PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
لاس
Reference :-
C.O. 882
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
4PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
78
questions, without strong and substantial reasons, still they are left their own judges with regard to the validity of those reasons.
The same honourable gentleman speaks of a distinguished member of council who was made to understand that he was at liberty to withdraw his services, if he con- sidered his position did not tally with his independence.
What may have happened once is not customary. Things of that kind may happen under a despotic governor, but it must be borne in mind that the suspension of any one holding a mandate from the Crown is not so easy, and that unofficial members of the Legislature are nominees of the Crown. In the 45th paragraph of the Royal Instructions of the 20th of July 1831, it is distinctly stated that before any suspension the party holding a nomination from the Crown must be warned in writing of the Governor's intention to suspend him from his duties, and of the reasons for such suspension, that he has the right to disculpate himself, and in the same paragraph it will be seen that the Governor is bound to send to the Secretary of State a copy of what he has written to the party in disgrace, and the answer thereto.
It is true that to be made to understand that Government can do without one's services is very unpleasant, but between that, and the dismissal of a member, there is a great difference. No dismissal of a member of the Legislative Council ever took place, unless my memory fails me, and it is not likely ever to occur, and it cannot be denied that Government measures have often met with the strongest opposition on the part of the unofficials, without any interference on the part of the Governor. As regards the dismissal of the two Seychelles members, the Hon. Cox has with much reason answered in his speech at the Council, that it is no proof that the unofficials are not and cannot be independent.
But let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that pressure on the unofficials be expected to be used, and that they are likely to yield to such pressure. What is then the object of the reform partisans in asking for a semi-elective assembly, knowing beforehand that the elective members will have no authority whatsoever? think the solution of that problem is not a difficult one.... Once the elective mem- bers are admitted in Council, they will on the first opportunity ask for a new reform. and claim that the unofficials be allowed to vote in all questions as they think proper.
If the Home Government grants the reform petition, which has been started after a discussion in Council about the position of unofficials, will it be disposed to loose all its powers by granting further changes? .... or maintain a partially elective assembly without altering the position of the unofficials, and thereby introduce dissatisfaction into the Legislative Council, and consequently prevent its proper working.
That it is the intention of the reformists to ask further changes may be inferred from the following words used in the Report of the Sub-Committee, page 17 :-- "Sachons nous contenter de peu au début pour être sûrs de ne rencontrer plus tard
aucun désenchantement, ce peu nous pourrons l'agrandir sans secousse, "sommes sages."
"F
"
si nous
If the Home Government grants the reform petition, and be disposed to countenance further changes (such as those above alluded to), which soon after that concession will be strenuously asked for, I submit respectfully that the condition of Indians will be unbearable in Mauritius, on account of the hostile feelings existing between the Creoles and Indians; and in reading the Sub-Committee's report it will be seen that no guarantee whatsoever is given that the Creole members will be impartial towards the Indian population.
Sir Virgile Naz said at the Council: "If they (the Indians) could not return their own candidate, they could by voting for one of two or more candidates secure his return, and the importance of winning their votes would, irrespective of higher impulses and "considerations, induce the elected members to act fairly and impartially towards them." To obtain the votes of the Indian electors it is to be expected that their candidate will at least offer them certain securities as to the representation of their views, and admitting that there be such a candidate, will be ever be able to succeed?
having the majority of those opposed to Indians against him?
Mr. Raoul attributes our prosperity to our geographical situation, to our soil, to our free trade, and to our free and abundant supply of labour. True, these things have greatly contributed to our prosperity, our harbour also may have facilitated com- mercial transactions, but the principal cause of our prosperity is our abundant sup- ply of labourers from India; and can it be denied that, had our Government policy been otherwise than it has been, we might have found ourselves in the same predicament
79
as the inhabitants of Bourbon were, when the Indian Government refused to allow
engagement of Coolies for that island.
the
When we cast a glance at the state of our finances, we cannot but be satisfied at the prosperous condition in which they are, and the president of the reform petition acknowledges himself, that saving a few failings, the administration thereof has been prudent and honest, and has allowed us to steer through many a storm. failings are concerned, happy indeed is the government which can boast of none!
As far as But when the Honourable Raoul comes to that passage which refers to the manner in which Mauritians in general have been treated, I am bound to acknowledge that is too true that we have not always been treated as British subjects. The history of Mauritius bears out too clearly that fact, the same paths as English born, and I confess that in
As British subjects we are entitled to tread favouritism shown to English born subjects who had no titles whatsoever to pass over many circumstances the the heads of certain Mauritians, has under several governors, been the cause of great dissatisfaction; but I must also say that some Mauritians, amongst whom are certain leaders of the reform, have not little contributed to that state of things, when they petitioned against a Creole judge of the Supreme Court, against one of those who honoured most the bench by his love for justice and bis great learning.
However! returning to what the Honourable Raoul has said about our not having the best and highest situation in this island, I shall say that the past is very sad indeed, and that it is the hope of all sensible men in Mauritius that the claims of Creoles as well as those of English men will be taken in fair consideration, and that the most deserving be the most successful; but I must confess that his speech on that point does not prove in any way that a partially elective assembly could change the state of things he complains of, inasmuch as all important final appointments are made in England, and the inferior ones by the Governor in person.
To Mr. Raoul's last argument, when he compares our Coolies to country labourers and workmen of England, I shall again use his own words to answer that argument. Coolies are starving men introduced from India and raised to the dignity of citizens "after the completion of their industrial residence," with religions, customs, &c., different to ours; while English workmen and labourers are the free children of England, forming one race with the representatives of that nation, and though they may have entered into contracts to work so many years for a person, they are not the less considered as citizens before the completion of the said contracts.
The Honourable Cox, after refuting many of Sir Virgile Naz's arguments, proposes a system which certainly is far preferable to the one proposed in the reform petition, for it offers a certain amount of security to all classes of this island; but will the Home Government grant such a reform which can be but protested against by the alleged majority of the influential and educated persons of this Island? On the other hand, if it has not been satisfactorily proved to your Lordship that the majority of the influential and educated persons of this Colony are partisans of the adoption of repre- sentative institutions, will your Lordship recommend to Her Majesty a constitution unasked for, and whose working may not be as profitable as the working of a council composed of a majority of unofficials.
With regard to the opinion of the Honourable Mr. Beyts, that there would be no danger to adopt the views of the reform committee, if the Governor be authorised to dissolve the council whenever too strong opposition shall be made against government I beg to say that if such authority was to be given to our governors, it would be a most dangerous power in the hands of a despotic one, and to avoid one evil we would fall into a worse one.
measures.
The Honourables Beyts, Raoul, and Sir V. Naz ask why we should not be allowed a semi-elective assembly, when the other colonies are allowed to have representative in- stitutions ? I shall answer that I am not sufficiently in presence of the history of all the colonies they speak about, and that I doubt very much whether the different classes of those colonies are in a situation as antagonistic, as ours towards the Indian popula- tion, that I doubt very much whether any of those colonies have been favoured with a Royal Commission to inquire about the treatment of their labourers, and, besides, until it be proved in a satisfactory manner (better than has been done), that repre- sentative institutions have given more beneficial results to those colonies than our cou- stitution has given us, I think it would be dangerous to expose us to animosities of parties, without at least some safe guarantees that all the classes of the population will derive some benefit from the change proposed.
Claiming your Lordship's 'indulgence, I shall beg leave to say one thing more before concluding, it is about the votes obtained at the Legislative Council in favour of the L 3