CO882-(8-9) — Page 357

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

C.O. 882

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

9

| PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

60

27 July 1909

***Tations

MAURITIUS ROYAL COMMISSION, 1909

The Very Rev. JR BILSBORROW.

mrut had no further responsibility, simply asking you Of course that is that the work was done

an obligation is something different. the Government would not understand anything of You would not reduce the number of that kind

hurches or schools or whatever the money which is What I want to know is now received is devoted to what your own feeling would be as to making the mony a contribution of that kind instead of dividing it up and treating all the people as though they were lump Government officers-You mean give us

FL

136) Yes The objection would be for us that priests would lose their pensions, which is a very important point, because it is a very unhealthy Colony l our priests suffer perhaps more than anyone else. leanse we occupy the unhealthy districts all the year round. Our priests never leave their parishes, they are in the districts of River Séche and Bambou, Port Loms, &c. all the year round.

13,62 You move them about, do you not ?—As httle as pessible, because we have not very many men To work with We are under-staffed. Even at present we have not enough priests to fill the necessary posta, and as a matter of fact, the sum received for salaries does not really cover the salaries we have to pay The Government only pays 49 salaries, and we have A number of It is arranged in this way. 57 prieste

r priests voluntarily consent to sacrifice Ra. 300, Though they only get Rs. 1,500 a year, they sacrifice

to the bishop in order to get more priests, because they all know that we have not enough priests. Every priest knows that the Government subvention is not sufficient With regard to the lump sum, there is not only the difficulty of the pensions, but the feelings of The the people would be very much against it. Mauritians cling to their establishment.

13.863. (Mr. Woodcock.) You say it is not enough the assumption that there is a duty on the State to pay the whole of the expenses ?-Exactly.

13,864. I mean that is the underlying assumption? You Speaking on that point of the accepting of u lump sum. that would put an end to any possible merase, as I presume it would take away all the elasticity from it in case of fresh needs.

1,865. (Chairman) Do you mean the sum which 18 now contributed --Exactly.

1.866 Naturally it would !--Exactly. Six years ago six more salaries were granted, and even they were not enough, because, as I tell you, as a very important joint in proof of that, a number of priests hand over R-300 out of their own salaries, which are absolutely the lowest possible salaries that people can live upon. because they have many expenses; they give to the peuple, and many of them have to provide a horse and trap They voluntarily sacrifice Rs. 300 out of their Is 1.500 a year, so that we have 30 odd priests who are only receiving Rs. 1,200 a year (801. a year), and in many places they have no extra resources whatever. We found, in some cases, that no funds of any sort.

it was too difficult, so to these we gave back Rs. 125 a month to be divided between them. The distances which they have to travel are long and they must keep a horse and trap. I myself do not know how they live

13,867 (Mr. Woodcock.) I suppose one may assume that a certain amount is raised by voluntary contri bution among the Roman Catholic community?—Not for the support of the priests at all.

We get a 13.868. Not a penny--Not a penny. little for the ecclesiastical students, for the education of the priests, but for the maintenance of the priesta I do not think we get a penny.

13,669. How much do you suppose the Roman Catholic community raise in the Colony for religious purposes?—It would be impossible to calculate.

13,870. Would it ?—It would be morally impossible. They get a great deal of money by voluntary subscrip. tion, by concerts and fancy fairs and all those kinds of things-they are perpetually going on; but the poverty of the people also is so great that they cannot give much. In my place now, I shall have to buildå a church; I do not know how on earth I shall be able to

[Continued

du it. Already they have been preparing a fancy fair for the last six months. The people will give what Tu they can, but their means are absolutely limited. give you a case, in my own parish there are 14 or 15 people who used to keep carriages and pairs; now there are only a few one-horse carriages, and many of those who had carriages have to walk

ін

an

13.871. (Sir Edward ('Malley.) Which parish is that St. Pierre, in the district of Moka. It is a big We get very little. parish with 5,000 Catholics in it. We have a collection on one Sunday in the month for ecclesiastical students, but the collection is very small

ecclesiastical 13,872 (Chairman) What student -A student who is being educated for the We have to take young boys and educate priesthood. them.

13,873. (Mr. Woodcock.) Educate them in Mauritius for the priesthood of Mauritius ?—No, a seminary was was found to be too started in Mauritius, but it expensive, because we do not require enough priesta to keep a seminary.

13.874. Then where do those boys go to towards whose education you are contributing ?—At present we have two young Irishmen in Mount Mellery.

13,875. (Sir Edward O'Malley.) That is educating priests abroad - Yes, and we have another in a Jesuit College school, who is a Mauritian.

13,876, (Mr. Woodcock.) How do you select them? -They are generally selected by their own priests, the priests of the parish who know them, if they show any inclination for the ecclesiastical state.

13,877. In Mauritius P-Yes, so far as we can get them, but the others are recommended to us by the superiors of the seminary. Mount Mellery has supplied It is most difficult for us priests for the last 30 years. to get priests to come out here, on account of the climate. We choose students in Ireland, because there Sometimes we can get them even are plenty there. when they have finished their ordinary college studies. their classics, and then send them to a French seminary in order that they may study their philosophy and theology, and learn French, because it is no use their coming out here if they cannot speak French. The We have to recruiting of the clergy is most difficult.

take, sometimes, priests who are recommended.

13,978. (Chairman.) Why cannot you get them from France? We do, as far as we can, but then we We do not always get the best. That is the difficulty. not only want priests, but we want the best priests here that we can get, and bishops, when they have good priests, generally like to keep them in their own dioceses.

13,879. (Mr. Woodenek.) Do not you make use of the Missionary Catholic collegee -French. yos, but there are none in England; it is necessary that we should get French-speaking priesta.

13,880. Are all the priests English subjecta?—Yes, they are all English subjects. They have to take the oath of allegiance before they receive any salary, and they always take it. They are very good priests; most of them are missionary priests of very good type indeed the Fathers of the Holy Ghost. They do unission work also in Africa and Madagascar,

13,881. What is the position-because it may be of some small help to us-in the neighbouring Island of Réunion-The soclestiastical position ?

13,882. Yes P-I do not think that the new French legislation has been published there yet.

13,883. Apart from that, was there in Réunion a subvention-Yes, they still, I believe, have practically the same status as we have.

13,884. (Sir Edward O'Malley.) That would be much the same state as they were in in France before the recent disturbance P-Yes, before the rupture, in fact, they were absolutely, because Bourbon is considered a part of France.

13,885. (Mr. Woodcock.) But in France was there

■ State grant to the Church ?--Yes, by the Concordat sach priest received so much from the State. It was precious little, but still they got something-1,000 franos a year for a curé, I think.

13,888. (Chairman.) Have you been in any other Colony except this one ?—No, I have not,

27 July 1909.]

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

The Very Rev. J. R. BILSBORROW

13,887. (Mr. Woodcock.) Of course you are aware that in a number of the Colonies very earnest and splendid work is done by the Roman Catholic com- munity where there exista no contribution ?--No doubt; and it could be done here. Of course the con- That dition here is considered to be a privileged one.

is the way the people look at it, and, of course, it is the way we are obliged to look at it as representing the people, and it would be impossible to touch it in my

pinion.

13,888. (Chairman.) As regards the possibility or the impossibility of tunching it, you must know your. self that it is only that the Government has been very considerate indeed, because all that was guaranteed was to give the people the freedom of following their own faith P-I do not think that at all.

Quite the contrary. I think it was absolutely the maintenance of the Catholic Church which was guaranteed-ita finances and everything—and the money was to come from the general taxation, and at that time it was a matter, to a certain extent, of an indemnity, because properties which belonged to the Catholic priests were taken away.

The property of the Vallée des Prêtres still belongs to the bishop to-day; the other properties were sold. Belonging to my church at St. Pierre there were 182 acres, which is all cane-land now, and the salaries were given partly as an indemnity for those properties.

13,889. The question that I speak of has already been settled a long time ago by a Secretary of State. It was discussed and it was settled, and the settlement remains P-I do not know about that.

13,890. The dispatch itself is the best thing to read. Have you never seen Lord Derby's dispatch on the question ?—I have not, and I should attach very little importance to it if I did.

13,891. (Sir Edward_Malley.) Of course that is only the dispatch of a Secretary of State P-I should attach very little importance to the dispatch of a Secretary of State if I did see it, if it was in that sense. because for 70 years before that all the other Secre. taries of State understood the situation. It was very late in the day for Lord Derby to point out that some- thing had been wrong-1 think so, at any rate.

13,892. (Chairman.) Surely you may allow some- thing to continue simply because you choose ?--But I do not think that that was the state of the case at all. I think it was quite a different standpoint. The question was a matter of treaty obligation.

13,893. I have looked at the treaty, and I should have thought that it was perfectly plain and evident, but still one's own opinion is perhaps nothing in the matter. Here is the opinion of Lord Derby, which be expressed in 1884, and he says here: "As the obser

vations of Messrs. Adam and Antelme appear to * indicate a disposition on the part of some members "of the Roman Catholic Church to apply for a further increase of the grant now made from the "public funds of the Colony for that Church, I think it well to state distinctly that I cannot hold out any hope that Her Majesty's Government would sanction "any such increase. If the general question of State "aid to religion in Mauritáns should be again raised, "it is not improbable that the result would be ita "total abolition, as in many other Colonies. I cannot "attach any weight to those arguments in favour of "granting special or increased endowments to the "Roman Catholic Church, which are based on the terms of the Capitulation, and, in fact, the amount " of aid now granted to that Church exceeds the "amount to which it was entitled under the law existing at the time of the Capitulation. Nor do I see any reason for questioning what is the actual effect and extent of the 8th Artiole of the Capitu- "lation, or for doubting that it retains its validity, "It simply states that the inhabitants shall retain " their religion, laws, and customs; and this reference "to the religion of the people was obvionaly intended "to secure full liberty and toleration to the Roman "Catholic religion, at a time when those professing it "laboured under grave dimbilities and impediments ** in British possessions in which it was not specially protected and recognised. I do not think it can be

41

T

++

[Continued.

61

intended to maintain that the terms of the Capitu lation are to be construed as implying that the lawe which existed in Mauritius in 1810 were to remain for ever unchanged. The alteration which has taken place in the interval between that time and the "present, in the constituents of the population (the number of non-Christian inhabitants being now "more than twice as grost as that of the Christians). is in itself a conclusive answer to such a contention."? -I am very sorry, but I cannot accept Lord Derby's view of the situation, that is all. Of course the origin of that dispatch is another matter.

There is great peace in the Colony amongst all the denominations There is mutual toleration, but the origin of that dispatch was simply a Protestant memorial addressed to Lord Derby against the Roman Catholics —a memorial which was addressed to the British Government in 1882 or 1883, I think.

now.

13,894. The only reason that I read that was to show that, whatever may be the opinion of the British Government at present, that was the opinion which was held by the Secretary of State, representing the British Government, in 1884, do not you see; merely an opinion with reference to what is the meaning of the Capitulation, and so on ?—Yes, but I think there are other considerations which are in Mr. Greene's pam- phlet; I do not know whether you have read it." He gives other things. It was not merely the wishes of the inhabitants or a concession to the inhabitanta, but it was the very wish of the King of England himself. It was their established religion which was decided upon.

13,895. I did not read the first part of the dispatch." which says: "I have the honour to acknowledge, the "receipt of your dispatches of the 31st of December. **reporting a conversation at a meeting of the Council " of Government on the subject of the Ecclesiastical Grants, and of the 28th of December, transmitting a pamphlet by Mr. Greene, the Crown Solicitor, on the "status and rights of the Roman Catholic Church in "Mauritius." It was absolutely on that very pamphlet that this dispatch was written P-Yee, I consider it is a very extraordinary deduction from it, so far as I am concerned, and I certainly should attach no particular importance to Lord Derby's interpretation after the thing had been a fait accompli, accepted and acted upon for 70 years before.

4.

13,896. Toe, by grace ?~Why "by grace" when it was a matter of tresty.

13,807. The question is the interpretation of the treaty ----I believe it is the last article of the treaty which says, If there is any doubt about the interpreta- tion of these articles, it shall be interpreted in favour of the Colony.

13,808. But I understand that there is no doubt about the interpretation P―That is all very well if only one side has to settle it, but suppose the other side objects, I presume there is doubt; there is a question at any rate.

18,899. But what is the tribunal before which s matter of that kind would be settled ?—If it is a ques- tion of right, I presume the highest tribunal in Eng- I believe land, the Privy Council, or whatever it is. that Sir William Newton states that the case settled by the Privy Council.

Was

19,900. (Mr. Woodcock.) I remember Sir William Newton referring us to the case. Speaking from memory, I think it was the osse of "In vs Adam." and the point there—I speak only subject to correction— seems only to be this, that the Capitulations, whilst they axist, form part of the law of the land !— Possibly.

19,901. I do not think that case goes farther indeed, I asked Sir William Newton whether he wished to put the decision higher than that, and I think I am right in mying that he agreed that that was the point of the decision.

(Chairman.) I am not aware myself that the question has ever been before the Privy Council at nil.

(Mr. Woodoosk.) It was not on this queation; it was on the questions of the Capitulation.

(Wiśmoon.) It falls under the same thing if it in with regard to the validity of the terme of the Capitulation."

(Mr. Woodowch.) I do not think the question of the validity of the terms of the Capitulation is even raised.