THE EARL OF KINGSTONMy Lords, I have to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies if it is the case that the charge of being accessory to murder against the Zulu Chief Usibepu was dismissed after a hearing of several weeks; and, if so, by what law, native or otherwise, is the Chief still detained in custody, and what power has the Governor of Zululand to have the case reheard? I should like, my Lords, to read what was said on the subject in another place, on the 11th July, by the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies in answer to a question:—
The Secretary of State has as yet only received an informal Report of the proceedings from the Governor, who has come to this country on leave of absence. The charge was one of being accessory to the murder at Umsuby-wana. The Magistrate, after an investigation extending over several weeks, dismissed the charge. The Government is not altogether satisfied with the action of the Magistrate in dismissing the charge; and it is understood that the case has been referred back to the Resident Commissioner for his further consideration as Chief Magistrate. In the meantime, it is understood that Usibepu remains at Eshowe.It appears to me, my Lords, that this man stands in danger of an inquiry a second time for the offence of which he was pronounced innocent by the Magistrate who, at great length, investigated the case. I desire to ask what power there is to have the case reheard?
§ * LORD KNUTSFORDMy Lords, I have not yet received official information as to the proceedings against Usibepu before the Magistrate. The proceedings were of a preliminary character, and, after an investigation of some weeks, the charge was dismissed. But proceedings of that kind are not of the same character as a proceeding in full Court, where an acquittal stands as an acquittal for ever, and the man cannot be charged a second time. The whole 1695 case was then very properly submitted by the Governor to the Attorney General, Sir Michael Gallwey, a gentleman of great experience and ability; and, as I understand, the case has, upon his advice, been referred back to the Resident Commissioner for his further consideration in his capacity of Chief Magistrate. I expect to receive further information very shortly. Usibepu is not, strictly speaking, retained in custody; but, in accordance with native law, he is not allowed to return to his location without the permission of the Resident Commissioner, and that permission has not been given. The dismissal by the Magistrate of the charge does not, as I am advised, preclude the institution of fresh proceedings. The noble Lord has asked under what law these further proceedings can take place. I should think the course which the Governor was advised to take would fall under his powers as supreme Chief of Zululand, even if not under the powers vested in him by the Royal Commission. I may also refer to a Natal Ordinance, No. 18 of 1845, which, by the Proclamation of 1887, has been declared to be law in Znluland. By the 51st section of that Ordinance, after a party accused has been discharged by a Magistrate on a preliminary proceeding, the Crown Prosecutor may apply for a warrant to re-apprehend the party accused, in order to stand his trial. I think that is an answer to the question which the noble Lord has asked.