§ *LORD COLERIDGE rose "To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, having regard to his statement in this House on May 16th, 1905, his attention has been called to the evidence of Mr. Stewart, late compound manager of the Cræsus Mine, at the inquest in Johannesburg on the death of Mr. A. Bradley, as reported in the Johannesburg Star of June 23rd, 1905, in which he is reported to have said, 'where he had considered the Chinamen wrong he had in many cases flogged them; it was against the law to flog them, but he had done so'; and whether any action has been taken in the matter, and, if not, whether His Majesty s Government propose to take any action, and, if not, why not."
The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, on May 16th this year I asked the noble Duke for information with regard to the suspicions I entertained as to flogging taking place in the Chinese compounds in South Africa. The noble Duke referred me to a statement made by Lord Milner. He also said it was illegal—which I knew—for any flogging to take place in compounds; that all floggings had to be imposed by a magistrate and sanctioned by a Court, and that as it was illegal it was impossible. At the time the noble Duke spoke there appeared in a well-known newspaper at the Cape—the Licensed Victuallers' Gazette, dated April 29th—a long account of a visit to the compounds on the Rand, and I
1357
will give the noble Duke a few extracts from this account—
In one compound that I visited there were, say, 2,500 coolies, of whom 60 per cent, have had a 'licking' since their arrival.
Continuing, the writer says—
Let us take one typical morning's work. Twenty coolies are lined up outside the compound manager's office. They are marched in one by one by Chinese policemen and charged. The charge may be anything—from malingering to opium-smoking, or failing to report after a shift. The sentence usually varies from live to fifty stroked. Those are administered variously. On one compound that I visited the punishment is carried out moat expeditiously. 'Ten,' says the compound manager, speaking in Chinese, and the unhappy coolie walks to another part of the same room between two or three Chinese policemen to take his gruel. The coolie lowers his pantaloons, falls flat on the boards (face downwards), and 'prepares to receive the enemy.' One policeman keeps his head in position, another his feet. The Lord High Executioner armed with a whip—a piece of leather three inches wide attached to a wooden handle about three feet long—then metes out the punishment. After the second stroke the coolie will probably groan and wail, but immediately after the last he is brought to his feet, and with a coup de derriere from a policeman's No.9 boot he is sent about his business.
He went to another compound and described what took place there. In one case he says—
the sentence was two whippings of fifty lashes each.
THE UNDER - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (The Duke of MAHLBOROKGH)Will the noble and learned Lord give me the name of his informant?
§ LORD COLERIDGEThe account is anonymous. The writer continues—
These whippings were administered in public. And in this case the victim did really and truly weep. The number of whippings varies according to the temperament of the compound managers. Some believe implicitly in their police and headmen; they accept their stories, and act accordingly. Others listen carefully to both sides and (provided they know the language well enough) give the accused coolies the fairest play. On some mines the strap is not used. Instead, a cane is laid across the shoulders at the rate of about three cuts per second; but of course the number of strokes is much greater than when the leather lash is applied.That account is anonymous, and I am not saying it is correct. I am saying that at the time the noble Duke spoke 1358 there was this paper circulated in the colony with this account in it. What I wish to ask the noble Duke is whether any heed was taken of that account, and any attempt made to find out who wrote it; whether it was true; or whether there was any foundation for it. At this time the Government were asserting that no such thing took place, and down to July 13th the Colonial Secretary had stated in the House of Commons that he had no information of any kind on the subject.Now the attention of His Majesty's Government has been directed to an account of an inquest which appeared in the Johannesburg Star of June 23rd; and in that report a Mr. Stewart, who was called, stated upon oath that—
Where he had considered the Chinamen wrong he had in many cases flogged them; it was against the law to flog them, but he had done so.That witness was the late compound manager of the Cræsus Mine. In the face of that statement, the Colonial Secretary had to admit that illegal flogging was being practised in the compounds. I wish to ask why these things escape the attention of His Majesty's Government and why it is left to private Members in one or the other House of Parliament to draw attention to these scandals. The Government have every opportunity of obtaining this information and finding out for themselves. They were asked whether these things were going on, and assured us they were not. Why, I ask, is it left to private Members to ascertain and, if I may say so, expose the illegalities now admitted to be practised in the compounds?MR. W. Evans, superintendent of the Foreign Labour Department in Johannesburg, was very indignant at the allegation of slavery (page 84, Cd. 2401). He pointed out that the cry of slavery had touched him personally, for he had been for over twenty years a member of the Civil Service in the Straits Settlements and had been closely in touch with Chinese, and he submitted that the record of his service ought to disprove any allegation of the existence of slavery. Why has not Mr. Evans discovered these practices? No doubt he is desirous of 1359 repudiating any sympathy with such practices as these, but what has taken place I think shows that Mr. Evans has singularly neglected his duty, or in some way or other has not been able to command the information that his post ought to enable him to obtain. I have no doubt that the noble Duke will say that such practices have not the sanction of His Majesty's Government, and that so far as the Government are concerned they shall be put down; but I can assure the noble Duke that unless greater efforts are made to obtain the truth in the future than have been made in the past they are likely to continue.
§ THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHMy Lords, before I reply to the specific Questions which the noble and learned Lord has put on the Paper, perhaps I may deal for a moment with one or two of the observations which fell from him. He expressed regret that on May 16th when we last debated this question of the treatment of the Chinese coolies I then stated that, as far as our official information went, there were no cases of unauthorised flogging. The noble and learned Lord reminded me that on April 28th a newspaper circulating in the coleny furnished a long account of gross outrages inflicted on the Chinese, and he said that it was remarkable that the Colonial Office was not aware of the statement. The noble Lord must remember that it takes three weeks for a paper to reach this country from South Africa, and it would have been impossible for us to be in possession of that particular paper on the day that I addressed the House.
The noble and learned Lord expressed regret that we were not more fully aware of these anonymous statements made in the Press of South Africa. The noble and learned Lord is perfectly well aware that the Secretary of State has frequently stated that he would be only too willing to inquire into any specific case brought forward and in which it could be shown that illegal flogging bad been administered to Chinamen. My right hon. friend will be perfectly prepared to go thoroughly into such a case and investigate it. But in the case of vague and indefinite stories by gentlemen who 1360 write in the Press without giving their names as to illegal floggings having been administered, it is very difficulty to trace their origin. The High Commissioner has been requested on many occasions to endeavour to ascertain whether the general statements made had any foundation in fact, and it has always been found practically impossible to trace the original instances on which those general statements were made.
The noble and learned Lord twitted His Majesty's Government with the fact that they were not fully aware of the general statements that had been circulated, and he mentioned a statement which was made on June 24th and reported in the Johannesburg Star. That statement has only been in the possession of the Colonial Office a few days, but long before the noble Lord had put his Question on the Paper we had communicated with South Africa in order to try to ascertain whether there was any truth in that statement. We did not wait until the noble and learned Lord had raised the question, or until it was raised in another place. We are perfectly prepared to give the noble and learned Lord every information we can with regard to specific cases. Our attention has been drawn to the fact that this late compound manager said that he had in many cases flogged Chinamen and that he knew he bad done it in contravention of the law. It seems, undoubtedly, that an illegality has been committed, and I need scarcely assure the noble and learned Lord that the Secretary of State is quite determined to put the practice down. The noble and learned Lord is anxious to know what action we are going to take in this particular matter. We are in telegraphic communication with Lord Selborne, who is thoroughly alive to the importance and gravity of the matter, and, no doubt, the consideration of this particular question will form the subject of a recommendation from the High Commissioner to the Secretary of State, and it will then be for the Secretary of State to decide how far he will be able to accept any recommendation made to him. The Government will certainly not depart from the principle they have laid 1361 down that Chinamen shall not be flogged except according to law: that is to say, that no Chinaman shall receive corporal punishment unless a sentence has been passed upon him by a magistrate and confirmed by the Supreme Court.
§ EARL SPENCERMy Lords, I think the noble Duke's Answer is somewhat unsatisfactory, so far as it touches of the difficulty of dealing with anonymous representations. I did not gather clearly from it that the Secretary of State did take notice of those statements. I maintain that the Government, in dealing with the state of things that exist in South Africa, are bound to find out for themselves whether rumours circulated in the papers are true or not. Both I and my noble friend behind me have had a great many such cases to deal with in Ireland, and we always felt bound to find out whether they were true or not and to deal with them accordingly. I now come to the other part of the noble Duke's Answer. I recognise with satisfaction that the Government have taken steps to communicate with the High Commissioner with regard to this statement, and that the Secretary of State is determined to see that the law is carried out. I think, however, the noble Duke was rather vague as to what was to pass between the High Commissioner and the Secretary of State. It is somewhat strange that the High Commissioner has no power himself to deal with a case so flagrant as that mentioned in the Question.
§ THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHThe man is no longer a compound manager.
§ EARL SPENCERHe has been removed?
§ THE DUKE OF MARLBOROUGHHe left some time ago.
§ EARL SPENCERThen there may be a difficulty; but I am surprised that the High Commissioner has no power himself to deal with these casts without reference home. I was glad to hear from the noble Duke of the feeling of horror entertained at the Colonial Office 1362 at what has taken place. I will only add that we on this side of the House have often been subjected to attacks for the way in which we have met the proposal to introduce Chinese labour into the Transvaal, but I confess that cases of the kind to which attention has been drawn amply justify, in my opinion, the opposition we made at the time.
§ House adjourned at Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Four o'clock.