PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
19
Reference :-
TTIC.O. 882
سلسسلسلا
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
2
100
No. 47.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR H. T. HOLLAND, BART., G.C.M.G., M.P., to ADMINISTRATOR
SIB,
(No. 6.)
MAJOR-GENERAL W. H. HAWLEY.
Downing Street, January 27, 1887.
I AM advised that it is somewhat doubtful whether the Colonial Government empowered by Ordinance No. 5 of 1873 to issue to Sir J. Pope Hennessy any salary subsequent to the date of the suspension of his commission.
I despatched a telegram to you on the 22nd instant,* viâ Aden, instructing you to submit to the Council of Government a vote for the purpose of granting to Sir J. Pope Hennessy the half-salary of Governor from the date of his suspension, and until a final decision shall be taken upon his case, and informing you that this vote should be considered to be a Government measure, and be supported by the official members of Council.
This vote will not, of course entail any additional cost to the Colony, as you will only be drawing the half-salary of Governor while temporarily administering the Government.
I have, &c.
SrR,
The Officer Administering the Government.
No. 48.
(Signed)
H. T. HOLLAND.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR HERCULES ROBINSON, G.C.M.G., to THE RIGHT HON. EDWARD stanhope, M.P. (Received February 7, 1887.)
Government House, Cape Town, January 7, 1887.
In pursuance of the authority vested in me by the Queen's Commission, appointing me to be Her Majesty's Commissioner to inquire into the affairs of the Colony of Mauritius, and in obedience to the instructions contained in your despatch of the 29th September last,† I visited Mauritius, and have now the honour to submit the following Report.
2. I left Simon's Bay in Her Majesty's Ship "Raleigh and reached Port Louis on the 3rd November.
"
on the 23rd October 1886,
I landed on the following day, and lost no time in making the necessary arrangements for commencing the inquiry with which I was charged.
3. A special meeting of the Council of Government was summoned for the 10th November, and on that day the Council passed through all its stages an Ordinance‡ empowering me, as Royal Commissioner, to summon witnesses and administer an oath to them. The Ordinance enacted also penalties for non-attendance in obedience to a summons, and for wilfully giving false evidence.
4. At a subsequent meeting of the Legislative Council a vote was passed for the total estimated expenses of the Royal Commission. The vote was agreed to unanimously, and without discussion.
5. On the 10th November, the same day as the passing of the Ordinance, the Royal Commission sat for the first time and took evidence. The Commission sat altogether on 22 days, and examined 80 different witnesses, as will be seen by the accompanying list.§ The last sitting took place on the 16th December. The 80 witnesses examined classed as 36 for the Governor, 36 against him, and 8 as neutral, as will appear from a
may
be further list which I enclose.§
6. The conclusions at which I have arrived, after hearing the evidence, and perusing the voluminous original correspondence which accompanied your despatch of the 29th September,† will be most conveniently stated by my dealing with the subjects referred to me in the order indicated in your despatch, wherein they were classified under the nine nine following heads :—
• No. 46.
† No. 24.
Ordinance No. 7 of 1886 (Enclosure 2 in No. 35).
Not printed.
101
1. Mr. Clifford Lloyd's Case.
7. Mr. Clifford Lloyd not having returned to Mauritius, he has been unable to give evidence personally, on oath, before the Royal Commission as to his complaints against the Governor. The case has been incidentally referred to in the evidence given by Sir Virgile Naz and Mr. Geffroy, on one side, and by Mr. Escott and General Hawley, on the other. But I have had to deal with this branch of the inquiry mainly upon the original correspondence relating to the subject, which has been placed in my hands by you, to which has been added a minute by Sir John Pope Hennessy upon Mr. Clifford Lloyd's letters of the 6th and 16th October last, which having been written in London, the Governor had not before seen.
8. The impressions left on my mind, after a perusal of these papers, and after considering the information which I have received here as to this case, are as follows:-
9. Sir John Pope Hennessy appears to have received Mr. Clifford Lloyd, on his first arrival in the Colony in February last, in a cordial and even friendly manner, and to have shown a desire to work amicably with him. He recommended an increase of his salary. He allowed him to introduce, provisionally, changes in the organization of his office, which he evidently thought were recommended after too slight an acquaintance with the system up to that time in force. And he replied to an unreasonable remon- strance, as to a matter of prerogative, made by Mr. Clifford Lloyd within three weeks of his arrival, in a courteous and forbearing spirit.
10. Mr. Clifford Lloyd, on the other hand, appears to have been from the first discontented with his position. He had expected Sir John Pope Hennessy to go on leave, and that he himself was to become at once Lieutenant-Governor. Within a few weeks of his arrival, his action seems to have been strangely in unison with that adopted by those in opposition to Sir John Pope Hennessy; for, when Messrs. Beaugeard and de Coriolis, with an undue assumption of authority, protested against certain educational appointments, determined on before Mr. Clifford Lloyd's arrival, Mr. Clifford Lloyd simultaneously complained, I think without reason, that those appointments had been made without his views having been ascertained. The terms in which the address in reply to the Governor's opening speech was originally framed, the five questions addressed by Mr. Clifford Lloyd to the Governor in the Legislative Council, on the 18th May, his official complaint as to pressure having been applied to obtain signatures to the laudatory memorial to the Governor, at the same time that a similar complaint was sent to the Secretary of State by Mr. de Coriolis, the junior member for Port Louis, and a conversation with Sir Virgile Naz, which has been given in evidence by that gentleman, all serve to strengthen the conclusion I have arrived at, that from a very early period after Mr. Clifford Lloyd's arrival in Mauritius he was in sympathy with those who were in opposition to the Governor.
11. Sir John Pope Hennessy was no doubt kept fully informed by those around him, of the sayings and doings of the Lieutenant-Governor, and the cordiality with which he had at first greeted Mr. Clifford Lloyd was soon succeeded by feelings of suspicion and distrust. He withdrew the authority which he had given to him to change the procedure in the Colonial Secretary's Office. He desired the old system to be reverted He abstained from transacting business with him personally. He took steps to prevent the despatches to the Secretary of State being seen by him. He sent him constantly bickering fault-finding minutes as to petty details in the working of his Department, which must have been embarrassing and aggravating; and he is stated, besides, by Mr. Clifford Lloyd, to have been rude and insulting to him in his manner, when they met officially on public occasions; a statement confirmed, as regards one occasion, by General Hawley.
to.
12. In short, an appearance of disloyalty on one side begat feelings of distrust and enmity on the other. After reading the despatches, letters, and telegrams addressed hy these two officers to the Secretary of State, from the beginning of May last, it is difficult to resist the conviction that, from about that time each of these officers had made up his mind to leave no stone unturned to get rid of the other.
1
13. Sir John Pope Hennessy, however, appears to have pursued this object with greater skill and dexterity than Mr. Clifford Lloyd. His bearing may have been offen sive, and his action irritating, but he seems in his instructions to have been within his rights, and his correspondence with the Secretary of State is couched throughout in terms of moderation and propriety.
• December 3, 1886 (Enclosure 4). Not printed. N 8
Page 90Page 91
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :-
TTIC.O. 882
سلئساسا
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
102
14. Mr. Clifford Lloyd, on the other hand, has permitted himself, in his official communications, to write in a tone of excitement and exaggeration, which is not con- ducive to the proper transaction of public business. Having had no previous Colonial experience, he had apparently no correct appreciation of the relative positions of the Governor and the Colonial Secretary in a Crown Colony; and when the relations with his superior officer became strained, he abstained from regular attendance at the meetings of the Executive and Legislative Councils, as well as at his office, and sent letters direct to the Secretary of State, which he did not allow the Governor a fair opportunity of commenting on by the same mail, although they contained grave charges against his character and proceedings.
15. Thus, in his letter to the Secretary of State of the 5th June he states that a despatch of Sir John Pope Hennessy to the Secretary of State contains " "and very serious misrepresentations." In a subsequent letter of the 29th July he quotes very deliberate the above words, and says they "inadequately express the vindictiveness and gravity of the misstatements." Further on he adds that they are "misstatements of a deliberate and malicious nature."
16. Again, in his printed letter to the Secretary of State upon Mr. Cockburn Stewart's case, dated the 26th August 1886, he states: "In this as in other matters, his Excellency "has deliberately misrepresented facts to the Secretary of State."
17. Besides making these charges in letters, Mr. Clifford Lloyd sent a telegram* direct to the Secretary of State in the following words :-
Governor's long-continued attacks upon me productive of scandal. Government cannot be administered. Generally believed that he is suffering from mental derange- ment. Imperative to act at once, interest of Colony and public service, by telegraph."
18. Mr. Clifford Lloyd bas, in his letter of the 9th October last, in my opinion, failed to substantiate the very grave accusations of "deliberate misrepresentation" with which he has repeatedly charged his official superior; nor has he, as far as I am aware, ever furnished any justification, or even explanation, of the serious step taken by him in addressing such a telegram as that of the 4th June to the Secretary of State, without having ever, either before or since, made any communication to the Governor on the subject. Unless this telegram can be satisfactorily explained, it seems to me that Mr. Clifford Lloyd's conduct with regard to it must be held to have been very reprehensible.
19. After a careful perusal of the whole of the voluminous correspondence upon this unseemly quarrel between two high officials, and after considering the statements which have been given in evidence before the Royal Commission on the same subject, the general conclusion to which I am led is that there have been grave faults on both sides. The Governor, as soon as his suspicions were aroused, appears to have so far forgotten his position as to have become irritating, and even insulting, both in his action and demeanour, as well as, in one instance, unjust in his censure. Mr. Clifford Lloyd, on the other hand, appears to have been somewhat over-sensitive and wanting in self- restraint. He recklessly advanced charges against his superior officer, in language of excessive warmth, rarely met with in official correspondence; and he does not appear to have made any genuine attempt, as it was his duty to do, to substantiate them. How much, or how little, he allied himself with the Governor's political enemies, it is impossible to say; there is evidence that he took simultaneous action with them, and there are indications that he acted in sympathy, if not in concert, with them on more than one occasion. On the whole, I think his conduct is fairly open to the imputation of having been disrespectful, insubordinate, and disloyal.
2. The alleged Interference of the Governor at the Elections, and Mr. Ferguson's Case. 20. The facts which have been established in evidence under this head of the inquiry are these:-
Mr. Beyts, the Acting Colonial Secretary, sought an interview with Mr. Ferguson, the manager of the Oriental Bank, and one of the candidates for Port Louis, on Saturday, the 9th January 1886, two days before the elections. At this interview Mr. Beyts informed Mr. Ferguson that the Governor would be glad to nominate him to an unofficial seat in the Legislative Council, but could not do so if he were a rejected candidate. Mr. Beyts, accordingly suggested that Mr. Ferguson should withdraw his candidature in favour of Messrs. Newton and Guibert, who were also standing for Port Louis. Mr. Ferguson replied that he must consult his committee, and, having done so,
• Undated, but sent from Durban, June 4, 1886.
f
108
wrote the same day to Mr. Beyts expressing his regret that he could not comply with his suggestion as to withdrawal.
Mr. Ferguson subsequently stood at the election of members for Port Louis, and was defeated, as were also Messrs. Newton and Guibert. The members elected were Dr. Beaugeard and Mr. de Coriolis, the Democratic candidates, who have since taken a leading part in opposition to the Governor.
21. So far there is no dispute as to the facts, but there is a disagreement between Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Beyts as to whether the latter stated the communication he made on the 9th January to Mr. Ferguson was made by direction of the Governor. Mr. Ferguson's statement is clear and consistent throughout. He alleges the interview was sought by Mr. Beyts, to make a communication which Mr. Beyts stated he had been desired to make to him by the Governor. In his note to Mr. Beyts of the same day he observes: "Referring to the conversation which we had this morning, in which you did me the honour to make a communication from his Excellency the Governor to the "effect that he would give me the assurance of a nomineeship in the new Council, if I, to-day, withdrew my candidature in favour of those of Messrs. Newton and Guibert, "and also that his Excellency feared he would be unable to appoint me to such office in the event of my being a rejected candidate at the elections, I regret to say that I "cannot meet his Excelleucy in this matter." Mr. Beyts, in his reply to Mr. Ferguson of the same date, did not deny the correctness of the version given by Mr. Ferguson of the conversation.
CE
C
22. Mr. Beyts now states that the Governor did not authorise him to make any promise to Mr. Ferguson, and that he acted on his own motion alone in communicating to Mr. Ferguson, not a message from the Governor, but the impressions he had himselt formed from his confidential communications with the Governor as to Sir John Pope Hennessy's views about the elections, and the appointment of Nominee Members. He explains his not denying at the time Mr. Ferguson's version of what passed at the interview of the 9th January by stating that, being very busy when he received Mr. Ferguson's note, he intended to correct his erroneous impression in conversation later on, and, in the meanwhile, thought the matter of no importauce, as he considered the conversation had been strictly confidential.
23. It appears that on the 9th January, when Mr. Beyta had his interview with Mr. Ferguson, and informed him that "the Governor would probably not be able to "nominate him if he maintained his candidature and failed," the Governor had, on the previous day, the 8th January, received Colonel Stanley's cypher telegram of the 22nd December 1885, instructing him to nominate five unofficial Members to the new Council, and to give preference in order of standing to the Members of the old Council (of whom Mr. Ferguson was one) who might not be elected. Mr. Beyts has stated that, although he saw the Governor on the morning of the 9th January, on the subject of the then approaching elections, before he had his interview with Mr. Ferguson, this telegram, which had been received by the Governor the previous day, was not mentioned to him, and that Mr. Ferguson's case was not on that occasion alluded to by the Governor.
24. Sir John Pope Hennessy has also stated, in support of Mr. Beyts' evidence, that the interview with Mr. Ferguson took place without his authority or knowledge. He adds that he did not know that such an interview had taken place until several months later, when notice of a question in reference to it was given in Council, and that he was not aware that any correspondence had passed between Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Beyts on the subject until he received copies of it in Mr. Ferguson's letter of the 18th August, which will be found among the papers.
25. The elections throughout the island commenced at Port Louis on the 11th January 1886, and closed in the country districts with the election at Grand Port on the 20th January. One the 23rd January, Sir John Pope Hennessy addressed a con- fidential despatch to the Secretary of State, urging reasons why Mr. Ferguson should not be appointed to a Nominee seat in the new Council, as directed by Colonel Stanley in his cypher telegram of the 22nd December 1885; and the Governor asked for a reply to his despatch by telegraph. Lord Granville, who had succeeded Colonel Stanley by the time this despatch arrived in London, evidently doubted the validity of the reasong given by Sir John Pope Hennessy, but thought it necessary to accept the Governor's recommendation, and Mr. Ferguson alone of all the old Members was not offered a seat in the new Council.
26, The reasons given by Sir John Pope Hennessy in his despatch of the 23rd January for not offering Mr. Ferguson a seat in the new Council were that he had been defeated
• See Mr. Beyts' note to Mr. Ferguson of January 9, 1886, page 64.