§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That a sum, not exceeding £128,920 (including an additional sum of £30,000), be granted to Her 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, 1891, for sundry Colonial Services, including expenses incurred under 'The Pacific Islanders' Protection Act. 1875,' and certain Charges connected with South Africa.
§ (11.30.) SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLI must say I doubt the expediency of the First Lord of the Treasury closuring us at half-past 11 on a private Members' night. I am, however, ready and willing to go on with this Vote. I desire to move a reduction of £5,000. This Vote is the result of an agreement between the Government and Queensland with regard to New Guinea, and I object altogether to the arrangement by which Now Guinea is placed under the administration of Queensland. It has been annexed under pressure from Queensland; but, having been annexed, it ought to be administered by the Home Government, and we ought not to allow ourselves to be used as a cats paw to enable Queensland to carry on certain industries there. The Queensland Government, in a rough and overbearing manner, insisted on the annexation of New Guinea. I remember 1480 an eloquent passage in a speech by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Birmingham, in which he denounced the handing over of the population to a Colonial Administration, yet that is what we are now doing. In 1885, after the death of Sir Peter Scratchley, the Government did not appoint an independent administrator. They selected a gentleman whose conduct has since been condemned by the Queensland Government. This gentleman proclaimed that British New Guinea, being an appanage of Australia, was destined ultimately for the white race. That meant, of course, that the natives are to be turned out to make room for the whites. In the last Blue Book (page 629) we are told that Sir Anthony Musgrave stated that the incursion into New Guinea of prospectors for gold had been unwisely encouraged under the régime of the late Commissioner. I admit that the Government have now appointed a better qualified administrator. Sir W. Macgregor, who is perhaps more fitted to be an explorer and naturalist than an administrator, is, at any rate, a fair and honest man. But his administration is altogether starved, the sum set apart for it being very inadequate. This is the result of the contemptible bargain made by the Government with Queensland. For £15,000 a year, guaranteed by the colony for the cost of administration, New Guinea is made subject to Queensland. Sir W. Macgregor found it impossible to keep out of New Guinea prospectors and settlers, and I am afraid he has been obliged to punish the natives for offences which the white people have provoked by their unjustifiable acts. I deliberately say that Queensland ought not to be intrusted with the control of dark races. I am sorry the Member for East Mayo is not present. Only yesterday he denounced the usage to which the dark races have been subject during the last few years. In the Blue Book there is ample proof that many of the people of New Guinea have been kidnapped and unfairly treated. According to the Report of the private secretary of the late Sir Peter Scratchley, the offences committed by the blacks are attributable to the direct and aggressive provocation of the whites. The latest Blue Book that has been issued on this question contains an official Report which is dated 1887, and 1481 states that the hostilities that have occurred in New Guinea have been provoked by the white man himself, and that every native in the service of the white man has been either kidnapped or has been entrapped into the service by false statements. I am free to admit that measures have now been taken to put a stop to this objectionable traffic. But we have the most conclusive evidence that in the years 1885, 1886, and 1887, an unjustifiable traffic was being carried on by the people of Queensland against the people of New Guinea. I believe the traffic will be put an end to altogether in the year 1891, and that already a great improvement of affairs has been secured. It was our own Special Commissioner who said that, directly or indirectly, provocation has come from our side. As we have been induced to annex New Guinea we are responsible for the protection of the natives against injustice from our own colonists. I beg to move the reduction of the Vote by £5,000, which is our contribution towards this New Guinea steamer.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Item B, £5,000 (New Guinea Steamer) be omitted from the Vote."—(Sir George Campbell.)
§ *(12.1.) BARON H. DE WORMSSir, I think the Committee will agree with me that the hon. Member who has just addressed the House at such length has not urged any reason at all for the reduction of the Vote which he has just moved. The hon. Gentleman went into a very long, and, if I may be allowed to say so, a somewhat discursive and irrelevant argument as to what happened in New Guinea some years back; but as the hon. Gentleman is dealing with the Administration of New Guinea at the present time, logically, I think, he ought to have made out a case against the present Administration.
§ (12.2.) SIR G. CAMPBELLI quoted from the latest Blue Books presented to Parliament.
§ *(12.3.) BARON H. DE WORMSThe hon. Gentleman, in his rhetorical efforts, showed that he had not thoroughly mastered the details of the case, for he spoke of the action taken against a civilised population.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLComparatively civilised.
§ *(12.4.) BARON H. DE WORMSIs the hon. Gentleman aware that a very large proportion of the natives are cannibals? Of course, if the hon. Gentleman entertains the view that cannibals are comparatively civilised, all I can say is, it is a view with which I cannot agree. Under the administration of Her Majesty's Government the natives are becoming civilised; and here I must enter a protest, on behalf of Queensland, against the extreme and unwarranted attack made by the hon. Member upon the colonists, not for the first time. The hon. Member proposes that we should break deliberately the contract which we entered into with the colonists on the occasion of the Colonial Conference three years ago. At that Conference Her Majesty's Government gave a pledge to provide a steamer for the New Guinea Government, and also £3,500 a year with respect to it. If the hon. Member objects to this sum of £5,000 on the ground that New Guinea is being badly administered he is misinformed. It is not badly administered, and never has been so well administered as now; it is impossible to have a better and more able Administrator than Sir William Macgregor. If the hon. Member objects on financial grounds he shows that he has not mastered the subject. The original estimate was £18,500, and only £15,132 has been expended, so that the sum of £3,368 has been saved on the purchase money, and in three years only £1,500 will have been spent on maintenance more than was contemplated. I do not see what possible ground the hon. Member has for urging the reduction of this Vote. He has not made one specific charge, but has contented himself with reading extracts, dating from 1886 and 1887, out of the Blue Book. With regard to the present administration of the island the hon. Member is not able to put his finger upon one blot. Nor is the hon. Member quite correct with regard to the administration of the island. He wished the Committee to suppose that the administration rested entirely with Queensland. That is not the fact. Under the existing administration, dating from July, 1888, 1483 the Administrator reports to the Governor of Queensland on the general question of administration, but the appointment and dismissal of the Administrator rests solely with Her Majesty's Government, and if the Administrator had been inefficient, or guilty of cruelty to the natives, Her Majesty's Government would immediately have dismissed or suspended him.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLWas Sir John Douglas dismissed?
§ *BARON H. DE WORMSThat was before New Guinea was taken over. With regard to the protection of the natives that is specially provided for. If the hon. Member had looked at the Letters Patent he would have seen that their protection is specially mentioned in Sections 12 and 13. I maintain that the hon. Member has not made out the shadow of a case for the reduction of the Vote.
§ (12.10.) MR. A. WILLIAMS (Glamorgan, S.)Sir, I now move to report Progress, and I make the Motion because I think, without being unreasonable, we have a right to make this protest. This is the only occasion, probably, we shall have for a very long time of bringing forward grievances, and I think it unreasonable that the Government have not allowed us to have our talk out to-night. I do not wish to put it higher than that; but there are grounds for putting it very much higher. Mr. Courtney, we all know that with the conduct of the business of this House, there is a good deal of talk. [Ministerial cheers.] It is all very well to—I was going to say jeer, but to cheer. In the conduct of the business of the House, however, there must be forbearance, and it is not unreasonable that, on an occasion like this, Her Majesty's Government should be expected to forbear from preventing the discussion of public grievances. I do think we ought to protest against being shut up in the way we have been shut up to-night. I myself, in consequence of an answer given by the Postmaster General, felt it my duty to give notice that I would take the first opportunity of asking the House to affirm the undoubted right of the Civil servants to discuss their grievances, free from official intimidation or interference. Though I will do my best, 1484 the probability is I shall never have a chance of bringing that Motion forward, and to-night is probably the only opportunity I could have had of doing what I believe to be my duty. That is an illustration of the reason why we ought to protest against the way in which the Government determined, at 11 o'clock, to go into Committee. I do protest against the unreasonable way in which these discussions have been stopped by the Government.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Committee do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. A. J. Williams.)
§ (12.12.) MR. JACKSONWith great deference to the hon. Gentleman, I think he will see on reflection that he ought not to press his Motion. The grievances to which references have been made have been long known, and if they are so urgent how is it that not a single notice is put down on the Paper with regard to any one of them? The grievance to which the hon. Member refers is one which can be discussed on one of the Votes which is down on the Paper for to-night. The opportunity he wishes is not, therefore, lost to him.
§ *(12.13.) MR. PICTONI think the hon. Gentleman is scarcely fair to the hon. Member. There were two notices of Motion on the Paper, and it was quite inconceivable that any further Motions could be discussed. Their disappearance was quite unexpected by all, but it gave us an opportunity, rightly and properly, to bring forward grievances that had failed to obtain a place on the Paper. I challenge the Government to bring forward any precedent for the course that has been pursued to-night. Was ever a case known in which the Government have closured debate on private Members' night? I am sure no such precedent exists, and I am sure we ought to take every means of resisting the innovations on private Members' nights. Why, this is called a Conservative Government, but, so far as this House is concerned, it is the most Revolutionary Government that ever sat on that Bench. There is no tradition of this House sacred to it; none of the liberties of private Members are respected; all it cares to do is to turn 1485 the House into a sort of bureau to record its decisions. It may bring the House to such a sad and degraded condition that we shall not be able to recognise the historical Parliament of which we desire to be Members. I think I have another reason for concurring in this Motion. I think the constituency which I have the honour to represent was treated with considerable discourtesy this evening. As the Representative of 100,000 people, and supported by the Chairman of the School Board, I brought forward a grievance, which, whatever hon. Gentlemen opposite may think of it, is felt very acutely and painfully by the people of my constituency. About the personal aspect of such a slight, I do not care at all, but certainly the constituency which I represent does not deserve it, and I think that a constituency of its size and importance ought not to be treated in such a manner. I consider that I was perfectly justified in bringing forward on their account what to them was a serious grievance, and I protest against the matter being treated so slightingly and scornfully. It is mainly out of regard for the traditions and liberties of this House that I enter into this protest, and express my earnest hope that the matter will be pressed to its uttermost issue.
§ *(12.16.) MR. W. A. MCARTHUR (Cornwall, Mid, St. Austell)I do not think it matters very much whether we agree to report Progress or not, but I may say that I recollect having put a question to the First Lord of the Treasury with regard to the time the Vote was to be taken this Session, and the First Lord then promised that it should be brought forward in sufficient time for its careful consideration. It is quite impossible that there can be adequate discussion on this Vote to-night, and the Government can hardly expect that a question of so much importance as the Colonial Vote can be fairly considered within the limits of three-quarters of an hour. Unless the First Lord is determined upon applying the Closure to this question, I trust he will see the desirability of at once postponing the further consideration of this matter.
§ *(12.17.) MR. CHILDERS (Edinburgh, S.)I am bound to say that in 1486 the course of my experience I do not remember an occasion on which a Vote of so much importance as this has been persisted in by the Government at a quarter past 12 o'clock at night on a Friday, against the wish of a large number of Members that opportunity should be given for its further and fuller consideration. In fact, it is a most unusual thing for the Government to propose to take Effective Supply at a late hour on a Friday night, when it is well known a large number of hon. Members have gone away. I hope, therefore, Her Majesty's Government will see the propriety of not persisting in the discussion of this Vote at the present moment.
§ *MR. W. H. SMITHIn answer to the observations of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, I fully admit that it would not be reasonable on our part to press the House to dispose of the Colonial Vote this evening, but I think that, in as much as the hon. Baronet the Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir G. Campbell) has moved the reduction of the Vote, it is desirable that we dispose of that Motion, and when it is disposed of the Government will assent to the postponement of the Vote.
§ (12.19.) MR. J. O'CONNOR (Tipperary, S.)I have only one observation to make, and it is this: I think the hon. Gentleman who has moved to report Progress has every reason to make the complaint he has put before the Committee; but I would point out that in making that complaint the hon. Member was treated with very scant courtesy by Her Majesty's Government. In fact, he was absolutely jeered at by those sitting upon the front Bench. I think that when questions of this kind are raised here the very last persons to sneer at and jeer hon. Members who are endeavouring to point out what they regard as real grievances should be the Ministers of the Crown. When right hon. Gentlemen occupying such a position condescend to take this course I think they show, if I may be permitted to use the expression, exceedingly bad taste. They ought rather to invite than to discountenance discussion. At any rate, if they ought not to invite it they certainly ought not to object to it. I think there is every reason for the Motion which has been made to report Progress. Hon. Members on this side of the House have a right, I think, to 1487 complain that the speeches they have made on questions of considerable importance have not received the slightest reply from Ministers of the Crown. My hon. Friend behind me made a very important speech in reference to the administration of affairs belonging to a very important Department of the Government, and no answer whatever has been vouchsafed to the serious charges he has made against those who are in charge of that Department. Other speeches from this side of the House have similarly failed to elicit the least reply from Ministers who are responsible. Under these circumstances, I think it quite right that a strong protest should be made by hon. Members on this side of the House against the course pursued by the Government, especially when we consider they have adopted the unprecedented course of moving the Colonial Vote under the circumstances which have already been the subject of so much comment. The action of the Government involves an undue interference with the rights of private Members, and we cannot therefore allow it to pass without our strenuous protests. On these grounds I shall support the Motion that you, Sir, do report Progress.
§ (12.25.) The Committee divided:—Ayes 59; Noes 122.—(Div. List, No. 62).
§ Question again proposed, "That Item B, £5,000 (New Guinea Steamer), be omitted from the Vote."
§ *(12.32.) MR. W. A. MCARTHURI regret that on this occasion it is my unhappy fate to have to disagree with the hon. Gentleman the Member for Kirkcaldy; but I am bound to say I find it difficult to understand why that hon. Gentleman apparently can never make a speech in this House on Colonial topics, especially on Australia, without making a most unjust attack upon those entrusted by Her Majesty's Government with high offices of Administration.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI may be allowed to say that I have never attacked the Administration of any of our Colonies, except that of Queensland; and the Administration of Queensland, I admit, I have attacked strongly.
§ *MR. W. A. MCARTHURI am in the recollection of the Committee when I say that the hon. Gentleman to-night 1488 attacked, by name, three gentlemen who have been concerned in the Administration of New Guinea; and, I say, that to make attacks of this kind without notice, and without there being a shred of proof of the allegations on which they are founded, is a course which is not fair to gentlemen who undertake the administration of tropical Colonies under circumstances of difficulty, and it is not a course which will commend itself to the judgment of Englishmen.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLTo what three gentlemen does the hon. Member refer? I spoke in the highest terms of the three Administrators of New Guinea.
§ *MR. W. A. McARTHURI propose to make a speech, and not to conduct a catechism. I am bound to say I fail to see what connection there is between the question of the general condition of the labour traffic in the Pacific and the Vote for a steamer for New Guinea. But since the hon. Member has attacked the Administration of Queensland as to the labour traffic and its conduct of affairs in New Guinea, I may be allowed to say that the period at which this colony purged itself from the evils of which he complains was not so recent as he imagines. Queensland was not purged by outside influence, but she purged herself as soon as the evils were made known. The cruelties referred to did not take place in Queensland itself, but they occurred upon the labour vessels. When I was at Brisbane, four or five years ago, I saw the report of an investigation into the whole subject. Drastic legislation was then proposed, and it has been since passed, and the perpetrators of cruelties have been punished, and the labourers themselves seem cheerful and contented. It is a matter for congratulation rather than complaint that white settlers and prospectors have gone to New Guinea, and I wish them good luck. The manner in which New Guinea has been annexed is a natural expansion of the British Empire by colonists, who feel that the acquisition of this territory is necessary to themselves and to prevent its being fortified against us.
§ (12.40.) SIR G. CAMPBELL[Cries of "Divide!"] I would ask the House to allow me a word or two in reply. [Continued cries of "Divide !"] Give me 1489 fair play. Surely it is but decent to allow me to reply. As to what has fallen from the Under Secretary for the Colonies, I must say I was astonished to hear him accuse me of quoting ancient history, seeing that every word I quoted was from the very latest information the Government have vouchsafed to us on the subject of New Guinea. It may be that the Blue Book has not been brought up to date, as it ought to have been, but that is not my fault.
§ *BARON H DE WORMSIt deals with the period before the annexation.
§ SIR G. CAMPBELLI have endeavoured to master all the information given to me. I have done my very utmost to bring this matter up to date, and it can hardly be made a matter of complaint against me that I have given facts which are the most recent facts communicated to us by Her Majesty's Government. I am glad to find my hon. Friend the Member for Cornwall (Mr. McArthur) in accord with me as regards facts; but I think he cannot have listened to my speech, or he certainly would not have accused me of attacking the characters of three successive Administrators. I had nothing but the highest praise for these gentlemen. I did attack Mr. Douglas; but I did so on the authority of Sir A. Musgrave, the Governor of Queensland. As regards what has been said by the Under Secretary, I maintain that, for all practical purposes, the administration of New Guinea is made over to Queensland. The right hon. Gentleman says there are cannibals in the island, in answer to my statement that the mass of the population of New Guinea are comparatively civilised. I could occupy the attention of the House for a long time in reading extracts from the; Blue Book to prove my assertion. No doubt there are some uncivilised people there. There are certainly people in Scotland and Ireland living in hovels, and in a condition approaching to savagery; but I do not think a Minister in any foreign country would be justified in saying on that account that Great Britain is uncivilised. The hon. Member for Cornwall admits that atrocities have been committed, but says that drastic legislation has now been adopted to put a stop to them. I 1490 admitted that. It astonishes me to hear the hon. Member talk about New Guinea being a place for the ultimate overflow of the population of Queensland, a very largo part of which is not inhabited at all. It may be that the British Isles require an overflow which the Australian Colonies are not prepared to give them; but to say that Queensland requires a place for the overflow of her population, is a doctrine that I am content to leave to the judgment of the House. I am free to admit that I have put down this Motion for a reduction in respect of the New Guinea steamer, not because I desire to put down the steamer, but to afford an opportunity for protesting against the doctrines maintained by the hon. Member for Cornwall—who, be it observed, is connected with the Colonies.
§ *(12.52.) SIR T. ESMONDEWe have heard some theories about New Guinea, and we have heard what the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy has to say, and what my hon. Friend the Member for Cornwall has to say. I think there is another version of the matter. Perhaps the House is not aware that the whole of New Guinea has not been annexed. We have annexed a part, and the Germans have annexed the other part. The Australian Colonies got their views as to annexation carried out by the Home Government, because of their objection to have a powerful and armed neighbour next door to them. It would have been possible—if Her Majesty's Government had had the sense to see it—to allow Queensland to annex New Guinea. It would not have cost this country a penny. We should not then have had to send Sir William Macgregor out, and it would not have been necessary to spend this £5,000 on a steamer. The natives of New Guinea are not so civilised as the inhabitants of some other islands near, though, no doubt, they have some very estimable qualities. It is said that they are in process of being civilised—that the Papuans are a sort of semi-civilised cannibals. Some say that they are giving up their cannibalistic practices; but that is hardly borne out by a story I heard not long ago of a German Professor, who was fond of going into the interior of New Guinea for the purpose of collecting 1491 flies and beetles, and so on. On one occasion he went out and never returned. An expedition was sent out by the German Government to discover him, but they heard no tidings of him, until one day a native told them he could take them to a place where they would learn something about him. He accordingly conducted them to some inland place where there was a temple and some gods. They discovered one magnificent god, painted all sorts of colours, and exceedingly beautiful, according to native ideas; and on the end of this god's nose were a pair of blue goggles, which had belonged to the missing Professor. That was all that remained of the celebrated scientist, and that may be taken as an evidence of the civilisation of the place.
§ Mr. AIRD rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put;" but the Chairman withheld his assent, and declined then to put that Question.
§ Debate resumed.
§ *SIR T. ESMONDEThese are the people that Sir W. Macgregor is endeavouring to civilise. Sir William has made some wonderful journeys into the interior of the country, has made some fine surveys, and given some very graphic accounts of his performances; but I am bound to say I do not think New Guinea worthy of the attention of this country. There are other people to whom it would be of more importance, and who would be prepared to subsidise this steamer if the territory were handed over to them. The best policy to adopt would be to hand the island over to Queensland. Let Queensland send over a Governor or Chief Commissioner, and then the First Lord of the Treasury, or whoever represents the Treasury on a Vote of this kind, will not have cause to complain, for nothing will be asked from the Home Government. Whatever expense we have been put to hitherto on account of this island has been due to the extraordinary policy Her Majesty's Government has pursued in making their action subservient to that of Germany. A great mistake was made in not establishing a British protectorate over the island, and in allowing the German Empire to annex part of it.
§ (1.0.) Mr. AIRD rose in his place, and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."
§ Motion made, and Question put, "That the Question be now put."
§ House cleared for a Division.
§ DR. TANNERMr. Courtney, I beg to call your attention to the fact that when the Closure was moved it was 1 o'clock. The First Lord of the Treasury, as usual, made a mistake.
§ Members, with the exception of the Government Tellers and Dr. Tanner, having gone into the Lobbies, the Chairman, addressing Dr. Tanner, asked: Where is the other Teller?
§ DR. TANNERHe's in Limerick. You named Mr. Sheehy.
THE CHAIRMANasked Mr. Akers-Douglas, one of the Government Tellers, to obtain another Teller for the "Noes." Mr. Akers-Douglas left the House, but presently returned, and made a communication to the Chairman.
§ The Serjeant-at-Arms went to the "No" Lobby and returned with Mr. Waddy.
§ DR. TANNERMr. Waddy is in custody, Sir.
§ The Division was then proceeded with.
§ The Numbers were:—Ayes, 120; Noes 46.—(Div. List, No. 63.)
§ Question, "That Item B, £5,000 (New Guinea Steamer), be omitted from the Vote," put accordingly, and negatived.
§ It being after One of the clock, the Chairman left the Chair to make his Report to the House.
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again upon Monday next.
§ It being ten minutes after One of the clock, Mr. Deputy Speaker adjourned the House without Question put.
§ House adjourned at ten minutes after One o'clock till Monday next.