§ Mr. RENDALLasked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies whether, by virtue of the powers conferred on him by the Barotseland, North Western Rhodesia, Order in Council, 1899, His Excellency the High Commissioner of South Africa appointed Colonel Colin Harding, C.M.G., to be commandant of the Barotseland Police; and whether such appointment is contained in Proclamation No. 16, of 1013 1901, and signed, by command of His Excellency the High Commissioner, J. Perry, Imperial Secretary?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY for the COLONIES (Colonel Seely)The reply to my hon. Friend's question is in the affirmative. I should, however, state at the same time that under the Barotseland Order in Council it rests with the British South Africa Company to nominate officers for appointment.
§ Mr. RENDALLasked whether there is any official record that Lord Selborne, when accepting Colonel Harding's resignation, which had been handed in under the mistaken belief that the abolition of his post had been sanctioned by the Colonial Office, wrote Colonel Harding on 30th March, 1906, saying that he wished him to understand that his retirement was due solely to the reduction which Lord Selborne had agreed to in response to the urgent request made to him by the British South Africa Company?
§ Colonel SEELYLord Selborne on 30th March, 1906, addressed a telegram to Colonel Harding which contained the following statement: "I wish you to understand that I regard your retirement as due solely to the reductions which I have agreed to in response to the urgent request made to me on grounds of economy by the British South Africa Company. The Company are, of course, entitled to their own opinion as to your conduct while in their service, but I assure you that the opinion which they have thought fit to communicate to you is not shared by me, and would not influence me in considering your application for any suitable appointment under my control which might become vacant in the future."
§ Mr. RENDALLCan the hon Gentleman explain why Lord Selborne stated in his letter that Colonel Harding's resignation was accepted solely on the ground of necessary reduction for economy, whereas the hon. Gentleman said a fortnight ago that there were "other reasons"?
§ Colonel SEELYIf my hon. Friend will look back to the answer I gave he will find that I said I did not accept without reserve the statement then made. Beyond that I did not go, and I do not go now.
§ Mr. RENDALLDo I understand that my hon. Friend entirely concurs in Lord Selborne's view that the resignation was caused solely by reduction due to economy?
§ Colonel SEELYAll this happened long before I came to the Colonial Office. Of course, in a particular matter of this kind, in reference to facts that took place some time ago, it would plainly be easy for anyone to give a very wrong impression of what took place by replying to a question. If my hon. Friend will ask a specific question on any point I shall be only too glad to give him an answer. But in reply to a supplementary question as to what were the motives of different people at different times, I think the House will agree that it would be most unwise to give an answer.
§ Mr. RENDALLMay I ask——
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member may ask Question No. 5.
§ Mr. RENDALLasked whether on 14th May, 1906, Lord Selborne, as High Commissioner for South Africa, wrote to the then Secretary for the Colonies recording his opinion that Colonel Harding was an honourable and conscientious officer, who had loyally and efficiently served both His Majesty's Government and the British South Africa Company; and whether he will immediately retain the services of this officer in some suitable capacity?
§ Colonel SEELYYes, Sir, Lord Selborne did write to the Secretary of State in the terms indicated. The Secretary of State is desirous of finding suitable employment for Colonel Harding, but, as I stated in reply to a similar question on the 22nd of last month, it is very difficult to find a suitable post.