§ 69. Mr. OUTHWAITEasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies the number of South African troops at the disposal of the Union Government for the maintenance of law and order on the Rand; and how many, if any, of these troops were called out before an appeal was made for the assistance of Imperial troops stationed in South Africa?
Mr. HARCOURTThe Union Government are, I understand, relying on police, not on their volunteer forces, which under the recent defence legislation are only in process of formation, the old forces having just been disbanded. The only local forces available are those volunteers who enrolled for entry in the active citizen force, and they are only 1,000 in number and scattered throughout the Union. One thousand extra police have been drafted in on 2nd July, and special constables sworn.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEThe right hon. Gentleman gives the date when the troops were called in as 2nd July, whereas—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member appears to be reading some statement; he is only entitled to ask a question.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his reply does not answer my question? Were any steps taken to bring forces on to the Rand before the demand for Imperial troops on 2nd July?
Mr. HARCOURTThe hon. Member misunderstood my answer. I said a thousand extra police were drafted on 2nd July and special constables were sworn in.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEDid the South African Government take any special steps to preserve law and order on the Rand before applying for the assistance of Imperial troops?
§ 70. Mr. OUTHWAITEasked the number of Imperial troops dispatched to the Rand in connection with the strike; and what, if any, occurrence had taken place previous to sanction being given in the first instance to their employment?
Mr. HARCOURTTwo thousand six hundred and fifty troops have been sent. They were dispatched on urgent representation from the Union Government through the Governor-General.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODWill the right hon. Gentleman approach the Government of South Africa with a suggestion that the services of these troops should be recognised by striking some suitable medal or cross?
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs this a miners' war?
§ 71. Mr. OUTHWAITEasked what preliminaries have to be observed under the law of the Transvaal before an order to fire can be given to troops employed in connection with the preservation of law and order?
Mr. HARCOURTI am informed by Lord Gladstone to the following effect: The procedure in dealing with illegal assemblies is governed by Law No. 6 of 1894, Transvaal. Under Section 9 of that law, resident magistrates in disturbed areas have been constituted "local authorities." Under that law illegal assembly is required to disperse at request of police. If crowd do not disperse leader of police must then (a) call order by means of drum or bugle, and then (b) call out thrice in a loud voice, "Obedience to the law; disperse, otherwise force will be used." Paragraphs 956 to 974 of King's Regulations and this law have been circulated to all magistrates, police, and military authorities concerned. The instructions state that this procedure must on no account be resorted to except by leader of police present, and then only when, in his opinion, resort to force has become absolutely necessary for preservation of life and property. Troops have been placed under direction of magistrates, who must accompany or give instructions to troops.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is the old Dutch law, the enforcement of which by the Boer Republic caused statements to be circulated in this country that freedom of speech and of public meeting was being denied; and does he approve of British troops being used to enforce this law?
Mr. HARCOURTIt is the old law, and it has been maintained at the discretion of the Union Government.
§ Mr. MORRELLWas the right hon. Gentleman communicated with before British troops were employed?
Mr. HARCOURTI was communicated with at the time the British troops had been asked for and were authorised by the Governor-General.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODDid my right hon. Friend give his sanction to the employment of these troops, or were they sent before his sanction was obtained?
§ 72. Mr. OUTHWAITEasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if his attention has been drawn to the fact that on 20th June the Government of South Africa published a notice to the effect that in terms of Law 6 of 1894. (Transvaal) assemblies in the squares and streets of more than six persons within the municipality of Benoni would be prohibited; whether he is aware that this law was made use of to deal with the situation which had arisen through the leaders of the mining industry engaging in a seditious agitation against the Government of the South African Republic; and can he state whether Imperial troops have been sent to the Rand to enforce this denial of freedom of speech and public meeting against British miners on strike with whom their employers refuse to arbitrate?
Mr. HARCOURTI have seen a notice in the Press that a meeting at Benoni was prohibited by the magistrate, but it is also stated that the prohibition was withdrawn by the Government. Law 6 of 1894 was passed by the Government of the late Republic in consequence of the excitement which arose over the commandeering question at that time, and has I believe never been removed from the Statute Book. The answer to the last part of the question is, of course, no. I must, however, add, and I trust that the House will agree with me when I say, that it is not a part of my proper functions as Secretary of State for the Colonies to enter into any discussion of the merits either of any particular law of the Transvaal or of the industrial controversy out of which the most deplorable events of the last few days have arisen. These are matters which belong to the competence and responsibility of the 38 Government and Legislature of the Union of South Africa. Further, the House may rest assured that the Government of the Union fully recognises that the Imperial troops in South Africa could not rightly be called upon to act in the ordinary circumstances with which a police force is required to cope. But when grave disorder was threatened, and the forces at the disposal of the Government were held to be insufficient for the emergency which had arisen the Governor-General felt bound, in accordance with the request of his Ministers, to give them the help they needed for the preservation of peace and order, especially in view of the fact that there is a population of about 250,000 native labourers on the Rand.
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEAt the end of Questions I shall ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House upon the Question.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEI beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies two questions of which I have given him private notice. The first is, whether he has received a list of the killed and wounded during the street fighting in Johannesburg; and whether, in order to allay the anxieties of those who have friends and relatives out there, he will cause the same to be published without delay?
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEThe second question is whether the use of the British soldiers against the miners on strike in Johannesburg and district was authorised by Lord Gladstone, and, if so, on what authority he acted in ordering Imperial troops for this purpose?
Mr. HARCOURTThe assistance of the troops was called for by the Union Government and was assented to by the Governor-General in that capacity. Perhaps I may be allowed to read to the House a telegram I have received in the last five minutes from Lord Gladstone:—
Everything quiet in Johannesburg last night and this morning. Have every reason to believe that men accept terms of settlement and will return to work after funeral of men killed, which takes place there today. The authorities are making every arrangement for convenience of those wishing to attend funeral. No further trouble with strikers is anticipated, and any disturbance this evening of criminal and disorderly classes will readily be dealt with.I may be allowed to add that in these circumstances it might produce an. unfortunate effect in the Transvaal if the matter were further discussed at this juncture.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the original cause of all the trouble was the prohibition of peaceful public meetings, and the limitation of the number of people meeting in the streets to six; and in these circumstances, does he consider that the use of British Imperial troops was justified in suppressing the right of public meetings in Johannesburg and elsewhere?
Mr. HARCOURTNo, Sir. My knowledge is wholly insufficient at present for me to be able to say out of what the strike arose.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEI shall repeat the question upon Wednesday; will the right hon. Gentleman ask for complete information in the meanwhile?
Mr. HARCOURTI shall hope in due time to obtain complete information, but I am most unwilling, in the state of great anxiety which exists in the Transvaal, to trouble the Governor-General with questions for piecemeal information.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEI will repeat the question on Wednesday.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODWill the right hon. Gentleman institute an inquiry in South Africa by people from this side into these killings in Johannesburg?
§ Mr. OUTHWAITEI desire to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House to call attention to a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, the shooting of British miners and others in Johannesburg by Imperial troops placed at the disposal of the Government of South Africa by His Majesty's representative, and the prohibiting of the right of public meeting.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think I should be right in admitting the Motion the hon. Member proposes to move. In the first place, it seems to convey a vote of censure on the Transvaal Government. Of course, that we could not do on a Motion for Adjournment. In the second place, it would convey a vote of censure upon the Governor at the Cape, Lord Gladstone, and that we could not deal with either on a Motion for Adjournment. If the hon. Member wishes to press the second point, the proper course is to put a Motion down on the Paper in the same way as would be done in the case of the Viceroy of India, the Governor of Canada, or any great State official.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODMay I point out that we in this House are responsible for maintaining the,troops, and that the only way we can bring to the attention of the Government and the country the desirability of withdrawing these troops from South Africa is by a Motion such as this. All the Members of this House are responsible for our troops in Johannesburg; it is not Lord Gladstone or General Botha, and, therefore, it is for us to say whether they should be continued in Johannesburg or withdrawn to this country. In spite of what hon. Members may think, I do maintain that not only are we empowered to deal with this question on a Motion for Adjournment, but that it is our urgent and imperative duty to do so.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI am afraid I do not agree with the hon. Member in that respect. I do not deny for a moment that he is entitled to raise the question, but not on a Motion for Adjournment. It will be suitable for discussion on the Estimates.
§ Mr. WEDGWOODIs the shooting of these men not a definite matter of urgent public importance, and also the fact that those troops are still in Johannesburg keeping order?
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think that comes within this rule. The urgency, we hope, is passed after the telegram which has been read by the Colonial Secretary.