§ 2.35 p.m.
§ EARL JOWITTMy Lords, I beg to ask the noble Marquess the Leader of the House the Question of which I have given him private notice. The Question is as follows: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have any statement to make with regard to the Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations' conversations with members of the Bamangwato tribe at present in this country.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS (THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY)My Lords, I have had two meetings with the members of the Bamangwato Tribe who are in this country. At the first meeting I listened to all that they had to say. I gave them the fullest facilities and all six spoke at length. They also delivered to me a memorandum of their views. They claimed to represent the tribe and argued that the tribe as a whole strongly desired the appointment of Seretse Khama as chief and was prepared to accept his wife. They asked me to reconsider Her Majesty's Government's decision that Seretse Khama could not be recognised as chief. They added that, if I could not see my way to alter this decision, they would welcome a further statement of the reasons which had led Her Majesty's Government to make it.
At the second meeting I informed them that I saw no reason for alteration of Her Majesty's Government's decision about Seretse Khama, which was firm and final. My predecessor and I had been fully aware, before the decision was reached, of the views which they had expressed and the delegation had added nothing to the information already at our disposal. I pointed out that opinion 394 in the tribe had changed in the past and might do so again. I emphasised, what is so often overlooked, that at the first kgotla in November, 1948, a large majority of the tribe showed a very strong aversion to acceptance of Seretse Khama's marriage, on the grounds that it constituted a flagrant breach of tribal custom. A division of opinion in the tribe clearly existed, which was likely to be intensified in the future over the succession.
Moreover, as had been stated in the White Paper of 1950 (Cmd. 7913), the view of the tribe, or of a majority of the tribe, was only one of the factors which Her Majesty's Government had to take into account. Under Bechuana-land law the final decision rested clearly and specifically with the Government, which would be failing in its responsibilities if it did not consider what was best in the ultimate interests of the tribe and the Protectorate. The reasons for the Government's decision about Seretse Khama were already fully set out in published documents—namely, the White Paper of 1950 (Cmd. 7913), the Statement made in this House and in another place on the 27th March, 1952, and speeches in the debate in this House on the 31st March, of which I gave them copies to study and to take back with them for the information of these whom they claimed to represent. I pointed out that their claim to represent the tribe was not unchallenged. Quite recently, for example, persons of high standing in the tribe had seen fit to petition my predecessor contesting their right to speak for the tribe.
Finally, I emphasised Her Majesty's Government's determination to secure settled conditions in the Reserve, to reunite the tribe and to restore the chieftainship in the person of some other and more suitable candidate who was acceptable both to the tribe and to the Government. The sooner the tribe's co-operation over this was secured, the sooner would happiness and progress—social, economic and political—be achieved in the Reserve. I counselled them, therefore, to abide loyally by the Government's decision.
§ EARL JOWITTMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Marquess for the statement which he has made. I do not want 395 to reopen the matter, but in view of the fact that the next step has still to be taken, I hope the noble Marquess will realise that the good will of the members of this deputation may be an important factor for the future. I say frankly that I was a little disturbed to see it reported (I do not know whether it is true) that when this deputation arrived in this country no facilities were provided for them, and nobody was there to meet them. I should like to say this to the noble Marquess: I hope he will realise that it would be very wise that he should do everything possible both to make their stay in this country, so long as they do stay here, easy and comfortable and also to facilitate in every way he can their return to their own country, so that, if it be possible, they may go back as emissaries of good will and help in the negotiations which may well have to be taken in the future.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I would very largely agree with what the noble and learned Earl has said. With regard to their not being met on arrival, he will remember that these men were not an official delegation of the tribe: they were members of the tribe who had chosen of their own free will to come, and I do not think we were required to give them an official reception. But I need hardly say that every effort will be made to facilitate their return. There is no reason to suppose—in fact, quite the contrary—that they did not feel that they had been received with every courtesy.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEMy Lords, may I ask the noble Marquess two questions? First of all, has he any reason to doubt that at this moment the tribe is wholeheartedly in favour of the return of Seretse? Secondly, what are these informations which he has received to the contrary and from whom do they come? And, if I may be allowed to add a third question, what other reasons beside the wishes of the tribe are in his mind?
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, first of all with regard to the suggestion that they represent the whole tribe, I think it would be perfectly true to say that at the present moment they represent the views of the majority of the tribe. With regard to the second question, I do not think I will go into detail to-day, 396 for obvious reasons; but the noble Viscount must take it from me that my predecessor did receive communications from people of substance in the tribe to the effect which I have described in my reply. With regard to the third matter, it is not really a question of exactly what the tribe wants at any one moment; it is what is the proper course to be adopted with regard to the tribe, not only for the present but also for the future. In that matter we must take very much into account the question of succession.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEThe noble Marquess will realise that it will not create a good impression if people, who undoubtedly are representative—whether or not they are wholly representative—come with their statements, and are met with the statement that undisclosed information is available to the Secretary of State and that it has influenced his mind.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI am afraid that it is always the case in public life that there are certain things which can be disclosed and others which cannot. It is not a question of whether we create a good impression or not; it is what is best in the public interest.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEBut a good impression depends upon good faith.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI hope that the noble Viscount is not charging this Government with a breach of faith. Certainly there is no reason for such a charge. If I may say so, of the two hours that I listened to the Bamangwato tribesmen, about three-quarters of the time was occupied with complaints about what happened in the days of the previous Government.
§ VISCOUNT STANSGATEThe noble Marquess is quite entitled to say that; it is an excellent Party point, and one to which perhaps my noble friend Lord Ogmore can reply.