§ MR. LONSDALE (Armagh, Mid.)I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, if Chinese coolies are repatriated in opposition to their desire to renew their contracts for a further term, who will pay the cost of returning them to China.
§ MR. CHURCHILLThe employer will be called upon to pay in accordance with the bond entered into by him.
§ MR. MITCHELL-THOMSON (Lanarkshire, N.W.)I beg to ask the Undersecretary of State for the Colonies if the Home Government has any financial liability during the present year for the repatriation of the Chinese coolies from the Transvaal; and, if so, if any sum has been provided in the Estimates.
§ MR. CHURCHILLAny expenditure incurred under the repatriation notices posted last year will be borne by His Majesty's Government, but I cannot say whether any expenditure will actually be incurred. No other liability exists.
§ LORD BALCARRES (Lancashire, Chorley)Has any provision been made for this service in this year's Estimates?
§ MR. CHURCHILLIt is not possible to make provision to defray the cost of any particular service until there are some data available for knowing what the I cost of that service is to be.
§ SIR GILBERT PARKER (Gravesend)Has the right hon. Gentleman any knowledge as to the number of coolies who asked for repatriation?
§ MR. CHURCHILLNo, Sir. I do not know that any new information has come to hand. No doubt applications are made from time to time. If the hon. Member will put down a Question I will make inquiries.
§ MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONI beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether Sir Richard Solomon, the Transvaal Agent-General in London, telegraphed to the Transvaal Government that the Imperial Government would veto any retention of the Chinese after March, 1908; if so, whether such a telegram was sent with the cognisance or under the authority of His Majesty's Government; and whether His Majesty's Government have intimated or caused intimation to be made at any time, through any channel, that it is their view that a time limit should be set for the presence of the Chinese.
§ MR. CHURCHILLThe Secretary of State for the Colonies has no control over or responsibility for any correspondence which may pass between an Agent-General and the Colony which he serves. Such correspondence, whatever its nature, is private correspondence; and even were I fully informed upon it, I could give no information to the House. All official communications are transmitted from the Colonial Office to the Transvaal Government through His Majesty's High Commissioner Lord Selborne. The policy of His Majesty's Government upon the subject of Chinese labour has for many months past been before Parliament in its entirety.
§ MR. MITCHELL-THOMSONasked for a specific answer to the last part of his question, whether at any time, through any channel, the Government had expressed the wish or the hope that a time limit should be set or the presence of the Chinese.
§ MR. CHURCHILLI have answered fully the last part of the Question when I say that the policy of His Majesty's government on the subject of Chinese 882 labour has for many months been before Parliament in its entirety.
§ SIR GILBERT PARKERwas understood to ask if duplicate copies of the correspondence sent to the Transvaal Government were placed in the hands of the Agent-General for the Colony in London.
§ MR. CHURCHILLsaid be had frequently talked to the Agent-General on matters of public interest, but he was not aware how a question of this character, affecting confidential communications passing between the Agent-General and his Government, could be answered in that House. As a matter of fact no suggestion of a time limit for the repatriation of the Chinese had ever come from the Government. He would like to draw attention to the very singular manner in which the affairs of that Colony were dealt with in the House as compared with the affairs of other Colonies in the British Empire.