MASHONALAND. (Hansard, 21 September 1893)

§ SIR E. ASHMEAD-BARTLETT
not being in his place,

§ MR. PAUL (Edinburgh, S.)
asked: Should I be in Order in putting a question on this subject?

§ SIR J. GORST (Cambridge University)
I intended to put a question on this subject at the end of questions, and perhaps I may put it now. It is to ask the Under Secretary whether, in view of the statements which are continually appearing in the newspapers regarding an apprehended attack by Lo Bengula on Mashonaland, he can state to the House the position which Her Majesty's Government have taken up on this subject and the policy they intend to pursue?

§ MR. PAUL
Before my hon. Friend answers that question, perhaps he will say whether it is not the fact that the British South Africa Company are at perfect liberty to deal with an attack of the Matabele or anybody else in any way they please; whether the only thing the Company have been forbidden to do is to invade Matabeleland without the leave of the High Commissioner; and whether Lord Knutsford, when he was Secretary of State, did not inform the Company that they would not be protected by the Government, but would have to protect themselves?

§ MR. S. BUXTON
The reply I have prepared to the question of the hon. 1790 Member for Sheffield, who is not in his place, will cover the question of my hon. Friend behind me, and I am very glad to have the opportunity of making it, although I am afraid it is somewhat extended. The policy which Her Majesty's Government have taken up in regard to affairs in Mashonaland has been neither uncertain nor variable. Any grave disturbances in Mashonaland would almost certainly involve the peace of Bechuanaland, and have far-reaching-results throughout South Africa. Her Majesty's Government are, therefore, bound to take care that a war is not lightly entered into with Lo Bengula, and so, acting under Clause 10 of the Charter, they required that their previous assent should be obtained before any aggressive movement was undertaken by the Chartered Company. No such assent has been asked, and, therefore, no such assent has been refused. This action the Government took because they believed that an aggressive attack on Lo Bengula on the part of the Company would then have been neither justifiable nor successful. The Company have entire freedom to take all measures they may think fit for resisting any attack that may be made by the Matabele, and they are now, both for defence and offence, in a far stronger position than they were six weeks ago; and while we insist that, under present circumstances, our assent must first be asked to an offensive movement being made against Lo Bengula, it is clearly understood, as I stated on Tuesday, that if such an attack is made by the Matabele the Company will be justified in undertaking any offensive operations that may be necessary. We believe that Mr. Rhodes, who is the responsible representative of the Company, is in accord with Sir H. Loch in regard to the position which has been taken up by Her Majesty's Government. Certain it is that we have received no official remonstrance from the Company on the matter, nor any request that they should be allowed a freer hand. As regards the question of compensation, to which reference has been made, Her Majesty's Government, directly they heard that a claim for compensation from Lo Bengula was contemplated, stated that that demand should not be pressed, on the ground that the impi had acted contrary to Lo Bengula's orders, and that they had been quite 1791 sufficiently punished by the heavy loss of life inflicted on them. Two telegrams which would have made the matter clearer were omitted from the Blue Book as being confidential; but I see no reason why they should not be presented, and I have, therefore, to-day laid them on the Table. Throughout the anxious desire of Her Majesty's Government has been, if possible, to preserve peace, and if war, unfortunately, becomes inevitable to be clear that it can be carried to a successful issue.