HC Deb 21 February 1901 vol 89 cc664-5
MR. LABOUCHERE (Northampton)

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether he has received any official confirmation of the alleged flogging of a coloured man, at Calvinia, named Esau, until his bowels protruded and his subsequently being shot, by the orders or with the approval of General De Wet; and if so, whether he will communicate it to the House; whether he has received any official confirmation of General De Wet flogging and shooting members of the Peace Committee, or of his flogging his own men who desire to surrender; whether the members of the Peace Committee who entered the lines of the forces of General De Wet carried the terms on which the Boers were urged to surrender to General De Wet, or whether they addressed themselves to his soldiers with a view to induce them to surrender, or to withdraw from his forces; and whether this latter action was taken with the sanction of General Kitchener.

MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON (Dundee)

I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for War what was his authority for the statement he made on Thursday with respect to the alleged ill-treatment of a coloured man named Esau by the Boer leaders.

MR. BRODRICK

The authority for the statement of the flogging by the Boers of a coloured man named Esau at Calvinia was a Renter's telegram, confirmed subsequently by the report made to Cape Town by the district surgeon of Calvinia. As regards the Peace Committee, Lord Kitchener reported in a telegram of 13th January, published in the morning papers of 14th January, that three agents of the Peace Committee were taken prisoners to De Wet's laager on the 10th, and that one British subject had been flogged and then shot, and two burghers flogged by De Wet's orders. We have no information as to the third and fourth paragraphs of the hon. Member for Northampton's question.

MR. EDMUND ROBERTSON

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the agency to which he now refers is the same agency which he repudiated the other day?

MR. BRODRICK

The telegrams followed each other on separate days, and we have every reason to believe they are accurate.

MR. LABOUCHERE

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information with regard to the district surgeon beyond what he read in Reuter's telegram?

MR. BRODRICK

Reuter's telegram contained not merely a general but a specific statement, and it was corroborated.

MR, DILLON

May I ask whether we are to understand that the other day the right hon. Gentleman in his capacity as a Minister of the Crown made a statement in the House of Commons without any official information?

MR. SPEAKER

I must remind the hon. Member that it is out of order to discuss the answer to a previous question.

M. FLAVIN (Kerry, N.)

Is there any truth in the report?

MR. PIRIE

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the name of the district surgeon?

MR. BRODRICK

I cannot give the name now, but I will ascertain it.

MR. O'SHEE (Waterford, W.)

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Chief Secretary for Ireland, when acting as Under Secretary for War, refused over and over again to answer questions based on newspaper reports and telegrams?

MR. SPEAKER

Order, order ! That does not arise out of the question.