HC Deb 04 April 1910 vol 16 cc3-4

asked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies whether his attention had been called to the Governor of Southern Nigeria having publicly stated that the Nigeria Seditious Offences Act differed very little from that of India, and to his having threatened that when in operation it would be employed against the local press, which had been criticising the endowment of a State church and the financial matters of the railway system; and whether these utterances may be taken to express the policy of the Government?

Colonel SEELY

No, Sir, lam not aware that the Governor of Southern Nigeria has made any such statement as that attributed to him in the question of my hon. Friend or that he has used any threat as to the application of the Ordinance. That Ordinance, as I stated in answer to a question by my hon. Friend the Member for the Ashburton Division on the 22nd March, is readily differentiated from the Indian law, and is, as I said, simply the translation of the existing law of the Colony that is the Common law into Statute.


Were any representations or objections made to these Ordinances by the members of the Legislative Council?

Colonel SEELY

Speaking from recollection, I do not think there were. I think not. I would not say for certain.


Does the Under-Secretary accept the implication in the question that the Indian Government has become an accepted standard of badness in this behalf?

Colonel SEELY

No; nor do I accept the implication in the question that the Governor is likely to take action such as suggested in it.