§ MR. MOLTENO (Dumfriesshire)I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention has been drawn to the intervention of Lord Selborne in Transvaal politics, as evidenced by the letter addressed to the Mayor of Pretoria from Government House, Johannesburg, dated 31st October, in favour of a Party Leader therein described as the protagonist of political warfare, and who is seeking a seat in the new Parliament for Pretoria; and, whether, in view of the neutrality en- joined upon a constitutional governor, he will state what action he proposes to take?
§ MR. DALZIELhad the following Question on the Paper: To ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to a letter written by the High Commissioner in South Africa to Sir Percy Fitzpatrick, a candidate for Pretoria at the forthcoming elections, in which people were recommended to go and hear Sir Percy Fitzpatrick delivering an address; whether, at the meeting in question, the candidate defended the conditions under which Chinese labour is employed in the compounds; whether it is usual for High Commissioners to write letters which cannot fail to be regarded as of a Party character; and whether any representation has been, or will be, made on the subject?
§ MR. CHURCHILLI will answer together this Question and that addressed to the Prime Minister by the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy Burghs. I have seen a 1052 telegram in the Press which refers to a private letter written by Lord Selborne to the ex-Mayor of Pretoria, in which he appears to have desired expressly to safeguard himself against the imputation of intervening in political contests. No action by the Secretary of State seems to be required.
§ MR. DALZIELAre we to understand that the Government approve of the High Commissioner's inviting people to go to hear a speech in defence of Chinese labour?
§ MR. MOLTENOMay I ask whether Lord Selborne desired that the letter should be made public?
§ MR. CHURCHILLThe letter has been published.
§ MR. DALZIELAre we to understand from the Answer of the Undersecretary that the Government approve of the action of Lord Selborne in writing a letter not marked private inviting attendance at a meeting at which Chinese labour was defended?
§ THE PRIME MINISTER AND FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Sir H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN, Stirling Burghs)I have not seen the letter. The Answer of my hon. friend is that he has seen a telegram in the Press which refers to a private letter, written by Lord Selborne to the ex-Mayor of Pretoria, in which Lord Selborne appears desirous to safeguard himself against the imputation of intervening in a political contest. No action by the Secretary of State seems to be required. We do not either approve or disapprove of Lord Selborne's action.
§ MR. DALZIELThen as no representation is to be made and no action taken, is the High Commissioner free to continue to write and publish letters in favour of pro-Chinese candidates?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANThe High Commissioner must act on his own responsibility.
§ MR. J. WARDAre we to take it for granted that the High Commissioner can do just as he chooses in these subjects, even if he is opposing the policy of His Majesty's Government at home?
§ SIR H. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANI really do not see how we could step in to control the High Commissioner in a matter of this sort. If we found that he was overstepping the limits and actively interfering in political elections then we might interfere.
§ MR. LYTTELTON (St. George's, Hanover Square)Is the Prime Minister aware that in the letter referred to by the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy Lord Selborne professed his desire, and, I sure, was anxious to make a conciliatory movement between the interests of Pretoria and those of Johannesburg?
§ [No Answer was returned.]