§ BARON H. DE WORMS (Liverpool, East Toxteth)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has seen in The Times of 8th August a statement of the terms of a proposed Convention between Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the Transvaal relative to the cession of Swaziland to the South African Republic; and whether the terms are therein correctly stated, and were communicated officially or unofficially to the Press; and, if so, why the conditions of the new Convention were not first stated in the House of Commons in answer to repeated questions on the subject?
§ MR. S. BUXTONI have read the article in The Times. It appears to contain a fairly accurate account of the history of the Swaziland question. But I would point, out to the right hon. Gentleman that the terms of the Draft Convention—which I may mention is not yet signed—are not stated; nor, indeed, could they be, for they are not yet public. I repeat what I have said more than once, that, as soon as the Convention is signed, I will make a full statement to the House on the subject, and lay Papers.
§ BARON H. DE WORMSAre we to understand the statement is correct; and, if so, was it communicated officially to The Times?
§ MR. S. BUXTONCertainly not officially. There was some correspondence with The Times, but not as to the terms of the Convention.
§ BARON H. DE WORMSCan the hon. Gentleman explain how it is that the terms of the Convention were known to The Times before they were communicated to the House, and that my questions on the subject were not answered?
§ MR. S. BUXTONAs far as the terms stated in the article are concerned, I had already stated them in Debate in this House on the Vote on Account. But, I repeat, they are in no sense complete.