PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TILITIC.O.
דו
882
54
the labouring class much beyond their former range, is a serious obstacle to the engagement of efficient emigrants.
4. In despatch No. 59 Sir A. Gordon transmits Mr. Beyts' explanation of the discontinuance of his visits to estates. Mr. Beyta says that the regulations under Ordinance 16 of 1802, which required him to make such visits, having been repealed by regulations made by the Governor in Council under Ordinance No. 81 of 1867, he considered that he was relieved of the duty, especially as in the meantime medical inspectors charged with the duty of visiting the states every quarter had been appointed. The repeal of the regulations under the Ordinance of 1862, though it might relieve the Protector from the necessity of visiting estates at fixed intervals, did not, as it appears to us, remove the moral obligation attached to his office of personally ascertaining the condition of immigrants on estates. Bir A. Gordon excuses Mr. Beyts on the ground of the extraneous duties imposed on him from time to time by the Government, which he enumerated. It is clear that the Protector's time and attention. ought not to be diverted from his special and important duties by the imposition on him of other duties such as the Governor mentions. As, however, the constitution of the Protector's office has been referred to the Commission of Inquiry it is unnecessary
pursue the subject further at present.
to
5. Despatch No. 69 incloses the Report of Mr. Ellis, the Substitute Procureur. General, on the proceedings before the Stipendiary Magistrate, and afterwards before s Petty Sessions of the District of Pamplemousses, on the complaint of sixty-seven immigrants against their employer Mr. Poulin. That portion of this case which was conducted before the Stipendiary Magistrate commenced on 11th May, and was protracted by the manner in which the Magistrate allowed the defendant to conduct it to the 20th September, upwards of four months, when judgment was given on the complaint of only five of the complainants. A Court of Petty Sessions was then appointed to inquire into the complaint, which commenced its sittings on 10th October, and gave its judgment on 29th November. The Governor has been directed to bring the papers under the notice of the Commission of Inquiry; but without anticipating their opinion it is impossible not to feel that the case as it stands is very unsatisfactory from the evident disposition of the Stipendiary Magistrate to favour the defendant an much as he could, and from the apparent power of an employer to protract proceedings in a case of this description so as to wear out the means and patience of complainants, and eventually to defest justice. Mr. Ellis states that, "had it not been for the interference of the Protector of Immigrants, who provided for the complainants at the depôt, it is morally certain that the Indians, compelled to return day by day to their master's estate, would have been induced or coerced to withdraw their complaint long before it was 'allowed by the defendant to ripen for judgment."
In his Confidential despatch of 9th February, Sir A. Gordon gives his opinion of Mr. Beyts' character and fitness for the office of Protector of Immigrants. Lord Kimberley will, I presume, postpone the 'consideration of that question till he receives the Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry.
The other papers inclosed in your letter, which consist of a correspondence with the India Office, and a despatch from Sir. A. Gordon, inclosing copies of the Immigration Laws and Regulations of Mauritius, call for no remark.
I have, &c.
(Signed) T. W. O. MURDOCH.
55
They also consider that the questions put should only be in one fixed form printed and published beforehand, which is hardly in accordance with ordinary views of an Inspection.
3. I also inclose a few extracts from one of the local newspapers on the subject.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
Inclosure 1 in No. 18.
Betract from the “Cernden,"
ARTHUR GORDON.
M. Hart.-JE dois appeler l'attention de la Chambre sur une question qui me semble sérieuse. Je tiens de plusieurs planteurs que M. Beyts, dans ses tournées, s'adresse directement, pour les renseignements qu'il veut obtenir, aux employée des propriétés, en l'absence des propriétaires ou des administrateurs. Je n'ai, en principe, aucune objection à répondre à des questions ayant un caractère général, qui micront êté approuvées par le Gouverneur et qui auront été publiées sous forme de circulaires; mais je dois objecter à des questions posées d'une manière irrégulière, surtout lors- qu'elles sont adressées à des employés peu intelligents qui parvent y répondre d'ane manière peu exacte. Notre devoir serait d'en référer au Gouvernement afin d'obtenir que les choses se passent d'une manière régulière. Je demanderait, en conséquence, que M. le Président soit prié de se mettre en rapport avec M. Beyta afin d'obtenir de lui des explications sur les circonstances que je viens de mentionner.
M. D'Arifat.--J'appuie cette proposition.
Le Président.-Ne sachant que d'ame manière très vague les circonstances aux- quelles M. Hart fait allusion, il m'est bien difficile d'exprimer une opinion sur es proposition. Cependant, je ne pense pas devoir me refuser de me mettre, à la requête de la Chambre, en communication avec M. Beyts. S'il aroit pouvoir me donner des explications qui soient de nature à satisfaire à l'objet de la demande, je les commu- niquerai à la Chambre. Je sais pouvoir compter, dans tous les cas, sur une réception courtoise de sa part quand même ma démarche lui paraitrait non motivée.
Il ne faut pas oublier que la loi autorise M. Beyts à faire certaines questions, et que les planteurs doivent s'empresser d'y satisfaire. Si des questions sont adressées à des employés subalternes, il y aumit beaucoup à dire là-dessin, et dans tous les cas un tel mode de procéder ne devrait et ne pourrait avoir aucun poids officiel. Cela no pourrait être considéré que comme de simples conversations mana objet sérieux. 8i des questions inutiles ou dictées par l'animosité étaient posées aux propriétaires ou aux administrateurs-en-chef, ce serait à ceux-ci à en apprécier la légalité et l'opportunité.
M. Hart.- est essentiel que des questions concernant des sujets aussi importanta soient l'objet de circulaires publiées avec l'approbation du Gouverneur. Je ne suspecte en aucune façon les intentions de l'administration, mais les choses doivent être faites d'une manière régulière. Les questions qui peuvent être adressées aux planteurs doivent l'être sur des points indiqués par les lais et d'après des formes approuvées par le Gouverneur.
La proposition de M. Hart est mise aux voix et adoptée. La séance est levée.
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
2 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
April 8.)
Governor the Hon. Sir A. H. Gordon, K.C.M.G., to the Barl'of'Kimberley.~(Received
(No. 88. Miscellaneous.) My Lord,
Mauritius, March 6, 1872.
THE complete abandonment of all serious inspection of sugar estates in this Colony could hardly be more fully shown than by the extract which I fnolose from a recent local newspaper, giving an account of the proceedings of the Chamber of Agriculture at its last meeting.
2. Since the resumption of inspections by Mr. Beyts, he has visited about thirty catates. Where he found the proprietor absent he has questioned his chief representa- tive on the spot. This appears to have given offence to the Chamber of Agriculture, who, it seems, consider that, when inspecting, the Protector should question the proprietor or resident maninger only, and, in their absence, desist from inspection.
Inclosure 2 in No. 18.
Betract from the “Commercial Gazette."
AT the meeting of the Chamber of Agriculture yesterday, one of its members brought under notice a fact which demands serious attention. Mr. Hart informed the Chamber that the Protector of Immigrants, when investigating the state and condition of immigrants on sugar estates, kad, in the absence of proprietors or managers, inter rogated subordinate employés. There is nothing in any of the Ordinances regulating the inspection of immigrants any provision giving this power to Mr. Beyts, and we are at a low to understand how he could have ventured to commit himself to so gross an irregularity. Proprietors of estates, we sincerely believe, have absolutely nothing to 'conceal with respect to the treatment of their labourers, but if it were otherwise we must condemn any departure from the provisions of our laws, when results that are
No. 18.