§ MR. MACKARNESS (Berkshire, Newbury)I beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether the preliminary examination of the chief Dinizulu was conducted in open court, with right of access to the public; whether the examination was based upon any formal charge supported by any sworn information; whether he has been committed for trial; and, if so, upon what charge and before what court.
§ MR. CHURCHILLThe preliminary examination of Dinizulu has not been held in public. The circumstances are reported by the Governor in his despatch of 28th December printed at page 217 of Cd. 3,888. The same Blue-book contains some of the sworn information on which I understand the Colonial Government relies. With regard to the charges the Governor has telegraphed as follows: Following are charges in warrants—(1) High treason; (2) Contravening the provisions of Section 44 of Act No. 1 of 1906 known as the Firearms and Ammunition Act of 1905; (3) Sedition and rebellion; (4) (a) Murder, (b) being an accessory to the crime of murder, (c) conspiracy to murder, (d) inciting to murder. The Secretary of State has not yet been informed that Dinizulu has been committed for trial. The trial will be before the Supreme Court.
§ MR. WILLIAM REDMOND (Clare, E.)Has the attention of the right hon. Gentleman been called to the statement that the barrister employed to defend Dinizulu has decided to give up his brief and return home in consequence of the obstacles which he alleges were placed in his way in obtaining evidence for the defence, and will the right hon. Gentleman make close inquiry into the matter, so that Dinizulu may at least get a fair trial?
§ MR. CHURCHILLMy attention has been directed to the statement which appears in the newspapers, but at present I have only newspaper authority for it. In view of the special conditions which were attached to Dinizulu's return to South Africa, the Secretary of State representing His Majesty's Government is bound to give earnest and persistent attention to the whole course of this matter.
§ MR. WILLIAM REDMONDWill the right hon. Gentleman direct his earnest and immediate attention to the statements made by Mr. Jellicoe publicly that in Zululand unresisting natives had been shot, and in several cases Hogged? Those statements are made on the authority of an English professional gentleman.
§ MR. CHURCHILLI think I should prefer to deal with the question of Dinizulu apart from other matters.
§ MR. WILLIAM REDMONDI beg to give the right hon. Gentleman notice that I will call his attention to these statements.
§ MR. MACKARNESSAre we to understand that the charges of murder and incitement to murder are not charges of murdering a particular person or inciting to murder on a particular occasion, but are vague charges.
§ MR. CHURCHILLI read to the House the words of the telegram we received, which constitute the capital charges so far as they have been imparted to us.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILL (Donegal, S.)Will the Government inquire whether it is a fact that Miss Colenso 1406 was not permitted to have interviews with Dinizulu?
§ MR. CHURCHILLThere has been a lot of telegraphic correspondence on that subject.
§ MR. SWIFT MACNEILLWhat is the upshot of it?
§ LORD R. CECIL (Marylebone, E.)Under the law of Natal, is it possible to bring any one to trial for murder without alleging who was murdered?
§ MR. CHURCHILLI cannot answer that Question without notice, but the point certainly occurred to me.