"The problem is a very urgent problem. The necessity of going forward is an urgent and vital necessity in the economical condition of the country. I will tell the House why in a sentence. The mines are 30,000 natives short of the number engaged in the pre-war period."
These were the words subsequently used by Mr. Lyttelton, the Colonial Secretary. The matter was urgent. Already protests were pouring in from every part of the Empire. Imperial meetings, white league meetings, anti-slavery meetings, political meetings—all the machinery, in short, of protest and obstruction was being got under weigh, and to the Rand lords it seemed as if the ideal of slavery for which they had struggled so long and so hard was to be denied them at the last hour. The anguish of Sir Lancelot when a vision of the Holy Grail was denied him after all his trials and tribulations was not greater or more poignant than the trepidation of the mine owners. It became, indeed, a very urgent[Pg 28] problem for them, for unless they could bring the matter to a head, not even the strongest Government of the century could hope to withstand the popular will when once it was organized sufficiently to voice its petition loudly enough.
But of economical necessities there were none.
It was natural after such a devastating war that some time should elapse before the mines could get into full working order and attain that wonderful output of gold which prevailed immediately before the outbreak of hostilities. The progress of the gold industry after the war had to be gradual; but so far from it being depressed or showing signs of being stagnant, it had, as I have already shown, increased enormously. Already it was within measurable distance of the output of the pre-war period. The economical necessity was not the necessity of importing cheap labour, but the necessity of paying a proper wage to the Kaffir and of treating him well.
Already Dr. Jameson, who in no sense was a partisan opponent of the Rand capitalists, had declared in November 1903 that the De Beers Company would not employ Chinamen—that they had plenty of labour, white and black, because they treated their people well.
But the Rand mine owners not only did not pay their Kaffirs a proper wage, but meted out to them such treatment that the death-rate among them had increased since 1902 to an[Pg 29] extent which, to express it in mild terms, was appalling. I quote the figures below—
NATIVE MORTALITY ON MINES
This was the economical necessity that should have occupied the attention of his Majesty's Government, and not the question of introducing Chinese indentured labour into the colony. That the mine owners have successfully baulked in the past all inquiry as to their treatment of natives is proved conclusively by the fact that even these statistics did not draw forth a commission from the Government to inquire into such a terrible state of affairs. Instead of the question being, "Why is it Kaffirs die at the rate of seventy per thousand per month?" the problem they set themselves was how to provide an alternative to these[Pg 30] quick-dying wage-wanting niggers. Attempts had been made to procure coolie labour from India, and Lord Curzon never did a greater or a nobler thing than when he refused the sanction of his Government to such a step.
Mr. Chamberlain said in the Commons that Lord Curzon should have been overruled; an inexplicable remark from a man who had had the courage to say to the miners that it was better they should be governed from Downing Street than from Park Lane.
In December 1903 General Ben Viljeon informed a labour commissioner that a petty chief had told him recently that if he sent 100 boys to the Rand only 66 returned, and some of them had scurvy. It was not wonderful, therefore, that black labour was scarce; but it was wonderful that his Majesty's Government did not take steps to put an end to a state of things which they must have known to be terrible, instead of merely substituting for the ill-used, underpaid, criminally-treated but free labouring Kaffirs Chinamen who were to be nothing better than slaves.
But the drawing up of the draft Ordinance went forward. It was hurried on at an incredible rate. Until the last minute it was kept back from Parliament, and the Blue-book dealing with the alleged necessities for introducing yellow labour was only placed in the hands of the members of the House of Commons a few days before Mr. Herbert Samuel moved his famous amendment to the[Pg 31] King's Address—"It is highly inexpedient that sanction should be given to any Ordinance permitting the introduction of indentured Chinese labourers into the Transvaal Colony until the approval of the colonists has been formally ascertained."
At one end of the cable sat Lord Milner, pricked on by the Rand lords, at the other end sat the Colonial Secretary, anxious to be fair, anxious to be humane, anxious to do nothing contrary to the historic principles of British rule, but bemused by the clamour of the Transvaal, and seeing in the protests against the Ordinance only party moves and party partisanship. The clamour for the Ordinance increased day by day.
Sir H. Campbell-Bannerman had managed to extract a pledge from the Government, by which Lord Milner was instructed to introduce into the Ordinance a clause suspending its operation pending further instructions from home. But it was pointed out that the matter was of such great urgency that his Majesty's Government could not undertake to postpone their decision longer than the termination of the debate on the Address.
As a matter of fact, they had already made up their minds. It was stated that if a colony desired Chinese labour it was not for the Imperial Parliament to interfere. To have done so would have been contrary to the traditions of Imperial Government. But when Mr. Herbert Samuel asked that the Ordinance[Pg 32] should not be permitted until the approval of the colonists in the Transvaal had been formally obtained by the natural expedient of a referendum, Lord Milner asserted that to hold a referendum was impossible—it would occupy too much time, that at any rate it was an expedient unknown in any part of the British Empire.
As a matter of fact, a referendum has been put in practice in South Australia, in New Zealand, in New South Wales, and was used more recently to decide upon the important question of the Australian Commonwealth. That it would have occupied six months to take such a referendum, during which period the gold of the Transvaal would have vanished, everybody would have refused to work, and the Kaffir market would have been blotted out, was preposterous. Yet, at the moment when Lord Milner made this statement, a census of the colony was taken, which only occupied seven weeks. It is not unreasonable to assume that such a referendum would have occupied more than a month.
All the arguments of the Opposition were in vain against such plausibility. It was useless to point out that while the educated Chinese were good citizens, the bitter experience of Australia, Canada, the United States and New Zealand proved conclusively that the uneducated Chinamen, wherever they went, were vicious, immoral and unclean, hated by the white man, loathed and feared by every decent white woman. The Government admitted the danger[Pg 33] of allowing 50,000 Chinamen to be planted down in a colony without any restrictions. Their introduction was a regrettable necessity; and so it was proposed to keep them in compounds, to round them up every night like sheep, to make them liable to heavy penalties if they wandered abroad without a permit. This was the only way, they declared, in which these necessary evils could be used. Of the necessity of utilizing the evil at all they were convinced, and no argument succeeded in shaking their faith. It was pointed out to them that this would be semi-slavery, if not indeed actual slavery. The Chinaman was not to be employed in any position but that of a miner; he could not improve his position; he could not give notice to one employer and go to another. He could never leave the compound without permission. If he struck work he could be imprisoned. He was bound to reside on the premises of his employer, in charge of a manager appointed for the purpose. Permission to leave these premises might or might not be granted; but in any case he could never be absent for more than forty-eight hours at a time. If he escaped, he could be tracked down, arrested without a warrant and imprisoned by a magistrate, while anybody who harboured or concealed him was fined ￡50, or imprisoned in default of payment.
The Ordinance was without parallel in the Empire. Because the Chinese were competitors, because they were a moral and social[Pg 34] danger, the supporters of the Ordinance were compelled to devise some system under which it could become law in the Transvaal, and by which they could yet prevent any one of the Chinamen brought in being able at any time to leave his employment and turn to other and more profitable undertakings.
Only a casuist could call this anything else but slavery. One of our most unsuccessful ministers tried to find a parallel between this system and the life of our soldiers—a parallel so bright and so pleasing that no one, I think, has yet attempted to spoil the bloom of this flower of grim humour by disclosing its absurdity. The Transvaal Government had, in fact, gone to the statute books of the slave states of America for a model for their Ordinance.
It was soon seen and realized that any attempt to negative the Ordinance must prove abortive. All that the Opposition could do was to render it as innocuous as possible, and to secure as many guarantees as they could for the proper moral and physical treatment of the unfortunate Chinamen. They extracted pledges and promises galore, most of which have been completely broken.
On March 21, 1904, Mr. Lyttelton, after stating that the average Kaffir wage was 50s. for thirty days' work, made this statement in the House of Commons—"Chinamen would receive in the Transvaal at least 2s. a day. I stand here and give the House my assurance that the[Pg 35] Chinese will receive at least the amount I have specified."
At that time, when this well-meaning pledge was made, the Kaffir was only receiving 33s. per month. But even had he been receiving 50s. a month, which Mr. Lyttelton in his ignorance imagined, was it at all likely that the Rand owner would pay the Chinaman 2s. a day, or 60s. a month, that is to say, 10s. a month more than they were presumably paying the Kaffirs? Of course, the mine magnates were not going to pay the Chinaman more than the 33s. they were paying the Kaffir.
Mr. Lyttelton's pledge was summarily disposed of by Lord Milner and the mine owners.
After at first insisting on a minimum of 1s. a day instead of 2s., Lord Milner finally made this plausible promise, that if within six months the average pay was not more than 50s. for thirty days' work, the minimum should be raised from 1s. to 1s. 6d. a day. Mr. Lyttelton's maximum of 2s. a day was thus reduced to a possible minimum of 1s. 6d. a day.
Another delightful pledge was also given. It seemed almost indeed as if the Transvaal Government were continually advising Lord Milner to cable, saying, "Promise anything in heaven or earth, but let's get this Ordinance through."
With somewhat unusual consideration, the opinion of the Chinese Government had been asked on the subject. Speaking through their[Pg 36] ambassador, the Chinese Government insisted that the immigrant should have free access to the courts of justice to obtain redress for injury to his personal property.
On March 10, 1904, Mr. Lyttelton stated that the Chinese labourers would have the same right of access to the courts as all the other subjects of his Majesty's dominions. Any subject of his Majesty's dominions has the right to appear before a court when he has any grievance. That is the right of all subjects of his Majesty's dominions. The Chinaman, according to Mr. Lyttelton, was to have the same right. As a matter of fact, he has no right of access to the courts, except by leave of an inspector.
Again, Mr. Lyttelton declared, when the Chinese Government raised the point of flogging, that there was no power in the Ordinance to impose flogging. There was not at that time. B............