HC Deb 02 April 1912 vol 36 cc1031-2
Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH - COOKE

asked (1) whether the Secretary for the Colonies is aware that, under Sections 23 and 24 of the Nyasaland Ordinance, No. 6, of 1909, as amended by Section 3 of the Nyasaland Ordinance, No. 14, of 1911, any person who causes or attempts to cause any native to leave the Protectorate by any suggestion or advice whatsoever may be convicted of a criminal offence, and on conviction is liable to a fine not exceeding £100 or to imprisonment with or without hard labour for a term not exceeding one year, or to both fine and imprisonment; whether there is any precedent for legislation of this character; and, seeing that the Ordinance interferes with the liberty of the subject and is opposed to the best interests of the natives themselves, whether he will issue instructions to have the terms modified; (2) whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that Rhodesian farmers pay £1 a month for native labour, whereas the rate current in Nyasaland for similar work is only 5s.; that there is a superfluity of labour in Nyasaland requiring an outlet for its energies, and that in the present conditions that outlet is closed; that the net result of these restrictions is to keep the Nyasaland natives in idleness or to compel them to work for a far lower rate of pay than they can obtain elsewhere; and whether he will consider the advisability of permitting these British subjects to sell their labour as they themselves may think best and not enforce them to hire themselves out to masters who do not pay them the price their labour will fetch amidst the equally healthy surroundings in Rhodesia?

Mr. HARCOURT

The hon. Member's statement of the law is correct. I know of no precedent, but the legislation has been framed to meet exceptional conditions, and I cannot accent his suggestion that it is opposed to the best interests of the natives. I am aware that the wages paid by farmers to native labourers in Rhodesia are considerably in excess of those paid in Nyasaland for similar work, but I am not prepared to admit that there is a superfluity of labour in Nyasaland. The evidence, indeed, in my possession points to the opposite conclusion, and, in view of the rapid development of the Protectorate and of the fact that this development will be accelerated by the improvements which are about to be made in the means of communication, I see reason to apprehend a shortage of labour in the near future. Moreover, I consider that the Nyasaland Government is amply justified in restricting as far as possible the emigration of natives from the Protectorate, if for no other reason than that such emigration is entirely subversive of domestic and tribal ties, and imposes considerable hardship on the wives and children who are left behind.

Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKE

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that the conditions of native labour in Rhodesia are generally superior to the conditions of native labour in Nyasaland, and that the mortality of native labour in Rhodesia is very much less than in Nyasaland, or is comparatively insignificant?

Mr. HARCOURT

No; I do not think I should be prepared to admit that statement.