§ DR. MACNAMARA (Camberwell, N.)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he yet has any information of a strike of 2,000 Chinese 1264 coolies on Saturday week last, at the North Randfontein Mine, near Krugersdorp, the alleged grounds of revolt being dissatisfaction with wages; that, on the police being called in, the casualties among the Chinese were considerable, and that fifty-three coolies were eventually arrested; and whether he can state the particular gounds affecting wages which appear to have caused the outbreak.
§ MR. HERBERT SAMUEL (Yorkshire, Cleveland)I beg also to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state how many Chinese coolies were concerned in the riot which took place at the North Randfontein Mine on 1st April; what was the cause of the disturbance; what were the casualties among the coolies and among the police; how many coolies were arrested; and, if their trial has already taken place, what sentences have been inflicted.
§ MR. LYTTELTONThe facts as reported to me by Sir A. Lawley are briefly as follows: The number of coolies at the Randfontein Mine are about 2,000, and a general strike arose out of a dispute between the mine manager and the labourers as to the interpretation of Clause 6 of the contract of service. The labourers claim that each individual labourer was bound to receive, fifty shillings per month irrespective of amount of work which he might perform. The head boys incited all other labourers on the mine to refuse to drill more than twelve inches during a shift of ten hours, a hole of thirty-six inches being accepted ordinary day's work for unskilled labourers. Work in the mine was impeded for three days, when mine management decided to have the ringleaders arrested and charged before magistrate. Ringleaders resisted police, who were also set upon by the coolies. Eventually they arrested fifty-nine ringleaders without firing a shot. No lives were lost, casualties practically nil. As soon as ringleaders had been removed the remaining coolies went quietly to their work. I have not yet received information as to the trial and sentences of the ringleaders.
§ DR. MACNAMARAasked the right hon. Gentleman whether, after six months, 1265 these labourers were not now entitled to at least 1s. 6d. a day.
§ MR. LYTTELTONYes, Sir; and they are receiving that.
§ DR. MACNAMARAIs it not the fact that they caused this riot because they have not received it?
§ MR. LYTTELTONNo, Sir. The dispute arose not as to the right to receive 1s. 6d., but as to the day's work for which the 1s. 6d. was to be received.
MR, HERBERT SAMUELasked whether, if the coolies did not perform the amount of work which the mine-owners considered satisfactory, they would not receive the 1s. 6d?
§ MR. LYTTELTONThe judges as to whether a day's work is satisfactory or not are not the mineowners but the Courts of law.
§ MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)asked the right hon. Gentleman whether he considered the arrests because the men asked for better pay were legal?
§ MR. LYTTELTONThat is not the point. They were not arrested for asking for better wages, but because the ringleaders impeded the work of the mine.
§ MR. LYTTELTONNo doubt.
§ MR. HERBERT SAMUELI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he will state what was the average rate of wages paid to the Chinese labourers employed on the North Randfontein Mine before the recent riot; whether these labourers have been in the Transvaal for the period of six months which would entitle them to be paid a minimum wage of 1s. 6d. a day; whether they were recently asked to sign any supplementary contract of service; and, if so, what were the terms of that contract.
§ MR. LYTTELTONI have received the following statement from Sir Arthur Lawley:—Coolies had been in Transvaal 1266 six months. There has not yet been time since expiration of six months employment to compute rate of wages paid, but assessment appears to be under £2 10s. 0d.; coolies on day work Were receiving eighteenpence per ten hours shift for ordinary day's work. Coolies on piece-work or desiring piece-work were offered opportunity of accepting and signing a supplementary agreement in terms of Clause 6 of the contract of service at following rates: halfpenny per inch drilled with a bonus of threepence per shift if thirty-six inches or over were drilled. Acting Superintendent has most carefully explained to coolies this offer, which is more favourable to ordinary worker than day pay of eighteenpence.
§ MR. HERBERT SAMUELHas that contract been sanctioned by the Courts?
§ MR. LYTTELTONNo sanction of such a contract is required of the Courts; but I entirely agree with the hon. Member, if that is the suggestion which underlies his Question, that no supplementary contract of this kind should be entered into without the closest investigation in the interests of the men.
§ MR. HERBERT SAMUELCan the right hon. Gentleman say why the Transvaal Government, instead of arresting fifty-nine men, who in this country would be called trade union leaders, but in South Africa are called ringleaders, did not take steps to have this contract examined?
§ MR. LYTTELTONI do not know what the hon. Gentleman includes in the term trade union leaders, but I do not agree with him in supposing that trade union leaders are those who constantly oppose the law.