§ Mr. FELLasked if the compounds at the mines in the Transvaal which had been vacated by the Chinese were now occupied by Kaffirs or other black labourers; if these Kaffirs were confined in the compounds under conditions at least as stringent as those lately in force for the Chinese; and if their pay was as low and their food as good and plentiful as that which was given to the Chinese?
§ Colonel SEELYI have no doubt that the compounds are being utilised by natives, but the Transvaal is now under responsible Government, and arrangements for housing labourers are under the supervision of the local authorities and not of the Secretary of State. With regard to the second paragraph of the question the reply is in the negative, as the hon. Gentleman will see if he will refer to the reply I gave to my hon. Friend, the Member for West Ham, on Tuesday last.
§ Mr. FELLAre the Kaffirs confined in compounds and not allowed out without permits, and then only occasionally?
§ Colonel SEELYThe hon. Gentleman has asked me questions again and again as to what is the distinction between Kaffirs and Chinese. I have endeavoured not to raise questions which have any connection with immediate politics, with the sole desire of avoiding political controversy. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to know what is the distinction, I may say that these Kaffirs live under the ordinary law, but the Chinese live under legislation of so restrictive a character that it was protested against by the Chinese Minister as likely to make Chinese labourers mere chattels or implements of industry, was described by the Lord Chancellor in another place as semi-slavery,and was protested against by the legislatures of self-governing Colonies. It is a system of restrictive legislation which I am glad to say will shortly be wiped out from the Statute Book.
§ Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAINMay I ask whether the statements widely circulated on the subject of these Chinese Regulations by hon. Gentlemen opposite were described by the then Under-Secretary for the Colonies as terminological inexactitudes?
§ Colonel SEELYI know nothing of that, Sir; I only know that much the best answer to any questions of this kind, either here or in the country, is to read the Chinese Labour Ordinance. It is quite sufficient an illustration that legislation of the kind is a disgrace to the Statute Book.
Sir GILBERT PARKERIs it not the case that the Kaffirs in. the mines are under exactly the same restrictions as the Chinese, except as regards repatriation?
§ Colonel SEELYNo. The whole circumstances were absolutely and com- 746 pletely different, so much so that their status was described in the Transvaal itself, by an impartial legal authority, as I said in the reply to which I referred, as being in the position practically of outlaws.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member can deal with this at a later stage—on the Consolidated Fund Bill.