§ MR. GUY DAWNAYasked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, with reference to the statement made by Mr. Shepstone, the British Commissioner in the Reserved Territory, in his letter of January 12th to Sir Henry Bulwer, that—
If all the Chiefs who expressed unwillingness to live under Cetywayo were to come into the Reserved Territory, and to be followed by any number of their people, room would not be found for them,and to the further statement in his letter of March 16th to the same effect, Whether, considering that nine out of the twelve deposed Chiefs have signified this unwillingness, there is at present in the Reserved Territory room for all those Chiefs, and the people who may wish to follow them; and, for what reason Sir Henry Bulwer's important telegram of November 30th 1882, in which he pointed out that the further reduction in extent of the Reserved Territory, as decided upon by Her Majesty's Government, would have the effect of preventing the establishment of a necessary balance of power, was omitted from Blue Book C. 3466?
§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEYMr. Shepstone's statement was only a contingent prophecy, which certainly as yet has not turned out true, as his successor, Mr. Osborn, does not report to us any actual or anticipated overcrowding in the Zululand Reserve. I do not know where the hon. Member got his information from; but certainly the facts within the knowledge of the Government do not bear out the statements in the second paragraph of the Question; on the contrary, several of the Chiefs had expressed their desire for Cetewayo's return. The telegram of November 30 was not given in the Blue Book, because it added little or nothing to what had already been given as Sir Henry Bulwer's views; it was merely an acknowledgment of the Secretary of State's despatch. 38 It did not require the insertion of the telegram to show that Sir Henry Bulwer is not responsible for the curtailment of the Reserved Territory.