MR. GIBSON BOWLESTo ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies, have His Majesty's Government considered whether the contribution of the Crown Colony of British Guiana of one-third of the expense of the immigration into that colony of Indian Coolies for work on sugar plantations constitutes a direct or indirect bounty on the manufacture or exportation of sugar, such as His Majesty's Government have undertaken by the Brussels Sugar Convention to prohibit in any of the Crown Colonies; and will the question be submitted to the Permanent Commission at Brussels.
(Answered by Mr. Secretary Chamberlain.) In reply to the hon. Member's Question I can only refer him to the answer returned to his previous Question of the 5th of March. His Majesty's Government have undertaken that no bounties shall be given in the Crown Colonies, and that undertaking will be carried out,
† See page 1124.1354 and they do not anticipate that occasion will arise for reference to the Permanent Commission. I may, however, add that in view of the benefits which the Colony as a whole derives financially and otherwise from coolie immigration as being in large measure State-aided colonisation, and in view of the additional expense which is caused by the enforcement of regulations made by the Government in the public interest, the share of the total cost which is borne by the Government is not admitted to be in any sense a bounty.