CO882-(8-9) — Page 359

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

IC.O. 882

6

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

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON

02

27 July 1909

MAURITIUS ROYAL COMMISSION, 1900:

The Very Rev J R. BILBORROW

The question is as to the interpretation of those words, that the inhabitants shall retain their religion, laws, and

Customs

1.5. (Chairman) That is all, so long as nothing is tone to interfere with the freedom of the religion of the mhabitants- That was not the case at all, it was To guarantee the establishment of the Roman Catholic Church in the Colony as opposed to the Protestant

Church

1993 Those are the words of the Capitulation which Mr Woodcock has read Those are the actual words of the Capitulation If we are to have the interpretation with regard to that. from whom can we get it better than the people who worked according to the interpretation at the time It is the people who Be the treaty who understood it best, and that is

lently the way that they understood it

I

Mr Woodcock) It is of some value, but I do not think it is conclusive in considering a thing, if you find that people have acted on a certain interpretation. thank you will agree with me that it will be very very far from being conclusive, and whilst a court might give a certain amount of weight to it as a court, still it would not hesitate to brush it all aside if that inter- pretation were not borne out

13,504 (Chairman.). Suppose even that that question were going to be raised, suppose it was raised, would not immediately something be said as to the fact that the French Government, which then held the Island. have changed their views towards the Church-I do at think so, because they are out of court altogether. They have nothing to do with it; they have no say in

the matter now

13,905 If the matter was really to be argued at length, would not that question be raised -But I do But some how it could touch it, because they have nothing whatever to do with it.

13,906. Suppose England had never come into Essession of this Island, what would be the position of the Government even to these churches to-day?— Very had indeed, but then it is not the casÐ.

13,907, (Mr. Woodcock.) I think the Chairman's remark leads to this consideration. Can it be con. tended that a country like England, having taken over Mauritius under the terms of this Capitulation, is in a wors position than the country from which it has taken over Mauritius would have been in if it had retained Mauritius? That seems to me to be about the short issue, and that raises this question, whether it can really be suggested that there is an obligation un the English Government never to alter the law in Mauritius in any way which was in the slightest degree inconsistent with that Capitulation, because one has only to take an example, which 1 can put to you umminediately, and which strikes me pretty forcibly, and. after uil. these things have to be tested by extreme casey. Assume B

case where the Roman Catholic communion in Mauritius became quite insignificant,

could it be contended then that the Government w bound to go on insisting, perhaps against the wishes of the vast majority of the people, that they should he taxed in order to support a church whose doctrines, perchance, were displeasing to them, and so on? I take That as an extreme case to find out what are the viewa you take on that matter-1 certainly think, if the number was reduced, that they should reduce the grant, that in all.

13.4MM. It has this bearing, however, that, Lord Derby points out here, the position has considerably altered," inasmuch as, at the present time, the con. stituents of the population, the number of non- Christian inhabitanta being now more than twice as great as that of the Christians, therefore you have Riven rise to this extraordinarily anomalous position, that you are levying a tax on a large number of Orientals who are not members of the Church of Rome, or the Church of England, or of the Church of Beotland, but whose religious doctrine in already completely contrary or different, and you are laying on them a considerable tax to support churches in doctrines that they do not believe?--I doubt very much whether the tax is a considerable tax on these 200,000 Indiana, especially sa most of them have 'been

or

[Continued

coolies. are coolies, and the amount they pay towards it is insignificant.

13,909. (Chairman.) But they are very large pro- ducers of sugar?-1 de not think so. They produce very little angar

13,910 (Mr Woodcock) They are planting one. third of the whole of the cultivable sugar area today? Of course. But that is scarcely producing sugar. there is a large number of little planters, but I fancy these people do not pay very much taxation. But,apart from that consideration. I do not consider those people. ought to weigh against the original inimbitants of the Colony Most of the Indians are absolutely uneducated and are pagans, and they were introduced, the vast ajority of them, as coolies.

13.911 (Chairman) Yes, for the benefit of the people of the Colony -They do not stay here for the benefit of the Colony; it would have been much better if they had been sent back, in my opinion, when their contract was finished.

13,912. Yes, but they did not come here on their own motion P-No, they were brought here on contract to work.

13.913. For the benefit of the people of the Colony-Exactly; for the benefit of the planters.

13,914. Then I think one has to look at them from It is not as if they had simply that point of view. wandered here themselves; they were brought here for the purposes of the people of the place P-I think so.

13.915. And they brought them, knowing exactly what they were doing?-Yea, but they did not leave them here knowing what they were doing. It would have been much better if they had sent them back.

13,916. If they had felt that, they would have made that part of the arrangement-that at the end of their work they should go back. I mean it is the people of Mauritius who are responsible for these people being here; not only for their coming, but for their staying? -I quite see that, but it was an error.

13,917. One has to bear that in mind ?-But I do not see why that should lead to the reduction or abolition of the ecclesiastical budget of the people. who were here.

13.918. I do not think that is suggested. Mr. Woodcock only saya that the conditions which ob- tained in 1810 were quite different to the conditions which obtained in 1909 P-That is all

13,919. (Mr. Woodcock.) You were taxing the Catholic community then to support the Roman Catholic Church; then when the English Church came you taxed them and you did not differentiate--I will By the Christian community to support the Christian Church. Then there comes a large influx of Indians, and you are taxing all that number-we need not discuss precisely how much they are contributing to the country-but you are taxing them all, and that in the difficulty which strikes me ?--I do not suppose that the Musselmen have ever made any complaint about it and I cannot understand paticularly why you should take so very much interest in these pagans as all that.

13,920, I take interest in all of them as being subjects of the British Crown; I do not take more interest in the priests of the Church than in them; I am only looking at them as British subjects P- Theoretically, there may be something in it, but practically I think, if the present state of the Catholic Church were touched here, it would be most un- fortunate from a political point of view. Of course, I am an Englishman myself, as much as any Englishman can be, and I know the people well, and they are highly sensitive people, and I must say for the 12 or 13 years that I have been here, both the bishop and myself have been working in the English interests entirely doing everything for the sake of peace, and belping the Government as far as we could. I know the people thoroughly well, but I am very much afraid that they would get out of hand altogether if the question of their religion was touched.

18,921. (Chairman.) In what way do you mean they would get out of hand?-They would not accept any interference; I should not like to be the Governor who would have to put that into execution myself.

27 July 1909.]

MINUTES OF EVIDENCE.

The Very Rev J. R. BILBORROW.

13,922. Unfortunately, that seems to have been the euse hitherto, that whenever anything was proposed to be done by the Government, if the people, for any reason whatever, did not like it, it was given up?-1 do not accept it in that way. I take it in this way. I think it is recognised that it is a very difficult thing to tamper with people's religion and with their language. Of course, I speak to you quite frankly,

13.929. (Mr Woodcock.) I think that we very much appreciate the way that you always have considered the English interests P-I think we have done it far more than people know now, because we have done it privately. I may tell you that I have been in rather à delicate position, because the people were getting excited. Of course, they always go beyond what is in view or what is suggested, but the whole Colony, apart from the Pagane, is practically Catholic, and it is an organisation spreading out its ramifications to every corner of the Colony, and in all these parishes--there are 25 of them, I think-there is a fabric composed of notable Mauritian gentlemen who represent the people of the parish; they are chosen amongst the people. and it is considered a post of honour, and I should not like certainly to be responsible for keeping the peace amongst them if their religion was attacked.

13,924. (Sir Edward O'Malley.) That is a sort of council ?—Yes, a council of fabric. The cathedral has nine gentlemen. They are chosen from the whole Colony and there are others chosen for the fabric, representing the parishes; each parish has its own fabric, and each fabric represents the people of the parish, so that if there is any trouble at all ́it spreads throughout the whole place and they are very sensitive. They are as loyal as people can be. I have never met a single Mauritian yet who is not as loyal as can be. Their loyalty is a conviction. I will tell you the plain truth. It is a loyalty of conviction. They appreciate the generosity and the liberty of England, and also that it is the best Government for them, and they would not live under any other flag for anything.

13,925. (Chairman.) They would not like, for in- stance, to be returned to France -No, they would not have it; it was suggested once in a paper.

13,926. When you say they would not have it, how can they prevent it P-They could not prevent it, of

course.

13,927. When you say they would not like it, I understand, but when you say they would not have it, I do not understand it P-As a matter of language it is perfectly wrong, but practically speaking, it is perfectly right.

13,928. But how can they not have it P-You do not want to set the whole Colony in a flame.

13,929. We do not want to do anything of the kind P-That is what I mean; that is what I insinuated it would come to, and eui bono, I really do not understand it, for, after all, Rs. 102,000 for 120,000 Catholics is not a very big affair when it is all considered.

13,930. That is perfectly true, but the Colony is in a position when it has to make economies, and you tell us, what seems rather curious, that the Roman Catholics do not themselves contribute to the support of their Church at all ?-Not to the support of the priests. I said they contributed to the support of the Church; for the building of churches, for the ornamen- tation of the churches, they contribute a great deal according to their means.

13,931. (Sir Edward O'Malley.) And all the takes which support the Church P-Tes, all the taxes which support the Church; of course they are the chief contributors.

13,932. (Mr. Woodoook.) There is another aspect of it which impresses me very much. I have seen the effect of the disestablishment of the Church in various places, in some of our Colonies-not with my own eyes. mean, but on creditable report—and in Ireland, and you may perhaps know what has been the position in Ireland alnoe the disestablishment of the Church there. It has been to the advantage of Ireland ... Do you mean the disestablishment of the Catholic Church?

[Continued.

A3

13,933 Of the English Church; that it has very much deepened and strengthened the Church ?—I do not. know, but I think that England has had to pay pretty well for the disestablishment and persecution of the Catholic Church in Ireland. I have the solid conviction —of course I am not speaking here as the head of the Catholic Church-that it would be a most dangerous thing that is to say, considering the well-being and peace of the Colony for many years past, and con. sidering the feelings and the loyalty of the people with regard to their Church—to interfere with the religion of the people. I answer as well as I can. I only want to be frank. I spoke to the Governor, because it puts me in a difficult position. I went to him and told him, People are beginning to get excited about this." 1 may tell you that this question came as an absolute surprise to everybody, at least everybody that I know. and perhaps you may allow me to say now that the Bishop of Port Louis, if he had had the slightest idea that this question was going to come on the tapis, would not have been away now; of that I am perfectly certain, and I confirm that by saying that a little before your arrival there was a report in one of the papers that they were going to disestablish the Roman Catholic Church in Mauritius. The Bishop saw that, but he did not put much faith in it. The Colonial Secretary, who was, I believe, then acting for the Governor-the Governor was not back-wrote to the Bishop of Port Louis and told him that there was no question of anything of the sort in official circles. He may have been wrong, I suppose, but he said what he knew. But I may tell you that the Bishop of Port Louis would most certainly have been here, had be thought that this question might be raised—that there was any truth in that report.

13,934. (Mr. Woodcock.) Do you mean that Sir Graham Bower wrote that officially ?—I think so, but officially or not does not matter. The Bishop told me that the Colonial Secretary had written to him, aud that there was no question of that sort in official circles.

13,935. (Chairman.) You my that was before the arrival of the Commission ?—Yes.

13,936. Neither the Colonial Secretary nor anybody else could know what the terms of reference to the Commission would be; he could only be expressing an opinion?-Certainly; but my point is simply this: that the Bishop would not have gone away if he had had the slightest idea that this was going to come on the tapie at all. I only give you that in proof of the statement.

13,937. Quite so. I understand the view that you hold in that the Government is bound to give what it is giving now, and that it is equally bound to give as much more as may hereafter be required for the same purposes?-Yes.

18,988. Am I to understand that whilst the Govern ment might find it necessary to cut down elsewhere. the Education Department or the Railway Department and so on, that it is quite unable to cut down anything to do with the religion of the people ?—Quite the con- trary, cut it down to a living wage; we would accept it for the good of the Colony. As I tell you, there are already 30 priests who are giving back Rs. 300 of their salary every year. It is not a commercial business tu us; not one of us makes anything out of it.

13,989. You are an Englishman, and so am I. I have lived a great many years in another Colony, where I should think there are probably as many Roman Catholic priests, and certainly as many Roman Catholic institutions, as there are here, and they are entirely supported fròm, I do not know whers, but not by the Government, and there it has been my business to go and collect information from the priests, and I have known very well many of them who did not receive anything like the sum that you name as being low than a man can live upon here ?—Rs. 1,800.

13,940. Yes?—I did not say it was loss than a man could live upon.

13,941. You said you did not know how some of them lived upon it -Neither do 1. They have to keep a servant and they have to keep a horse and carriage, and they have to feed the horse.