§ MR. MACKARNESSI beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies 872 whether the Secretary of State has been informed by the Natal Government why it is necessary to examine more than 100 witnesses on behalf of the prosecution against Dinizulu before formulating any definite charge against him; and whether he can give any approximate date when the Attorney-General of Natal will consider that sufficient evidence has been laid before the magistrate to enable him to decide whether the prisoner shall be committed for trial or discharged.
§ COLONEL SEELYThe Governor telegraphed to the Secretary of State on Saturday last that the Attorney-General has informed him that he anticipates that the preliminary examination of Dinizulu will be completed as far as the prosecution is concerned almost immediately. The Natal Government have not specifically informed the Secretary of State of the reasons why it has been necessary to examine so many witnesses. But it is clear that, greatly as the prolongation of the preliminary examination is to be regretted, it would be unjust to Dinizulu to spring upon him any charge at the trial which had not been exposed to him in the preliminary examination; as a consequence the production of new evidence has rendered a multiplication of witnesses unavoidable. Dinizulu's counsel have not taken any legal action indicating a desire that the preliminary examination should be closed.
§ COLONEL SEELYThat was an objection to the personality of the magistrate and not the procedure.
§ MR. MACKARNESSI beg to ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, in view of the unprecedented length of the preliminary examination to which the chief Dinizulu has been exposed in Natal, its secret character, and the refusal of bail to the prisoner, the-Secretary of State will inform the House whether by the law of Natal a British subject is deprived of the right to a writ in the nature of a writ of habeas corpus where he is unjustly detained in prison; and, if he is not so deprived, whether the Secretary of State is aware of any reason why such a 873 writ has not been moved for on behalf of the chief.
§ COLONEL SEELYThe writ of habeas corpus does not exist, I understand, in Natal, but there is an analogous procedure. For such a procedure to be successful it would be necessary to show that the authority under which the prisoner is detained is illegal and as far as the Secretary of State is aware, it is, and always has been, open to the prisoner, if his legal advisers consider this to he in his interests, to take steps to test its legality. I presume that they do not advise such steps.