In the House of Commons on Monday the debate in
Committee of Supply turned chiefly on the New Hebrides Convention. Mr. Lyttelton recapitulated the reasons of the Opposition for objecting to the Convention, and remarked that the queensland Ordinance was the model the Govern- ment ought to have copied. Mr. Churchill said that Mr. Lyttelton's "querulous oration" was an attempt to revenge himself for the Chinese labour controversy. Mr. Churchill admitted that the regulations under the New Hebrides Ordinance were "primitive," but declared that the Colonial Premiers would be consulted and further regulations would be issued. There was nothing in the Convention to make repatriation compulsory.—We may note here that Mr. Churchill in the same speech also hotly defended what he had said as to the mining ring in South Africa, and repeated his charge that the Witwatersrand Labour Association had manipulated the supply of native labour.—Sir Edward Grey repudiated the suggestion that the New Hebrides Ordinance was inhumane. It introduced inspection and control which had not existed before. There was no analogy between it and the unwhole- some conditions established by the Chinese Ordinance in South Africa. Mr. Balfour reasserted the Opposition argu- ment that there was no difference between the New Hebrides and South African Ordinances as to repatriation. It was clear that the further regulations of which the Government spoke were being offered as an afterthought. It was absurd to suppose that any real changes could be made without drawing up a new Convention with France. Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman closed the debate by repeating Sir Edward Grey's assurances,
Previous page
