CO882-(4-5) — Page 60

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Is To Te

Reference :-

C.O. 882

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

5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

40

between Réduit and my office as between two separate departments, it is not improbable that these instructions did not come before me until a few days afterwards.

6. The matter in itself does not seem to me to be of much importance, but as all the facts connected with Mr. C. Stewart's case will no doubt come before your Lordship, I prefer that there should be no misconception as to the only part I have taken in it of my

I have, &c. (Signed) CLIFFORD LLOYD.

own motion.

The Right Hon. Earl Granville, K.G.

From the Hon. the LIEUTENAnt-Governor AND COLONIAL SECRETARY to HIS EXCELLENCY THE GOVERNOR.

Will your Excellency be kind enough to retain the draft Despatch to Earl Granville, regarding the charges against Mr. C. Stewart, which you referred to me, and upon which I made an endorsement. I would also feel obliged by your Excellency either sending me a copy of the Despatch and the endorsement, or permitting me to take a

copy.

22/4/86.

(Int.)

C. LL

I did not receive this till yesterday. Here is the copy you want, with a copy of your endorsement and my Minute.

29th April 1886.

DRAFT DESPATCH to Earl GRANVILLE.

(Int.) J. P. H.

Government House, Mauritius, April 14, 1886.

MY LORD,

I HAVE to-day been informed by Mr. Clifford Lloyd that there is a mistake in my Despatch No. 130 of the 12th April, which went to Downing Street by the last mail, respecting the Procureur General's report and further charges against Mr. Cockburn

Stewart.

In that Despatch I informed your Lordship that the further charges, with the evidence on which they rest, had been communicated to Mr. Stewart.

2. Mr. Lloyd now tells me that he had taken the responsibility on himself of keeping back the charges, as he had heard from good authority that Mr. Stewart was very ill. There appears to have been no medical certificate and no communication on the subject in writing.

3. My direction that the Procureur General's report should be acted on, and the further charges sent to Mr. Stewart, was recorded on the 7th instant.

4. I have now requested Mr. Lloyd to send the charges to Mr. Stewart without any further delay, pointing out to him that the Executive Council and I would, of course, most favourably consider any medical certificates or other reasons that may be given as an excuse for Mr. Stewart's not replying to the charges within the usual time.

I have, &c.

(Signed) J. POPE HENNEBBY.

Endorsement by Mr. Clifford Lloyd.-B.

2. Mr. Clifford Lloyd now tells me that in directing the charges as drafted by the Procureur General to be written out, he also directed that they should not be sent to Mr. Cockburn Stewart for a few days, as Mr. Clifford Lloyd states he heard from the medical gentleman attending Mr. Stewart and from others that Mr. Stewart was very seriously ill with rheumatic fever and delirium. Mr. Clifford Lloyd took the earliest® opportunity of informing me what he had done.

MINUTE by the Governor.

• There is a mistake here. Mr. Lloyd did not inform me till the 14th, that is a week after my instructions, that they had not been carried out.

J. P. H.

15th April 1866.

(Initialed)

41

No. 10.

GOVERNOR SIR J. POPE HENNESSY, K.C.M.G., to the RIGHT HON. THE EARL GRANVILLE, K.G. (Received June 2, 1886.) (No 167.)

Government House, Mauritius, MY LORD,

1. I HAVE the honour to transmit a letter addressed to your Lordship by Messrs.

May 10, 1886. Beaugeard, de Coriolis, Antelme senior, and Planel, together with a minute from Mr. Clifford Lloyd, that he wishes to be sent to your Lordship, objecting to the way a complimentary address to me has been signed.

2. I enclose, for your Lordship's information, a letter from the President of the deputation, Sir Virgile Naz, K.C.M.G., that presented the address to me denying that any pressure was used to get the address signed.

3. Had the five gentlemen who address your Lordship on this subject remarked that it was very easy to get an address signed to a Governor in Mauritius, who had identified himself with Lord Derby's just and generous policy to the Colony, I should not indeed have been surprised at such a statement. But I must confess I am astonished at their being under the delusion that any pressure was needed to get such an address signed.

4. However, I have kept back the large parcel that contains the signatures to the address, with the view of having the signatures carefully classified, and their bonâ fide character, or otherwise, ascertained. When this is done I shall venture to transmit the result to your Lordship.

The Right Hon. the Earl Granville, K.G.,

&c.

&c.

&c.

I have, &c.

(Signed)

J. POPE HENNESSY.

Enclosure l'in No. 10.

Colonies.

To the Right Hon. the Earl Granville, Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the MY LORD,

AN address to his Excellency Sir John Pope Hennessy, bearing a certain number of signatures, and commenting in a laudatory manner on his past administration, will no doubt be forwarded to your Lordship by the outgoing packet.

2. At one and the same time your Lordship will probably receive the minutes of the first sitting of the new Legislative Council, in which is recorded the answer to the address made by his Excellency to the Council, in which answer the fifth paragraph, running thus:-

"We feel confident that your Excellency will continue to take the same watchful "interest in the welfare of all classes of the Colony, and continue to use your best efforts "to promote the material and moral progress of its inhabitants," objected to by a minority, was maintained by a majority of 20 votes against four.

3. But it will be doubtless screened from your Lordship that such majority was obtained almost in toto through a declaration, made by order, that the question was considered by his Excellency, in Executive Council, to be one of paramount importance, and the ex-officio and official nominated members were compelled to vote with Government.

4. Very likely it will also be concealed from your Lordship that by far the greater number of the signatures on the address to his Excellency were obtained by pressure-- moral or otherwise-by deceit in many instances, or by placing the subscribers- salaried employés," municipal and even Government officials—in the alternative of openly showing a kind of disregard for their Chiefs by refusing their signatures, or else affixing the same although against their wish and belief; all which facts we pledge ourselves to prove before the Royal Commission which we have suggested your Lordship might appoint.

5. We have considered it necessary to bring all those facts and observations to the knowledge of your Lordship, in order that your Lordship might be enlightened as to the delusive value which the documents mentioned above-openly intended to contradict the memorial which we have taken the liberty to forward to your Lordship possesses with regard to the true and honest estimation in which the administration of Sir J. P. Hennessy is held by the people of Mauritius.

I 94914.

F

Page 60Page 61

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE

BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO

42

6. We cannot help, before concluding this explanatory letter, respectfully observing to your Lordship that the first mention and publication of our first memorial was irrelevantly made by periodicals avowedly belonging to the supporters of his Excellency's policy, and by official members at the first public sitting of the Legislative Council.

7. We shall also bring to your Lordship's notice that the formal declaration that the vote should be official on the subject referred to above-the fifth paragraph of the answer to his Excellency's address-was refused insertion in the minutes of the first sitting of the Council on the plea put forward by his Excellency, that it formed part of the Lieu- tenant-Governor's speech-who moved the adoption of the answer-and had therefore no occasion for being recorded in the minutes, although-and perhaps because such record would have thrown the necessary light on the results of the division which took place. Such decision appears indeed strange when it is remembered that the minutes of the former Council contain more than one of the speeches of his Excellency and of those members who supported his policy at the time.

8. We beg to add, in conclusion, that the largest and the most enlightened electorates of the Colony are represented in the Council by us. Whilst Dr. Beaugeard has been

returned by

-

Mr. de Coriolis by

Mr. C. Autelme by

Mr. Planel by

941 votes.

-

879 407

""

"

-

108

>?

in all 2,335

those elected members who have voted the reply to the address have been returned only by 622 votes altogether, viz. :-

Mr. V. Geffroy

Mr. H. Leclézio

Mr. H. Adam

Sir V. Naz

Mr. H. Portal

55 votes.

137 ""

·

125 ""

149 156

59

in all 622

Your Lordship cannot fail to be convinced, after the above explanations, that the majority of the community is on our side and that only a handful of Mauritians support per fas et nefas his Excellency's policy.

Mauritius, 6th May 1886.

HIS EXCELLENCY the GOVERNOR,

We have, &c.

(Signed)

O. BEAUGEARD, D.M. G. DE CORIOLIS. C. ANTELME. CHARLES PLANEL.

Enclosure 2 in No. 10.

May 8, 1886. I DULY informed your Excellency in writing, on the 4th instant, that subordinate officials were being called upon to sign the address alluded to in the enclosed petition, and requested permission to call the attention of heads of departments to the fact, and to request them to inform their subordinates that it was against the traditional rule of the service for subordinates to express either approval or disapproval in such a form of the acts of their superiors. Your Excellency did not reply to me.

(Signed) CLIFFORD LLOYD.

P.S.-I request your Excellency to forward a copy of this minute to the Secretary of State.

C. L.

Sia,

48

Enclosure 3 in No. 10.

THE letter of the Honourable Messrs. Antelme, Beaugeard, Coriolis, and Planel

Mauritius, May 10, 1886. to Lord Granville, dated the 6th instant, contains the following paragraph :-

4. "Very likely it will also be concealed from your Lordship that far the greater number of the signatures on the address to his Excellency were obtained by pressure. moral or otherwise, by deceit in many instances, or by placing the subscribers-salaried 'employés,' municipal and even Government officials-in the alternative of openly showing a kind of disrespect for their Chiefs by refusing their signatures, or else affixing the same, although against their wish and belief; all which facts we pledge ourselves to prove before the Royal Commission which we have suggested your Lordship might appoint."

Your Excellency has thought fair to communicate this paragraph to me as president of the deputation who presented the address to you.

I regret to see that Mr. Antelme, the father, is continuing, as he did during the reform movement, to send to the Secretary of State documents reflecting upon many people in Mauritius. without their knowledge, and without giving them the opportunity of contradicting him.

If the assertions contained in that paragraph were published, they would certainly call forth indignant protest from the signers of the address. Meanwhile I think it my duty emphatically to contradict them.

Never was a public document signed more spontaneously and more readily in Mauritius than this address. The idea of presenting it was not put forward by party leaders; it emanated from the people themselves.

C

•

During several weeks past, impartial and moderate men, belonging to all classes, have been shocked by the unjust and systematic attacks directed against your Excellency by the two Members for Port Louis, and by their two newspapers; attacks supported by Mr. Antelme the father and by the English newspaper in which Mr. Antelme published his letters signed

"Those impartial and moderate men have, in consequence, been anxious to express their regard for, and confidence in, your Excellency.

The memorial to Lord Granville against your Excellency, sent by four Members of Council, and the proceedings of the first meeting of the new Council, which were witnessed by two or three hundred people, including many of the most intelligent among the Mauritians, and which were published in some of the newspapers, intensified the public feeling in favour of your Excellency and in condemnation of the attacks directed against you.

At the request of many belonging to all sections of the community, the address pre- sented to you was drawn up and published in four newspapers. On the day of its publication, it was signed by one thousand people at least in the town of Port Louis. Gentlemen of all classes, usually strangers to politics, applied for printed forms for Bignature, and collected the willing signatures of many others.

I annex, for

your Excellency's information, printed copies of a circular letter which I addressed to about 25 gentlemen in the district of Savanne and elsewhere, with printed copies of the address and of the forms for signature, and which clearly show that no pressure was intended or used. The many other gentlemen who circulated those printed forms acted in the same manner.

In fact, no pressure, moral or otherwise, still less deceit, had to be used when almost everyone was so willing to sign. If time had been lost in using pressure, nearly 7,000 signatures could not have been obtained all over the Colony in nine days.

The lists of signatures conta'a, in addition to the signatures, the residence and pro- fession of each signer. An examination of those lists will show that the signers belong to all classes, and to people of all origin, upon the very large majority of whom pressure cannot have been used in so short a time. A very small proportion of the Government officials have signed the address.

This spontaneous manifestation of the large majority of the educated and independent classes in Mauritius is so damaging to the opposition of your Excellency's few oppo- nents, that it

not surprising that they should attempt to diminish its magnitude and effect.

The fallacy of the influence drawn at the end of their letter to Lord Granville, from the fact that the four signers polled 2,335 votes, whilst the five elected members whom they name were returned by only 622 votes, will strike the Secretary of State at

once.

3,894 electors voted at the last election for the whole island, of whom 1,903 in Port Louis voted for two candidates, making together 5,797 votes. From that number

F 2