Sitting of 16 November 1909

FINANCE BILL.
Petitions against; of the Melcombe Regis Habitation of the Primrose League, Weymouth, Dorset;—of persons signing (8);—Read, and ordered to lie on the Table.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: My Lords, I beg to gives notice that on the Motion for the Second Reading of the Finance Bill I shall move, "That this House is not justified in giving its consent to this Bill until it has been submitted to the judgment of the country."

CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES.
The Viscount Hutchinson (E. Donoughmore) appointed to take the Chair in Committees of the Whole House this day in the absence of the Chairman of Committees.

NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL,
[SECOND READING.]
Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
THE EARL OF GRANARD: This is a Bill to enable the punishment of detention to be substituted for the punishment of imprisonment for offences against naval discipline under the Naval Discipline Act. In the Army, as your Lordships are aware, imprisonment for purely military offences has been more or less done away with, and the punishment of detention has been substituted in its stead. The object is that no slur shall be cast upon a man after he has left the service and re-entered civil life. This Bill has been somewhat criticised in the House of Commons owing to the fact that it does not come into operation before the year 1911; but I shall, in Committee, move an Amendment which will, I think, meet that case.
Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Granard.)
EARL CAWDOR: My Lords, I only rise to say that, as far as we on this side of the House are concerned, we quite concur in the principles of this Bill, and hope it will be carried into law as soon as possible. I am glad to hear that the noble Earl will
590
move an Amendment in Committee which will bring the Bill into operation at an earlier date than that proposed. I do not know whether the noble Earl means to make its coming into effect earlier compulsory, or whether powers will be given enabling the Admiralty to bring the Bill into force at an earlier date if they think it desirable.
LORD HAVERSHAM: My Lords, I should be glad if the noble Earl in charge of the Bill would explain what the effect of detention will be on a man's pay. At present if a man is put into prison he loses his pay during the whole time of his imprisonment. But the punishment in this case is to be detention, and I should like to know what the effect of that will be upon a man's pay and also subsequently upon his pension.
THE EARL OF GRANARD: In the Army if a man is sentenced to, say, fourteen days detention in barracks, his pay during that period is stopped. I understand that this Bill is on all fours with the Act relating to the Army, and that the same rule will operate in this case.
On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House To-morrow.

MOTOR CARS (INTERNATIONAL CIRCULA TION) BILL.
  COUNTY COUNCIL MORTGAGES BILL.
  House in Committee (according to order): Bills reported without amendment: Standing Committee negatived, and Bills to be read 3a To-morrow.

BRITISH INDIANS IN THE TRANSVAAL.
LORD AMPTHILL*LORD AMPTHILL rose to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies what had been the result of his negotiations in regard to the question of British Indians in the Transvaal and to move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I hope that the noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies will recognise that in this matter I have not been importunate, that I have even been patient, that I have refrained from asking him Questions on the subject from time to time when he represented to me that the moment was not opportune and that if I delayed he might be able to give me a more satisfactory answer. But I think the time has come when the matter will not brook

591
any further delay, and when it is desirable that Parliament and the public should be informed of the present state of the case.
I will not take up time by repeating the past history of the question. I will begin with a period of four months ago, when the occasion of the discussion of the South African Constitution Bill raised hopes that this question—this unhappy question—which has reflected no credit on the Colony and no credit on the Imperial Government, which has been fraught with such misery to the British Indians in the Transvaal, would at last be settled; that there would be some generous concession on the part of the Colony, inspired, perhaps, by the Imperial Government, which would enable the British Indians to participate in the general rejoicing over the Union of South Africa. With these hopes in mind two Indian gentlemen, Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Hajee Habib, arrived as delegates from the British Indian community in the Transvaal on the 10th of July. They stated their case to the responsible authorities in this country, they refrained from any sort or kind of public agitation, and they waited patiently in the hope that their expectation would be fulfilled. I asked the noble Earl from time to time whether he was able to make any statement in this House as to the progress of his negotiations, and he led me to hope that by waiting a little longer it might be possible to hear a satisfactory announcement; and in the breasts of the delegates great hopes were engendered by the sympathetic manner in which the noble Earl received them and listened to their representations.
The Transvaal Ministers left the country and still nothing was settled, and the delegates waited on. Then the replies which they received from the Colonial Office became somewhat discouraging, and finally, about a week ago, they received an answer from the Colonial Office which crushed their hope of a settlement which they could regard as honourable and satisfactory. The delegates, who had all this while maintained an admirable patience and self-restraint, made a dignified and temperate statement to the Press and left the country. Mr. Gandhi, the principal of them, is going back to the Transvaal probably to be clapped once more into gaol and treated as a common criminal. That, my Lords, is the recent history of
592
the question, and I think the time has come when we have a right to know what has actually passed between the Imperial Government and the Colonial Government.
Now, my Lords, what is the question at issue? I beg your Lordships to give me your attention, for that which I have to say is really a matter of very grave importance. During the past three years Indians in the Transvaal have been deprived of a right which Indians have hitherto enjoyed in every other part of the Empire—the right of entry into the Colony. That right, although it exists in theory in every other part of the Empire, is in some parts limited in practice. The Indians in the Transvaal are perfectly willing that the right should be limited in the Transvaal to any extent that the Colonial Government may think expedient, but they claim that they should not be deprived of it, and deprived of it in the particular manner which the Colonial Government have chosen. The manner which the Colonial Government have chosen for depriving them of this right—a right which I must again remind your Lordships exists in every other part of the Empire and always has existed—is that of classing them as prohibited immigrants; that is to say, classing them with the outcast and the scum of humanity I from every other nation. What it amounts to is this. During the past three years, and while the Imperial Government has been under the direction of the Liberal Party, a colour bar has been instituted in South Africa—a colour bar such as never before existed in the history of the British Empire. While the Bill for the Union of South Africa was under discussion in both Houses of Parliament the leaders of all Parties protested in the most solemn and emphatic manner against a provision instituting a colour bar. That provision was a disqualification from future political rights. But the colour bar which has been instituted in the Transvaal is far more serious, for it amounts to a deprivation of rights which have always existed—not a deprivation of political rights but a deprivation of social rights, of the ordinary rights of the subjects of His Majesty. It is a law declaring all Indians—never mind what their status or their education—unfit even to enter the Colony, because it classes them with prohibited I immigrants and places them in an inferior position to the people of any other non-Asiatic nation.
We are told that a compromise has been offered. The Indians are offered as a compromise residential permits for a few Indians annually, and they are considered unreasonable because they will not barter the honour of their race for this slight concession to the material comfort of their community. I cannot for the life of me understand the position of those who say that the Indians ought to accept this compromise, as people call it. My Lords, will you not allow Indians to have a sense of honour? Will you not admit that they can feel, that they have a right to feel, in these matters just as we should feel ourselves? Have they not proved it? Those of your Lordships who have followed the story of passive resistance in the Transvaal cannot possibly have any doubt on that subject. The Indians domiciled in the Transvaal—that is to say, who have a right to be there according to the present laws of the Colony—number some 13,000. At the present moment I am informed that there are only 5,000 in the Colony. That means that 8,000 Indians who have been unable to stand this persecution have been driven away from the country in which they have a right to live. Over 2,500 Indians have passed through the gaols of the Transvaal, and of that number all but 150 have been imprisoned with hard labour. Many hundreds of families have been utterly ruined, and the whole tale of self-sacrifice and suffering is one of the most remarkable and extraordinary you can find. About sixty Indians have been deported to India and landed there penniless and friendless, for India is not their home—they belong to the Transvaal.
A few days ago the Prime Minister, speaking at the Guildhall, used memorable words of which I beg leave to remind your Lordships, for they bear very closely on that which I have been saying. The Prime Minister said—
"If we do not forget, as we cannot and as we ought not to do, that besides Briton and Boer South Africa contains a vast population of the coloured subjects of the King, we may, I believe, feel the strongest confidence that the same width of outlook, the same liberality of temper which has made possible the Union, will be exercised as widely and as promptly as policy and prudence may allow in extending to its broadest possible limits both the rights and privileges of citizenship."
Well, my Lords, if that is not merely an empty phrase, it means that His Majesty's Government have at heart the cause of the
594
British Indians, and that they have felt bound to do something to promote it. What have His Majesty's Government done or been doing to repair the grave mistakes of the past—the mistakes which gave sanction to this unfortunate legislation? There have been communications; there have been communications with the delegates in this country and there must have been communications with the Government of the Colony. I hope that the noble Earl will see his way to lay those Papers on the Table of the House. I am aware—painfully aware—that this cause has suffered from the advocacy of a person so insignificant and uninfluential as myself, but there was nobody else to take it up. The cause, however, is worthy of the advocacy of the foremost in the land. It is a cause which has been advocated by the foremost in the land, by the leaders of both Parties, and I fail to understand why they are not still advocating it. Will none of your Lordships take up the question—take it out of my feeble hands—and press it as you would press any question which concerns the plighted words of our Statesmen, the honour of our race, and the contentment of the people of India. I beg to move.
Moved, That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty for Papers relating to the negotiations in regard to the question of British Indians in the Transvaal.—(Lord Ampthill.)
THE LORD PEIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOB THE COLONIES (THE EARL OF CREWE): My Lords, I feel sure that the House will agree that in what the noble Lord said about his presentation of the subject he has been unduly modest. The case as he has more than once brought it before the House could not, I think, have been argued with greater ability, if he will allow me to say so, or with more reason or moderation, and although the points involved are somewhat difficult and technical, I think the noble Lord has on previous occasions succeeded in making them clear to the House at large.
Like the noble Lord, I will not attempt to travel over the earlier history of this difficult subject. It is quite true, as he said, that the visit of so many South African Statesmen here in connection with the Union Bill afforded, in our opinion,

595
a favourable occasion for an attempt to arrive at some solution of the difficulty which would be satisfactory to the Indian population of the Transvaal, acceptable to the Colonial Government, and reasonable in the view of public opinion here. If, as I fear, we have not been altogether successful in arriving at such a solution, I can assure the noble Lord and the House that it has not been for want of efforts on my part—on the part of His Majesty's Government; and I do not think any failure there has been is in any way due to the manner in which the spokesmen for the Indians have put their case, because they put it with skill and with fairness; neither has it been due to a want of a true and deep-seated desire on the part of the Transvaal Ministers to settle the question if they could.
The two points to which our attention was originally directed as constituting the principal grievance, partly theoretical and partly practical, of the Indians in the Transvaal were these. The first was a desire that Act No. 2 of 1907—what is known as the Voluntary Registration Act—should be repealed. It was considered that the continued existence of that Act on the Statute Book of the Transvaal constituted a slight to the Indian population, and its repeal was demanded. In the second place, we were told that if the Indian community in the Transvaal was to continue and prosper it was necessary that from time to time certain professional persons, either priests or doctors or the like, should be able to have free access to the country, because it was evident that if by lapse of time those who belonged to those professions in the country died or left the Transvaal, the community might be left without those adjuncts to its general civilisation, which would make it impossible for it to continue. In the conversations which I had with the Transvaal Ministers those two points were principally borne in mind, and the outcome of our conversations was that they expressed themselves willing, if an opportunity offered, to repeal Act No. 2 of 1907, which had really fallen into disuetude because its place had been taken by an Act of last year, called the Asiatics Registration (Amendment) Act. I pointed out, on the second matter, that it would not be fair to admit these professional persons from India merely under a temporary permit but that if admitted in limited number—
596
and it was considered that the number of six in each year would meet the case—they ought to be admitted as residents in the country with the power of settling there permanently. On that point, too, the Transvaal Ministers expressed them selves willing to attempt to meet the wishes of the Indians. Therefore, so far as the practical difficulty was concerned and the practical disabilities under which the Indian population laboured, it seemed as if there was a good prospect of those being removed.
But there remained the theoretical grievance, of which the noble Lord has spoken. That grievance consists in the I fact that in the Transvaal, unlike other parts of the Empire, Asiatics are explicitly excluded from the Colony instead of being subjected to the treatment they receive in some other Colonies—that is to say, of being admissible in theory, but being kept out in fact by being subjected to impossible tests. What happens is that in some other parts of the Empire the admission is, to use the words of the noble Lord, limited in practice. It is not only limited in practice; it is made altogether impossible. An education test is supplied for admission, and a task is set to an Asiatic, although not to an European, which is obviously an impossible one for him to carry out. He is asked, for instance, to translate some scientific work full of technical terms into modern Greek or Roumanian. It is impossible for him to fulfil that obligation, and therefore he is not admitted.
And so the question, it seems to me, really comes to this. Is it a greater slight to a race to be told frankly that the members of that race will not be admitted except under certain provisions and limitations, or that they should be told that they are on a theoretical equality with European subjects of His Majesty, but that so far as individuals are concerned they will invariably be kept out? That is a difficult question. I think it might fairly be argued that you do not really save the dignity of a race by, if I may use the phrase, making a fool of the individual in the manner which I have described. On the other hand, it cannot be disputed that the Indians, as represented by their spokesman, Mr. Gandhi, and Mr. Hajee Habib, who accompanied him, one representing the Hindu and the other the Mahomedan population in South Africa, undoubtedly

597
take the view that if theoretical equality be admitted any administrative steps may be taken, even those of the most fanciful kind I have alluded to, for the exclusion of Asiatics; consequently the proposition to which they were prepared to accede, although I think with some unwillingness, was this—that an education test should be devised for all immigrants into the Transvaal, both whites and Asiatics, but that power should be given to the Executive to refuse to admit even those who passed that test. That, it was considered, would safeguard the theoretical position of the Indian. The Transvaal Ministers took exception to that proposition. They took exception to it, first, on the ground that it was a mere device, that it did not represent any practical state of things; and, in the second place, on the ground that once theoretical equality was granted they would be subjected to a continual pressure to increase the amount of practical equality, and that there would be a continual demand for the admission of a greater number. They wished to be safeguarded by statutory obligation or by statutory power to admit a certain fixed number, but they thought that if this complete equality in theory was given the number to be admitted would be subjected to a continual possible increase.
I think we should all of us be glad if it were possible that all the subjects of His Majesty all over the world bad equal access to the whole of His Majesty's Dominions; but I am sure that anybody who has even a slight acquaintance with the opinions of those who inhabit our various great over-seas Dominions know that this is an ideal which if it ever is to be attained will only be attained at a very distant date. I do not see myself any signs of a softening of opinion in that direction. I do not know that I should be overstating the case if I said I saw some signs of hardening in the opposite direction. We may all regret that, but we all know that we cannot force on the self-governing Dominions a policy of this kind to which they are so strongly opposed. We know, too, that with them it is not merely a question of prejudice. The matter has its very practical side from the point of view of labour questions, sanitary questions, and other important departments of social life. As I say, I did my best to assist—I could do no more than assist—at arriving
598
at some solution. The Transvaal Government expressed themselves in general terms willing to bring forward some such legislation as I have mentioned if opportunity offered—that is to say, if their Parliament ever met again for business before the formation of the Union. I am not certain that their Parliament will meet for business, and, therefore, their intention must be taken as being subject to that possibility.
There is also this side to the matter. When the Union Parliament is formed questions affecting Asiatics come under the Union, and there may be something to be said, both from the point of view of white South Africa and of the Indians, for postponing any further legislative action until the Union Parliament has been formed. We hope that the Union Parliament will be disposed to take a broad view of this question, subject to the strongly held opinions which I have mentioned. What may be the precise views of the representatives of India on this point I am not aware—whether they would prefer that those practical steps which the Transvaal Government were disposed to view favourably should be taken before Union, or whether they would prefer to wait until the Union Parliament had come into being. The fact that the grievance which would remain even after such legislation is a theoretical grievance is one which in a sense adds to the gravity of the situation. I am very far indeed from saying that this question of theoretical equality ought to be ignored; and I am disposed to think that within the limits which are possible it is one which those who are responsible for the different Dominion Governments ought to bear in mind. I think I have nothing further to add in the way of giving direct information to the noble Lord. But he has asked for Papers. He will see, of course, that I cannot engage to publish any more Papers on the subject without the concurrence of the South African Government, but I have no reason to suppose that they would object to such written communications as have passed between us being made public, and I will inquire with a view to seeing if it is not possible to publish at any rate some part of the correspondence at an early date.
LORD AMPTHILL: My Lords, I am not going to take up time as I know that the noble Earl is called away by other duties, but I should like to say that I am

599
greatly obliged to him for the trouble he has taken in making this reply to my Questions. The noble Earl said he was not sure what the attitude of the representatives of India would be on this question of theoretical equality, which he was rather disposed to make light of.
THE EARL OF CREWE: I think the noble Lord misapprehended me. What I said was that I was not certain as to whether, assuming it to be possible, the Indian representatives would prefer that the practical steps which I indicated should be taken, or whether, if the theoretical grievance could not be removed, they were indifferent as to those steps being taken.
LORD AMPTHILL: I will put it this way. If your Lordships were in the position of the Indians and were told, "You cannot come in here because you are prohibited immigrants—that is to say, you belong to the same category as people who are flying from justice in their own country and people who are verminous and infected with disease," or if it were said to you, "You cannot come into this Colony because we are engaged in our work of development and have no room for you here." I do not think there can be any doubt as to which you would prefer. The theoretical grievance could be removed by a stroke of the pen without the Colonial Government giving away an ounce of anything material that they value. I cannot resist the conclusion that it is only false pride and fierce prejudice which stand in the way.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

POLITICAL PRISONERS AND THEIR FASTS.
LORD LAMINGTON: My Lords, I rise to ask the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether, if he has not already done so, he will make a representation to the Government of the Transvaal on the hardship inflicted on Mahomedan political prisoners by the prison authorities making no concession during the Fast of Ramadhân in respect of their meals.
This deals with only one small feature of the larger question so ably presented to your Lordships by my noble friend on my right, but it is important as it affects the religious scruples of our Mahomedan fellow-
600
subjects in India. As your Lordships are aware, the Fast of Ramadhân is a very important and stringent Fast and must be observed. No food or drop of water must pass the lips of a Mahomedan from sunrise to sundown, the only exemptions being cases of sickness or when a man is travelling. What Mahomedan political prisoners complain of is that the prison authorities make no concession to them during the Fast of Ramadhân in respect of their meals. No food is allowed to be given to them at special times which would enable them the better to stand the rigours of the Fast. They ask, if food cannot be so supplied by the prison authorities, whether their friends can be allowed to bring it in to them. I think it is very hard that there should not be greater humanity displayed towards those who are strictly political prisoners. The noble Earl the Secretary of State for the Colonies, in answering my noble friend, said, as I am sure is the case, that his sympathies are with our Indian fellow-subjects generally, and he added that what we should like to see is very difficult of attainment, and that there is rather a hardening than any weakening of the attitude of Colonial authorities against the other subject races of the Empire. But I think there is also, on the other side, a gathering force of opinion, particularly in India, in this matter which ought to be recognised, and recognised particularly by those who, after all, are the trustees of their interests. These people have no Government of their own to which to make representations; they must trust the Imperial authorities. The feeling to which I refer is crystallising, and wherever you look in the East you see indications that races which have hitherto been subject races mean in future to make themselves more felt, and, therefore, I think it is more necessary that in cases like this something should be done to meet grievances. The number of Mahomedans affected is no doubt very small. But it is a matter that affects their religious scruples and consciences, and one which should be given attention to, and I shall be glad if the noble Earl can say he has done or will do something in the matter.
THE EARL OF CROMER: My Lords, what with Suffragettes in this country who will not eat at all and Mahomedans who will only eat at certain hours, it is pretty clear that the question of feeding prisoners is a rather difficult one. I am

601
not familiar with the details of this question, and I cannot state offhand what was the practice in Egypt where there were a few political prisoners; but I should like to testify to the extraordinary importance that Mahomedans generally attach to this matter. The Fast of Ramadhân is, perhaps, one of the most important features of the Mahomedan religion, and I cannot help thinking that the refusal of this concession would not only affect the prisoners themselves, but would be calculated to have a bad influence on the opinions of Mahomedans generally. I therefore hope the noble Earl will be able to communicate with the Transvaal authorities and that they will make this concession. It can only be a question of prison arrangements and of providing food at special hours; and I think it is a concession which, considering the interests involved, might reasonably be made.
THE EARL OF CREWE: My Lords, the matter is one to which I think your Lordships' attention may very reasonably be drawn, and the noble Lord opposite has, if I may say so, stated the case quite fairly. As soon as we heard that this question had been raised we communicated with the Transvaal Government. Indeed I sent two separate communications on the subject. They were under the impression that in India the prison arrangements were not made to facilitate the keeping of the Fast of Ramadhân. I understand, however, that that is not altogether the case, and that in some parts of India—
THE EARL OF CROMER: May I ask whether that is in the case of political prisoners or ordinary prisoners in India.
THE EARL OF CREWE: I do not know how that may be. I do not know that a distinction is drawn in the Transvaal between political prisoners or other prisoners any more than it is in the case of certain prisoners in this country. But, so far as I can gather, in India the practice is not
602
absolutely uniform. I confess that, speaking entirely for myself, I should be very glad if this concession could have been made, because the idea is disagreeable to everybody of adding to the punishment of any person an extra penalty, more particularly if that penalty is connected with the observance of his religion. But the difficulty, I understand, which the Transvaal Government have in agreeing to this is that in the Cape Colony, where, of course, there are many more Mahomedans than in the Transvaal, it has never been the practice to make arrangements for the observance of Ramadhân in prisons, and they find it difficult to differentiate their practice from that of their neighbours. I understand that, so far as the religious duty is concerned, by the ordnances of Islam those who are in prison or are prevented by any such means from keeping Ramadhân can keep it another time; but, however that may be, it is certain that the practice is not invariable through-out the Empire for the maintenance of its observance. That is all the information I can give.
LORD LAMINGTON: The noble Earl is incorrect in saying that exemptions, other than in the case of sickness or travelling, are allowed. I have that on the authority of one of the heads of the Mahomedan religion. He also implied that no difference was made in this country in the case of prisoners being political or not, but surely political prisoners have been treated differently till they have broken the common law. Therefore the case to which I have called attention is one of extreme hardship, and I trust that some good may result from the raising of the question.
THE EARL OF CREWE: I am afraid the question has ceased to be a practical one for the moment, because the month of Ramadhân is, I believe, now over.
House adjourned at half-past Five o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter-past Four o'clock.