HC Deb 09 May 1881 vol 261 cc20-1
SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFF

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether the attention of Her Majesty's Government has been called to a telegram in the "Standard" of May 6th, dated Newcastle, Wednesday, in which it is stated that— Considerable surprise has been manifested here at the question raised in England as to blame or praise due to General Wood for his making the Treaty with the Boers. Sir E. Wood as a soldier obeyed the orders he received from the Home authorities, and carried out a painful and delicate task to the best of his abilities. It is, however, no secret here that he strongly advocated driving the Boers out of Natal before entering into any negotiations with them; but his advice was altogether ignored at home; and, whether such statement is correct?

SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACH

asked permission, before the right hon. Gentleman answered the Question, to put to him a Question on the same subject of which he had given him private Notice. It was—Whether any communications by telegraph or otherwise bearing on this subject have passed between Sir Evelyn Wood and the Home Government, or between the late Sir George Colley, while he was in command, and the Home Government, which have not yet been published; and, if so, whether any such communications will be published?

MR. GRANT DUFF

I will, Sir, with the permission of the House, answer these two Questions together. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Portsmouth (Sir H. Drummond Wolff) asks me with regard to a passage in The Standard newspaper. To that I have to reply that the statement therein contained appears to me to be neither correct nor just to Sir Evelyn Wood. In reply to the right hon. Baronet the Member for East Gloucestershire (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), I have to say that the whole history of the transaction to which he alludes is in the hands of hon. Members; that we have received no telegrams or other communications either from Sir George Colley or Sir Evelyn Wood besides and beyond those that have been laid on the Table of the House. I would refer hon. Members more especially to No. 89 of 2,837, received at the Colonial Office on the 6th of March, to No. 113 of the same Paper, received on the 17th of March, and to No. 5 of 2,858, dated the 23rd of March, the material part of which I will read as containing the most recent expression of Sir Evelyn Wood's views— March 23, 11.30 p.m.—Sincerely grateful to Government for appreciation of efforts in carrying out their wishes. Referring to words 'happiest results,' &c., in my telegram of March 5, I meant that a series of actions fought by six companies could not affect our prestige, but Boer leaders had lit a fire which had got beyond their control and would be quenched more easily after a British victory; the fire is now out for a time, but Kruger to-day stated the Republic would be ruined if the Commission admitted claims from all forced to aid Boers. In drafting instructions, therefore, the hitherto inert power of the loyalists must be treated as an important factor in the question of a lasting peace. It would be also false modesty to conceal belief that personal acquaintance with me has materially aided solution. Uneducated men mistrust Governments, but trust persons.