CO882-(3-4) — Page 564

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

4 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

40

The

Lord Stanley, then Secretary of State for the Colonies (Lord Stanley subsequently became Earl of Derby, and was the father of the present Earl of Derby). Minister received their petition coldly and represented, amongst other things, that in their country

"more than in almost any other possession of the British Crown, the "elements of which society is composed, are heterogenous, dissimilar, and separated

from each other by distinctions almost indelible."*

The reasoning based upon the diversity of races, is therefore not new. Though countenanced by the distinguished statesman who, even at that time, was already one of the most brilliant ornaments of the Conservative party in England, it did not prevent the Cape from obtaining and retaining elective institutions; used in this Colony forty years later, it has no greater force, its emptiness has been demonstrated, and, as applied to Mauritius, it is still more easily confuted since those very men who resort to it are the first to admit that the greatest harmony prevails among all classes of our population.

Nothing is easier than to solve the difficulty which we are now adverting to, provided we are resolved to be just and equitable, and provided we keep constantly in view this twofold truth, that, on the one hand, the right to vote does not necessarily belong to every British subject, and that, on the other, no man should be deprived of that right solely on account of his origin.

one.

It will presently be shown that, in the reform we propose, we seek to ostracize no Of the Asiatics resident here, many are held to be incapable by law, as for the remainder, if they possess the qualifications required to enjoy the privileges we wish to obtain, they will share in them.

We also call attention to the fact that our pretensions are much more modest than were those of the inhabitants of the Cape of Good Hope.

Lastly, some persons have exhorted us to reflect that it is better "to let well alone," and that the form of Government which we now possess ensures to us complete tran- quility and almost perfect felicity; that before substituting for it a constitution more liberal in appearance, we should be certain that we shall not be unloosening upon ourselves the evils which have overwhelmed and are still overwhelming nearly all the Colonies in which the political power is vested in elective institutions; others have reminded us that we should be all the more prudent, because the experiment of the municipality of Port Louis is not calculated to induce great confidence in the future prospects of free Government in Mauritius.

Happy are those who think we have the best of Governments, and that everything goes on so well in this Island!

It would be strange indeed if, in an English Colony so peaceful and so loyal as ours, we were denied those privileges which are the common birth-right of all who live under the shelter of the British flag. If we have liberty of conscience, liberty of the press, free trade, and free navigation, it is to the essential and primordial principles of the English Constitution that we are indebted for those blessings; the form of our own Government has nothing to do with the question. There is no more reason to feel surprised at their existence here than at the non-existence of slavery in Mauritius. What we complain of is the administration of our local affairs; our grievance is that that administration is conducted according to a system which is contrary to the spirit of that British Constitution under the protection of which we are entitled to place ourselves.

We are tempted to believe that those who contend, at the present moment, that we are wrong to complain of our system of Government, wish really to indulge in irony. For some years past, everything has seemed to conspire to show even to the most blind how defective is our system of Government and how it fails to protect the interests of the Colony.

The most recent events prove its powerlessness in this respect.

Though it was voted by the Council of Government and clamoured for by the whole Colony, we were refused the appointment of a fourth judge by the Secretary of State We were listened to at last, but we were given only partial satis- for the Colonies. faction. We had asked for five judges, in order that the quorum of the Court might be of three judges. One additional judge only was appointed; the quorum remained as it was, and, when a judge is absent on leave, the vacancy is not filled up, so that, practically, the Supreme Court is, at the present moment, just as it was formerly.

Later on, the questions of reforestation and of mountain and river reserves were con- sidered, and, although all were agreed as to the object in view, there was a wide rift

• Vide Blue Book already quoted, p. 4.

41

between the majority of the Council and the community. Not that the unofficial members who supported the Government on this occasion were not moved by the best intentions; but, as they do not emanate from the community, as constitutionally they are not responsible towards it, they are neither sufficiently imbued with nor sufficiently solicitous about its wishes.

Still more recently, in connexion with our postal service, we had an opportunity of judging of the success of the efforts of the Council of Government, even when the unofficial members and the community are at one.

The instances we have just quoted, and many others besides, establish clearly that the Council of Government does not give satisfaction to the Colony, and this simply because it is not in its power to do so. There are laws that should be voted and which are neglected; other laws that are voted and which are opposed to the views of the community, as, for instance, the ordinances passed last year concerning woods and forests, and which place many owners of forest land almost entirely at the mercy of the Government.

Your sub-committee confesses in all sincerity that it has searched in vain for the Colonies upon which the system of elective government has had so baneful an effect as has been asserted, and for the evils which such a system has given rise to. Unless your sub-committee is mistaken, the only Colony in possession of free institutions, that has undergone really serious political crises, is Jamaica; but the disturbances which about 17 years ago broke out in that island, should be attributed to peculiar causes, which prove really nothing against the system of elective government for Colonies in general. Panic-stricken, the Legislative Assembly of Jamaica dissolved itself and abdicated; but light has since been thrown upon that dark page in Colonial History. The report of the Royal Commission appointed at the end of 1865, the prosecution of Governor Eyre at the suit of the Jamaica Committee, the admirable and impartial charge of Chief Justice Cockburn in that case, have placed in their true aspect the Jamaica riots, and have demonstrated that the conduct of the colonial authorities in those sad circumstances, was not free from blame. At any rate, the inhabitants of Jamaica are now craving for a return to the elective principle.

The sub-committee does not deny that the municipal elections for Port Louis have not always been what they should have been; but it thinks, that at times, too much severity is displayed in regard to the municipality. The indifference which has been shown, and which is still shown by electors for that institution, is but the consequence of the unimportance of its powers; but it must be said, and there is something re- assuring in the fact, that whenever a gentleman of position has offered himself as a candidate at those elections, he has been returned without the least difficulty, and often by a large majority, and that notwithstanding its very limited resources and the successive withdrawal of several of its privileges by the Government, the municipal corporation has done good service, and has administered the affairs of the city far better than the Government ever did before it.

Some persons entertain the mistaken idea that we should not introduce an elective element into our Legislature, unless we are in a position to secure ourselves from possible mistakes or vagaries on the part of electors, as though the question resolved itself into the following dilemma, that either we must realise a political ideal for Mauritius, or that we should do without free institutions altogether. There is not a single country even among those which have enjoyed and practised liberty for ages in which elections are always perfect. Ever so ingenious as the electoral machine may be, however safe and delicate may be the band intrusted with the management of it All it were folly to expect that it will work always in an absolutely correct manner. that can be done is to take reasonable precautions to prevent or rather extenuate the errors to which the electoral body is liable like all other institutions in this world; it is simply impossible to do more.

It is for the above reasons, that without allowing ourselves to be deterred by the doubts and fears which we have thought it our duty to sum up, whilst trying to reduce them to their true proportions, we have, nevertheless, taken them into account in sketching the constitution, the plan of which we submit in our present report: they are factors which are not to be overlooked, but the importance of which must not be exaggerated. We have not for a moment lost sight of the fact that, if there are in Mauritius people who would fain see the Colony endowed with elective institutions, similar in every respect to those which exist in the great and free English Colonies, there are also others who, if not hostile to such institutions, yet look upon them with distrust. We have endeavoured, and we trust not unsuccessfully, to find a middle course between these opposite views. Let us try and content ourselves with little to

R $115.