§ MR. R. N. FOWLER (LORD MAYOR)said, that there were a few points touched upon in the Speech from the Throne upon which he should like some explanation. As to Basutoland, which had not been alluded to in the Speech, he was very glad to hear that the Earl of Derby had taken the course of placing the Basutos under the Imperial Government, an arrangement which was most likely to promote peace. He should be glad, however, to have any further information which Her Majesty's Government might place before the House. He had the misfortune to differ on the subject of Zulu- 124 land from several Gentlemen with whom he usually acted. It would be said by many sitting on that, and by some sitting on the other side, that the course which those who agreed with him urged upon the Government, and to which the Government had to a great extent acceded, was unwise. He was rather disposed to believe that the authorities of Natal had interfered with the policy adopted by the Earl of Kimberley when he was at the Colonial Office, and that it was on that account the failure in Zululand was brought about. He should be glad to hear whether the Under Secretary was in a position to give the House to-day any information with regard to things in that country. He was anxious to-day to say a few words about the paragraph in the Queen's Speech which referred to the Transvaal. In former days such questions were generally debated on Tuesdays and Fridays, and Her Majesty's Government generally gave private Members some assistance to keep a House; but during the present Parliament the Government had repudiated all responsibility for doing so, and the consequence was that questions of that kind in which some Members took an interest were usually disposed of by counts-out. The question of the Transvaal, however, was debated at some length last Session, when it was brought forward by the hon. and learned Member for Chatham (Mr. Gorst), who was not now in his place, and some very able speeches were made, especially one by his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Forster), which were answered by speeches from Members of the Government. As the House was aware, there had been now for three months in this country some Delegates from the Transvaal urging certain claims upon Her Majesty's Government. These were claims which he ventured humbly to hope Her Majesty's Government would not accede to. They demanded the abolition of the Sand River Convention, the abolition of the Suzerainty, the giving up by England of the debt due to her from the Transvaal, and a great enlargement of territory. With regard to the debt, he did not suppose that the Transvaal Government were likely to pay, whether they could pay or not. They were not honest enough to pay if they could. Therefore, Her Majesty's Government had only one course to pursue, and that 125 was to forgive them the debt and to write it off. But if Her Majesty's Government made that substantial concession, they ought on all other questions to stand firm. There was the question of the Suzerainty. If his memory served him rightly, when the Convention of Pretoria was made it was represented to the House by the Prime Minister that this Suzerainty was of real practical importance; that it gave us certain rights over the Transvaal; and that in gaining the Suzerainty Her Majesty's Government had gained a great diplomatic victory. But now Delegates had come over asking that the Suzerainty might be given up. If it was given up it would show that the Suzerainty was a worthless thing. The Government, he asserted, committed a great mistake when they entered into the Convention of Pretoria. They were told under that Convention they would have certain rights and exercise great influence over the Natives and the general affairs of their Commonwealth. Those predictions had, however, been completely falsified. On many former occasions charges of the gravest nature had been brought in that House against the Boers, especially with regard to the manner in which they treated the village in which the illustrious Dr. Livingstone had resided, and that celebrated man had in his schools children whom he subsequently found in slavery under the Boers. Complaints of the most serious kind had been made against these men; and he therefore hoped that in any transactions with them the Government would provide for the safety and protection of the Natives. Then there was the question which his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Forster) had called attention to—namely, the concessions which the Boer Delegates were asking for in regard to the Bechuanas. As far as he could gather from the statements made in the newspapers, Her Majesty's Government had consented to give up to the Transvaal those Chiefs who, according to the representations of the Delegates, were friendly to the Boers. He should be glad to know, however, what proof the Government had that Moshette and Massouw wished to come under the rule of the Transvaal? The Boers, of course, had a very strong interest in pressing this matter; but the Government, before taking action, should be convinced 126 that these Chiefs desired of their own free will to come within the Transvaal administration. For himself, he had no hesitation in declaring that he did not believe a word the Transvaal Delegates said. The men they represented were charged with the blackest crimes, and the Delegates, if not murderers themselves, were the apologists of murder. He was very glad that Her Majesty's Government had stood firm with regard to the measures to be taken for the protection of the Native Chiefs, whose cause was so ably advocated in that House last Session by his right hon. Friend the Member for Bradford. Mankoroane and Montsioa were two Chiefs who had stood by this country in its difficulties, and the Government were bound by every feeling of honour to protect them. In the matter of taking up arms they were discouraged by the British Government; and because they were known to be faithful to Her Majesty they had been attacked by the Transvaal. It certainly seemed to him that it was the duty of the Government and the country to afford proper protection to those loyal Chiefs. He was glad to know that Lord Derby had taken measures to safeguard their territory; but he wished to remind the Government that the Boers believed in nothing but force. He could not accept the statement that they respected the moral influence of England. When he was in the Free State, some time ago, the language he heard was to the effect that it was all very well for the English to talk, but the real fact of the matter was that they gave up the Transvaal because they could not help themselves—they were defeated, and they knew it. No doubt the Government desired to put an end to the shedding of blood, and were strongly influenced by feelings of humanity. He gave them full credit for that; but he remembered saying to his hon. Friend the Member for Whitby (Mr. A. Pease) that he believed the action of the Government was a mistake, and that whatever course they intended to take they were not likely to promote peace in South Africa until they had put down the Boers. It was a great mistake to make any terms with the Boers until they had them in their power. He greatly regretted the course which Her Majesty's Government pursued three years ago; but the question 127 they had now to consider wag what they should do under present circumstances. He was glad to learn that Lord Derby had stood firm as regarded the territory of these two Chiefs, and also on the question of the trade route into the interior. Everyone who had studied the history of the country must see that if they handed over this route to the Transvaal, or allowed them to encroach on it, they would inflict a dreadful evil on the missionaries and the traders into the interior of Africa. The Boers, he believed, were hostile to this country, because this country had always protested against slavery; whereas the cornerstone of the South African Republic, as they used to call themselves, was the institution of slavery. In these circumstances it was of the most vital importance that they should maintain that route open, and therefore he was glad to hear that Her Majesty's Government stood firm in that respect. With regard to the transactions of the Boers on the Eastern Frontier, he was also glad to hear that Her Majesty's Government were endeavouring to take steps for the protection of the Bechuanas. But there was also the question of the Swazis and the Zulus. The latter had been, by our own act, left to the mercy of the Transvaal, and he hoped Her Majesty's Government would take stringent measures for the protection of the Swazis and the Zulus. He had been taken to task by a section of the Liberal Press for certain language he had used with respect to the Boers. All he could say in reply was that the same language had been once used by a very eminent statesman, Mr. Canning; and if he knew of language of a stronger nature, and which the custom of the House would permit him to use, he would use it with regard to the Boers of the Transvaal. He trusted that Her Majesty's Government, in dealing with them, would recollect that they were dealing with a slave-holding Power, and with a Power whose representations ought to be confirmed by independent testimony; and that they would not take as Gospel what was told them by these Delegates. The Boers were a set of men who deserved no consideration from any civilized people, and he heartily pitied the hard necessity which had brought so excellent a man as the Earl of Derby into contact with these people. 128 He had always been proud to have been a supporter of the policy under which the Transvaal had been annexed; and he thought his right hon. Friend (Sir Michael Hicks - Beach) deserved very great credit, when Colonial Secretary in the late Administration, for the part he had taken in that great step.
§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEY, after expressing regret that he had not been present at the commencement of the right hon. Gentleman's speech, said, the Papers relating to Cetewayo and Zulu-land were laid on the Table yesterday, and those relating to the Transvaal would be presented in the course of a few days. He understood that his right hon. Friend had first made remarks connected with Zululand and Cetewayo, and he would therefore summarize the sequence of the circumstances which had occurred in Zululand since the House rose. Cetewayo had been put back on the Throne of Zululand, with certain conditions imposed upon him. One of the principal of these was, that he should respect the territory reserved by the British Power on the one side and the territory allotted to the Chief Usibepu on the North. Cetewayo seemed, however, from the very first to have disregarded the condition as to the territory on the North. He began the game of fighting, and retaliation ensued. Fortune attended first on one side and then on the other, but principally on the side of Usibepu, until it culminated in the crushing defeat of Cetewayo at Ulundi about the month of July. It was quite clear that, whatever might have been the feeling of many of the people towards Cetewayo, he was not in the position he previously occupied, and when he attacked Usibepu he found an opponent more powerful in tactics and courage than himself. The result had been that Cetewayo was driven over the Border, and became a refugee in British territory. For a considerable time he remained in the bush in a state of isolation, except that he was surrounded by his own Chiefs and adherents; and he refused to place himself submissively under the authority of the British Resident. It was only when absolute force was threatened to him that at last he gave way and came into Ekowe, where he was immediately under the view of the Resident and of the small body of British troops there. 129 Cetewayo was now in this position—he was a refugee within our territory. The Government had no intention, at present at any rate, of restoring Cetewayo to the place he formerly occupied, and he did not think they would have such an intention at any future time. That was not the business of the British Government, nor was it an undertaking which, in his opinion, would meet with much success. The object of Her Majesty's Government was to allow, as far as they could with regard to the safety of the British Possessions, the Zulus to settle their own matters for themselves, and decide who they would have to rule over them. But Cetewayo's presence in the Reserve was, no doubt, a matter of danger, for as long as he was there he was, however careful our attempts might be to prevent it, acting as an inciter of disorder. It was undoubtedly true that the presence of Cetewayo did keep the elements of discord on the surface and prevented matters from settling down as they otherwise would. But it was a difficult thing to know what to do with Cetewayo. They must proceed carefully and slowly in the matter. If they were to say to Cetewayo he must go back to his own country, because his presence was a source of danger, and refused him the rights of a refugee on British soil, he apprehended Cetewayo would probably be killed when he returned to Zululand, unless he might be disposed to retire into the Transvaal, instead of remaining within the borders of his own territory. To remove him to Natal would be distasteful to the Government and the Colonists of Natal. While on this point, he might mention that he had been told that the right hon. Gentleman said in the course of his remarks that a great deal of the difficulty had arisen owing to differences between the Imperial Government and the Government of Natal. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that was news to him. If they were to propose to locate Cetewayo within Natal territory that difficulty might arise.
§ MR. R. N. FOWLER (LORD MAYOR)said, he did not refer to the present, but to some time back.
§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEYsaid, he did not suppose the House wished him to go back for two or three years; but with respect to recent events there had been no differences between the Imperial Go- 130 vernment and the Government of Natal. Another thing might be the removal of Cetewayo to the Cape; but that, again, was a question which presented considerable difficulty, and Her Majesty's Government had not thought it a matter urgent enough to decide among conflicting difficulties of procedure. Cetewayo, as he said before, was now a refugee in the Reserved territory, and it might very likely become necessary to increase the stringency with which he was guarded, so as to prevent him having communication with people outside, and thus stirring up strife. A very few words uttered by a man with the history and the antecedents of Cetewayo might be productive of great disturbance and agitation in the minds of the Natives. But he was neither under the patronage of Her Majesty's Government as an aspirant to the Throne, nor had he any authority in the Reserve. Her Majesty's Government were convinced of the necessity of maintaining intact British authority in the Reserve, and he was merely there as a refugee, claiming and receiving the protection of Her Majesty's Government from any of his enemies who might seek to pursue and destroy him. Then the right hon. Gentleman proceeded to deal with the question of the Transvaal. He could not go into great details about the Transvaal question, because the matter was still under discussion. The right hon. Gentleman alluded to what he had seen in the public Press. He might inform the right hon. Gentleman that what had been stated in the public prints was fairly accurate; but, at the same time, he should say that the publication of that information was not due to the action of the Colonial Office, but he presumed was due to the initiative of the gentlemen who had come here from the Transvaal. He believed they would come to what even the right hon. Gentleman would consider a satisfactory settlement. They had firmly insisted on, and had received, the acquiescence of the Delegates to the necessity of maintaining the trade route intact from the Transvaal. It might, perhaps, be a subject of astonishment that this particular trade route should be of such great importance; but the reason was that this route alone provided travellers with a sufficient supply of water. The right hon. Gentleman asked why Her 131 Majesty's Government believed that the Chiefs Massouw and Moshette were willing to come under the Transvaal dominion? and he warned them against taking for Gospel everything the Delegates stated. Now, whatever Gospel he (Mr. Ashley) might have an admiration for, it was not the Gospel of the Transvaal Delegates. They came here to plead their own cause; they were parties in the suit; and his noble Friend the Secretary of State had sources of information entirely distinct and apart from the assertions of gentlemen who naturally took one view of the question. He was not at the present moment able to put his finger upon any positive passago whore Massouw and Moshette or their agents had expressed any willingness to come under the Transvaal; but they had certainly not expressed the contrary, and he appealed to the right hon. Gentleman, and asked him whether it was not self-evident that the whole of the interest of Massouw and Moshette naturally lay on the side of the Transvaal? The real origin of all these disputes on the borders of the Transvaal which the freebooters had taken advantage of had been a claim for pre-eminence by one set of Chiefs over the other. The consequence was, that the side that took up the supremacy of Massouw and Moshette was naturally the side to which, in the apportionment of territory, they should wish to be annexed. The alternative would be that they would have to come again under the dominion of the rival Chiefs. Montsioa and Mankoroane might, perhaps have some claim upon them; but Massouw and Moshette had no claim whatever, because in all their actions they had been hostile to British interests. He was quite convinced, although these two Chiefs would prefer to be left entirely to themselves, and to carry on their operations untrammelled by any White intervention, that they would prefer to be put under the protection of the Transvaal, than be again restored to the position where Mankoroane and Montsioa would hold the right of authority over them. As the right hon. Gentleman had pointed out, this settlement would be of no avail unless steps were ultimately taken to ensure its fulfilment. When the Papers were laid before the House in a few days, the right hon. 132 Gentleman would see that the Delegates had assured Her Majesty's Government that they would scrupulously preserve the frontier; and his noble Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies had proposed—and was determined to carry out—that there should be appointed a Resident Commissioner of some character on that frontier, and that he should have under his command some sort of police force, with which he could keep the frontier from the incursions of the freebooters.
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACHWill the pay of the force be borne jointly?
§ MR. EVELYN ASHLEYYes; jointly by the Cape Government and the Imperial Government, as far as any deficit was concerned, after the receipt of some sort of but tax from the Natives. Her Majesty's Government believed they had now secured a settlement to a very difficult question, with the consent of the Transvaal Government as a Government. It was a matter merely of police. There was no race animosity, and no collision of Governments or policies, as there would have been had any violent action been taken last year; and as the great majority of these freebooters went in to these territories, not to settle themselves, but to take up land which they turned into money afterwards by selling it, his belief was that if, by a small but efficient police force, they took away the security which these freebooters were able to offer to those to whom they wished to sell, the market for their operations would be destroyed; and when they found nobody would come in to buy from them, he believed they would abstain from depredations on the Border. The right hon. Gentleman was correct in saying that, to a certain modified extent, there had been a threatening of an inroad of Boers into parts of Swaziland and Zululand. At present he was only able to say that the matter was meeting with the attention of the Colonial Office, representations had been made on the matter to the Delegates, who professed the same anxiety to preserve their frontier on the East as well as on the West; and he dared say that they would not present any obstacle to anything which Her Majesty's Government might think fit to propose. At the same time, he believed 133 the Swazis and the Zulus were far more able to defend themselves than the right hon. Gentleman gave them credit for from any inroads of this sort; and he thought that all that was required there was a Resident of some sort with responsibility and position, who could draw the attention of the Transvaal Government to any inroads which were made, and to a certain extent form a rallying-point for the Native tribes in that country. He could only say, however, at present, that the subject had not escaped the attention of Her Majesty's Government. He hoped that the House, when the Papers were before it, would be able to do justice to Her Majesty's Government in their conduct of a very complicted matter. Of course, the right hon. Gentleman could speak in foro conscientiœ; but the Government had to take into consideration many things which were not mere matters of conscience The House would see that, while recognizing to a certain extent existing facts and avoiding pitfalls, Her Majesty's Government had satisfied the legitimate claims of the Natives; and that, as far as they were able, Hoi-Majesty's Government had placed on a good footing the relations between the Boer Government and the Natives on the Bechuana Frontier. With respect to the debt and Suzerainty, the right hon. Gentleman would excuse him entering into that question. They had carefully abstained from going into it with the Delegates until the preliminary question of the Border was settled, that being the turning point of the whole matter.
§ SIR MICHAEL HICKS - BEACHsaid, there was much that was satisfactory in the speech of the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and he thought they were indebted to his right hon. Friend behind him (Mr. R. N. Fowler) for having brought this important subject before the House. It was well remembered how last year from day to day the debate on the state of affairs in the Transvaal was postponed, and how those who had wished to bring the question to an issue had failed to obtain any opportunity of doing so; he, therefore, thought that they were fairly within their rights if they availed themselves of the debate upon the Address for calling the attention of the House to the matter, even in the absence of the necessary 134 Papers. The hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies had referred first to the question of Zululand. He (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) had taken the trouble to look back to a paragraph in the Speech from the Throne just a year ago. It was then stated that the condition of Zulu-land, and the possibility of renewed disturbances there, had engaged Her Majesty's most serious attention, and that it was earnestly hoped that the restoration of Cetewayo, which had just been effected, would lead to the establishment of a more stable Government in that country. He was afraid they must all confess—and he thought no one had confessed it more completely than the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary—that these hopes had been completely disappointed. They were told that Cetewayo had disregarded his under taking, at any rate, so far as his relations with his northern neighbour Usibepu were concerned; but the stipulation under which alone Her Majesty's Government had consented to his restoration was that he should not make war upon his neighbours, and yet from that day there had been nothing but bloodshed, disorder, and anarchy in Zululand, and this state of matters had resulted from the policy adopted by Her Majesty's Government—a policy for which he never could find any reason at all except the pressure of some hon. Members who were mainly influenced by sentiment in their consideration of the subject. Next they had received the news of Cetewayo's absolute rout by Usibepu and his reputed death; and then in the Speech from the Throne, at the end of last Session, they were told that the hopes of Her Majesty's Government for peace and order in Zululand had not yet been realized. Now, in Her Majesty's present Speech, all that was told them was that the condition of Zululand continued to be unsettled. That was a fact about which there was no doubt whatever. The question which he hoped would be carefully considered by Her Majesty's Government was the cause to which this unsettlement was due. Why was it that Her Majesty's Government still allowed Cetewayo to remain so near to Zululand as the Reserve territory? The Under Secretary stated that in the Reserve, although under the Resident, 135 Cetewayo was a danger to the peace of the Reserve and of Zululand. He fancied there could be no doubt whatever—he himself had received, and no doubt other Members of the House had received, information upon the subject—that for the whole time that Cetewayo had been under our protection he had been secretly intriguing against the peace of the Reserved territory and of Zululand; and it was only the other day that news had been received of a fresh battle in Zululand, in which, as usual, there had been great slaughter and bloodshed. Would it not be better for Her Majesty's Government to make up their minds that the whole of their policy as to the restoration of Cetewayo had absolutely failed; that it would have been better if they had left him where he was; and that now, for the peace of the Reserve, and for the peace of the rest of the country, they ought to send him back to the Cape Colony? His belief was that so long as Cetewayo was allowed by Her Majesty's Government to use their protection for the purpose of intrigues, so long would these troubles continue; and, therefore, he hoped they might have some further consideration than had yet been given by the Government to this subject. He hoped the Government would see the urgency of some measures being taken, on as early a day as possible, to put an end to the troubles which had existed during the last year, and which still continued to disturb that unhappy country. With regard to the Transvaal Convention, of course it was very difficult for them to discuss that matter in the absence of any information as to the negotiations between Her Majesty's Government and the Transvaal Delegates, or to the various requests made by these Delegates and the replies of Her Majesty's Government. He might say, however, that he was very glad to learn from the statement of the Under Secretary that the account which had appeared in the public Press was true upon two points—first, that the trade route through Bechuanaland would be absolutely kept outside the territory of the Transvaal; and, secondly, that something was at last to be done towards the fulfilment of our obligations towards those unfortunate Chiefs Mankoroane and Montsioa. He should have preferred, however, that the Under Secretary should have been 136 able to announce to the House that the Cape Government, recognizing the importance to them of the control of the trade route, and also the peace of their frontier, had undertaken the sole charge of the Resident and the police force, which were to be maintained for the protection of those tribes. The trade route was of more importance to the Cape Government than to us. So long as it was in the power of the Cape Government to impose what tariff they liked at their ports, so long was it in their power practically to render useless to this country any trade route to the interior of Africa from any port within their dominion. It was, however, something gained that the Cape Government should have undertaken a joint liability with ourselves; but many of them would be disposed to regret that Her Majesty's Government did not undertake a precisely similar liability 18 months ago. He believed if that liability had been undertaken before the disturbances in the territories of these unfortunate Chiefs had reached the point they attained this time last year, and before feelings of race antipathy were excited-, that it would have been possible to do with perfect success precisely what Her Majesty's Government proposed to do now, and they should have been saved all the humiliation which they had incurred by deserting their allies for so long, while much misery and bloodshed would have been spared to these unfortunate people themselves. With reference to the statement that the Government were coming to a satisfactory settlement on the question of the Transvaal, the Under Secretary had given, as one reason for it, the assurance of the Delegates that the Transvaal Government would respect the new frontier. A similar assurance was given when the Transvaal Convention was signed, but it was broken, if not by the Transvaal Government themselves, at least, by those whom they ought to have controlled. He, therefore, attached as little value to the present assurance as he did to that more formal pledge. But he did attach importance to the active policy which at last Her Majesty's Government had determined to adopt. There had been several statements in the public journals of late with regard to this matter; and he confessed he road with a little apprehension 137 a statement which had appeared of certain conditions which the Transvaal Delegates had sought to impose, and on which alone they had agreed to the proposal of the Earl of Derby on this question. The first was, that the Government of the South African Republic would not be bound to take part in any demarcation to be carried out by force of arms. It was difficult to understand the precise meaning of that condition. At any rate, he hoped it did not imply that if any subject of the Transvaal Government took steps to resist the demarcation, that Government would not take such measures against him as the circumstances might demand. The second was, that the republic should not be responsible for the action of freebooters. It was the contention of the Transvaal Government that all the troubles which had arisen in Bechuanaland had arisen because the Convention defined a boundary which it was impossible to maintain; and it appeared to him that in making that condition the Delegates were leaving open a door to precisely similar difficulties in the future. He had no hope whatever for a satisfactory solution of this question, except through the action of the Resident and the police, who were to be maintained jointly by the Imperial and the Cape Governments. It must be remembered, however, that this policy entailed upon us a very serious responsibility. It could not be avoided on account of our pledges to these Chiefs and their people; but it was a policy which must be maintained whatever might happen, whatever might be the conduct of the Transvaal Government in supporting, either directly or indirectly, the conduct of the freebooters whose proceedings, they declined to control. He thought the Government were almost as much bound to prevent incursions by Boer freebooters into Zululand and Swaziland as they were to prevent similar incursions into the territories of Montsioa and of Mankoroane. He feared that these incursions had in time past been made with the connivance of the Transvaal Government; and as he was also afraid that they might be continued he thought Her Majesty's Government would have to face the question of the establishment of a Resident on the East of the Transvaal with powers precisely similar to those with which the Resident on the West would be in- 138 vested. While he should like to have had some further explanation than had yet been given as to the concessions which it was proposed to make in regard to the foreign relations of the Transvaal, he did not blame the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ashley) for the reticence which he had displayed in regard to negotiations which were still pending. But, at the same time, he must say that in his view few things could be more dangerous to the future of South Africa than an alteration by Her Majesty's Government of the terms of the Transvaal Convention so as to leave the whole of the foreign relations of the Transvaal Government absolutely free. It might be well to leave the Transvaal Government to themselves in their dealings with tribes with which this country had no concern—those, for instance, on the North-East or North of the Transvaal. But it ought to be very gravely considered whether this country would be justified, in view of the possible future of South Africa, in allowing the foreign relations of the Transvaal with European Rowers to be as absolutely free as if it was an independent State. He did not believe it was a point on which the Transvaal Government themselves were particularly anxious for change; but, at any rate, he trusted Her Majesty's Government would stand firm in the matter. As far as the question of Suzerainty was concerned, he did not think there were many Members in the House who would have supported the policy of Her Majesty's Government in the Transvaal if they had known at the time that the Convention was made that the Suzerainty meant as little as it was now found, or seemed, to mean. At the time the Convention was agreed to, Suzerainty was interpreted by the Prime Minister as meaning very much more power to this country than it possessed over self-governing Colonies; but, as a matter of fact, the Suzerainty had since been insulted and practically ignored by the Transvaal Government, and it might well be questioned whether such a nominal authority was worth maintaining except on the point to which he had made allusion, for it could not be said that the retention of Suzerainty had in any sufficient way vindicated the authority of the Queen in the Transvaal. There was, however, the question of what was to be done in re- 139 gard to the relations between the Transvaal Government and the 700,000 or 800,000 Native inhabitants of the Transvaal State? A Resident had been appointed at Pretoria, whose duty was to watch over their interests. The Natives protested against being handed over to the Transvaal Government, even under those conditions. He did not at the time see how a Resident, without any power at his back, could be of much use in assisting the Natives against their Rulers. Therefore, he did not think that the question of the maintenance of the Resident was so vital as some of his hon. Friends seemed to imagine; but, at the same time, he could suggest no other means by which anything could really be done towards protecting the interests of these nations. He thought that Parliament was entitled to further information with regard to the case of the Chief Mampoer, who was hanged as a common murderer for the death of the Chief Secocoeni, which occurred in an attempt made by the last-named Chief to recover possession of a territory from which he had been deposed and to which Mampoer had been appointed. It was but natural that Mampoer should defend the territory to the government of which he had been appointed, and he could not be deemed a murderer for so doing, though the violent death of Secocoeni resulted. Then, again, Parliament had a right to inquire as to the case of another Native Chief, Mapoch, who, refusing to submit to the Transvaal Government, was subjected to very severe penalties, and many of his tribe were indentured to White inhabitants of the Transvaal. When this question was before the House last year he reminded the Prime Minister that when he (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) was Secretary of State for the Colonies he wrote a despatch to the Cape Government pointing out that an indenture for five years was too long, and that it ought not to be for more than a year. He was, therefore, entitled to ask whether anything had been done in this matter so as to prevent the system of indenture becoming practically one of slavery? Finally, with reference to the debt of the Transvaal State to this country, his opinion was that the Transvaal Government should not be excused from paying the debt simply because they would not; but if it could be proved that they were 140 unable to pay, he should be one of the first to say they should be exempted. He hoped the Government would be able to make some reasonable arrangement; and he trusted that the taxpayers of this country would not be charged with the compensation which had been paid out of our funds to those loyal subjects of the Transvaal who had been proved to have suffered through unjustifiable acts at the hands of the present Transvaal Government, or their representatives, during the war. He had taken part in this discussion for no Party purpose, but with the most cordial wish that the negotiations now in progress might have a successful issue. The affairs of South Africa ought not to be approached in a Party spirit, for they were sufficiently complicated to tax the energies, not only of any Government, but of a Government and an Opposition combined. From the firmness with which, as he understood it, the Earl of Derby had already adhered to two of the vital points at issue, and from the way in which the noble Earl had assumed the responsibility of securing that the Convention now made should really be carried out, and should not be waste paper like the old Convention, he hoped that there would be not only a nominal success in these negotiations, but that they would really, tend to the benefit of the people of South Africa.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERsaid, he thought that the paragraph in the Queen's Speech dealing with the Transvaal could not have been passed by in silence, as great interest was felt in the subject of our relations with that territory. He was glad to believe that the speech delivered by the Under Secretary for the Colonies would remove a great deal of anxiety that many Members felt upon the subject. He understood from that speech that the official Papers would be laid on the Table in a couple of days; but he also gathered that the information that had been published in the newspapers was substantially correct, although it had been furnished by the Transvaal Delegates, and not by the Government. He trusted that the Government would, at any rate, supply the official Correspondence up to the date reached in the information supplied by the Delegates, so that the House might form a judgment on authentic documents, and not upon irresponsible statements 141 appearing in the newspapers. It was the more necessary that the Government should adopt that course, because it appeared that some of the statements that had been made were not quite consistent with one another. The Under Secretary for the Colonies had stated that it would he difficult to discuss the question of the Suzerainty because it was still the subject of negotiation. He did not expect the Government to explain the exact position of the negotiations, or to state what they had been asked to do or were going to do. Nevertheless, he thought that Members interested in the question of Suzerainty were justified in referring to it. It would, in his opinion, be a most serious matter to leave to the Transvaal State absolute freedom in its dealings with foreign civilized Powers. He could imagine very great evils arising from such a course were it followed, evils which might affect the whole of our South African Colonies for many generations to come. The Suzerainty had afforded very little protection—perhaps no protection—to the Natives within the Transvaal, but that fact did not diminish our duty towards the Natives. He did not think, when they looked back to the late history of events in Basutoland, to the fact that the inhabitants were grieved to lose the sovereignty of this country over them and that they protested against it, and also to the fact that they were in some danger of ill-treatment, and above all to the fact that at the time the Convention was made assurances were given in the strongest possible terms by the Government of the clay that steps should be taken for their protection—he could not imagine that they could forget that duty. Especially they must not forget that in the Sand River Convention there was an Article declaring against slavery, and he should be glad that the Government would still maintain a provision that any establishment of slavery would render the Convention null and void. But as regarded the Sand River Convention, he hoped and trusted—and he saw no reason to fear—that the most unjust provision preventing our supplying ammunition to the Natives and our entering into alliances with them would not be repeated. To whatever extent we ceased to interfere on behalf of the Natives, we were undoubtedly bound not to interfere against thorn. He was very glad to find 142 that Lord Derby and the Government had acknowledged our obligations to the Bechuana Chiefs, and that they resisted to the utmost all attempts on the part of the Delegates to get the sanction of this country to the freebooting robbery which had been carried out against those Chiefs, and be must thank the Government for their resistance in the matter. The trade route was also a matter of the greatest importance, not only for trade purposes, but for the progress of civilization and Christianity. That part, however, of the speech of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary which gave him the greatest satisfaction was with regard to future action and immediate future action. Judging from the past, they would be perfectly blind and perfectly foolish if they were satisfied that the Convention would maintain itself. There would not then be a chance of such a Convention lasting for months, or even for weeks. There were many persons in the Transvaal continually looking out to see how they could enter upon free-booting and marauding expeditions, and they would treat with the utmost contempt a Convention which they knew there was no power of enforcing. He had always thought that the difficulty of enforcing a Convention was far less than was generally supposed. He thought that now there was a good hope of order being maintained on our side of the boundary through the steps which the Government now stated would be taken. He was very glad to find the Cape Government joining with the Imperial Government in the establishment of Border police. He did not very much regret the refusal of the Transvaal Government to join. They had undertaken to keep order within their own boundary, which was all that he cared to ask of them. To his mind it was better that this country and the Cape Government should alone make themselves responsible for the Border line. He had seen a rumour mentioned in the Press—it might be without foundation—that an effort was to be made by the freebooters to anticipate the result of the Convention by an attack upon Mankoroane in Stellaland. He did not entirely join in all the remarks of his right hon. Friend (Mr. R. N. Fowler) in regard to the Boers, though he thought they required very careful watching. But there was nothing inconsistent 143 with their past conduct in such an instigation coming from the Transvaal Leaders, or even from their Delegates here. He only hoped the Government would adopt measures against any steps of the sort being taken. It was said that men of very high authority, the President or Vice President, were themselves deeply interested in the matter, by being the real owners of several farms in Stellaland. The Government should let the Delegates know that so long as there was a doubt about what would happen out there, the other provisions would not be finally settled. By holding back their final arrangements as to the Suzerainty and as to the debt, they would be able to prevent the occurrence of such a state of things. Otherwise all our negotiations would be useless. The Government should demand full proof that there was not by this mode a means of making all the negotiations as futile as previous ones had proved to be. With regard to the Eastern Frontier, he observed the Government had it under their attention, and he believed there was considerable danger of free booting happening on the Eastern Frontier on even a larger scale than on the Western. There were two or three reasons why that was so. There was such a greed of land. It seemed extraordinary that, with such an enormous territory to so few people, the Whites of the Transvaal should be so greedy of land. But it appeared to be an idiosyncrasy of the Boer farmer, that he was perfectly wretched if he could see beyond his boundary from the top of his highest tree, if he had one, or his highest hill. He called to the memory of the Government the fact that the free-booting in Bechuanaland might—and he made the statement on the authority of the Governor—have been prevented with small trouble and little cost at the very beginning. He hoped the Government would not rest entirely upon the power of the Swazis and Zulus to defend themselves, but that they would take some steps towards their protection themselves. They must recollect two things with regard to these Chiefs. As to the Swazis, they had been undoubtedly our allies; and as regarded the Zulus, the Zulu War, for which it was true the present Government were not responsible, had very much destroyed their power. If it ha not been for that war, 144 they would have been very well able to take care of themselves. That gave them a degree of claim upon this country, and he was of opinion that they could not allow, with any degree of regard for right or prudence, the supposition to be entertained that the Zulus were to be allowed, almost encouraged, to go on killing one another. In conclusion, there was one passage in the paragraph in the Queen's Speech which he had read with the greatest satisfaction, and that was that the Government had not shrunk from taking authority in Basutoland. He believed that their having done this would do more towards keeping peace in that territory, preventing future wars, and making the relations between the Whites and the Natives and between the English and the Dutch pacific, and guiding the future prosperity of the Colony, than any course that could have been adopted; and he, moreover, believed that that success would afford an example for our future relations with the Natives of South Africa.
§ SIR HENRY HOLLANDsaid, he hoped that, as he was one who had taken keen interest in the questions relating to the policy of our Government in South Africa, the House would bear with him for a very few minutes. He desired, with those who had spoken before him, to express his sense of the obligation they were under to his right hon. Friend the Lord Mayor for having brought these questions at so early a period under the consideration of the House. It was true that the negotiations of the Government with the Transvaal Delegates were not concluded; but he thought that was an additional reason for being glad that the question of South Africa had been raised, because it could not but be of great advantage to Lord Derby to be made aware of the opinions of such men as his right hon. Friend the Member for Bradford (Mr. Forster), and his right hon. Friend the late Secretary of State for the Colonies (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach), than whom none were more conversant with the affairs of the Transvaal and Zululand. It must be an advantage to Lord Derby to know in what direction the hopes and fears of such men tended. Now, Her Gracious Majesty had informed the House, with respect to the communications with the Transvaal Delegates, "that nothing has 145 occurred to discourage the expectation that these communications may be brought to a favourable issue." This was satisfactory, if they were all agreed upon what would be a "favourable issue." He (Sir Henry Holland) ventured to think that no issue would be favourable—no issue would be satisfactory to the country—which did not clearly and distinctly provide for the protection of the Natives, who had a right to rely upon those engagements to them, which had been in truth recognized by Her Majesty's Government and this country. Last Session the Prime Minister had found fault with him (Sir Henry Holland) for not sufficiently appreciating the difficulties in South Africa, and for too lightly proposing remedies without sufficient consideration of those difficulties. But he (Sir Henry Holland) had more than once expressed his sense of the difficulties of government in South Africa, and had pointed out that they would be increased a hundredfold if we once lost our touch of the Natives—if they once lost their trust in our good faith and in our honourable observance of our engagements. In passing, he hoped the House would forgive him for pointing to the case of Zululand as bearing upon and confirming this view. For some time after Cetewayo's defeat, and after the partitioning up of Zulu-land amongst Native Chiefs, those Chiefs who had disputes with each other—disputes leading, unless checked, to disturbance and bloodshed—were ready to submit their differences to the arbitration of the Resident or of the Lieutenant Governor of Natal, and to abide by his awards; but later on, when rumours arose of the intended restoration of Cetewayo, distrust of the British good faith seemed to have arisen, and to have unfortunately checked the willingness of the Chiefs to refer to the British Government, and serious outbreaks consequently occurred which probably might have been prevented had the Chiefs continued to trust the British Government. We were bound, therefore, as a matter of policy as well as honour, to see that by the terms of the new arrangements our protection of the Natives was not diminished. One of the most important questions would be, whether Her Majesty's Suzerainty should be given up? He ventured to hope that it would not. Its retention was put forward by the 146 Government, at the time of the Pretoria Convention, as affording a substantial guarantee of protection to the Natives against Boer aggression and ill-treatment. This was secured, as it was urged, by the veto on all legislation affecting the Natives; and he thought it most important, in the interest of the Natives, that this veto should be retained, as we should then be in a position to exercise a wholesome check upon any measures which might savour of slavery—measures which, under the specious name of apprenticeship, really continued slavery itself, though in a modified form. He thought, further, that the retention of Her Majesty's Suzerainty might prove useful in regulating the dealings of the Transvaal Government with foreign nations. He passed by the question of the debt due to us from the Transvaal. There was no reason why it should be given up if the Boers could pay it; but if they really could not do so within a limited time, he thought it might be just as well to wipe it out as a bad debt, but in doing so the Government should bear in mind the point made by the right hon. Member the late Secretary of State for the Colonies (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) as to the special amount paid for compensation to those who remained loyal to the British Government. He came then to the question of the alteration of the frontier line which was fixed by the Pretoria Convention. In the first place, he should be glad to be informed whether the Government were aware of the strong belief, amounting almost to a certainty, entertained by persons conversant with what had passed outside the frontier of the Transvaal, that two, at least, of the Transvaal Leaders, Messrs. Kruger and Joubert, had largely profited by the freebooting and filibustering which had taken place outside those frontiers, and that they were, directly or indirectly, large holders in that very territory which they now were negotiating to have annexed to the Transvaal; and, secondly, whether the Government would make inquiries as to the truth of these rumours. It was certainly desirable to know whether these leading men were acting in their own interests, while professing to be acting in the interest of the Boers generally; and if the fact were proved, it ought to make Lord Derby very cautious in admitting their 147 statements as to what had taken place, and as to the present state of affairs, and still more cautious in trusting their promises for the future maintenance of peace and order. As to the alteration of frontier, which was stated in the newspapers to have been agreed upon, he (Sir Henry Holland) desired to make this observation—that although it was true that the actual territories of Mankoroane and Montsioa had not been included within the new frontier line, yet the position and safety of these Chiefs against attack had been materially affected. Instead of having two independent and weak Chiefs between them, they now would have a strong and rapacious, and, he might add, aggressive Republican power between them. What return could be made to Mankoroane and Montsioa for this weakening of their position caused by our arrangements with the Transvaal Government and alteration of the frontier line? He thought that the Government were bound to see that they were safely secured against any future encroachment, whether affected directly or indirectly, by the Government of the Transvaal; and that that Government should be held responsible for the acts of its subjects, and should not be allowed to plead that they could not restrain those subjects. And this led him, in conclusion, to ask the Government a very plain question to which, he felt sure, the House and the country would look for a plain answer. He wanted to ask the Government if they would now assure the House and the country that if the Convention, as altered, was broken by the Transvaal Government, they would insist upon and require its observance? The Pretoria Convention had been broken, as had been the Sand River Convention in the past; and there was, to say the least of it, a strong possibility of the altered Convention being broken. It must be remembered that the Transvaal Delegates were not satisfied with the new frontier line, though they had for the time yielded. Unless, then, the Government took a decided line and made it known that they would insist upon the observance of this Frontier line, and thus secure our Native allies, we might well fear lest the Boers should pursue the same tactics that they had pursued with such success in setting aside the Pre- 148 toria Convention frontier line with which they were then dissatisfied. They were certain to begin again within a few years agitating for a re-arrangement of the new frontier line with the professed view of putting an end to further tribal disturbances which they would have, as heretofore, indirectly fostered. But by giving some distinct assurance of the kind he asked for, by showing at once their determination to enforce observance of the Convention, Her Majesty's Government would best ensure that observance; best protect the Natives against encroachment and attack; and probably prevent a renewal of the troubles which had landed us in our present position. He was glad to hear that the Government had decided to have a Resident outside the Transvaal Frontier, and also to keep up a body of Border police. He had advocated both these measures, and especially the latter. It was satisfactory to learn that the Cape Government would join with us in supporting this police force, as it would tend materially to increase its efficiency and power; but even should the Cape Government change their views upon this point, he was satisfied that we must employ a Border police, and he did not believe that this policy would tend to war or trouble with the Transvaal Government, as was last Session anticipated by some, but the very reverse.
§ MR. CHAMBERLAINsaid, it would not be necessary for him to trouble the House at any length after the speech of his hon. Friend the Under Secretary for the Colonies, which had been received with general satisfaction. The right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach) had entered into a justification of the Lord Mayor (Mr. R. N. Fowler) for raising this debate. He did not think any justification was necessary. No complaint had been made by the Government either of the raising of the debate or of the manner in which it had been conducted. The time had been well spent, if only for this—that the debate had elicited from the right hon. Gentleman a statement that he would come to the consideration of these important negotiations in which the Government were now engaged with a cordial desire for their successful issue, and that he felt that our position in South Africa was so difficult and complicated that it ought to be treated 149 by the Opposition and Government alike without any Party spirit. The right hon. Gentleman stated that anarchy in Zululand had resulted from Cetewayo's restoration. He (Mr. Chamberlain) did not think that accurately represented the state of things. There was anarchy, or something very nearly approaching to anarchy, before Cetewayo was restored. There were disturbances and disputes as to precedence, who should be the chief Ruler of the country, which would have led to anarchy. No doubt the restoration of Cetewayo had failed to bring about a satisfactory settlement. But what alternative would the right hon. Gentleman have proposed as likely to produce a more effective settlement? There was only one—namely, the annexation of the country, and that was scarcely suggested by him, since that was a course against which the late Government always consistently set their face. Although they had to regret the failure of the settlement attempted to be secured by the restoration of Cetewayo, still he did not think it was fair to say that any other settlement ought to have been attempted, for there was no other open but to undertake the annexation of the country. The right hon. Gentleman went on to point out the danger of Cetewayo's presence in the Reserve. That matter would receive the careful consideration of the Government. There was no doubt that his presence there was a difficulty and a danger, and it called for immediate attention. Coming to the negotiations at present proceeding with the Transvaal, he noticed, in the first place, an observation of the right hon. Gentleman that the arrangements with regard to the Cape route and the Chiefs of Bechuanal and appeared to him to be on the whole satisfactory, and he regretted that the Government had not made those arrangements 18 months ago. He (Mr. Chamberlain) desired to repeat and enforce what had been said by his hon. Friend the Under Secretary for the Colonies, that the condition of things with which they were now dealing did not exist 18 months ago. They had now the assent of the Cape authorities and of the Transvaal. Eighteen months ago they could not have obtained the assent of the Transvaal to the arrangements now being made, and without this assent the Cape 150 absolutely refused to enter into negotiations on this subject. The hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Henry Holland) called on the Government to say that they were prepared to go to war with the Transvaal if they did not keep to their engagements. This was a most unusual request. It would hardly be becoming to anticipate a breach of faith on the part of the other negotiators, and to say what the Government would do in that event. If they were to assume that the Transvaal Government would not keep its engagements, they ought absolutely to refuse to negotiate with it at all. It was alleged that, the Transvaal authorities having broken the previous Convention, they were most likely also to break the next. A great deal was to be said as to what constituted a technical breach of the Convention, and how far it had been broken. As a matter of fact, he supposed they had broken it in assuming a title for their State which was not authorized; but that would not be made a serious cause of complaint against them. When, however, it was alleged they broke the Convention by attacking the Natives outside the Border, he must point out that this was absolutely denied on behalf of the Transvaal. As a State they asserted—and he thought they had some ground for their assertion—that they had not broken the Convention by attacking the Natives outside the Border, although they acknowledged that freebooters—some from the Transvaal, some from the Orange Free State, and some from our own Possessions—had attacked the Natives, and that they were unable to restrain them. Bearing in mind that distinction, he had to point out that if hereafter there should happen again what had happened in the past, and if freebooters from the Transvaal State should again attack Mankoroane and Montsioa, who would be outside the Border, they would, under this arrangement, come in conflict with the police established and maintained at the cost of the Imperial Government and the Cape Colony, who would, he had no doubt, be able to give a very good account of them. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. W. E. Forster) referred in some detail to the question of the Suzerainty. The Suzerainty over the Transvaal was a matter as to which there was a good deal of difference in the House; but its value was to be regarded in con- 151 nection with two matters—first, as to the foreign relations of the Transvaal State, and next, as to its internal government, and especially as to its dealing with Native questions. As far as the negotiations had proceeded at present, that subject was absolutely a blank page, because the Transvaal Agents had made no demand, and Her Majesty's Government had to hear what they had to propose, and give it careful consideration. But, with reference to the control of the Natives in the territory of the Transvaal, he thought he ought to say that, although they had heard of the rumours which had been referred to in that debate, yet they had no evidence on which they could rely that in recent years the conduct of the Transvaal authorities had been such as to cause serious complaint; and it was certainly in their favour that the Natives in the Transvaal had multiplied many fold under a Government which was said to be very harsh and oppressive. It was clear, therefore, that the Natives found it much better than the government of the Chiefs from whom they had sought to escape. It had been urged that it was very important that slavery should not be imposed on the Transvaal Border under cover of a system of indentures or the like. He (Mr. Chamberlain) was sorry that, as people who lived in glass houses in reference to this matter of indentures, they were not in the position to throw the first stone at the Transvaal authorities. He was afraid the system of indentures was invented by British authorities, or, at all events, carried out to a large extent under British control. He was speaking from recollection, but he thought he would be borne out in stating that indentures much longer than those they complained of in the case of the Boers were permitted in connection with Cape Colony, and also in connection with the administration of Natal, and that within the last 10 years indentures of five years had been permitted under British rule; and, unless he was mistaken, the indentures which the Transvaal authorities proposed to sanction were of three years' duration. Even those Her Majesty's Government thought unnecessarily long, and they had made friendly representations to the Boers in the hope that they might consent to shorten them. But he thought it was right that the House should know that 152 in this matter we were not entitled to speak as we should have been if our own hands were perfectly clean. He thought he had gone over all the new points left untouched by his hon. Friend (Mr. Evelyn Ashley), and he could only say, in sitting down, that it was satisfactory to the Government to find that their policy in regard to those negotiations, as far as they were now able to explain them, met with the general concurrence of the House.
§ MR. ANDERSONI beg to move the adjournment of the debate. I think, after the reply that was given to me by the Prime Minister this forenoon—a reply which I feel bound to say was singularly wanting in the courtesy which usually characterizes the right hon. Gentleman's replies—I see no other course but to vindicate the rights of private Members by moving the adjournment of the debate, and taking a Division upon it. Wednesday is essentially a private Members' day, and we have a right to have our Bills taken on Wednesday. Government, by calling the House together on a Tuesday, have put us in a great difficulty. They have taken upwards of four hours of our private Members' day, and I think it is not too much to ask that private Members be allowed to have the remaining two hours of the Sitting for bringing in their Bills. According to the invariable custom of the House, the order for bringing in Bills is settled by ballot. That ballot was arranged yesterday. A number of Members, who asked the Clerks at the Table what the order of procedure would be, received various replies. Some were told they had better try Thursday; others that in all probability the arrangement would be made for an early adjournment of this debate to-day, in order that they might get their Bills introduced. Those who followed the latter statement chose Wednesday; those who did not chose Thursday; and by the arrangement which has now been made by the Prime Minister, it is clear that those Members who got good places in the ballot for Wednesday would be entirely cut out if the debate be prolonged till a quarter to 6 o'clock. It is because an unusual course has been followed that we are put in this difficulty. The House usually meets on a Thursday, and Friday becomes the day for Members to introduce their Bills. I do not say it is unprecedented to summon the 153 House on Tuesday, but it is convenient, because, Wednesday being the following day, it makes it impossible for private Members to introduce their Bills if the debate is continued until a quarter to 6 o'clock. If the Prime Minister does not consent to the reasonable request that private Members should have the remaining two hours of this Sitting on their own day, the Government will not gain any time, because it will become necessary at some subsequent time to move a change in the Rules under which this procedure takes place, and that must be debated at some length. I would strongly urge on the Government now to allow the debate to be adjourned, in order that private Members may be able to get their Bills introduced in the order in which they believed their precedence secured by the ballot.
§ MR. STEVENSONseconded the Motion, which was a necessary consequence of the House having met on a Tuesday, and gave expression to a hope that the Government would not make a stand against the opinions and the convenience of the general body of the House.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Anderson.)
§ MR. PARNELLI trust that the Prime Minister will give a favourable ear to the request which has been made by the hon. Member for Glasgow. Members of this House have always been accustomed to look to the chances of the ballot as their one chance for the purpose of enabling them to bring Bills before the attention of the House, and the ballot that was duly taken on the first day that this House assembled gave certain days to certain Members for that purpose; but what was our astonishment when we found that the whole of that arrangement was likely to be upset, owing to the fact that the day following the assembly of the House was to be Wednesday. Now, Sir, I cannot help thinking that if the usual custom is not pursued on the present occasion by the adjournment of the debate somewhat earlier than usual, in order to enable private Members to bring in Bills for first reading at the usual time, that the ordinary custom of the House will be departed from in a marked degree, and a very serious injury will have been 154 done to the rights of private Members. The rights of private Members have been very seriously limited of late years. The Government has been in the habit during the past few years—I will not say without cause—of absorbing more of the time of private Members than any ever did before. And it would be very unfortunate if private Members of this House were to commence their Session with the knowledge that the chances that the ballot guaranteed to them by the Rules of this House have been completely thrust aside owing to this precedent, which, practically speaking, enables any Members who display sufficient activity of body and mind to appropriate Wednesdays, which are usually open to private Members during the Session. Speaking for myself and those who sit about me, I wish to say that we were fortunate enough to secure very good days for two important Bills—one relating to the amendment of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, and the other relating to the Labourers' Act. I fully believe that important results will arise out of both these measures, and we should extremely regret if we were by this mistake deprived of the results which we were fortunate enough to obtain by the operation of the ballot. I do, therefore, trust that the Prime Minister, seeing—for he must see—that it would be impossible to make much more progress with this debate, will consent to the Motion for Adjournment which has been made by the hon. Member for Glasgow. I do not speak from the point of view of obstruction—nothing of the sort is intended—certainly not by any of my Friends who sit about me—but from the general point of view of the unpleasant occurrence which upset the calculations of some hon. Members who intended to move Amendments from these Benches. I do, therefore, trust that under the unusual circumstances attending the rights of private Members, the Prime Minister will be able to give us some chance of rescuing those Wednesdays which were obtained in the ballot for the purpose of bringing the measures I have indicated before the House.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow (Mr. Anderson) had thought it necessary, in the discharge of his duty, to complain of his (Mr. Gladstone's) discourtesy in 155 the answer he gave to him in reference to this matter. It appeared to him, however, that he need not take up the time of the House by defending the answer he gave. This was a question which was fairly in the power of the House to decide. He thought it his duty not to take away from hon. Members who might wish to do so the opportunity of discussing the Address; and, therefore, he declined to take the responsibility of shortening the debate. The debate on the Transvaal and South Africa, however, had come to a close, and he did not perceive that any other hon. Gentleman was prepared to go on with any other subject. He admitted that there was force in what had been urged by the hon. Member for the City of Cork (Mr. Parnell), that plans had been divided by the occurrence of last night and hon. Gentlemen dislocated from their position. It was his duty to secure opportunity for prosecuting the debate; and he had, therefore, no objection to the debate being adjourned.
§ Motion agreed to.
§ Debate further adjourned till Tomorrow.