the salary of the Secretary of State himself. I should like to make it clear at the outset that I have no desire to quarrel at this moment with the policy of the Secretary of State for the Colonies. I have a quarrel, such as it is, not with the policy of the Under-Secretary, but with the manner in which he has pursued the policy which has been decided for him by the Secretary of State in the other House. I understand that the Prime Minister having given this opportunity for a discussion upon the Colonial Vote, it would not be convenient if I were to attempt to disturb the course of proceedings by moving a reduction of the salary of the Under-Secretary. I trust I may be able to say what I have to say in a very moderate spirit.
rose to a point of order, but the right hon. Gentleman refused to give way.
Sit down.
* resumed his seat.
, on a point of order, asked whether, if the right hon. Gentleman now moved the reduction of the salary of the Under-Secretary, other hon. Members who desired to move a reduction of the salary of the Secretary of State for the Colonies would not be debarred from doing so, seeing that the salary of the Under-Secretary came subsequent to that of the Secretary of State.
The Question docs not arise. The right hon. Gentleman has distinctly stated that he does not propose to move a reduction of salary of the Lender-Secretary of State.
* : I think the hon. Member's interruption was discourteous and unnecessary.
Probably not many hon. Members heard what the right hon. Gentleman said. He talked of the discourteous interruption of the hon. Member. Although I am not responsible for the hon. Member in any sense, yet I do not think that was a phrase that was deserved by the hon. Member, and I think the right hon. Gentleman should withdraw it.
The Prime Minister no doubt did not hear the remark of the hon. Member. He called upon my right hon. friend in a very discourteous manner to sit down, and when my right hon. friend announced his intention not to move the reduction of the salary of the Under - Secretary, the hon. Member taunted him with making use of stage thunder. That was an unnecessary, and, in my opinion, a discourteous interruption.
* : I do not think the phrase was unparliamentary in the sense that I need call the right hon. Gentleman to order. I think I may appeal to the Committee now to allow the debate to proceed.
* : I do not think I have offended in this matter. I thought I had made it clear why I was not moving the Resolution I had put down on the Paper. The Prime Minister has given us this day for the Motion on the reduction of the Secretary of State's salary, and I do not in the least want to interfere with that arrangement. I do want, however, to say something with regard to the Colonial Office Estimates, and I want to say it, if I can, in a moderate spirit. I believe that what I should like to say—and what I wish were to be said by someone much more competent than myself—represents the view of a great many moderate men and women of both Parties throughout this land. I should lie forgetting my duty if I said anything which savoured of Party heat or of a Party character, and in challenging the policy of the Under-Secretary of State I need hardly say I am animated by no personal motive at all. I entertain no vindictive feeling. Such feeling is absolutely foreign to my mind, and, if I were to say any word which seemed like expressing such a feeling, that word would not express my view. I wish, on behalf of my Party and as I believe on behalf of a great many other people who do not belong to my Party, to challenge the method by which the right hon. Gentleman has thought it necessary to pursue his idea of political duty in carrying out the policy imposed upon him. There is an electric phrase which the hon. Member himself is acquainted with, about an "old man in a hurry." That is a very pathetic position. An old man in a hurry has too little time to carry out the ideals of his life. He has the pressure of his waning years, and one may make many excuses for his doing that which in his youth he would scarcely have cared to do. I can find no such excuse for what with great respect I would call a young man in a hurry. If the hon. Member lives as many years as I hope he will, be will have ample time to achieve that great position in the State which we all hope he will achieve. He will also have time to conform to the sound traditions of British statesmanship, and he will not be under the necessity of short circuiting those traditions, and of presenting his views in a way which is certainly most unpalatable to us on this side of the House and to many persons outside the House. I honestly believe that behind the apparent desire on the part of the hon. Member to be on the wining side—
asked whether the right hon. Gentleman was in order in referring to the conduct of the Under-Secretary for the Colonies on this Vote.
* : The right hon. Gentleman is raising a Question which concerns the conduct of the office, and I think it would be quite convenient to let the debate go on.
* : Really my whole point is not an attack. I do not; want to use any offensive words and I have used none yet, but I propose, if I can, to criticise, the manner in which the the Under-Secretary has conducted the great business of his Department in the House. I believe the time will come when we shall have evidence of the patriotic desire which I believe is in the breast of the hon. Gentleman, though I must confess that hitherto we have not had the happiest signs of its existence. I do not think the policy the hon. Gentleman has pursued is, or can be, a wise one. The hon. Gentleman has made many attacks on the Unionist Party. That is part of the business, and we all expect it, but the hon. Member has not yet realised that the Unionist Party, although a small Party in the House, does represent an enormous power in the country. Over 2,500,000 votes were polled on behalf of it, and if we had our rights the majority supporting the right hon. Gentleman would not, as I calculate it, be 300, but twenty-five. But, whether that be so or not, whether we are a powerful Party in this House or not, we are a powerful Party in the country, and some of the taunts which the hon. Member has thought necessary to hurl at this Party I thought rather missed their mark. I hope he will live to believe, as I do, that there is an immense force, an immense righteous force, behind those who represent the Unionists in this House which it is his duty to remember and to regard. The hon. Member has denied that the Unionist Party has almost any locus standi in this House. ["Oh, oh."] Yes; he has taunted us with our small numbers. ["Question."] I must really ask to be allowed to proceed with my argument. I do not think the hon. Member himself has been particularly gentle in his dealing with the Party to which I belong, and I am quite certain he is the last person who would object to my making what defence I think necessary of my Party. The hon. Member has attacked our Party, but he has admitted that we possess this great privilege, that, though we have lost the confidence of this country, we have retained in a large measure the confidence of the Colonies. [A laugh.] I do not think that is a matter to laugh at; it is a very great possession. I sometimes think the hon. Gentleman is devoting some of his great talents to the task of insuring that the power which the Administration of this country has obtained over the Colonies shall be wasted and lost. He seems to me to be in a fair way of succeeding, but that is not a matter to be proud of. It is absolutely true that the Unionist Party has obtained a large measure of sympathy and support throughout the whole of our Colonial Empire. How was that sympathy obtained? It was obtained by long years of sympathetic administration, and it is because I am a strong believer in the necessity for the continuance of that tradition of sympathy in the administration of this country towards the Colonies, that I object to the policy of the hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary. What is the alternative policy which we are having put in place of this policy of sympathy? The hon. Gentleman taunted us the other night with doing or saying something that was likely to estrange colonial opinion. I appeal to the judgment of the Committee, and I would ask whether a great deal has not already been said from the Treasury Bench this session which has done more to estrange colonial opinion than anything that has been said by the Unionist Party for the last ten years. The hon. Gentleman has ranged himself against all those who are loyal to this country in South Africa. He has used expressions, not once nor twice, but many times, calculated to wound, and which did deeply wound, our fellow-subjects in South Africa. He has attacked, in the most open manner, the principle of colonial self-government. He has attacked our great South African Colonies, and he has attributed to our countrymen in South Africa motives and actions which he would be the very first to repudiate if he had boon charged with entertaining or committing them himself. The hon. Gentleman is perfectly entitled to express his opinion as to the wisdom or unwisdom of employing Chinese indentured labour in South Africa, but I object very strongly to the embittered and empoisoned language with which he has conducted his campaign against the use of this indentured labour. I hoard him speak, with a note of triumph, of the effect of the policy which a sense of duty has compelled the Government to impose on the principal industry in South Africa. He told the House that the proof of the effective character of that policy was the great fall in South African securities. That is, no doubt, a legitimate observation; but why was it necessary to barb it with the further remark that "we were now using ball cart- ridge"? That was a remark which was intended to wound and did wound. It was a remark calculated to show that the Government were doing something which was calculated to produce, and did produce, great injury to the principal industry in South Africa. The hon Gentleman spoke of the whole question of Chinese labour in South Africa and said "it was a melancholy and notable derogation from any standard of labour Ordinance, even the lowest, tolerated in the British Empire." That may be a legitimate opinion for hon. Members below the gangway who have no responsibility; but when I think how little has come from that extraordinary statement, how little that very severe condemnation has been followed by any corresponding modification of that Ordinance, I think something would have been gained, and little would have been lost, if His Majesty's representative in this House had refrained from a condemnation which must have been very wounding to South Africa. The hon. Gentleman has attributed motives broadcast to the men from whom he differs, whom he has declared over and over again to be working for purely personal, private purposes, and to whom lie has denied the right to believe that they were working for the greatest good of the State in which they live. He has made the whole question of Chinese labour a Party weapon. We know now that much that was said on that question has been withdrawn. [MINISTERIAL cries of "No."] Yes. A great deal that has been said has boon withdrawn. [MINISTERIAL cries of "Not a word."] Why, the whole accusation of slavery has been withdrawn. [MINISTERIAL cries of "No."] That may comfort the hon. Members who make the interruption, but it certainly will not shake my opinion—and those who heard the expressions used by Ministers in the other House, and indeed in this House, can have no doubt at all about the withdrawal. It is a smaller matter, but I object again to the hasty condemnation by the hon Gentleman of Mr. Davis, of whom I know nothing, but who I understand is well known in Pretoria and Johannesburg. I do not think it wise, in the present temper of South Africa, to suggest to the House that some words used by that gentleman were used when he was drunk. What other meaning could there be for telling the House that Mr. Davis was speaking after dinner? If the hon. Gentleman had limited himself to saying that it was inadvisable of Mr. Davis to make the remarks he did in the presence of the High Commissioner he would have said all that was required. Then we come to the hon. Member's attack upon Lord Milner, whom South Africa has delighted to honour. From beginning to end we have had one series of insults—I can use no other word—thrown at Lord Milner. We hoard first of "a man of fine profession and poor performance." Is not that an intentionally insulting phrase? We heard of his "wicked permission." Again, is that a word which can with advantage be used by an Under-Secretary who wishes to remove ill-feeling and diminish bad blood in South Africa? He compared Lord Milner with Mr. Parnell, and the only thing he could find to say was that Mr. Parnell was innocent while Lord Milner was guilty. He may have entertained that opinion, but again I suggest that that is not the trope and metaphor we should desire to use if we were simply engaged in the task of soothing colonial opinions. He said he did not propose to pursue him further, and then he told us that he would not use any undue or excessive exertion to defend Lord Milner from attacks which might be made upon him. I heard the hon. Member's condemnation of Lord Milner, and I found it tiresome, but when it came to the hon. Member's praise of Lord Milner I confess my gorge rose. The hon. Member, when he spoke the other day, interrupted me because, he said, I hail used a discourteous expression. I hope I did not. I used an expression which was forced strongly upon me when I hoard Lord Milner taunted with his poor estate. [Cries of "No."] When I heard that he was "suffering from the mortification which he must have experienced because what he had toiled for was not accomplished, because he was utterly discredited by the people of Great Britain, because he knew that the arrangements in which he had consumed the energies of his life were about to be reversed and dissolved," and that Lord Milner had "ceased to be a factor in public events," then I confess I did give way to an expression which, though not unparliamentary, was certainly a true expression of my feelings on that kind of treatment of a man whom so many of us esteem, honour, and love. The hon. Member spoke of "the tolerance of overwhelming victory." I do not know whether he considers that in what he said about Lord Milner he was giving full effect to the tolerance of overwhelming victory. I think the victory will rest yet with this despised, this broken, and this forgotten man.
Lastly, we come to the case of Natal, and there I am bound to say I do see signs of grace. The speech of the hon. Member a few nights ago is fresh in the recollection of the House. Of course, he made the usual attack on the Unionist Party. He must get cheers from his Party although he has to stoop low to get them. Before I conclude I will give the hon. Member an illustration of what I mean by stooping low to get a cheer. But undoubtedly he did turn over a new leaf with regard to Natal. Most of his speech was such as any statesman might have made from these Benches, and might have been applauded by all Parties in the House of Commons. He praised the Government of Natal, and he praised the Governor, Sir Henry McCallum. That was a great change for the better. He approved of the executions. Well, that may have been a wise thing to do. [Cries of "No."]
I said the trial was not unfair.
No, do not let us be put off in that matter. The hon. Member and his Government cither did approve of these executions or they did not. Do you moan to say that with the power and the light to stop these executions, and having permitted it, they did not approve of these twelve men being put to death? They approved of the executions, and he said most truly and justly that the crime was the crime of murder. He told us most truly and fairly that every one of the persons executed had been personally concerned in the commission of that murder. He administered, it is true, a lecture to the Natal Government, which I think might have been omitted. It greatly marred his speech, if I may say so. He greatly marred his speech also by the reference to the concession of self-government in Natal. I think that remark was most mischievous. What was the condition of Natal? For forty years Natal had gone through the probationary period which precedes self-government. The Orange River Colony has gone through two years of a similar period. The population of Natal is almost to a man—I suppose to a man, if you take the British element—loyal to the British Crown. Who would say the same thing of the Orange River Colony? Yet the Colony of Natal is to lie told that it obtained its self-government too soon, while in the same week we are thrusting on the Orange River Colony this doubtful privilege—this doubtful possession of self-government. I think he might have omitted with great advantage this reference to the premature bestowal of self-government on the Colony of Natal. There again I find the same characteristic which I find in everyone of the passages I have ventured to criticise—I find something calculated to wound, and yet which could not by any possibility result in any practical issue. Is he going to take away self-government? He cannot do it. He himself has told us that the boon once given cannot be withdrawn. Self-government must be accepted with all its responsibilities. Then, why, when all Natal is tried by an affliction the nature of which we cannot conceive, should he select that time to scold the Colony and threaten a withdrawal which he cannot effect? But that is an interlude. I wish to complete my survey of the speech the hon. Gentleman made the other day. He told us that this trouble was not due to the poll tax, and he flatly contradictor the hon. Gentleman below the gangway The Under-Secretary of State said it was not due to the imposition of the poll tax, but that it was due to a deeper am a wider cause. It was due, he said, in the first place to the war, and in the second place to the Ethiopian movement. Lastly, there was the interference of Lord Elgin. I think the hon. Member, if I may say so—I do not know whether I carry with me all the Members on this side of the House—made out a very good case in one respect. Although we may doubt the final wisdom of what was done, undoubtedly the motives which animated Lord Elgin were humane motives—motives which appeal to all men in this House and in the country; whether it is wise to forget the great issue to satisfy yourself on the smaller issue is a matter of doubt. But no doubt Lord Elgin hesitated when without information he was called upon to use the authority which he possessed to sanction the execution of twelve of his fellow creatures. But why is it that Lord Elgin's action has given so much offence in the Colonies and caused so much trouble here? I saw a very pregnant passage in a newspaper with whose views I very often differ, but with whose general tone I have very much sympathy the Westminister Gazette said—
"If the previous administration had done this, none of this trouble would have arisen."
That may be an exaggeration. It is an exaggeration behind which there is an enormous amount of truth. This action was taken by Lord Elgin in the interest of humanity, and why was it that the Colony was in a flame? It was because this Government was suspect.
Because of your speeches.
* : I have failed greatly in the task I have undertaken if I have not made it evident why the Government was suspect. I will take up the interruption. I will ask whether I am not justified in saying that it is due in a great measure to speeches made on the other side of the House. The hon. Gentleman is suspect because he has touched the great principle of self-government in the Colonies. He said the other day that "the maxim 'Trust the people' ought to follow the flag." Is he giving effect to that maxim? Not at all. What did he say? He said the Government are prepared to assort that "the House of Commons should be consulted on all matters affecting the Colonies which may be said to involve in their just and truest sense Imperial interests." "This Parliament," he said, "has rightly aspired and rightly claimed to exert an influence on the course of politics which shall be intimate, immediate, and direct," and he truly said that no other Parliament in modern times has put forward that claim. Lastly, and this is not an unimportant passage, he told us that with regard to a matter which I intimately concerns the whole welfare of; the Transvaal "the Government will pay no attention to the Transvaal assembly, however unanimous," and that "as long as the Transvaal retains a policy which is repugnant to the opinions of this country the Government will veto the opinion of the Transvaal people." I am not here to exchange opinions about ethics, but I do say that whatever the ethics of the question may be, that is very bad politics. I say you cannot live up to that declaration. You cannot make yourself the judge of moral questions between this country and the Colonies. The right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister yesterday, in what I thought was rather a flippant Answer to a bona fide Question, referred to the meaning of the moral view of the Colonial Office.
"The spirit of morality entertained by the Colonial Office."
* : That will quite satisfy my purpose. My point is a serious one. I say if we are to be arbiters of moral questions between this country and the Colonies we shall get into infinite trouble. I am not going to weary the Committee, but I could cite fifty instances which would reduce that proposition to absurdity. Only the other day we had a remarkable instance of what this meant in practice. We had an interjection from an hon. Member in regard to what had taken place in Natal. The interjection was we which I confess I regret. I still more regret the reception it received What was it? Let me recall the circumstance. An execution had taken place in Natal under the law, after a trial sanctioned by the Legislature, "by the Executive of the Colony, by the Governor, and by His Majesty's Government, and that act was described by an hon. Gentleman as a bloodthirsty murder."
rose.
Does the hon. Member rise to a point of order?
No, Sir. May I read from one of the prison authorities? It is a personal explanation. [Cries of "Order."]
* : The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon gave way at first, but when he found that the hon. Member desired to make a personal explanation he refused to give way any longer. A personal explanation can be made later.
* : I am in the memory of the Committee. We all heard the expression and the cheers with which it was received. But I refer to the expression, not so much because it was improper, but as an illustration of the impossibility of enforcing this doctrine which the Under-Secretary for the Colonies had laid down for our guidance. We never can, even if we ought to, make ourselves the censors of the morals of the Colonies. I say without hesitation that if an attempt were made for one year to act in regard to the Colonies upon the principles laid down by the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, we should run the risk of losing the Empire. It cannot be done in Canada, in Australia, in New Zealand, and it cannot be done in South Africa. You may attempt it, but it will lead you a great deal further than you think. The hon. Member told us that he relied on the great majority which the Government has, but I venture to believe that in that majority there are some hon. Members who will speak with that moderation which I desire, and who fool in their hearts that there is something in the point of view I have taken that these speeches of the hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies are not calculated to soothe the distress and alarm felt in the Colonies. The hon. Member talked about imagination in politics. I agree. I think imagination is one of the greatest powers in politics and in life. The hon. Member for Tyneside spoke of the small population of Natal, and that it was not equal to the population of his own constituency. It is true, but let us apply the faculty of imagination. Some of us know that there was once a town called New Amsterdam, smaller no doubt than the constituency of the hon. Member, but if we translate New Amsterdam into New York we are confronted by a multiplication both of political power and of population that gives us something to think about. I feel that this policy of the Government is a mistaken policy. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board has said many wise things, and some things of which I am not yet been able to perceive the wisdom. He has said one thing in which I believe there is no wisdom at all. He has frequently cited the text of scripture which says, "The eyes of the fool are in the ends of the earth." In my opinion the eyes of every man in this country which are not turned to the ends of the earth are eyes turned away from the true interests of this country. Hon. Members below the gangway apparently forgot or ignore what is the central position. I am not going to labour that matter now, but anyone who thinks for a moment will perceive that the future of our race cannot conceivably be identified with the comparatively small number of people who are in these islands; that oven now the primacy of our race is in passage to the other side of the Atlantic. It is certain that if we were by any rash act to deprive ourselves of those Colonies which other countries seek for, almost everything which makes life possible to the whole population of this country would be lost with them. Therefore, I hear with regret these contemptuous attacks on the Colonies, because they are small and cannot vie with these islands in population. In conclusion I will draw one moral. I do object in my own name, and in the name of hundreds of thousands and even of millions, to the tone and temper in which the hon. Member has approached these burning questions. No one will doubt the hon. Member's capabilities; no one will doubt the hon. Member's power to serve his country, but I would suggest that he might, with advantage, adhere in the future to his later manner and style of speech on the Natal question and not to his earlier style. If the hon. Gentleman does that he may lose a cheer or two from the hon. Member for Salford or Tyneside, but he will gain the esteem of many men who admire his qualities and would like to admire his policy. I would ask him to change his tone. It is not much to ask. By doing so he may forfeit the good opinion of Mr. Smuts, but I think he would win the good opinion, which he has lost, of every loyal Afrikander. [MINISTERIAL ironical laughter]. Surely that is not a small thing to possess. But, if the hon. Gentleman cannot, or if his conscience will not permit him, to approach Colonial matters in a different spirit, I would only express a hope that his talents might be devoted to some other task, say at the War Office. I am sure success will await him there, although I should regret it if he were to carry out his promises to reduce the Army by so many battalions, which, however, his colleague will not do. Or he might go to the Exchequer; Tint, tit any rate, whatever Department the hon. Gentleman may go to, let him not exercise his talents either in the Foreign Office or in the Colonial Office. In this country we often use what are called in Ireland "Party expressions." They are well understood in this country, but people do not understand them in foreign countries or in the Colonies. People who are face to face with stern realities, as the people in Natal are, do not and cannot be expected to appreciate the true inwardness of the expressions which the hon. Gentleman has used. Therefore, I hope that the hon. Gentleman will either change his tone or else devote his talents to some other office than that to which he has been appointed; for of all the offices in the gift of the Crown it is the least suited to his particular qualities.
Does the right hon. Gentleman move a reduction?
* : No, Sir, I do not.
said that he spoke in the character of one who desired to forward in the most progressive spirit that social and domestic legislation for which the country was looking, but who at the same time agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon that in dealing with Imperial and Colonial concerns great prudence was required in administration and great moderation in discussion. The right hon. Gentleman had appealed to the House to be moderate in the discussion of these questions. He took down, as the right hon. Gentleman went on with his speech, a few of his own moderate expressions in regard to the Under-secretary for the Colonies. The Under-secretary for the Colonies was "A young man in a hurry," a phrase which, by the way, had not even the merit of an original production, but was merely that poor thing which they knew as an adaptation. "He was also anxious to be on the winning side;" and the kindly hope was expressed that "some day he might develop something in the way of patriotism;" "He makes use of empoisoned language; he is a member of a Government which is suspect." Here were sentences typical of the moderate language to which they were accustomed from the Opposition Benches. He thought that those who had listened, as lie had done, to every speech which had been made upon Colonial matters since the second day of this session could only be driven to the conclusion that hon. Members on the Opposition Benches were determined to discuss these Colonial questions in no spirit except that of the partisan. He made one exception. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Dublin made a most moderate and temperate speech the other night upon the subject of Natal. He (Mr. Mason) wished to recall to the House the opening day of the session. On that afternoon, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, whose absence they all deplored, for however they might be opposed to his policy, they recognised in him a very forceful and stimulating personality, made an earnest and sincere appeal for continuity in Colonial policy; but the very next day hon. Members opposite made speech after speech calling on the Government to prove their sincerity by at once reversing the policy of their predecessors. The attack reached its culmination in the speech of the right hon. Member for Dover, who, speaking with the authority of an ex-Cabinet Minister, declared that although the responsibility rested with the late Government while that Government was in power, it now rested entirely with His Majesty's Ministers. If that doctrine were to hold good—that each Government transferred, not merely its policy and the consequences of its policy, but all responsibility for its continuance to the shoulders of their successors, the day when there could be any continuity was very far off indeed. Nor could such doctrine be fruitful of good to the Empire at large. He thought perhaps the right hon. Gentleman was not very serious in what he said. To quote the homely saying of Lord Milner, any stick would do to beat a dog with. During the whole of that debate upon the importation of Chinese labour, the contention was continually urged from the Opposition Benches that no real effort was being made by the Government to carry out its pledges, that the altera- tions in the Ordinance were trifling, and it was claimed that something more should be done. And having thus elicited the announcement that in the last resort the veto would be used, the Opposition at once turned round and said that nothing would be more disastrous to the future of the Colonies. In the words of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, they should have thought of that before. He thought that it would have been bettor if, when claiming that something more should be done, hon. Gentlemen had realised that those consequences must follow which they now deplored. On this side of the House they did not deplore the consequences. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon had declared that the veto was a very dangerous thing. They had heard that the exercise of it would be an unconstitutional proceeding, but the right hon. Gentleman had against him the authority of Lord Milner, at all events, who had described the veto as having a certain power. He thought that if ever there was an occasion when it could be properly exercised by this country, it would be after so great a sacrifice of life and treasure as that which had been made, and in order to carry out the determination of the people who had made the sacrifice. They were told that this verdict on Chinese labour was gained by the grossest misrepresentation. But some Members had been in their constituencies since the debate upon the Address, and although the speeches of right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite had been published, had been read, had been discussed, it could not be denied that the feeling of hostility to the system of, Chinese labour ran just as deep and just as strong as ever it did before. He must say a word with reference to his hon. friend the Member for Gravesend, because he thought that much of the speech which he made the other night was not of the soothing kind which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon desired. He passed over the hon. Member's persistence in stating that the present Government had reversed the decision of the Natal Government after it had already been announced that the Government only postponed it. He came, however, to a more serious matter. The hon. Member had tried to move the adjournment of the House on the ground that there was an omission from the instructions of the Committee which was just going to set out for South Africa of a particular direction, that it should have in view the preserving of the two new colonies as integral parts of the British Empire. He had in his hand a copy of the Paper which gave that Committee its instructions, and no one who had read that Paper could have any doubt that the Committee was sent out to elicit facts with reference to the constituencies and the electorate with the precise object that the Government to be established should have permanence under the Crown. But every one had not this letter of instructions ready to his hand. Many people would only have the Reports of the debates to rely upon. He did not know what the intention of the hon. Member was, but the effect of his Motion for adjournment could only be to convey to such people that the Committee was sent out in order to loosen the ties between the mother country and the Colonies. Was that his intention as well as his effect? [Cries of "No."] It was not, and he gladly accepted the hon. Member's word, but his Motion was not a good example of that soothing system which was recommended by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to the disturbances in Natal and also to the action of the Natal Government, and for his part he was not surprised that the Natal Government took precipitate action when it was fed upon such fiery stuff as came from the Opposition side of the House. The hon. Member referred to certain phrases and speeches which had been made by hon. Members upon this subject, and he wished to express his regret that such phrases as "blood-thirsty murder" had been shot out in the course of a Question and Answer across the floor of this House by an hon. Member who, when the matter came up for discussion a few hours later, did not rise in his place to justify the phrase. He also agreed that the vote of censure upon Lord Milner was a hampering mistake. It was not necessary that they should endorse the policy of the late Government in order to disapprove of such a Resolution. It was not necessary that they should accept all the eulogies which had been passed by the right hon. Gentleman and others upon that distinguished man in order to oppose it. He frankly admitted that he thought that there was a greater man than Lord Milner in the history of South Africa. There was a most distinguished soldier, a veteran of Waterloo, who was Governor of the Cape and High Commissioner, to whose memory justice, he believed, had not yet been done, viz., Sir Harry Smith. He should like to recall to the House certain memorable words which were spoken by Sir Harry Smith. The Government of the day had urged upon Sir Harry Smith an arrangement of which he and the whole of the colonists disapproved. The colonists sent a deputation to Sir Harry Smith, and it happened that the deputation waited upon the Governor on the 18th of June. Although Sir Harry Smith agreed with the object of the deputation and the words in which they expressed it, he made them this reply:—
"Gentlemen, this is the anniversary of Waterloo; for forty-three years I have served my Sovereign—I take pride in it—and I wish God Almighty may strike me dead before I disobey Her Majesty's Government."
He thought those words bespoke just by a little the higher spirit, just by a little, the nobler conception of public duty. But he acknowledged that to pass a vote of censure upon a man for a fault which he had frankly acknowledged was to make a mistake, especially when that man had laboured unsparingly through many anxious years in the service of the Crown, and must, whatever they might think of his policy or that of the Government which inaugurated it, take in the end a distinguished place in that distinguished body of public servants by whose zeal and devotion the greatness of this country had boon fostered. [OPPOSITION cheers.] Hon. Members opposite applauded. But they could have very little to congratulate themselves upon when they looked back upon the night of that debate. Speech after speech was made declaring that the Amendment proposed by the Government was a base and cowardly one. Yet it was hon. Members opposite who insisted that this base and cowardly and pernicious Amendment should be inscribed upon the records of the House. It could hardly have been good for the Empire, in their eyes, that a base and cowardly Resolution referring to the Colonies should be carried by an enormous majority, yet it was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham himself who rose to move that the "Question be now put," and insisted upon a division. Most of them had cherished a hope at the beginning of the session that some sort of neutral ground might be found upon which the two Parties might meet, but now that hope was certainly dead, and the only sort of agreement that he could conceive as possible was that which was best described in the words of the young lady who won a large prize at her girls' school by describing Platonic love as "a rapprochement where she does not know what it means and he does not mean it." He thought that few of the speeches which had boon made from the opposite Benches could come under any definition of patriotism even in the ample volumes of the New English Dictionary, although they might figure as instances of the metaphorical use in the English language of the game of battledore and shuttlecock. He had one more word to say. For many years he had taken his pleasure in travelling in the more or less untravelled corners of the world, and he wished to place on record his belief that on the whole and in the sum, whore the British flag had gone, there the races which came beneath its folds had enjoyed greater security for their property and greater well-being in their lives. It happened that once in that very troubled country which he trusted would get some relief from the Algeciras Conference, he came one afternoon to a fortified caravanserai in which it was prudent to sleep if one hankered after going on again in the morning. It was an hour before sunset, and during that hour, the caravans with their camels and their merchandise came crowding into the caravanserai there to pass the night. Just before sunset, while the gates were still open, there came out from the guard room at the end throe Moorish soldiers, a drummer, a bugler, and one with a fife, and to his astonishment, and indeed to some feeling deeper than astonishment, there rang out suddenly the "Last Post," which for many years he had been accustomed to hoar played beneath his window at night in the parade ground of Wellington barracks. The sound of that peculiarly English tune ringing out through the open gateway over the wild country and summoning those who were still without the caravan- serai into its shelter and security, seemed to him then, and seemed now, to symbolise the ideal of British Governments in their dealings with their Colonies and the races which inhabited them. He believed that that ideal was still being followed out by His Majesty's Government to-day, and he should like very inefficiently to place upon record his very firm belief that the policy which was being followed by them would result in the ultimate benefit of the Colonies, and was at the same time in consonance with the highest traditions of the British race.
said he would not follow the right hon. Gentleman in the remarks he had made, but he would follow his example in not dealing with previous speeches which had been made in the acrimonious debates they had hail upon subjects which this Vote raised. It would be easy to call attention to the action of the Government in proposing an Amendment to a vote of censure of which they were ashamed, and then endeavouring to got it talked out. It would be easy to call attention to the various forms of hypocrisy which had characterised the action of the Government in the past, but he did not intend to go into these matters. What he wanted the Committee to consider what was going to be the policy of the Government in South Africa in the future. After all, these acrimonious Party debates did not serve any useful purpose, and what they wanted to know was what the policy of the Government was going to be. In this House there was a Party, only a small Party, of extremists who believed sincerely, and always had believed, that the whole of the British policy in South Africa was wrong; that the war was wrong to start with; that it was unnecessary, and that the host thing that they could now do was to try and got back the country which had been the scone of those warlike operations to the condition it was in before the war. That extreme section of the House represented a certain proportion of opinion in the country, but there was a great danger that the views of that section would obtain far too much importance, not only here but in South Africa. The British settlers in South Africa might come to the conclusion that that section represented the views of the English people as a whole. Therefore it became necessary for those who were on the Unionist side of the House, who represented a large section of the population, and who represented even a certain amount of Liberal opinion on this subject, to point out that the real feeling of this country on this question did not disapprove of the war. He expressed the hope that the Government would clearly show that their policy was not influenced by the views of these extremists. He was afraid there was in South Africa at the present time a suspicion latent in the minds of the British population that the policy of the Government was indeed being influenced in that way. And that being so, he hoped in the course of the debate there would be some expression of opinion which would carry a message of hope, not so much to the Dutch as to the British population of South Africa. In connection with this, the question of laud settlement in the Orange River Colony was of particular importance. If, as Lord Elgin recently said in the House of Lords, it was premature for him to say that no reservation should be made with regard to land settlement, how much more premature was the statement made at the beginning of the session that the Orange River Colony was to be at once given responsible government. He hoped the Government would not feel bound to persist in the policy of granting to the Orange River Colony immediate responsible government. When they had examined all the facts in the light of the knowledge they would acquire from the Commission sent out to South Africa, they would be perfectly justified in saying that the decision they had come to was premature and that they did not see their way to giving that responsible government which they had suggested. If the Government took that course those sitting on the Unionist side of the House would not blame, them for inconsistency. They would be only too glad to see the right policy carried out. If the Government could not withdraw that statement, perhaps they would take into very serious consideration the possibility of reserving the question of land settlement for some time after responsible government was given to the Orange River Colony. It would be far bettor to make this reservation when giving responsible government than to give responsible government without any reservation, and then to find it necessary to interfere. Whether the opinion come to was right or wrong there was no doubt that a considerable section of the settler's in the Orange River Colony—the British colonists—felt in considerable danger. He hoped their fear was not justified and that whoever replied on behalf of the Government in this debate would send a word of encouragement to them and allay their fear. When they had regard to the letter of Mr. Cross which appeared on March 15th, and which said—
"In 1881 you sold the men who fought for you. Are you going to sell us again,"
it showed how necessary it was for the Government to say something to relieve those fears and to take no course of action which should in the future give rise to any fear of that kind. With regard to the Commission of inquiry which had gone to South Africa, it seemed to him rather a pity that all the suggestions made to the Chairman in the letter addressed to him were suggestions to ascertain whether it was possible to do something to conciliate the Boers rather than to do something that should put the English settlers in a strong and impregnable position. There was no doubt that that letter gave rise to a considerable amount of apprehension in the minds of British settlers lest it was the intention of the British Government in the Constitution subsequently to be given not to give the British settlers the equal rights which they would naturally expect with the Dutch. They on the Opposition side of the House pleaded for the Constitution not on behalf of the magnates. He wished the magnates had not been brought into this question at all. He thought history would clear away the cobwebs of prejudice and ignorance in this matter, and would judge them by their work in South Africa when the magnates had been long forgotten. The Under Secretary for the Colonies complained rather bitterly a day or two previously about the tone of the Press. He could sympathise with the hon. Gentleman, because it could not be pleasant to have the whole weight of the Government's policy in South Africa thrust on his shoulders. It could not be pleasant to be put in a more prominent position by the Press than the hon. Gentleman really occupied. He should regard the hon. Gentleman rather as a messenger of the gods, rather as Mercury who had to obey the commands of Jove and Jupiter who nodded on Olympus and sometimes on the Treasury Bench. The weight of the responsibility lay not upon the hon. Gentleman but upon the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for the Colonies, notwithstanding what the malign and corrupt Press of this country might say. In the case of South Africa, and especially with regard to land settlement, he wished to know whether the Government were going to adopt a policy which would make the present British settlers disloyal, and drive them into the arms of the disloyal Dutch population, or whether they were going to adopt a policy which would gradually promote the fusion of the two races—a policy based on equal rights whereby the British population would be encouraged rather than the Dutch. It rested upon the Government to say whether in the future the colony was to be a loyal portion of the Empire, or whether it would be disloyal and anxious to cut itself adrift in a way that he hoped would never happen in one of our Colonies again.
* said he had put down a Motion to reduce the salary of the Secretary of State by £100 for the purpose of initiating a discussion on the same subject as that with which the noble Lord had just dealt, namely, the question of the land settlement, which had been strangely neglected in the course of the anomalous arrangements which had taken place in connection with South Africa recently. Whilst he was the last to underrate the importance of fostering the mining industry in South Africa, he believed the prosperity of South Africa depended to a much greater extent upon a united and loyal community of British and Dutch. At the best the mining industry was but a transitory feature of the history of that country. What had to be more considered was the permanent stability, which could only be realised by the establishment of a prosperous and contented community of British and Dutch working together. He desired to examine what had taken place with regard to British land settlement in these colonies in the past, and to elucidate from the Government what policy they intended to pursue in the immediate future. The period between the annexation of the Transvaal and Orange River Colony in 1900 and the termination of the war in May, 1902, presented a peculiarly advantageous time to prepare a complete scheme of land settlement. A scheme on a very large scale might have been promoted in these two colonies. Although there had been one in operation and a certain amount of good work had been done in that direction, the scheme was but a shadow as compared with the very large expense involved in bringing it about. He did not wish to ignore or under-estimate the great difficulties that presented themselves to those who were responsible for this work at the termination of the late war. They were various and numerous. There was always the difficulty of a judicious selection of settlers, and there was also the difficulty occasioned by the country having been laid bare by the long and devastating war. Large numbers of the Boer inhabitants had been exiled as prisoners of war to different parts of the world, and, of course, the first and most urgent duty at the expiration of the war was to repatriate those prisoners, replace them on the farms, and put them in a position to be able to obtain their livelihood. But the settlement of British settlers from this country and other parts of the Empire should have been a separate and distinct operation. He did not desire to approach this subject in any Party spirit. Party spirit had been far too rife in the discussions on South Africa, and, if anything permanently beneficial was to be done to the Transvaal and Orange River Colony in the future, it could only be done by the united efforts of both sides of the House. When the land settlement scheme was commenced a sum of £3,000,000 was allocated from the War Loan, and he gathered that something like, £2,200,000 had been spent upon settlements in the two colonies. Of this amount £845,000 had been spent in the purchase of something like 1,100,000 acres in the Orange River Colony, and some 700 adult males, as the report termed them, had been placed on the land. Of these, 207 were South African born, 102 Dutch, and 391 were home and over-sea immigrants. Perhaps his hon. friend would be able to enlighten him, but it appeared that from the total sum a considerable amount had been spent, apart from the purchase, in placing these men on the land and in general administration. Probably something considerably over £1,000,000 had been spent in connection with land settlement. As a result, after four years less than 400 British over-sea settlers had been placed in the Orange River Colony. Without being hypercritical, and looking at the extreme importance of a land settlement scheme for that country, it did appear to be a very small result for the very large sum spent. But what was a matter of concern to those who looked upon British land settlement as important was the fact that during the past year there had been a practical cessation of immigration into the Orange River Colony. In all, only 120 men, women, and children, of which number only twenty-four were men had settled in the country during the past year. Yet the report said there were about 500,000 acres of undeveloped land on the western side available for purchase, and anyone acquainted with the subject knew perfectly well that any amount of land could be Drought in the open market at a very small sum compared with that asked a few years ago. Was there a scarcity of applicants? The report said that to-day there were numbers of suitable applicants only waiting to come upon the land if land were put at their disposal—men who had farm implements and were in possession of a sufficient amount of capital, men who fought for the Crown in the late war, and the very men they would like to see upon the land. He had no desire to attack the late Government as regards this question, nor did he desire to argue whether the land had been allotted in unsuitable portions, although it did seem that a large amount of land had been allotted to a very few people. Fifteen thousand acres was considered the economic denomination for a profitable grazing farm, but anyone who knew the Orange River Colony knew that there were large tracts in that country which with irrigation could have been converted to other purposes than grazing, Such as market gardening, and cereals of any kind. Had that been done it would have had the great advantage that it would not have necessitated anything like so large a tract of land being purchased by an individual, and much less capital would have been required. The colony in that case would carry a much larger population, which was one of the most important factors for the future prosperity of that colony. The presence of men of this character was of extreme political importance. There was to lie representative government comparatively soon. He felt sure everyone would agree that the idea of gerrymandering the franchise so that preference should be given to the Briton or the Boer was one that was od ous to them all. The establishment of a large community of British farmers working in harmony with Dutch neighbours and the mining community was the only true solution. He hoped that before the recently appointed Commission returned the Prime Minister would have seen his way to instruct the Commission to look into this question of land settlement as well, because it very closely touched the whole question of franchise in the future. He was not arguing for a moment the carrying out of any policy with a view to swamping the Boors in the colonies. There was no fear of that. There were 10,000 farms in the Orange River Colony, and at present only 2,000 were occupied by Englishmen. There was no fear of any policy the British Government might carry out swamping the Boers there, but a large proportion of Englishmen in the country was a valuable, and, he believed, an imperative factor in its future prosperity. He believed the Boers in their farm districts would welcome the advent of Englishmen as their neighbours. Wherever they went in South Africa and saw a community of farmers consisting of Boers and Englishmen, as he had often seen, they would invariably find that the land was being better cultivated; there was a higher standard of prosperity, and, in fact, the whole conditions of life were improved by the presence of Englishmen. Therefore, in speaking strongly on behalf of increasing the British population in the Orange River Colony, he did so in no antagonistic spirit to the Boers who were resident there. He would turn for a moment to the Transvaal, because the question there was as important as, if not more important than, in the Orange River Colony. In the Transvaal a British farming element was urgently needed as a healthy link between the Boers and the natives. Very important information was to be found in the Report of the Director of Land Settlement on the Transvaal. This volume contradicted the statement that the Transvaal was only suitable for the mining industry and was not of any use for agricultural purposes, and it showed that in that country were to be found large tracts of laud most useful for modern scientific agricultural purposes. It also proved that within the past three years with scientific methods the Transvaal had given satisfactory results. After a careful examination by experts of the agricultural capabilities and disabilities of the country, the same volume pointed out that immediate remedies could be found for those disabilities, to extinguish or mitigate diseases amongst cattle, to meet the difficulties caused by the periodical droughts, and all those natural pestilences which were so detrimental. There was available any amount of land of the very best quality which, with a little capital, could be made most productive. Up to 1903 there were practically no British settlers in the Transvaal, but there were now 600 established there at a cost of £600,000. Each of them owed the Government £1,000, and unless it was paid in the prescribed time the land would be forfeited. He hoped the Under-Secretary for the Colonies would vigorously prosecute the policy of land settlement during the months which would intervene between now and the establishment of the new constitution. The noble Lord the Member for Thirsk had made an allusion to those who were already settled on the land. Lord Milnor seemed to be particularly anxious that those settled on the land should not run the risk of being treated arbitrarily by the new Transvaal Government when it was established. He would not go into the merits of that point. If there was any fear that there lingered in the minds of the Boers bitter memories of the past war which might find expression in a Government in which the Dutch element was strongly predominant, he hoped the Government would not flinch from putting every safeguard in the new constitution to preserve the rights of British settlers on the land and to prevent injustice being done to them. He would probably be met by the assertion that, after all, the only industry in the Transvaal of any importance was the mining industry. He utterly refused to accept that proposal. If that were true, then there certainly ought to have been no Boer War or any annexation of the Transvaal or the Orange River Colony, and those countries would be of very little use and, possibly, a great encumbrance to us in years to come. Those who had experience of colonisation he thought, would agree as a general proposition that no colony could remain an integral or loyal portion of the British Empire which was not capable of civilised occupation otherwise than in connection with mines. Therefore, he refused to accept the doctrine that the mines were the sole source of wealth in the Transvaal. The whole of the British Empire was a contradiction of that argument. In the year 1820 the difficulties of Capo Colony between the Boors and the British and the dangers which confronted both those peoples were overcome in the happiest possible way by a scheme of British land settlement. This House voted £50,000, and with this small sum of money no less than 5,000 English settlers wont out to Delagoa Bay, and that nucleus of British population had done more to keep Cape Colony loyal and an integral portion of this Empire than anything else. The same story was to be found in Canada and in New Zealand. When New Zealand became a British colony the sum of £800,000 was expended upon a scheme of land settlement, and it could not be denied that that was the main nucleus of all the prosperity which had since taken place in that Colony. He asked his hon. friend not to reply that this policy could no longer be continued on vigorous lines because it cost too much money; it would have to be done if we were going to hold South Africa. We had spent £250,000,000 on the war, and wasted untold treasure for which, at the present time, there seemed to be very little prospect of any return. He thought that a small sum of money spent at this period would probably be the best investment of all. In view of the possible £3,000,000 surplus he was not going to ask the Undersecretary for the Colonies to request the Chancellor of the Exchequer to find more money for this purpose out of British taxation, because there were other ways in which the money could be found. The sum of £3,000,000 had been allotted already, and only £2,200,000 of that sum had been spent. Then there was the £35,000,000 loan. He understood that up to last July £28,000,000 had been spent, and so there remained another £1,000,000 unspent, and it could not be spent better than upon a land settlement scheme There was also money owing to us from South Africa. The House had heard a great deal about the mines, but in spite of all the debates that had taken place, he expected that they would find that the output of gold in the Transvaal this year would be the biggest of all, although the mining shares had gone down. Then there was the sum of £30,000,000 owing to this country. He did not think it would be asking too much if we asked for an instalment, and that first instalment could not be allocated to a more useful or servicable purpose than a scheme of land settlement. He hoped they would hear more upon this question from other hon. Members. His hon. friend the Member for Gravesend, who took a somewhat hostile line occasionally on Colonial questions, had done some useful service in connection with one of those big Imperial associations which had been doing its best to promote land settlement. He invited his hon. friend to use all the influence he could with his colleagues to look upon this as one of the most important factors in the future prosperity of South Africa. The whole future of South Africa depended upon it, and if a scheme of land settlement was developed, the difficulties in regard to the mines and Chinese labour and all other wrangles would be forgotten. The establishment of a British population on the land, working in co-operation with the Boers and the natives, was the only foundation upon which South Africa could become a prosperous and contented portion of His Majesty's dominions.
* said that he was glad to follow the hon. Baronet, because he wished to deal with the same subject, and he was in agreement with much that he had said with regard to land settlement. He desired to direct the attention of the Committee especially to that point which had been incidentally touched on by the hon. baronet, but not to an extent equal to its importance, namely, irrigation. He believed not only that irrigation was essential to any satisfactory scheme of land settlement, but that it supplied a real solution of the South African problem in its economic, political, and imperial aspect. That perhaps was a large order; but he would make his reasons clear before he sat down. He had always regretted that at the time when the repatriation of the Boers took place after the war, and some sort of project of land settlement was initiated, a far larger scheme with regard to the latter was not undertaken. The country was in a generous mood, and willing to secure permanently the results of the war, which had cost so much money and so many lives. This could have been done by adopting as a basis for such a scheme the plan of the distinguished irrigation export from Egypt, who examined the whole country and embodied his conclusions in a Report which was thrilling reading to anyone from whose mind economic considerations did not banish all sentiment the sum total of Mr. Wilcox's Report was that South Africa might, by irrigation, be converted into the granary of the world.
He would venture to trouble the Committee with some experience of his own, which constituted his claim to address them on the subject. For ten years he had been engaged in an irrigation project in the North West Territory of Canada—a project that was now recognised by the Canadian Government as of great importance to the country, and as forming the cradle of a new population for that vast and hitherto thinly inhabited area. From this experience he could put the financial question in a nutshell. Land, of which they had a quantity, and which they could not sell at half-a-dollar an acre, they had from the first been soiling for from £10 to £15 per acre. It cost three dollars an acre to irrigate it. The population of as yet a very limited area was now increasing by thousands. They had a problem before them similar in its main features to that existing in South Africa. It was true that there were none of those political or imperial aspects involved in it which made the problem infinitely more pressing in the latter country. It was also true that the physical features were different, and that those existing in South Africa were of such a nature as to make it imperative that any large scheme of irrigation should be undertaken on the same scale as in India, and Egypt and America, and as had been laid down as a condition for South Africa in the brilliant and comprehensive Report of Mr. Wilcox. They had a vast expanse of land useless for purposes of cultivation and practically uninhabited. Some of it could be used as ranch land in blocks of 30,000 or 50,000 acres or more, employing here and there a superintendent and a few cowboys. But there was no cultivation and no population. By the introduction of water they had converted it into a country where a farmer could live and grow prosperous on 150 acres of land. The same conditions existed in South Africa; the same beneficent change could be made there. What was more important, the same security would exist for the repayment of the capital to the central authority, which in that case would be the State. In the United States the Federal authority supplied great sums of money to the State authority, who in turn expended it on irrigation and received the instalments from the colonists and thus repaid the Federal treasury.
There were many other points of similarity between the two cases, but he would only mention one more. They built their canal by the labour of those they intended to settle there. During the work of construction they paid them a living wage. But they paid them the rest in land on which they settled. He cabled the attention of those interested in what was called the "poor white question" in South Africa to this process. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for India had stated that the coloured man in South Africa was "deemed a necessary part of the economic machinery of the country, whether for mining or for manufacturing, for tillage or for ranching." He did not altogether like to hear human labour called a part of the machinery of production, although that statement was economically accurate. But in such a case as this, when the workers had the prospect of settlement and independence before them, and every day's labour would bring them nearer to the possession of a home of their own, he believed that the whites of South Africa would not be averse to such labour.
It might be true that the time had passed for dealing with the question of irrigation in South Africa on a scale commensurate with the needs of the country, its illimitable and wastes, with untold fertility and natural wealth buried below the surface, and only wanting water to bring it forth, and the hand of man to materialise it; its great rivers running slack in deep ditches for ten months of the year, but running the other two months in mighty volume, of which only a hundreth part needed to be saved to irrigate the whole country; its physical features in many parts suited to the formation of vast reservoirs which would make men independent of nature's niggard provision during the greater part of the year. To deal with such a question comprehensively would be a splendid mission for the Liberal Party, for it would people South Africa with the British race by means economically sound and remunerative to the State. But the policy of irrigation might be adopted on a smaller scale of dams and well-sinking—with the £3,000,000 or such additions to it as the hon. Baronet had suggested, and the money would always be coming back and could be laid out again in the same way. Irrigation would change the face of the country wherever it was applied. It would change it from a country where 5,000 acres were needed to support a single farmer to a country where a settler and his family could live and prosper on 150 acres; from a country where land was worth £1 an acre to a country where land would be worth from £30 to £100 per acre; from a country thinly inhabited, in many parts not inhabited at all, to a country which would carry ten times the population, and keep them prosperous and thriving; from a country suited only to a scattered Boer population to a country suited to a British population. At present there was no agriculture worth the name in South Africa except these portions which had been already subjected to some form of irrigation, however imperfect. There was, at least in the Transvaal, a great industrial population and hardly any pursuit of agriculture by cultivation. Even maize, the food of the natives, their chief product, had to be imported in large quantities the hon. Baronet, in speaking of the mining industry, seemed to imply—and he looked towards the Opposition Benches—that someone had stated that the mining industry was the only industry in South Africa. He did not know where that statement came from. It was quite true that at the present time, and for many years to come, it would be by far the most important industry; and that all other industries in which white labour especially was engaged were dependent upon it. Even this very industry of agriculture was dependent on the mining population to take its products; and in proportion as they injured the prosperity of the mining industry they not only lessened the employment of white men in that industry, but in all the other industries which employed white men only. There w ore different opinions as to the life of the mining industry. One said that it would only last twenty-five years, another said 100 years. He was not inclined to believe that there was any limit of that sort to be placed on the metalliferous wealth of South Africa. There was a vast amount of mineral wealth yet untouched—vast areas of low grade ore which it did not pay to work under the Boer Government, but which could be worked under the less onerous conditions that now prevailed. But even if the time came when the mining industry should dwindle and eventually disappear, the mining industry would have done its work for the agricultural industry, and an adequate policy of irrigation would, in the words of Mr. Wilcox, "have put its agricultural wealth on such a solid basis that the country would not have to fall from the height of prosperity to the depth of poverty." So far he had spoken only of the economic aspect of the question. He desired to deal with the other aspect which the hon. Baronet had only touched on in guarded terms, but which he would treat more frankly. He did not disguise that such a scheme would tend very largely to increase the British and pro-British population of South Africa. He had not the slightest desire to propose any exclusion of the Boers. But the Boers did not care to cultivate the land. In the Orange River Colony the Boers had only taken 100 farms while the British had taken 600 under the Land Settlement Scheme. That was because these were farms requiring cultivation. That would be far more the case with irrigable farms which necessitated that sort of agricultural labour to which the British colonist was peculiarly suited. A Boer with a farm of 5,000 or 10,000 acres would only till twenty or thirty acres of it. They were a pastoral people. The British colonist lived by working the land. It would be the same with I he sons of the loyal South African colonist, so many of whom fought in the war. If they opened the land of South Africa to this sort of colonisation, it would be those people, and not the Boers, who would occupy the irrigated firms and around whom families would grow up British in race, in character, and loyalty. Was that a result to be ashamed of? What was all the talk they had heard about "packing" the country with a British population? Why should not they settle a British population there if there was an overflow of British strength and fibre in this country or in South Africa to be dealt with? What did that sort of contention mean? It meant that they who were ready to pursue an Imperial project—the securing the South African Colonies—by means of a war which cost thousands of lives and millions of money, were doing something shameful and reprehensible if they continued to pursue that object by an economic process which could stand on its own basis and which would be of inestimable benefit to South Africa. They were going to give self-government to these Colonies. Every question great and small would then have to be decided by the majority at the polls. What about the racial question? They would be blind if they did not consider the possibility of the racial question supplying the political line of cleavage in the future as it had done in the past. In that case what would be the position of South Africa when they had given it self-government, if there was a Dutch majority? South Africa would go. This country could not oppose the decision of popular opinion in the Colonies concerned. There had been, happily, only one case in our colonial history where popular opinion had decided in favour of separation from the Mother Country, and in that case popular opinion conquered. The American Colonies seceded. They did not want that to happen in South Africa. He could assure the Committee that he did not wish to treat this question on the lines of Party divisions in this country. In this matter there must be a new division of Parties. There must be two camps; one, those who were on the side of South Africa remaining a part of the British Empire; the other, those who were against it. By the light of that division all these South African questions must be viewed, and whatever accusations they might bring against the Party opposite for their treatment of those questions, he for one did not believe that there would be any considerable section of opinion in the country in favour of separation or of any steps that would lead to it.
said he desired to call attention to the very serious announcement made that afternoon by the Under-Secretary for the Colonies. In answer to a Question, that hon. Gentleman stated that martial law still prevailed in the Colony of Natal, and that he saw no reason why it should speedily come 10 an end. Hon. Gentlemen were too well informed to suppose that martial law was necessary for putting down armed rebellion. It was part of the common law of this country, and of every part of the King's dominions, that an armed rising might be put down by force not only by the regular forces and by the Militia, but by any loyal subject of the Crown. Martial law applied only to the punishment of offenders. He was not going to defend Lord Elgin and his attempt to rescue the twelve natives of Natal who were executed the other day. He believed that very few hon. Gentlemen were in favour of abolishing the Imperial veto, but those who were, whether they knew it or not, were marching to the disruption and disintegration of the Empire. If they abrogated the right of Imperial control, the Empire itself would cease to exist. That was almost a verbal proposition, but at any rate it was one which nobody out of Bedlam would attempt to deny. If Lord Elgin had not insisted in staying the execution of those twelve natives until he knew the reason why, removal from office would have been totally inadequate as punishment for the offence. There remained the much more serious question as to whether Lord Elgin should have allowed the execution of those natives. He was not going to attack the Government of Natal. It did not consist of archangels, but of mortal, fallible men like ourselves. They were anxious to do right, but liable to go wrong. They were men possessed of the same prejudices and passions as our own. Was any hon. Gentleman absolutely certain that every one of those natives was guilty of the murder of which he was accused? He was well aware that the evidence had been examined by the Attorney General of Natal; that the Government had approved of it—and they must all admire the wisdom and capability shown by Sir Henry M'Callum throughout those proceedings. Courts martial were not the only tribunals which made mistakes. There was nothing more dangerous than trying men in batches. Some of the natives might have been guilty of murder; the majority of them might have had no defence; but there might have been one single man who was innocent. Hon. Gentlemen opposite for Ireland might have in their minds the case of the men who were known as the Manchester martyrs. He was not allowed to discuss the question of whether the title of "Manchester Martyrs" was just or not, as it was foreign to the issue before the House. Three men were executed for the murder, although five men were convicted. One man was released on the ground that he had no arms in his possession, but really he thought because he was an American citizen. The remaining man had no more to do with the murder than the judges on the bench. He was not a Fenian, and he was at home in his own house at the time of the murder. Yet the jury unanimously found him guilty. That was not a court-martial. There were on the bench two of the most learned and able judges of the land. And how was M'Guire's innocence discovered? Because some reporters for the Press were in court, and were so impressed by the evidence given in his favour that they addressed a petition to the Home Secretary, and so M'Guire was pardoned, and, being a Marine, went back to the service of the country. In the case of the court-martial at Natal there were not five men, but twelve men on trial. It was on record that the Governor first told his Ministers that the proper course was to bring these men before the ordinary courts, but in deference to the opinion of his Ministers he gave way. He asked the Committee most seriously to consider the great and crucial question whether in such circumstances, even in a self-governing Colony, the Governor was bound to yield to the advice of his Ministers. He put that point with all the more readiness because it was the point taken in The Times that morning by his distinguished friend Sir Frederick Pollock, who was, what he was not, a constitutional authority. A Governor was bound by the advice of the Minister in legal and political matters, but not when they gave him advice to go beyond the law. Martial law had never been proclaimed in this country since the Petition of Right became a statute of the realm in 1629. Not even in the civil war between the King and the Parliament, not even in the devolution of 1688, not even in the rebellions of 1715 and 1745 was martial law proclaimed—never, never, never!
Except in Ireland.
said it was applied in Ireland in 1833, but it was applied by Act of Parliament. No one denied that Parliament could do anything which was physically possible. But it had been laid down by one of the most distinguished men who had ever occupied the position of Lord Chief Justice of England that there was no authority short of the Legislature which could apply martial law in any part of the King's dominions. In the case of Jamaica, with which he was dealing, Lord Chief Justice Cockburn said there was a local statute which empowered Governor Eyre for a limited time to do what he did do. He should like to know whether there was such a statute in Natal, and, if not, who gave the Governor authority to proclaim martial law. If it had never been necessary in this country, it was a strange thing that it should be found necessary in a small colony defended by a large force of British troops provided by this country, and paid for by this House. He hoped they would have a little more light upon this point. He might remind his hon. friend of another case of martial law in Ireland, that in regard to Wolfe Tone in 1798, when there was a much more dangerous revolution in Ireland than there ever had been since. Wolfe Tone was an active rebel acting with soldiers from France; he was taken red handed and was brought before a military court. His counsel applied to the High Court for a rule to stay the proceedings, and the judges ordered that even under those circumstances the case should be brought before them, and the rule would have been made absolute if Wolfe Tone had not cut his own throat in prison. He did not believe that there was a member of this Committee, however learned, who could quote a single case where martial law had been held to be legal in this country at any time since the Petition of Right. The hon. Member for Thirsk had said that acrimonious Parliamentary debates did no good, and that what they wanted was information about the policy of the Government. He had done his best to avoid the one, and was doing his best to procure the other. Why should this be made a Party question at all? Hon. Gentlemen opposite had shown themselves just as zealous for the rights of the native races as any one on the Liberal side. They could all make political speeches when they liked, but why bring the British Empire into the melting pot? Surely the time was arrived when they all, at least before dinner, might take the greatness of the British Empire for granted. But there was something greater than the greatness of the British Empire with its splendid and manifold resources. The sensual idolatry of more size was not a very lofty faith. But what was greater than the Empire itself, or even of any material thing, was the knowledge, the conviction, the assurance that there were at the heart of the Empire, in London, statesmen who were wise and brave enough to protect the subjects of his Majesty, of whatever class or creed or colour, from tyranny or oppression, from injustice or wrong.
said he agreed with every word that had fallen from his hon. friend, who in language more natural and picturesque than he could employ had referred to a matter to which he intended to allude. As he listened to the debate, one scene was in his mind and one only. It laid upon him as a nightmare. It was the scene which took place in Natal on Monday. He saw as plainly as possible the firing party; he saw the men who were shot down, the pits in which they were to be buried, and he saw the coloured men forced up from district to district to see their own kith and kin put to death. He believed that these men, whatever their colour, were made in the image of God, and he must speak out what he thought. He was a somewhat enthusiastic student of history, and his sense of horror at these proceedings was only equalled by what he felt when he imagined the scones which took place in Ireland in 1798. The sentence of a court-martial law was not a legal sentence in itself, and when he thought this matter over he remembered the letter written by Lord Cornwallis to his bosom friend General Ross, in which he described the devilry which went on in Ireland. Lord Cornwallis said he was surrounded, even at his own table, by people who rejoiced in blood and in gibbetings, hangings and death. He asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies to take note of the fact—he spoke subject to correction by the great authorities and especially the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the Forest of Dean, who was one of the greatest authorities in these matters—that a Colonial Government was dismissible and removable without any reason being assigned—absolutely dismissible at the will of the Governor-General. What was the position of Sir Henry McCallum. A Colonial Governor's term of office was generally conceded to be four or five years. Never was the term of the office extended beyond five years mi less there was some special reason for it. If hon. Members would look at the date of the appointment of Sir Henry McCallum as Governor-General of Natal, they would see it was 1900. Why was he kept so long in this appointment? He (Mr. MacNeill) did not wish to say anything disagreeable about anybody. Lord Milner was in town and would correct him if he was wrong, but his recollection was that when the letter of Lord Milner, in which he desired unofficially that the Cape Constitution should be suspended, was written it was directed to Sir Henry McCallum. It would be far better, he thought, for a Governor to be a man who had not taken a great part in the warfare in what might be called the arena of politics. Sir Henry McCallum had been engaged before in matters which had brought him into conflict with the native races. He had been at the head of several punitive expeditions before he became Governor of Natal. They all knew what a punitive expedition meant. Sir Henry McCallum had now been Governor beyond the allotted term, and what the House wanted to know was why it was. In 1902, during the peace negotiations, Sir Henry McCallum, who had then boon two years Governor in Natal, made in a place which was the centre of this disturbance, Greytown, a speech calculated to destroy the peace negotiations, and to which attention was drawn in this House on September 5th, 1902. He did not think Sir Henry McCallum was the best man to be put into the position of Governor of Natal when there was a contest between the white population on the one side and the black population on the other. There was one other matter, and this he thought was the most serious matter of all, and one to which the attention of Lord Elgin should be directed. Sir Henry McCallum had said that he was in favour of having these twelve men tried by the Civil Courts, but that he had yielded to the advice of his Ministers, and had had the se men tried by court-martial. Sir Henry McCallum had no constitutional right to yield in that way to the aidvice of his Ministers. Sir Henry McCallum here was an Imperial servant, he was Commander-in-Chief of the forces, and in a case like this it was his bounden duty to read the instructions which were published for the use of every Colonial Governor, which stated that the ugh a Governor might seek the advice of his Ministers he was bound to come to his own decision whatever that decision might be. If hon. Members would consult "Todd," one of the greatest constitutional colonial authorities after Sir Erskine May, they would find he said that in general criminal cases the Governor-General need not refer to the Home Government—
"But His Majesty's Government will be ready to afford any information, instruction, and advice, for which a Governor may think it necessary to apply when there is a question arising in a question of criminal procedure."
Could there have been a more special occasion than this for invoking the assistance of the Home Government? Here was martial law established by him at the desire of the Capo Ministry. He was at the head of the military forces. He was Governor of the Colony. Why did he not telegraph to the King's Government for instructions? Nothing was known of this court—martial until the sentence was passed, and then they knew that twelve men had been sentenced to death. Why was not the Imperial Government put into possession of these facts? Sir Henry McCallum, in a case of this kind, must be regarded as a distinct entity from "the Governor of Natal." He was an Imperial Officer, he was the servant of the Imperial Government, the servant of this House and hon. Members of this House who, in their turn, were the servants of the people of this country, were indirectly responsible for all the martial law that went on in South Africa. There must be no mistake about that, no sheltering behind the Cape Ministry. The hon. Member for Graves-end had given an interesting and accurate description of the powers vested in the Colonial Governor. Among others was the prerogative of mercy. The prerogative was exercised by the Crown in this country very little differently from the way in which it was exercised in the Colonies. Here it was exercised by the Crown through the Home Secretary on the advice of Ministers. A Colonial Governor; took the advice of his Executive Council, he was bound to hear them, but the exercise of the prerogative of mercy depended not upon their advice but upon the decision at which the Governor had arrived upon his own responsibility as an Imperial officer. That was stated most clearly in a speech by Lord Carnarvon on April 14th, 1878. His hon, friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies ought to be a very proud and happy man to-day; he had been for nearly an hour censured by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon. If the right hon. Gentleman only gave him (Mr. MacNiell) his censure he would regard it as the very highest praise. The right hon. Gentleman had exhibited an extreme jealousy of the rights of self-government in Natal, but though he trusted the people there he would not trust His Majesty's Government. The right hon. Gentleman had spoken of His Majesty's Government as suspect in this question of Natal. There seemed to be an hereditary flavour about this. "Oh," the right hon. Gentleman seemed to say, "if I only had a great Kilmainham compound in which to confine them, and give them a judicious dose of buckshot." But even a man who claimed omniscience, and who seemed every day to be congratulating the Almighty for having produced such an intellect, made a mistake which might be corrected by Arnold-Forster's "Easy Lessons in History." The right hon. Gentleman had said that the constitution of Natal—and there was a tremor in his voice when he mentioned the constitution; he seemed to be a sort of twentieth century Edmund Burke—could not be touched. The right hon. Gentleman was as wrong as he ought to be. The Constitution of Natal was granted, as they knew, in July, 1893. The last Gladstone Administration was in, and it was granted, curiously enough, not by Statute but by Letters Patent, and consequently it could be revoked. If Natal had boon a Crown Colony administered justly and wisely by the mother-country this matter would never have occurred. Let them only regard it from the point of view of statistics. Natal had 97,000 inhabitants of European races and 1,097,000 of coloured races. The former had been given responsible government. In the history of the Colonial Office it used to be the regular practice that when on the one side there was an enormous population of coloured people not yet educated in the principles of liberty, and on the other side a small white population, the government should be that of a Crown Colony. The reverse had been tried in Natal and nowhere else in the whole history of the British Colonies. With the emancipation of the slaves in the West Indies, the old representative assemblies were immediately and rightly abolished and a Crown Colony substituted, because there was the absolute necessity of the Imperial Government to defend the blacks as against the whites, and protect the whites as against the blacks, and a better system of government resulted. But in Natal exactly the reverse had happened, and there was a sharp and bitter controversy between the whites and the blacks, and there was a Ministry dependent on our money and troops telling His Majesty's Government that they themselves should decide: whether there should be any black men executed. That was a state of things which demanded a considerable manifestation of firm power by the British Parliament. He had not spoken in a Party sense. He spoke as a Member belonging to neither of the great Parties of the State, and one who cared not, except that it affected Ireland in a very modified degree, for the British Empire, but who did feel that so long as he was a Member of this House that he was doing good, not for his own country alone, but for all persons to whom the feelings, thoughts, and aspirations of humanity were dear, in endeavouring as far as he could to check bloodshed, and to establish peace and concord in every realm in the King's dominions.
* said he desired to urge upon the Government the necessity for some definite declaration with regard to Chinese labour in the Transvaal. He must reiterate an argument which he used when he had first the honour of speaking in this House. Members were in the House of Commons, he took it, because there was such a thing as the British Constitution. They were here because by a long established custom the mass of English people required to govern themselves, and they were the mouthpiece of the English people in the country. If they were not that then there was no particular reason for their being where they were. There was no doubt that, more important even than the question of dear food, as an actual turning-point of individual elections last January, was the question of whether Chinese labour should or should not remain licensed by us in South Africa. There were very few Members returned after hostile contests who could say that that was not the case. It was their business to obey the man-date of the English people in this matter. Very often the electors differed profoundly on many points from the private opinions of their representatives. But here the views of both were very strong. The electorate had declared themselves pretty strongly in regard to the taxation of food, but they had expressed themselves equally strongly upon Chinese labour in South Africa. Whether the introduction of Chinese labour in South Africa was a wise or unwise thing hon. Members had been returned as the servants of the electors and the Government existed only to do their will. But let them for a moment leave aside the argument as to the folly of the electorate, and let them consider whether there were not arguments which any reasonable and quiet man could urge upon this question. Were there no arguments which a reasonable man who desired to do good in his country and not be precipitate, could find? Had the conscience of the people been misinformed, or had the common sense of the people a good and rational basis when at the last election they determined that Chinese labour should come to an end? They had. For the first time since the industrial revolution capital had been permitted to transfer labour mechanically in large quantities from a place to which it was not native to a place where it was artificial and foreign, and to a country which was not tropical. The English people were determined that the Chinese should go from South Africa the se for whom he spoke regarded the action of the Government on this matter as unsatisfactory and incomplete. Supposing that the English people were light. What would take place? He did not wish to weary the House with stale facts, but they all knew that it was a little group of rich men who decided that as this country had fought a difficult and expensive war for them, they would take advantage of it by lowering the wages of the Kaffirs. They then found, as would be found anywhere where forced labour did not exist, that if they lowered wages suddenly there would come what was called a deficiency in the supply of labour. The mineowners lowered wages by some 25 per cent. upwards. If there was any large employer of labour in the House who cared to lower wages 25 per cent. upwards arbitrarily, he thought he would find a deficiency in the supply of labour very quickly, and then he would begin to understand the situation in South Africa. Immediately wages were lowered in 1902 there began what they had experienced before the Jameson Raid and before the war. A policy was started in the se little offices which he knew himself, and of which he could give the addresses in London; places where they displayed a large map of South Africa marked out in yellow and black, and the people in these offices began to whisper about Chinese labour. He remembered at an election in Dulwich a gentleman standing as a candidate for the love of his country who said he would never dream of such a thing as Chinese labour. It was said also that no Chinaman would be paid less than 2s. a day, and so they proceeded to pay him 1s. per day, and the thing followed its regular course. That was the usual procedure and the usual state of things in South African phenomena. They had now arrived at that stage when the English people were in the mood to demand that something should be done, and they had returned hon. Members to this House largely to put an end to Chinese labour. There they were on the 5th April, and nothing whatsoever had been done in this matter of Chinese labour. What could be done? There was a policy which it seemed to him was not extravagant or unwise. He thought it would be quite possible for His Majesty's Government to say that by a certain date—say three months hence—an earnest should be given of the intentions of the Government by sending the first batch of these men back to China. They could make the number small if they liked, and he would suggest that the first batch should consist of 1,000 Chinamen, who could easily be replaced by native labour. After that they could declare the rate at which the deportation should continue, and he would suggest that the rate should be 3,000 a month. If the se two principles were laid down the country would know that the Government were doing something. Would there be an economic disaster if this policy were followed? Certainly not, because there was an ample supply of black labour if the rate of wages paid before the war was restored. At the rate of 3,000 Chinamen per month returning to their own country, it would take eighteen months to get all of them back again, and they could replace them at the same rate by native labour the se Chinamen were retained simply and solely because the wealthy class were afraid that if the Chinamen were taken away it would make them a little less wealthy. He asked from the Government some declaration as to whether they would not go further than they had done, because all they had done so far was to make a very vague declaration that when any mineowner chose to make it uncomfortable for a body of Chinamen, they could get them sent back to China at our expense. In conclusion, he said that if the policy of the Government remained as it was, there was no course left to the se who had given definite pledges upon this question but to take the sense of the House upon it.
* said he thought it was time that both sides of the House set themselves to work in order to see whether they could formulate some line of policy upon which they could all agree in order to settle this very thorny and difficult problem. During the late war in South Africa the vast majority of the people in this country, whether they agreed or disagreed with the policy which led up to that war, gave their hearty support to the Government of the country in carrying the war through, because they considered it was the duty of all to support the Government and see the war carried through to a successful conclusion. They spent an immense amount of money, and many the thousands of valuable lives were lost, and the consequence was that the British flag was now flying over these new Colonies in South Africa. He thought they ought to be very careful what they said upon this question on both sides of the House, in order that the interests of the people in those new Colonies should not be injuriously affected. They must look forward to the settlement of that question with anxiety and well weigh their words. It was very unfortunate that political Parties were divided so much on racial lines—the Dutchman on the one side and the Englishman on the other. Indeed, the division was carried further, because it was practically a division of the towns against the country districts. It was to be hoped that if the country was to work out its own salvation, those racial lines might be obliterated, and that the two races might work together for the benefit of South Africa and to maintain the British connection. In the Dutch they had a nation against which any country might be proud to have fought, because a more tenacious and upright nation did not exist. Now that they were British subjects, let the people of the country do all they could to make them loyal. Naturally among the Dutch in South Africa there were a number who did not wish the English connection and who wished for an Afrikander republic. To his mind the vast majority of Dutch were more or less indifferent what flag they lived under. They were perfectly content to live under the English flag if only they received the treatment which they considered was their due. To balance the extreme party on the Dutch side, they in England must do all they could to stimulate the loyalty of English settlers in that country. If they did that, they would more than balance the hostile element in the Dutch population, and they might look forward with confidence to the future of South Africa. In his opinion the sooner responsible government was given to the Transvaal the better, but on the lines of one vote one value. Things had come to a pass in the Transvaal that the knot could only be cut by giving them responsible government at the earliest possible opportunity after the conditions on which the constitution should be given had been ascertained. There was not the same urgent necessity in the case of the Orange River Colony. In that Colony there was not the same pressing need for the solution of the labour difficulty. There were no mines there to speak of; it was a pastoral country. There was a scheme going on in that Colony which it would be unwise to take out of the hands of the Imperial authority at so early a date. He wished to impress on the Under-Secretary for the Colonies the fact that the question of giving responsible Government to the Orange River Colony would not have come up for settlement if it had not happened that that Colony was geographically situated next to the Transvaal. What was the key of the situation, both economic and political, in South Africa? It seemed to him that it all centred on the prosperity of the Rand, and the working of the gold mines, because unless there was a large white population, the farmers of the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony would not be able to dispose of their produce. The prosperity of the Transvaal depended upon an unlimited supply of unskilled labour. On the subject of Chinese labour he would like to make an appeal to hon. Members in all parts of the House. It was a subject to which they should refer a little less frequently. Virtue had been its own reward in the case of hon. Gentlemen opposite. They had been returned in large numbers in consequence of the use made of Chinese labour; and therefore, as they had gained what they wanted, lie saw little use in going on talking about it. The Party to which he belonged had suffered heavily owing to what they considered misrepresentations on the question of Chinese labour at the general election. They had made their protest, and he thought there was no good to be gained by harping on the subject. It was doing harm in South Africa and no good in this country. The question of Chinese labour in South Africa should be left to the free and unfettered decision of the Transvaal when it got responsible government. [An HON. MEMBER: Why?] He would tell the hon. Member. Because he thought it was a matter which concerned the Transvaal and not us. It had been said that the working men who would be a large majority of the voters on the Rand would be under the thumb of the mining magnates, and that they would vote for a continuance of Chinese labour. He could not agree with that. The working men of this country had shown at the last general election that they could vote independently. Why should a working man, because he went to settle in Johannesburg, lose any of the independent characteristics he had in this country and vote at the bidding of the men who paid him his wages? If this matter were left entirely to the decision of the people of the Transvaal when they got self-government he was sure it would be for the good of South Africa. In the same way the decision about native questions ought to be left, as far as possible, to the responsible authorities in South Africa. After all, why should Englishmen and Englishwomen, when they emigrated from their country, leave behind all the kindly feelings and humane instincts which characterised them here, and become people who, according to some of the speeches which had been made, had no feeling for the native inhabitants at all? He was sure these speeches must give great pain to the white inhabitants of South Africa, both Boer and Briton. They ought to be able to trust their white brethren, be they Boers or Britons, in South Africa to treat the black races properly. On both sides of the House they should try to agree upon some policy for the good of South Africa. He looked forward to the time at no distant date when South Africa would be federated together under the British flag, loyal to the King and to the connection with this country—a federation which would add not only to the dignity but to the strength of the Empire.
* said he had been surprised to notice the extraordinary zeal for self-government now professed by the other side of the House. He remembered the time, not very many years ago, when those hon. Gentlemen or their predecessors in the Unionist Party, were agitating in the Press and elsewhere for depriving Cape Colony, which was a much larger Colony than Natal, of self - government. If that was considered tolerable then, why should they denounce now even a hint that Natal had been a little prematurely endowed with self-government. The I right hon. Member for Croydon, in his somewhat provocative speech, had said that Natal had been sneered at for having a small population. There was no question of sneering. It was a question of noting facts. The right hon. Gentleman said that New Amsterdam (now New York) had a small population a couple of hundred years ago. Yes, but when Natal had the population which New York now had she would be entitled to more attention than now. For, after all, size was of importance in this regard. He had been trying to find a few constituencies in England which had a population comparable to that of Natal in order to put the case fairly. The population of West Ham was nearly three times that of Natal. He meant the white population of Natal. There was a great deal of cant talked about the rights of the self-governing Colonies. After all, men did not become archangels when they left Great Britain and settled in the Colonies. They were no better than the average man in this country. He would assume that the people in Natal were as good as the people in West Ham. 'But supposing there was a quarrel' between His Majesty's Government and the Town Council of West Ham, and that the town council resigned, everyone in this House would say, "Let them resign." After all, the British Empire could get on without either West Ham or Natal. [OPPOSITION cries of "Oh, oh."] We were not dependent as an Empire on the wishes of the Government of Natal, which was virtually equivalent to the Town Council of West Ham. [OPPOSITION cries of Oh, oh."] There was the same type of man in the two councils, and it was perfectly right that both should be judged comparatively. Why should this small white population in Natal, in the name of self-government, be empowered, with the aid of British troops, to impose whatever taxes it chose on the large body of the native people in Natal? That was a doctrine which ought to be resented by every Party in this House when they remembered that they owed their privileges to the fact that their ancestors resisted taxation by the Crown. Nobody assumed that the natives in Natal were the intellectual equals of the whites; but they had sufficient intelligence to know when they were taxed. After all, they were human beings like ourselves. There was a good deal of glib talk about the self-governing Colonies; but it should be remembered that there were 400 000,000 of people in the British Empire and only 52,000,000 were white. We could not hold that enormous coloured population unless we treated them fairly. The real Empire to-day was Great Britain and India. The only portions of the Empire which subscribed anything worth speaking of to the defence of the Empire were the United Kingdom and India. All the rest of the Empire was dependent for its defence on the taxpayers of this country and India. The poorest peasants in India and in Ireland were paying taxes to-day in order to defend rich men in the Transvaal and Natal. Australia was absolutely dependent for its defence on this country, for it was well known that the Australian squadron added no strength to the British Navy.
Order, order. We are discussing the Colonial Vote.
* : Surely, in regard to the Colonial Office Vote, I am justified in referring to the defence of Australia.
The Colonial Office does not deal with the Australian squadron.
* said he would not argue the point. He merely wished to say that Australia was dependent on this country for its defence. Without the British fleet Australia would be at the mercy of any great maritime Power. In Natal the colonists were not only dependent on this country for external defence, but for the maintenance of internal order; and yet, when this Government asked for information in regard to a particular important matter, there was a talk in Natal of "cutting the painter." He would ask was there no English disloyalty in South Africa? Was it not disloyal to threaten to "cut the painter" directly the Imperial Government interfered? The first thing this country should do was to require the Colonies to pay for their own defence. Self-government without self-defence was a mockery. In addition we were entitled to insist that the honour of our flag belonged to us, and we had a right to demand that the Colonies should do nothing which disgraced that flag. The right hon. Member for West Birmingham had made a great point of sneering at the moral sense of the mother country. Did he propose that we should always accept the moral sense of the Colonies? In the eighteenth century the West Indian Colonies were practically autonomous, and the legislature; of Jamaica passed a law which relieved of all penalty a planter who unintentionally flogged a slave to death, but if he intentionally flogged the slave to death, the planter was only to be fined £10. Did the Opposition think that in such a case as that they should be absolutely silent? He would take another case. In 1832 the Jamaica legislature twice refused to abolish the public flogging of women. He had no desire to depreciate the Colonies in any way, but in many ways their ideals differed from ours. It was for them to decide whether they would adapt their ideals to ours. He could imagine no grander conception than a free federation of sister states each bearing its part in the common burden; but if ever that was to be realised, it could only be by our having the candour to tell the Colonies frankly that they must bear their portion of the common burden, and that they must be willing to accept as their rule of conduct that central principle of equal justice between man and man, which was the very basis of the British Empire.
* said the hon. Member for Preston has given the Committee some criticism in regard to the constitutional question in Natal, and had compared the present Government of that Colony with tin town council of West Ham. He thought however, that even the hon. Member for Preston would admit that if the town council of West Ham were face to face with a problem involving the disaffection of some 900,000 Zulus, and with the fact that if the situation was mishandled the disaffection might spread to many other millions of Zulus, the Government would be justified in thinking that it was an important matter whether West Ham should be deprived of its freedom of action or not. He would not attempt to follow the hon. Member into the maze of his extraordinary arguments in regard to Colonial defence, because he did not think anyone entirely agreed with him when he said that a Colony could not be a Colony unless it could defend itself, and line up in a general scheme of Imperial defence. He was sure that every one of our Colonies, as soon as it was able, would pay its fair share of Imperial defence. Some of the Colonies had not yet grown up, and a child could not be asked to do the work of a grown man. We must therefore wait for the growing up of our Imperial children. A remark had fallen from the hon. Member for South Salford to which he should like to allude. The hon. Member had rather departed from the line taken up by most hon. Members in these debates, and had made a violent attack upon those great mining magnates of whom they had heard so much during this session. He was surprised at the attack coming from such a quarter. They had had able discourses from the Member for South Donegal and the Member for Northampton on the constitutional question, and so on, but he should like for few moments, if the Committee would bear with him, to say a word or two on the broader question of South African policy. He thought it would be well if they looked at every question that arose in South Africa, not from the point of view of that question alone but from the point of view of the whole of South Africa. Of course on anyone question there were bound to be disagreements amongst them. They disagreed as to the justice of the South African War, the Chinese labour question, the native question, and so on. But there were certain points which he thought everyone in this House agreed upon. There were certain facts to begin with and the greatest of these facts was to his mind that they had got now under the British flag in South Africa a great collection of states, vast territories, varied governments, territories under responsible government, representative government, and Crown Colony Government, under the government of the British South African Company, and under protectorates. And the question of each of these territories had to be considered with reference to the others that lay around it. Of course all this involved great difficulty. They all agreed on that. The second point on which they were all agreed, to whatever Party they belonged, was the desire to bring, if possible, all these vast territories—all these varied governments—to one common life of happy contented peace under the British flag, to enable Briton and Boer, white man and black, to live in happiness side by side, to let them see and feel and appreciate the advantages of the great British institutions which he thought were the most advanced of any civilisation that the world had yet seen. It was only a question of method as to how it was to be achieved, and he thought that it would be well if they put aside their petty differences on those matters. Let them not mind whether the native question was a vexed question or not, but let the Colonies see that they treated this great matter with a broad view and did not try to hamper or force the hand of those who had to deal with it; let them try and inspire with confidence all their kith and kin in all these vast territories. There were one or two points upon which they were not agreed, and which would have to be discussed from different points of view. Among others there was the question of the constitution of the Transvaal. The whole question of the Transvaal Government depended on the electoral basis on which it was established. If they established it on a basis which would give the British a predominance in the first Parliament, could they be relied upon to give fair play and fair treatment to the Boers who had to live side by side with them? He said they could, if they established it on a basis which gave the Boers a predominance, would there be fair play given to those who live a side by side with them? He said no. The first thing the Boers would do would be to establish female suffrage, and when once they had established, female suffrage in the Transvaal, there would be no possibility of the British ever being on an equality. Therefore in the interests of all the races in the Colony it was important that the British should be given the predominance in the first constitutional assembly; that the electoral basis which was established should insure that. With regard to the constitution to be given to the Orange River Colony, they were in a rather different position. They could not establish an electoral basis there which would give the British a predominance if the constitution was given at once. He therefore asked the Government to hesitate and think seriously before, they gave the Orange River Colony responsible government now. Speaking of Natal, the Under-Secretary for the Colonies had said that responsible government had been given to Natal light-heartedly, but the House must remember that Natal was under the British flag from 1843 to 1893. Surely it would be doubly light-hearted to give the Orange River Colony responsible Government without their having that experience which had been gained in Natal by half a century of Crown Colony Government. He hoped the Government would wait till the land settlement in the Orange River Colony was in a more satisfactory condition; till there was a greater equality of Boers and Britons before they gave responsible government to the Colony. Then there was the question of the native unrest in Natal, and other questions to be considered. But whatever the question that had to be considered, it should be considered with a view to the benefit of the whole of South Africa and not with a view to the benefit of one Colony alone. If the question of the native unrest in Natal was mismanaged, the trouble would no doubt spread to adjoining Colonies, and possibly the whole of South Africa would soon be in a blaze. That was a matter that would have to be very carefully considered. In granting responsible government to these Colonies the loyal settlers should receive, as they deserved, the most sympathetic treatment the Government could give. Let them not feel that they had been deserted by the Home Government, as the loyal settlers felt they were deserted in 1881 by the mother country. The result of that desertion then was that most of the loyal settlers became the most bitter enemies of Great Britain. From being a source of loyalty to this country they became our most bitter foes. Let us take heed that that did not occur again. Let us give full consideration to the needs and wishes of the loyalists in South Africa. By doing that the interests of the whole country would be advanced. Although these views were represented by only a small Party in this House, he believed they were the views of all the Colonies of the British Empire, and the views of a large portion of the electorate of this country—of at least 3,000,000 of them, and he was glad to think from what had taken place within the last few days that they were also the views of a not inconsiderable section of the Party which supported the Government. But whatever might be the views of the people of England, they wanted to show consideration to the loyalists in South Africa. Let all Members agree on one point. Let them all try and lift this great question of South Africa above the noisy clamour of Party strife. By so doing they would serve the greatest interests of that great Empire which had been built up at so great a sacrifice of British blood and British gold.
said that if the views expressed by the hon. Member for Preston were put into practice, the connection between India and this country which the hon. Member so much extolled would be an extremely short one. Would the hon. Member advocate the abolition of polygamy among the Mohammedan subjects of the Crown and the substitution of the Bible for the Koran in order to bring about the adoption of the ethical standards of Preston in our Eastern Empire? It was not for him to speak, perhaps, in too light a vein of the arguments used by any hon. Member of this House, but he must confess that when the hon. Member for Preston was speaking, lie felt inclined, to borrow the phrase which had almost become classic on the Treasury Benches, and to ask the hon. Member if he really could have been serious. He had not himself either before, during, or after the General Election used a word about Chinese labour, and would not begin now. It was much too much with the House at the present time. The hon. Member for South Salford was pressing for the immediate abolition of the whole system without any regard whatever to those legitimate interests which had been founded upon and had grown up under this system. He and his constituents strongly disapproved of Chinese labour, but that conviction did not make it necessary to hold that there must be an immediate sacrifice of every interest that had legitimately grown up under the system. The hon. Member for the Abercromby Division of Liverpool had demanded the immediate denunciation of the Convention of 1904. But that Convention covered many things wholly unconnected with South Africa or Chinese labour, and to press for its denunciation without regard to any other interests concerned seemed rather a Chinese proceeding. He might explain that in making that remark he had in his mind the original Chinaman who burnt his house down in order to enjoy roast pork. He had voted in this matter with and had adopted the position of the Government, thoroughly approving, as he believed his constituents did, of the despatch of Lord Elgin. He believed that despatch dealt fairly with the subject and that the Government would deal fairly with it. Surely it need not be brought up on every occasion to the exclusion of other more domestic matters which required to be discussed. He shared the regret which had been expressed on the Ministerial side that day that a Resolution should have been brought forward in censure of the late High Commissioner of South Africa. The administration of Lord Milner could not, in his opinion, be regarded as a success. To say that the war was inevitable was, in his opinion, to beg the whole question. If an administration ended in war and the exacerbation, rather than the appeasement, of racial feeling, he could not see that in that regard it was a phenomenally successful administration. But it was a very different thing to pursue and hale before the House as a malefactor a man who had endeavoured to do his best for his country. He had lived a large part of his life among members of this class and had worked under them, and with them. He knew what good men they were; how they strove to serve their country, what the difficulties of their positions were, and how different was their situation from that of the hon. Members of the House, who had in sight perhaps no greater calamity than the cooling of the soup, he had heard an admirable speech by the Lord Chancellor in which the noble Lord said nothing else should be accepted between European and native races but absolute justice. When an administrator, however, had two races before him, each of which had an absolutely different idea of what absolute justice was his difficulties began. Hon. Members had spoken of the treatment of the native races to-day. He would point out that it was very easy to say that they were to be treated in all respects like Europeans. In the course of his life he had endeavoured to do that—and had incurred very often unpopularity, and sometimes, perhaps, even the enmity of his fellow countrymen in his endeavour to see the fullest justice done to the Orientals with whom he was brought in contact. But we must be just not only to Orientals, but to our own people. The hon. Member for Coventry had said that he had spent his life in travelling abroad, and therefore thought he knew something of these things. He himself made the same modest claim to the confidence of the House in this regard. He had seen British administrators in all parts of the world, and knew them to be perfectly just and trustworthy men, who were most merciful, humane, and incapable of doing injustice to the natives in their charge. Expressions such as those used in this House the other night—he would not repeat them—by the hon. Member for Lambeth gave infinite pain to those who administered our affairs in the distant parts of our Empire. That episode reminded him of the story of the pious Mahommedan who brought his son up in an equally pious way. The boy said to his father as they were kneeling in prayer at three o'clock a.m. on the flat roof of their house, and saw all their neighbours sleeping upon their roofs—
"Oh, father, in all this great city only you and I are awake and engaged in prayer."
and the father replied—
"Yes, my son, you, too, had better have been asleep than taking away so many peoples' characters."
As one who had spent his life amongst Orientals, it was to him a novel experience to be treated as if one was apologising for unjustifiable action taken by the Europeans in the Natal crisis. The hon. Member for Northampton had said he was no authority on constitutional law, which, however, he had laid down at length. He did not propose to follow the hon. Member in that argument, but he noticed that he put forward Lord Carnarvon as being a specially humane Colonial Secretary. He believed that at the present moment they had a man answering that description in the noble Earl who was the Secretary of State for the Colonies, who, he believed, would not do anything which was unjust, and, in fact, had had just that training and experience which would enable him to mete out justice to all concerned in such a juncture as the present position in Natal. As the Government had now dealt with, the matter, it would be well if they were to leave it alone and get on with other business which was less controversial and painful and less likely to arouse angry feeling. To turn to one of such subjects, during the debates on Chinese labour reference had been made to the British Central African Protectorate. He wished to ask the Undersecretary for the Colonies whether the Colonial Office were prepared to consider the question of making British Central Africa a Colony to which emigration from India would be lawful. Land settlement schemes for South Africa had been referred to, but the country to which he had alluded would never be satisfactorily settled unless they permitted the emigration of Indian agriculturists, who were just the class of people required to develop the cotton-growing potentialities of the Protectorate. He also hoped the Colonial Office would lose no opportunity of doing such justice as was possible to their Indian fellow subjects in South Africa. He sympathised acutely with their case, and it pained him to hear them confounded with the Kaffirs, because they were on a totally different plane of civilisation. He hoped everything that was possible would be done to alleviate their condition. He was, however, aware of the difficulties of the Colonial Office in dealing with the Colonial Governments upon such a subject, and for his part he believed it was too late in the day to teach such administrations within what limits they should practice the arts of self-government.
said the hon Member for Northampton had tried to make a speech with regard to Natal which would not be provocative and which would not give offence to his Colonial fellow subjects. But, nevertheless, he had said that the Ministers of Natal were not archangels. Even the wildest Imperialist on the Opposition side of the House was not of that opinion, but as the hon. Member had gone out of his way to say that, there was no doubt that he meant that they were something less than men. [Cries of "No, no."] That was the only meaning that could be attributed to his sentence.
Nothing of the sort.
said that was a matter which he would leave to the House. It was obvious that the hon. Member would not have said that if he had meant the contrary. When people were suffering under such difficulties in Natal, language of that kind was calculated to make the task of the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies harder than it was at the present time. It was not the criticism of the Opposition, but the unpatriotic remarks of their own supporters that was making the task of the Government so hard. He did not imagine that the Under-Secretary for the Colonies was thin-skinned, but he had complained of their criticism. The hon. Gentleman ought to remember that he himself had said that this was no sham fight, but a real battle, and had gone on to say that the rifles were all loaded with ball cartridge. He assumed that what he meant was that he was not only going to change the policy of the late Government in order to satisfy the eager spirits below the gangway, but that he intended to reverse the policy of the late Unionist Government. If that was his intention he must be prepared for criticism. Members of the Opposition would not be doing their duty if they did not criticise those alterations of policy which they believed to be for the worse. It was not only the small Party on the Opposition Benches who disagreed with the hon. Gentleman's policy. All classes in the Colonies had condemned the policy pursued on this question by the Government, and it had also been condemned throughout the Colonies by the Press.
And, it being half-past Seven of the Clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
Committee report Progress; to sit again this evening.
Evening Sitting
North West London Railway Bill [by Order]
Read a second time, and committed.
Supply [5th Allotted Day]
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
[Mr. EMMOTT (Oldham) in the Chair.]
Civil Services and Revenue Departments Estimates, 1906–7
Class II
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That a sum, not exceeding £29,050, be granted to His Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1907, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Department of His Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, including 8 Grant in Aid of certain Expenses connected with Emigration."
said the Colonial Press which had condemned the Ministerial position had been described as having displayed unscrupulous malignity. Not only was there almost unanimity of opinion among the colonial subjects, but even on the Under Secretary's own side there were many Members who seemed to be uneasy. Some of them had given expression to their uneasiness in this House, and others had written to the papers. The Under-Secretary himself had warned the House in the most solemn language in the debate which took place on the native question of the dangers which hung over any impolitic course. When the Under-Secretary made that speech he thought nobody could foresee the somewhat grave events which were impending, and that that warning was addressed to his own side in the hope that they might profit by it. They did not seem to have profited by it, because the hon. Member had followed up that warning with other remarks of a contradictory kind, so that it was difficult to know the object at which he was driving. In the Colonies it must have been impossible to know what the object of the hon. Gentleman was. He did not propose to deal with the question of Chinese labour except from one point of view. On the question of Chinese labour in South Africa the other Colonies were more or less in sympathy with the Government, but when the Government declared that they would exercise a veto against the Transvaal if, after the grant of responsible government, it elected for such labour, the Colonies were universally against the Government. The reason given by the Government was that they would interfere only when moral considerations were involved. Nothing in this world was more offensive than the assumption of a superior morality; in private or public life there was nothing more irritating and disagreeable. He confessed that the Under-Secretary for the Colonies was the last man he would have suspected to be influenced in that direction, but now that he had joined the Party opposite he seemed to have been engulfed by the general t arty characteristic. This assumption of moral superiority was, of course, peculiarly irritating to our fellow-subjects in the Colonies—the assumption that they were not actuated by moral motives, that they were less humane, less careful of the interests of human life—because they did not know that it was part of the recognised armoury of Party warfare. On that point what he wished to impress on the Government was that it was for the very reason that these moral and humanitarian considerations were so important that they were questions which should properly be left for the decision of the Colonies themselves. The gift of self-government to manage details and petty affairs was a worthless gift for which the Colonies would neither ask nor care. It was because these questions were vital that colonial statesmen rightly attached so much importance to the principle that their decision should be left to them. Of course, if we could not trust the humanity and morality of our fellow-subjects in the Colonies, we must withhold responsible government from them, so as to keep some sort of control. He urged the Government to make up their minds whether they were prepared to leave to the South Africans the management of their internal affairs, their native affairs, and all legislation dealing with local matters. If they could not do that, it would be far wiser to postpone the grant of responsible government until the Colonies were fit for it. The Colonial Under-Secretary had spoken of responsible government having been given "too light-heartedly" to Natal—Natal, which for thirty-five years, through difficult times and many crises, had earned responsible government; while the Government of which he was a Member was going to grant responsible government at once to the Transvaal and Orange River Colonies, which had not even a representative Government and had not served their apprenticeship to Parliamentary institutions. The Under-Secretary had said that the Natal Government in regard to recent events had displayed some precipitancy of action. A great deal had been heard from some hon. Members about the legal aspect of the question. They had disclaimed being lawyers, and he also made the same disclaimer. It seemed to him that the constitutional position was perfectly plain. The Government were entitled to ask the Governor for further information; they were constitutionally entitled to ask some delay in the execution until they were assured by the Governor whether everything was in order. It was not the infringement of constitutional propriety on the part of the Government of which they complained. It was rather of the language and the policy of the Party opposite which had made the position so difficult, and which had strained the political relations between the home Ministry and the Government of Natal. Such a condition of affairs was bound to bring about a crisis. He thought the way out of the deadlock which had been created was settled by the correspondence which took place between Sir Harry Parkes and Sir Hercules Robinson so far back as 1874. He thought the hon. Member for South Donegal did not go sufficiently into that matter. Sir Hercules Robinson pointed out that the Governor had an undoubted right to reject the advice of his Ministers if he was prepared to accept the consequence. The consequence was that he might find himself without Ministers, and with no one ready to undertake the duty. It was, of course, technically correct that the rejection of the advice of Ministers necessarily involved their resignation, but he need scarcely point out that in practice Ministers did not tender their resignation for a trivial difference of opinion between themselves and the Governor. Therefore, the way out of this apparent deadlock was the use of common sense. The quarrel of himself and his friends with the Party opposite was not that they had infringed the constitution or taken a wrong view of the functions and powers of the Governor, but that, owing to their words and criticisms, owing to the reflections they had made in regard to the humanity and morality of colonial statesmen, such a state of tension had been produced that the Natal Ministers resigned, as the Undersecretary had said, precipitately. He hoped that the condition of affairs that had been created in Natal owing to the criticisms of the Party opposite would be a warning to the Government. The Government should recognise that it was only by co-operation with and consideration of the legitimate wishes and ambitions of our colonial fellow-subjects that success in our colonial administration could be hoped for. He did not propose to go into details with regard to the future Transvaal constitution, but he did say that it was our duty carefully to consider whether the South African Colonies were ripe for responsible Government. It would be far better to delay the grant of that Government to the Colonies, and to give it to them when we were ready to trust them with the management of their own affairs, than hastily to give it to them now and then continually interfere with and hamper their action. That was the worst policy we could adopt. The other consideration which we should keep before our eyes was that nothing we did in the granting of a constitution should endanger the British connection. When there was a faction in this House that desired to undo the work of the late war—he would not for a moment assume that his Majesty's Government had any desire or policy of that sort—he held that when they granted this constitution it should be in such a form that injustice would not be done to the British section in South Africa. When it was given no doubt justice must be done all round. We must not gerrymander the constitution in order to give an undue advantage to one Party over another. There was no necessity to disregard general principles so as to give an undue advantage to the Dutch population over the British population. "One vote one value" was, he supposed, a democratic and Liberal principle. It did not apply in this country because it was sometimes used as a rider to "One man one vote," and it did not suit hon. Gentlemen who sat below the gangway, but none the less, he ventured to say, that it remained a democratic and Liberal principle. Nobody who was going to start the constitution afresh would begin by making constituencies like those of Romford and Galway. These considerations should be kept in mind in the framing of the constitution to be given to the South African Colonies. That was the case which he and his friends put from their side of the House. They denied that they had dealt with this question in any factious or unpatriotic spirit. They therefore urged the Under-Secretary not to pursue a policy of interference with the Colonies, but to treat Colonial Governments with greater generosity, to recognise that they had received responsible government, that they ha I received what was practically independence, and that they were tied to this country only by good administration and the wisdom and tact of the Colonial Secretary.
said that on five occasions he had moved a reduction of the Colonial Vote in previous sessions of Parliament. He was glad to say that on this occasion he would have the pleasure of supporting the Government. He was not supporting the Government simply because he sat on the Ministerial side of the House, for in regard to South African affairs he had always endeavoured to take the view which he thought was most consistent with the best interests of the Colonies. A number of suggestions had been made in regard to land settlement. Hon. Members had urged the Under-Secretary to approach the Chancellor of the Exchequer in order to obtain grants of money to place a larger number of British settlers on the soil in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony. Enormous sums of money had been spent for this purpose, and he earnestly trusted that the Government would not accept the suggestions made to them, for the whole policy of placing British settlers on the soil was, lie was sure, doomed to failure. After twelve months the settlers were found sitting on the door steps of the mining magnates asking for mining claims, and the whole of the money invested in settling these people on the land was wasted. With regard to the rising in Natal, he would urge the Government not to underrate it. A relative of his own, Sir John Dartnell, formed the Natal Mounted Police thirty years ago, and he had had the opportunity that very day of discussing with him the unhappy rising in South Africa. No one could deny that Sir John Dartnell was in a better position perhaps than anyone in this country, or even in South Africa, to give an opinion on this question. Sir John Dartnell said that the chief Bambaata, who had been the cause of the unfortunate policemen being murdered, had been for many years a source of incessant annoyance to him when he commanded the police, and he feared that unless His Majesty's Government took very strenuous measures the position in Natal would become very serious. Therefore, he urged the Under-Secretary not to underrate the rising in Natal. It should be dealt with rapidly, or more natives would join this disaffected chief, and a general rising of the whole native population in the Colony might be developed. He had risen chiefly to draw attention to a matter which, in his opinion, constituted one of the greatest scandals—and they had been many—that had arisen in South Africa during the last five years. Three years ago he drew attention, with little success, to the situation which had arisen out of the discovery of the Premier Diamond Mine. Shortly after the commencement of the war the Government sent out to South Africa a Commission to inquire into the reduction of owners' rights, and at the head of that Commission was the distinguished public servant, Sir David Barbour. In his Report Sir David Barbour said—
"As regards any valuable mining rights which may exist in lands which have not hitherto been proclaimed as public diggings, or which have not been granted to private persons, it seems to me that it is still possible to take measures for protecting the interest of the State. For the pas I failure to safeguard the State assets for the benefit of the community there is now practically no remedy. It is beyond question that in some cases the law was modified, strained, and even violated, with the connivance of officials of the Transvaal Government, in order to secure illegitimate advantage for mining speculators and others."
Then Sir David Barbour went on to say—
"The first measure to be adopted would be the reduction of the privileges in regard to mining rights which have been granted to the owners of the land."
Having that report before them, what did the late Government do? He was not blaming the present Government, for they were not responsible for the position arising out of the acts of their predecessors. In 1902 a mine of very great value was discovered in the Transvaal. Under the mining laws of the Transvaal the owners of the farm on which the mine was, were entitled to certain rights. The first occasion on which the mine came before the public was a statement made by Sir Alfred Lawley in opening the Transvaal Legislative Council on June 29th, 1903, in which he said—
"Investigations have brought to light the existence of diamond fields which bid fair to rival in richness, if not excel, any field which has hitherto been discovered."
Well, that was not by any means, as events proved, an over-estimation of the facts of the case; for it had proved to be a mine of immense value. Before the war the position in the Transvaal in regard to mining claims was a very difficult one, although it had been modified to-day. Before the war the owner of a farm which was proclaimed a mining field was entitled to one-tenth of the claims, but shortly before the war broke out, when the Transvaal became aware that diamonds had been discovered in the vicinity of Pretoria, they introduced a law that the owners of the farm were entitled to one-eighth. The Premier Mine consisted of 4,000 claims, and under the law of 1898 the owners of the farm were entitled to 530 claims, but under the old law they would be entitled to only 410 claims. The late Government, however, stepped in and said they thought it was desirable to create a monopoly in diamonds, and that monopoly had been persisted in during the last twelve months, to the detriment of the whole community in the Transvaal; and by a special law the late Government gave to the Company which bought the farm l,600 claims instead of the 530 to which they were entitled, and undertook that 2,400 claims should not be worked. When this special legislation was passed for the benefit of the mine owners—as so much of the legislation introduced by Lord Milner during his administration of the Transvaal had been—the effect was to give away millions of money which belonged to the State. He wished the House distinctly to understand that he had not the slightest intention of attacking Sir Richard Solomon, the Attorney-General in the Transvaal, because he was one of the few honest men in that country; but rightly or wrongly the Attorney-General thought that a monopoly in diamonds was necessary. On June 29th he said—
"The world could only take a certain quantity of diamonds. The output must be re- stricted. If they exceeded the world's demand, down would come the price, and away would go the value of their property."
Then he went on to say that—
"The industry at Kimberley was at one time on the verge of ruin, but a great man averted that ruin. The late Mr. Rhodes saw perfectly well that the only way to save the diamond industry in Kimberley was to amalgamate the different companies working claims in Griqualand West so as to bring the mines under one control, and so regulate the output of diamonds, seeing that the world could only take a certain amount of diamonds during the year. One of the most important lessons taught them by the diamond mining in Griqualand West was this: to keep their diamond mines as much as possible under one control. That he ventured to say was an axiom in diamond mine legislation, and it was an axiom the Government had endeavoured to give effect to as far as possible in the Ordinance."
On the same day Sir R. Solomon said—
"The principle was that the mine, as much as possible, should be under the control of one person or company. When they found that the owner of land on which diamonds were found had a large interest, it was surely better for the Government to try and make some agreement with the owner than that another person should do so, and thus destroy the principle for which they were contending."
Then Mr. Hill, Solicitor of the De Beers Life Governors, stated in the Legislative Council that—
"Any criticisms that were directed at the Ordinance should be in the direction that the Government had given too little to the owner, and when they got to the Committee stage he intended to move an Amendment to the effect that the owner's rights should be further increased."
He now came to the position as it stood to-day. The Premier Diamond Mining Company was formed and registered in November, 1902. The capital was £80,000 in £1 shares, and the vendors received from the company 67,000 fully paid shares. Ten thousand shares were subscribed at par, and 3,000 shares were sold afterwards by the vendors for £74,250. £10,000 was all that was subscribed as working capital, and the market value at present of the mine was £6,000,000 sterling. By arrangement with the Government the total expenditure of the mine was paid out of the profits, and the Government were to be entitled to receive 60 per cent. of the profits. The company last year made a profit approximately of £622,000. The shareholders who were entitled to only 40 per cent. of the profits received £269,000, while His Majesty's Government who were entitled to 60 per cent. of the profits, received only £259,000. Out of the profits of the first two years, according to the statements of the chair man, Dr. Wagner, there had been ex pended altogether £958,520, every penny of which had been supplied by the mine itself. There were no Government directors; no reports were issued to the Government except the annual report. He asked what were the late Government doing that they did not take steps fully to protect the interest of the British taxpayers, and why they did not have representatives on the board of directors to look after the interests of the British taxpayers. The company had paid in dividends 400 per cent. It paid in directors' fees £13,000 per annum. It paid commission to its agents in London, outside office expenses, amounting to £32,655. There were enormous items of expenditure which ought to be subjected to most careful scrutiny by a Government auditor. The directors in their report for 1905 stated that 124 loads had been proved in the first 400 feet of the mine. Although he could not remember Kimberley in the early days, it was worked by individual diggers for sixteen years, and everybody was able to earn a decent living; and he maintained that this Premier mine could be worked profitably with white labour. It would find employment for all the unemployed in the Transvaal. The monopolists had shut down the mines for the purpose of raising the price of diamonds. Three years ago the right hon. Member for West Birmingham said that a monopoly was necessary; but why should there be a monopoly in diamonds any more than in any other article of production. He contended that it was not in the province of Government to create a monopoly in diamonds. In the Premier mine 1,000 white men were employed and 5,000 kaffirs. What was the cost of working this ground? According to Mr. Cullinan——
asked whether the Government were responsible through the Colonial Office for these details of working.
on a point of order asked whether the hon. Member's charge that a monopoly had been worked in favour of individuals at the expense of the public at large did not come clearly within the scope of criticism of the Colonial Office Vote.
said the hon. Member was not out of order, but was going into great detail.
said he would only contend that if, as he had already stated, this mine could be worked with white labour it was the duty of the Government, being entitled to 60 per cent. of the profits, to see that it was so worked. If the Government said that this would be an injustice to the shareholders he would be content if the Under-Secretary would say that the claims which were the property of the Government should be sold with precautions to see that they did not fall into the hands of the monopolists. The people of the Transvaal had had their property taken away by one of the worst Governments that ever sat on that side of the House. He thanked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies for the assurance given to him that day that a Report as to whether the mine could be worked with white labour would be called for. He had frequently referred to the dynamite industry, and it appeared that a new dynamite monopoly had now been granted to De Beers in spite of the fact that the matter had again and again been called attention to. The result was that British manufactured dynamite was shut out of the Transvaal to-day, curious as that fact might seem. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, writing in January, 1899, to Sir William Butler, said that—
"The question of the importation of explosives into the South African Republic has as you are aware been brought to my notice by. British manufacturers, who complain that their manufactures are refused admittance into the Republic, and that they are thereby debarred from carrying on their commerce within the Republic conformably to Article XIV of the London Convention. On the receipt of these representations it became my duty to give the whole subject my full and careful consideration. Her Majesty's Government are advised that the creation of a monopoly in favour of the State is not necessarily inconsistent with Article XIV of the London Convention even when exercised by a concessionaire, provided that the concession is intended in good faith to benefit the State generally, and not simply to favour the concessionaire."
The company to whose proceedings he was calling attention erected a factory near Capetown, and Lord Milner's influence was brought to bear and a coast duty was placed upon dynamite all round the coast. The result was that to-day British dynamite was shut out of the Transvaal by a coast duty of l½d. a pound, and, although the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham had severe censure for Mr. Kruger's Government for granting a dynamite monopoly, a monopoly still existed in the hands of the De Beers Company protected by this coast duty. What could be said for the integrity of the British people, who allowed this to continue after having carried through a war for the benefit of stock-jobbing Jews? They protested against the monopoly granted by Kruger's Government, and set up a monopoly in favour of German Jews, and yet the Party opposite professed a desire to promote trade with the Colonies. He trusted that diamonds, dynamite, and other monopolies sought by speculators would have the attention of the present Government. These were matters of vast interest to the people of South Africa, but it was difficult for the people of this country to learn the truth, for the Press of South Africa and the agencies supplying the Press in this country were under the control directly or indirectly of millionaire monopolists. He could read letters to the House that would show how Press information was gerrymandered in the interest of speculators, but the former Chairman of Committees had ruled that to do so would not be in order. An opportunity, however, would be given to the British public to read these letters, as they were shortly to be published, and they would prove conclusively that information coming to this country was gerrymandered in the interest of certain millionaires, and there were very few newspapers from which the country could learn the actual facts from South Africa. The question of the Press was a grave one. If it continued to be as cruel as it had been and to be controlled in the interests of certain millionaires, it would do an immense injury to the people of this country.
I intervene at this moment to endeavour to elicit from the Government a consistent account of their attitude towards these South African problems. On both sides of the House hopes have been expressed that they may deal with the question of South African policy in no Party spirit. It would have been easier to fulfil those hopes if the Under-Secretary had seen his way earlier in the evening to give us a plain statement of the general attitude of the Government towards these problems. I do not criticise the Under-Secretary's reserving his right to reply. We have had speeches, the authors of which said they attempted to avoid recrimination, in which the questions of Chinese labour, the intervention of the Government in respect of the executions in Natal, and the Resolution passed, or attempted to be passed, in censure of Lord Milner, have been raised again and again. What are we to make of this rehash of partisan speeches? The Government are in a difficult position. Their daily diet is served out, now by one section of the House, now by another. It is the leek, the whole leek, and nothing but the leek, and the Opposition are not called upon to share in the repast. There are supporters of the Government who have indulged in talk about our Colonial fellow-subjects which is bound to be misunderstood in South Africa. For example, the hon. Member for Preston gave the pure view of a certain section of the Government's supporters. In all seriousness he asked why the resignation of the Ministry of Natal was a matter which should give them more concern than the resignation of the town council of West Ham. It is hopeless to argue with hon. Members who apply the test of population equally to a new country full of hope of a great future destiny and to a suburb of a great metropolis. The hon. Member said that it was a fair test. Will he apply it to the past as well as to the present? If so, Athens and Jerusalem are the most inconspicuous cities in the history of the world. The Undersecretary seems to be more concerned with adapting the theories of this or that section of his supporters to the political exigencies of the Government than with the grim facts of South African life. South Africa is suffering from political neuritis. All its nerves are tender, and the Under-Secretary is content to run the risk of what will come out at the other end of the cable from the rhetorical speeches he delivers in this House. We began by discussing land settlement in the Orange River Colony, but the success of land settlement and all else in South Africa depends very largely on the attitude of His Majesty's Government to these questions. The other day a mistake, a considerable mistake, was made by the Colonial Secretary as to the amount of loss which has attended the land settlement operations already carried on.
It was a slip of the tongue.
In that case I will not dwell upon it. What I was thinking of was not so much the accidental mistakes as that all these theories upon native questions, upon economic questions, and upon constitutional questions, look very different when they are received in short cable messages in South Africa. [MINISTERIAL cheers.] I do not attempt to evade the purport of the cheers of hon. Gentlemen opposite. They mean that, in the opinion of hon. Members opposite, we on this side of the House have sought to derive some Party advantage in discussing these matters. I return to what I have said before, that in my judgment there is a profound division between our attitude towards South Africa and the attitude of many of those who support the Government. What we want to know in precise terms is the attitude of the Government, and then these misconceptions may occur less frequently in the future than they have done in the past. We want to know the attitude of the Government towards two great sets of facts. We want to know the attitude of the Government towards the nature of the constitutions they are going to confer on the Orange River Colony and the Transvaal Colony—towards what I may call the Reform Bill the Government are going to give to those Colonies. And we also want to know the attitude of the Government, stated with some precision and consistency, towards native and economic questions in South Africa. Let me take the first question—their attitude on the governments which are to be given. The Government have appointed a Committee. I shall refrain, naturally, from criticising the personnel, of that Committee. The fact that I know and esteem both Lord Sandhurst and Sir West Ridgeway is nothing to the point. I do not say anything against those two Gentlemen, but I do criticise the Government for not having put upon the Committee some person or statesman of eminence belonging to the opposite Party. When my right hon. friend the Member for West Birmingham had to deal with the West Indian question, he put the present Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs as Chairman of that Committee. I think my right hon. friend was wise, and, in so far as the Government has not followed that course, even to the extent of placing on the Committee one Member of standing and eminence, though differing from them on Party questions, I think they have been unwise. The terms of reference are not wide, but they are obscure. That, I must say, is a great mistake in view of the suspicion, to whatever cause we attribute it, of their attitude towards the Colonies. That suspicion is a misfortune, and the Government should do all in their power to dispel it. The terms of reference are so obscure that many have read them to mean that any amendment which would throw power into the hands of the Boers was open to investigation, but that any amendment of the proposed constitution put forward by the late Colonial Secretary which might be held to secure British representation was not open to investigation. That is a very unhappy state, if not of ignorance, of doubt. It would not be candid on my part to pretend that we can discuss South African affairs if we do not keep in our minds the memories of the past. There are two sets of memories. The British are proud to know that they went to South Africa before the Dutch, and speeches which seem to suggest that they are interlopers are calculated to give offence to them; whilst speeches which seem to suggest that neither British nor Dutch have any right there affront the memories of both the British and the Dutch. It must be borne in mind that the natives in South Africa are not aborigines. If the Government intend that full responsible government shall be given forthwith to the Transvaal and Orange River Colony, they can no longer quote Lord Durham in defence of the course they are going to pursue. Lord Durham laid it down that there should be British preponderance in the legislature given to Canada. The Government cannot claim the support of Lord Durham's authority unless they intend that there shall be during the initial years of self-government that British preponderance which Lord Durham sought to secure in Canada. That to many plain men would seem to be a necessary corollary of the war. Whether the war was right or wrong we hold, as many of the supporters of the Government hold, and as many of the present Cabinet hold, that it was a just, necessary, and inevitable war. But whatever may be the case since the war has been fought, it is idle to revert to consequences past, and to indulge again in theories which, in my opinion, did more than anything else to precipitate that war. It is a misfortune that the impression should be created in South Africa that we neglect the views of those who have lived there all their lives. In South Africa people are prepared to take the consequences of the war, but they are not prepared to accept full responsibility for the Government if his Majesty's Government reserve the right to interfere in what most concerns them. If that course is adopted we shall revert to a state of affairs more unhappy than that which prevailed before the war. Before the war, whether you look at the Sand River Convention of 1852, the Bloemfontein Convention of 1884, the Pretoria Convention of 1881, or the London Convention of 1884, you will find that the Government of this country, speaking through the voice of Colonial Secretary after Colonial Secretary, always asserted that this country as the paramount Power had a right to interfere in certain circumstances. I say that among the many causes of this war was a growing irritation on the part of the Dutch against the right which was retained in spite of all those Conventions. That was a contributory cause to this just, necessary and inevitable war. In that war we had the support of our self-governing Colonies. If after we have granted full responsible Government we still assert the right of intervention whenever it so pleases us and run the risk, I hardly like to say of war, but of social strife almost amounting to war—if that should be the result of interference on the part of the Government—then, instead of our having the support of all our Colonies, the support of all our Colonies will be thrown into the other scale. To grant full responsible government and at the same time allow it to be understood that we shall frequently interfere is to bring about a worse, a more precarious, and a more dangerous state of affairs than even that which led to the late just, necessary and inevitable war.
I pass on to the attitude of the Government towards the native question and the economic question, but I do not wish in so doing to rake up the question of the execution of natives in Natal. As to those executions I consider that Lord Elgin had a difficult decision to take in a very brief period. But I must say the right of the Government exists, but if it is to be exercised in cases of procedure I doubt the expediency of exercising that right. Martial law is only useful and defensible if it is proclaimed in order to arrest a dangerous state at the outset of affairs before worse befals. After we had explicitly or tacitly consented to the proclamation of martial law, I doubt the expediency of trying to review the procedure. It may be truly said that to review the merits of the ease of the necessity for martial law would take weeks and months, and that if it were proper to do that it should have been done at the first intimation of these difficulties. It is too late to do it when the actions of the Natal Government come home to be confirmed. That has left, perhaps unjustly, certainly unhappily, an impression which must be dispelled if South Africa is to progress under the Government of His Majesty. Hon. Members in this House sometimes speak of the attitude of our fellow-subjects in South Africa towards the natives in terms which show that they do not appreciate the situation. I suppose we have all of us sometimes read novels dealing with the Western States of America and depicting the enmity of every man, woman and child to the Indian. But those people lived in close contact with the Indian tribes, and in Natal white men, women, and children live in close proximity to these native races, and round Natal, to the north and south, there are the native reservations for the tribes who have been allowed to cherish the recollection of the days of perennial fighting in which their ancestors indulged. It is very hard for anyone to blame these native races. They are different from ourselves; they and their ancestors have not passed the steps of the ascent of man from savagery, through barbarism, to civilisation. They suddenly respond to a call of the wild, which they cannot explain; they break out, throw back to their savage ancestors for reasons that are inscrutable. The white men in their midst know that they live under the constant menace of these reversions to the Stone Age, and if they are apprehensive and passionate in their views it is not for hon. Members in Westminster, comfortably discussing the subject, to point out that our fellow-subjects are lacking in the humanity which we are so proud of, and of which we make such boast. I shall give the Under-Secretary ample time to reply, but I must deal with the attitude of the Government towards the economic question in South Africa. Now there is a myth, widely believed in this country and in some sections of this House, that all these troubles are due solely to avarice and the thirst for gold. The hon. Baronet who opened this discussion said we ought not to hold that gold mining was the one and only industry of South Africa. I quite agree. Let me meet the question sometimes asked, why this hurry about gold production? Why make these efforts, legitimate, or illegitimate, to get labour at all costs for the mines? The reason is that the revenue of these Colonies, the revenue of the Transvaal, varies directly with the gold production. If there is an increase of 25 per cent. in gold production there is an increase of 25 per cent. in the revenue of the Transvaal. They are in permanent relation. The old rate of production just met the expenses of the Government, and if that is continued until the mines are exhausted in fifty or a hundred years the country will return to the state of affairs which obtained before the mines were worked. If, on the other hand, you can get this excess production and excess revenue the latter can be devoted, as it has been, to the very things which the hon. Baronet opposite and others have advocated, such as irrigation and afforestation, the things which create a country and a civilisation, and which will leave something after the mines are exhausted. There is no theory more fanciful than that the policy is supported by the mineowners and their chattels; they are opposed to it at every turn. It has been supported by such men as Sir George Farrar and Sir Percy FitzPatrick, by men who have tried to make a country, and it is associated with the name of Lord Milner. I believe that, without distinction of race, South Africa is in favour of having this surplus revenue in order that the country may be developed, and that there may be a civilisation after the war. On these surplus revenues the railway to a large extent depends. The railways in our old Colonies of the Cape and Natal were built at a cost of £22,000,000 of Colonial money. Are you going to hold back those powers in these Colonies? If you are, how can you pretend that you are really giving them full responsible Government? Moreover, you cannot deal with each of these-Colonies as if they were separate islands. They all hang together, and to grant responsible Government to one Colony until you are assured that the Colony will come into line with the other Colonies is to court disappointment and disaster. These Colonies were interdependent. Throughout that country, the people, Boer and Briton, are opposed to what, rightly or wrongly, they think is the Government's attitude towards the native question, towards the question of the Imperial veto, and, possibly, towards the Government's attitude on the economic question. The Government will not decrease their difficulties by accusing the Opposition of endeavouring to exploit South African questions for partisan objects. They will not diminish their difficulties by saying that we have been defeated at the polls; on this question we stand for more than 2,000,000 voters in the home country, and we stand up for what we believe to be the view of our fellow-subjects in the Colonies. In one speech after another delivered from the Government side the Opposition has been begged to be patriotic. Though small in number, our support has been solicited. I have watched the Government bowing, almost cringing, to one section after another in the House, and I felt sure that the Unionists' turn would come. We are now invited to refrain from attacking the Government. ["Oh'"] Yes, in speech after speech we were told to leave all recrimination upon one side. On this and on other questions I have to say to the Government that when they have a conviction, and stick to it, the Opposition will be prepared to support them. But when they arrive at a conviction they never adhere to it. I except, of course, the Secretary of State for War who arrived at the sound conviction that the Government ought to do nothing with regard to Army reform for a year and has stuck to it. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies should be the last person to deprecate the importation of partisan considerations into colonial discussions, for his motto seemed to be "Strike while the iron is hot." That is a capital plan if you have made up your minds as to the exact shape you mean to press upon the iron. But if you have not, and you have to send out a Committee of your political supporters to make up your mind for you, then all the hammer strokes only serve to generate heat. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies must needs run a tilt at the Press of this country. One of the latest developments of Liberalism is to defame the Press. What Press was the Under the Under-Secretary attacking when he spoke of "the malignant and unscrupulous Press"? [An hon. Member: The Conservative Press.] If the Under-Secretary reads the telegrams which come from our Colonies, he would gather that, not the Conservative Press, but the Colonial Press, and not only the South African, but the Australian, the New Zealand, and the Canadian Press, was all deeply exercised and indignant at the words of the Under-Secretary. No doubt the hon. Member has an explanation. The wicked people who control the cables do not do justice to the speeches which he delivers in this House. But it appears now that information sent home from the Government of Natal is being withheld from the House of Commons. Perhaps the Under-Secretary will tell us why this is so. Has the Government any further information as to the condition of Natal? On this native question—this economic and political question—the Government owes it to the Empire to make a clear, plain statement which will dissipate and dispel the mist of suspicion that exists. The attitude of the Government towards a handful of men in this or that colony may have a very grave effect upon the ultimate fate of South Africa. The ultimate fate of our American Colonies was decided by the attitude of the Home Government, and I now say, "God forbid that that should be repeated !"
* : We have had an interesting and discursive debate, and not the least interesting, and certainly not the least discursive part of that debate has been the contribution which we owe to the characteristically fertile ingenuity of the right hon. Gentleman who has just sat down. I should not find it easy to do justice to the many interesting and valuable speeches which have been made during that debate, because of the extraordinary variety, and in many cases because of the extreme complexity, of the subjects with which they have dealt. For instance, I cannot hope to follow the hon. Member for Mansfield very deeply into the recesses of those diamond mines he has mentioned, or into the complexities of that dynamite monopoly problem of which he has spoken with the knowledge of an expert and something like the vehemence of a fanatic. I am not an encyclopædia. I am only an Undersecretary. But, I would observe that when the hon. Member for the Mansfield Division of Nottinghamshire speaks of the evils of a monopoly in diamonds, he should remember that, from an economic point of view, diamonds occupy a very peculiar and unnatural position. One of the great elements of value in a diamond is its rarity; and when rarity is not merely a condition of price, but a condition of value, it is positively to the advantage of the consumer that diamonds should be dear.
I do not think the House will wish me to plunge again into a discussion of Natal. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover that His Majesty's Government, so far as I am aware—for I have not left the House during the debate this evening—have no further information on that grave matter. Nor do I think any advantage would be gained if I were to repeat the declared, settled, and accepted policy of His Majesty's Government upon the subject of Chinese labour. Still less do I think any public advantage would be served if I were to attempt an elaborate reply to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon. There are many subjects connected with South Africa, and I desire to do my best to speak upon them. As the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover has asked me for a plain statement of the general attitude of His Majesty's Government, I should probably better consult the interest of the Committee by endeavouring to make that statement than by embarking upon those personalities with which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Croydon occupied and amused, though I can hardly say delighted, the attention of the Committee in the earlier hours of the sitting.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover asked me to state, first of all, the general position of the Government with regard to the constitutional issue in the Transvaal and Orange River Colonies. In doing so the right hon. Gentleman referred in almost slighting terms to the Committee which was appointed to inquire into that matter, and which so far as I have been informed, has been received with almost universal approval even in quarters beyond the range of His Majesty's Government. Let me ask the Committee to realise what a long way we have travelled in the discussion of the Transvaal and Orange River Colony constitution. When the change of Government took place there was Mr. Lyttelton's constitution before us. That proposed representative and not responsible government. Under that constitution the election would have been held in March of this year, and the Assembly would have met in June, if the home Government had not changed. But just at the time that the Government changed in December two-questions arose—the question of whether or not soldiers of the British Army should be allowed to vote; and the question whether it would not be better to have sixty constituencies instead of thirty—and, as both questions involved necessary alterations in the Letters-Patent, the time was ripe, quite apart from any difference which the change of the men at the helm might make, for a reconsideration and review of the whole form of the Government which was to be given to the two colonies. The objection that must most readily occur in considering Mr. Lyttelton's constitution is that it was unworkable. It proposed that there should be from six to nine Ministers nominated in an Assembly of thirty-five, afterwards to be increased to sixty elective members. The position of a Minister is one of considerable difficulty. He often has to defend rather an awkward job, and has to depend upon the nimbleness of his wits, and when those fail him upon the loyalty of his supporters. But no Minister can move very far upon his road with satisfaction or success if he has not behind him either a nominated majority or an organised Party majority. Mr. Lyttelton's Ministers had neither. They were alone, hopelessly outnumbered in an Assembly the greater part of which was avowedly in favour of responsible and not of representative government. These Ministers had no Parliamentary experience and no ascertained Parliamentary ability. They would have been forced to carry their Bills and their Estimates through an Assembly in the main opposed to them. All this time, while we should have given to these Ministers this serious duty, we should ourselves have had to bear the whole responsibility in this country for everything that was done under their authority; and their authority could only be exerted through an Assembly which, on the face of it, they would not control. The Committee can easily imagine the telegrams and the questions which would have been addressed to these Ministers on native matters, on the question of the administration of the Chinese Ordinance, on all the thousand and one intricate questions with which we are at the present moment involved in South Africa. And what would have been the position of these Ministers from time to time in a hostile Assembly in which they had no friends, and without perhaps any Parliamentary talents of their own—what possibility would they have had of maintaining themselves in such an Assembly? Is it not certain that they would have broken down under the strain to which they would have been exposed, that the Assembly would have been infuriated, that Parties differing from each other on every conceivable question, fiercely divided by race and religion and language, would have united in common hatred of the interference of the outside Power and the Government of bureaucrats, and that then they would speedily have got to the bottom of the hill? There would have been a swift transition. The Legislative Assembly would have converted itself into a constituent Assembly, and it would have taken by force all that the Government now have it in their power to concede with grace, distinction, and authority. On these grounds His Majesty's Government came to the conclusion that it would be right to omit the stage of representative government altogether and to go directly to the stage of responsible government. It is the same in politics as it is in war. When one crest line has been left it is necessary to go to the next. It is quite idle to halt half way in the valley between. That is to court imminent and certain destruction and the moment you have abandoned the safe position of a Crown Colony Government, or Government with a nominated majority, there is no stopping place whatever on which you may rest the sole of your foot until you come to a responsible Legislative Assembly with an executive obeying that Assembly. [An IRISH MEMBER: Why not in Ireland too?] I do not attempt to localise the logic of these arguments. If there be any logic in them, they convinced his Majesty's Government that it would be necessary to annul the letters patent issued on 31st March, 1905, and make an end of the Lyttelton Constitution. That constitution now passes away into the never never land, into a sort of chilly limbo that is reserved for the discarded and abortive political progeny of many distinguished men. I think I may congratulate the Government and those who support them on the fact that we have been able to take this first most important step in our South African policy with such a very general measure of agreement, with, indeed, a consensus of opinion which almost amounts to unanimity. Both races, every Party, every class, every section in South Africa has agreed in the course which His Majesty's Government have adopted in abandoning representative government and going at once to responsible government. That is already a very great thing, but it was not always so. Hon. Gentlemen who sat in the last Parliament will remember that it was not always so. We remember that Lord Milner was entirely opposed to granting responsible government. We know that Mr. Lyttelton wrote pages and pages in the Blue-book of last year proving how futile and dangerous responsible government would be; and the right hon. Member for West Birmingham, who took it as a matter of course on the first day of the present session, made a speech last session in which he indicated in terms of great gravity and force that he thought it was wholly premature to grant responsible government to the Transvaal. But all that is abandoned now. [Cries of "No."] I heard the right hon. Member for West Birmingham, in the name of the Party opposite, accept the policy of His Majesty's Government. I heard the hon. Member for Blackpool this afternoon say that he hoped that responsible government would be given to the Transvaal at the earliest possible moment. In regard to the Orange River Colony, it is quite true that the official Opposition, so far as I gather their view, think that it should be delayed, and should not be given at the same time as to the Transvaal; but that is not the view of the right hon. Member for West Birmingham. Speaking in the House of Commons on July 27th, 1905, the right hon. Gentleman said—
* : That was not responsible Government.
* : It is true the right hon. Gentleman was speaking of representative government; but it cannot be disputed that if an advance were to be made in associating the people of the conquered Colonies with the Government of those Colonies, the right hon. Gentleman thought that it had better be in the Orange River Colony first. But it is incontestable that there is no Party in this country or in the Transvaal that opposes the grant of responsible government to the Transvaal. That is a great advance and shows, at any rate, that we have been able to take our first step with the entire approbation of all concerned. But the opposition, having abandoned their resistance to the grant of responsible government, now contend that on no account must the basis of the Lyttelton constitution be departed from. I am not convinced by that argument. The Government are to pursue a new purpose, but to adhere to the old framework. We are to cut off the head of the Lyttelton constitution, but are to preserve the old trunk and graft a new head on it. I do not believe that any Government, approaching this question from a new point of view, uncompromised and unfettered, would he bound by the framework and details of the Lyttelton constitution. It may be that that constitution contains many excellent principles, but the Government have a right to consider things from the beginning, freshly and freely, to make their own plans in accordance with their own ideas, and to present those plans for the acceptance of the House.
The noble Lord the Member for South Birmingham spoke of the principle of "one vote, one value," which was embodied in the Lyttelton constitution. The principle of "one vote, one value" is in itself an orthodox and unimpeachable principle of democracy. It is a logical, numerical principle. If the attempt be made to discriminate between man and man because one has more children and lives in the country, it would be arguable that we should discriminate because another man has more brains or more money, or lives in the town, or for any other of the many reasons that differentiate one human being from another. The only safe principle, I think, is that all men are equal, and that voting power, as far as possible, should be evenly distributed among them. In the Transvaal the principle of "one vote, one value" can only be made operative upon a basis of voters. In nearly every other country in the world, population is the usual basis of distribution, for population is the same as electorate and electorate the same as population. On both bases the distribution of the constituencies would be the same. There is, for instance, no part of this country which is more married, or more celibate, or more prolific than any other part. It is only in the Transvaal, this country of afflicting dualities and of vicious contradictions, where everything is twisted, disturbed, and abnormal, that there is a great disparity between the distribution of scats on the basis of voters and on the basis of population. The high price of provisions in the towns restricts the growth of urban population, and the dulness and inaccessibility of the country dis- tricts appear to be favourable to the growth of large families. It is a scientific and unimpeachable fact that, if you apply the principle of one vote one value to the constitution of the Transvaal, that principle can best be attained—I am not sure that it cannot only be attained—on the basis of voters, and that is the basis Mr. Lyttelton took in the constitution he formed. But Mr. Lyttelton's plan did not stop there. Side by side with this basis of voters he had an artificial franchise of £100 annual value. That is a very much lower qualification in South Africa than it would be in this country, and I do not think that the franchise which Mr. Lyttelton proposed could be called an undemocratic franchise, albeit an artificial franchise, because it yielded 89,000 voters out of a population of 300,000, and that is a much more fertile franchise, even after making allowance for the abnormal conditions of a new country, than we have in this country or than is the case in some American and European States. So that I do not accuse Mr. Lyttelton of having formulated an undemocratic franchise, but taking these two points together—the unusual basis of distribution with the apparently artificial franchise acting and reacting, as they must, one upon the other—I say that there is sufficient ground in these facts to favour the suspicion, at any rate, that something was intended in the nature of a dodge, in the nature of a trick, artificially to depress the balance in one direction and to tilt it in the other. Now I do most respectfully say to the Committee that, in dealing with nationalities, nothing is more fatal than anything like a dodge. Wrongs will be forgotten, sufferings and losses will be forgiven, battles will be remembered only as they recall the memory of the martial virtues of the combatants, but anything like chicane, anything like a trick, will always rankle. The Government are concerned in South Africa not only to do what is fair, but to do what South Africa will accept as fair. They are concerned not merely to choose a balance which will deal evenly between the races, but which will secure the acceptance of both races.
Whatever the amount of good will the Government may have, we cannot take all these things for granted from our predecessors; we are Philistines rather in regard to their handiwork, We know what money our predecessors have spent, and what a poor result they have produced. We are not inclined to take all that they tell us so glibly on trust. That is the reason why the Government have sent out this Committee of Inquiry to assure us of information on controverted and disputed points, so that the decision we take should not only be the decision of fresh minds, but a decision based on freshly ascertained facts. I recognise the injury which is caused by protracted uncertainty. I recognise the fact and deplore it, and it will be the effort of the Government to curtail by every reasonable means in our power the period of uncertainty and delay. We desire nothing more than that this question shall be settled, and we hope that it will be settled within the course of three or four months. The Committee we have appointed will have other matters to inquire into besides the two questions relating to voters and franchise. There is the position of the inter-Colonial Council, the question of the constitution, if any, of a second Chamber, a question intimately wrapped up with that of some means of safeguarding native interests, a matter for which this country has great obligations. Then there is the question of how we are to endeavour to secure if possible some proper representation of purely labouring forces in Johannesburg as against the capitalist forces which dominate and control the whole of the country. Then there is the question of the Orange River Colony constitution. I feel most strongly that there are few more pathetic spectacles in history than the spectacle of a small republic which lives at peace with its neighbours, which is admirably governed, and which out of motives of generous comradeship amounting to chivalry enters into a war through a promise to its neighbour. It would be intolerable if we were to give to the Transvaal a larger or more generous measure of self-government than we are prepared to extend on the principles of "similarity and simultancity" to the Orange River Colony. But in the Orange River Colony there are certain obligations which we cannot overlook. In the Transvaal I should suppose that whatever arrangement is come to—and I speak only with the information which the Colonial Office possesses—there must be a British majority, but in the Orange River Colony the situation will be different. There there will undoubtedly be a Dutch majority. That obliges the Government to consider gravely the interests of certain classes to whom we have great obligations. These are, first of all, the National Scouts. I deplore that such men were ever enlisted. I believe it was a great m stake, but it is done, and we cannot wash our hands of the transaction. This is, I think, a matter which the Committee which is just about to start on its journey must consider from the point of view of the general position these men will occupy when the country is once more governed by their fellow-countrymen. Then there is the question which was raised by the hon. Member for Chippenham, and which was referred to by the hon. Member for Westminster and others, namely, the question of land settlement. We have spent great deal of money on land settlement. We have spent £2,200,000 on settling British subjects in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony. We have got rather more than a million pounds worth of land. Some people thought it was worth more than we gave for it and some much less, and for that sum of money 1,500 heads of families have been settled—roughly about 700 in each Colony. I do not think it is very encouraging that we should have spent so much money upon the settlement of so few. I do not know that it is very wise to try and change the character of a country by planting out farmers as if they were orchids. It is not a very encouraging or remunerative or satisfactory process; but the fact that we have spent so much money for not a very great result is no reason for squandering such result as we have obtained. I do not think the Government they will have in the Orange River Colony will view with great enthusiasm a plan for increasing the number of persons who are to vote against their Party's supremacy, and I do not think the Government can make—at any rate, it does not suggest itself to Lord Elgin at the present time that we can make—any arrangement which will provide for an independent flow of British settlers against the will or independent of the action of the responsible Government of that Colony. But to those men already settled on the soil we have a distinct obligation. They have settled on certain conditions not altogether dissimilar to the working of the Irish Land Act; but it makes a great deal of difference in working all schemes of agrarian settlement whether they have a sympathetic or an unsympathetic Government. I think the settlements which have been established in the Orange River Colony, as the hon. Member for the Chippenham Division has well said, will do a great deal to soften the harshness of contact between the British and the Boer farmer, and will add to those amenities and friendliness of life which have answered so well in other parts of the Empire. Therefore, these settlers have a great claim upon our care and attention, and I trust that this may be a matter upon which the Committee will be able to enlighten us. I have no right to commit myself to anything of a definite character, but I know that it is Lord Elgin's earnest desire that means may be devised to secure for settlers already established that sympathetic administration of their holdings which they would have a right to expect hail no change in the Government of the Orange River Colony taken place. I wish to say one or two words about the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dover has said the Committee is going out to make up the minds of the Government for us. Nothing could be a greater travesty or perversion of the real facts. Sir, this is a Committee, it is not a Commission; it is an Imperial patrol, sent out for the purpose of reconnaissance and not of action. When it comes back with information the generals will make the plans of campaign. The Committee will inform the Government of the state of the ground and of the position of the different forces; they will report to the Government and give us their opinion, but the decision will be taken by the executive Government here at home. The idea that the Government should alienate their functions and responsibilities is unthinkable. The responsibility for settling all those vexed questions rests wholly on His Majesty's Government and on no one else in the world, and no one else in the world can relieve them of that responsibility. The right hon. Member for Croydon was good enough to inform the Committee tint His Majesty's Government and the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies hive ringed themselves with all that is most disloyal in South Africa, and he also stated—he is a master of suave and courtly phrases and is renowned for tin exercise of grace and tact in all the offices he has occupied—that the Government is suspect. It would not be surprising if it were suspect considering that the right hon. Gentleman himself informed the nation that its enemies all over the world would rejoice if the Liberal Party secured a majority at the general election. The right hon. Gentleman is always inclined to do himself injustice whenever he speaks in this House. He really possesses a character far more amiable than would be attributed to him if he were judged merely by his public utterances. I am quite sure the right hon. Gentleman does not think His Majesty's Government as black as he is inclined to paint them. He knows quite well that the permanence and security of British sovereignty in South Africa cannot be a matter of indifference to His Majesty's Ministers. Surely he does not believe that we could wish to cheat the British race in the Transvaal of any numerical preponderance which may properly belong to them. Equally with him we desire to see the maintenance of British supremacy in South Africa. But we seek to do it by a different method. There is a profound difference, as the right hon. Gentleman has said, between the schools of thought which exist upon South African politics in this House. We think that British authority in South Africa has got be stand on two legs. Hon. Gentlemen opposite have laboured for ten years to make it stand on one. We on this side know that if British dominion is to endure in South Africa it must endure with the assent of the Dutch as well as of the British. We think that the position of the Crown in South Africa, and let me add the position of Agents and Ministers of the Crown in South Africa, should be just as much above and remote from racial feuds as the position of the Crown in this country is above our Party politics. We do not seek to pit one race against the other in the hope of profiting from the quarrel. We hope to build upon the reconciliation and not upon the rivalry of races. We hope that it may be our fortune so to dispose of affairs that these two valiant, strong races may dwell together side by side in peace and amity under the shelter of an equal flag.
* said the Committee had listened with interest and in some regards with satisfaction to the speech of the Under-Secretary, who, however, had misunderstood some of the expressions of the right hon. Member for West Birmingham on the question of responsible government for the Transvaal. The late Colonial Secretary said that he would have given representative government to the Orange River Colony first. His hon. friend opposite, however, had forgotten to state that in this House at the beginning of this session the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham stated as clearly as he could state that he would not have given responsible government to the Transvaal at all at that time, and he based that statement upon knowledge as solid and profound as any man could have. He based that opinion, firstly, upon his long experience as Colonial Minister for nine years; secondly upon travel in South Africa; and thirdly, upon as wide a knowledge of the working of representative institutions as any man could have who had worked in public offices as his right hon. friend had worked with distinction, with power, and with a knowledge which every responsible Minister on the Ministerial side of the House had at one time or another acknowledged. Upon this question the minds of the people of the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony had become thoroughly unsettled by reason of the threat of the veto. He did not press that point in any acrimonious spirit, but that threat had led them to choose what they thought was the least of two evils, namely, complete control of their own affairs even at a premature moment. He wished to refer to the important question of the basis upon which the franchise would be established and the electoral system. The Under-Secretary for the Colonies had suggested that they must not gerrymander, and he had also suggested that it would be a most unfair thing if they permitted a representative system which would place either Party in that country at an advantage over the other by any dodge or trick. He did not think it was suggested that the late Colonial Secretary was guilty of a trick when he laid down as the foundation of the constitution which he was prepared to give one vote one value and voters the basis for the franchise. It would be absolutely impossible for the British, being in such a large minority, to get any real representation; whereas in the town where the Boers lived together, in Johannesburg, they would be represented because of their position in the municipality. Therefore the principle of one vote one value would work out to the advantage of the Boers in the municipality and to the disadvantage of the British in the rural districts. If the Government would keep in mind this principle they would secure for ever in the Transvaal a natural predominance which would make not only for Imperial interests, but for the security of the Transvaal as a State which should have the spirit of British institutions in all the works of its Legislature. There should be one great nationalising influence from the Zambesi to Table Bay. If they drew off from that influence any of its vital force and impulse they would have nothing to take its place. There was no Boer constitutional tradition, none of those powerful influences which had conic from constitutional practice through history and through the centuries. Therefore, there ought to be in the first Legislature granted to the Transvaal predominating British power through numbers. To establish the true constitutional spirit in the Transvaal it was necessary in the first instance to establish a constitution upon preponderating British influence. It would be impossible that members of the former Transvaal Government could rightly interpret the spirit of British institutions. This could also be said of the Orange River Colony. Did the Under-Secretary for the Colonies think it would be possible for those who served in the last Government in the Transvaal to be placed in a position where they could control the destinies of the Transvaal in the first Legislature which was granted to them? He thought that one of the most dangerous things that could possibly be done was to give to the Orange River Colony at the present time full responsible government. He did not suggest that that Colony would be seditious, but they could not expect them so soon after a great war to realise the true spirit of British administration, and they could not expect them to enter upon it with the fullest justice to the British residents there. [Cries of "Oh, oh !"] It was too late in the evening to enter upon a discussion of the question of land settlement in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony. He ventured to say that even if they secured the rights of those settlers as rigidly as they possibly could, that would not prevent any Government coming into power from altering the local conditions under which they worked, and they all knew what an enormous power there was in the hands of an executive to assist or to disturb and hinder development. The Committee which had been sent out met on a certain Friday and that synchronised with a speech delivered by Mr. Smuts in Pretoria, which he ventured to say was as strong a proclamation of determined resistance to what might be called British solidarity in the Transvaal and Orange River Colony as was ever made before the war. This proclamation was followed by statements elsewhere to the effect that the first thing that would be done if a Dutch Government came into power in the Orange River Colony would be to restore all the old officials—who had naturally left office after the war—to their original positions in the Orange River Colony administration. Their policy was perfectly frank, and it was to restore to the Transvaal and the Orange River Colony the old spirit of Boer and Dutch methods of administration. He believed it to be the duty of this House and the Government to sec that British institutions were made secure in both those Colonies. He had been freely criticised in regard to a certain Motion for adjournment which was declined, but he was afraid that Motion had been generally misunderstood. In moving that Motion he had in his mind that the instructions given to the Committee were suggestive of concessions to Boer prejudices which would make the Boer stronger in his position. What he wanted to establish was that due consideration should be given to those very things which his hon. friend had so clearly referred to not unsympathetically in his speech. He thanked the House for listening to the suggestions he had made.
Whereupon Motion made, and Question, "That the Chairman do report Progress; and ask leave to sit again"—(Mr. Morton)—put, and agreed to.
Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.
Adjourned at three minutes after Twelve o'clock.