THE CLAIMS OF THE COLONIES
ONCE a year, on the occasion of the Colonial Office vote, the House of Commons turns its attention to that vast portion of the British Empire whose inhabi- tants are not in a position to control their own govern- ment. Here, in the colonies and mandatory territories, democracy has to dictate while it educates, and in its rule in extreme cases is only differentiated from dictatorship by the degree in which British public opinion, asserting itself on behalf of backward races, can influence the administration. Perpetual vigilance is needed to ensure that a sound and forward-looking policy is adopted, that it is supported from at home, and efficiently carried out overseas. Germany is clamouring at the doors. She demands the restoration of her old colonies. If our final attitude to that demand should be rejection, it must rest on the ground that our way of doing the job is best for Africa and other colonial areas ; if it should be conditional acceptance, the conditions should be based upon experience learnt from unstinted effort. In either case an immense responsibility rests on Great Britain.
In making his statement last week Mr. MacDonald showed himself aware of the magnitude of the problem, but there was nothing to suggest that the Government was treating it as if it were a major question of general policy. It may not be desirable that the British should be as exact as the French in laying down the ultimate forms of colonial development; but since it must be assumed that the final goal is self-government for the natives, we expect a conscious policy in regard to educa- tion (on which Mr. MacDonald had nothing to report), and since we accept the view of our trusteeship in colonies and mandatory areas, we ought to show, as Sir Edward Grigg indicated, in an important speech on June 8th, in what way we are prepared to share the oppor- tunities and advantages with others. What more can be done to increase the prosperity of the dependent popu- lations, vast numbers of whom are living in abysmal poverty? And what is to be the political relationship of Africa to Europe? Will it, in another war, be drawn into our quarrels as it was in the Great War, or is it to be freed from such dismal results of association with white peoples?
The part which the continent of Africa takes in the world's economy is far less than would be expected from its size. It has only 4.5 per cent. of the world's export, and 4.8 per cent. of the import trade. Nor does it make up for this small trade by heavy consumption of its own products. In most regions, Lord Halley has shown, there is not much opportunity for white settlers to expect to make a living by engaging in manual labour in agricultural occupations alone. But this is not to say that there is no scope for white immigration. Sir Edward Grigg insists that the economic welfare of East Africa imperatively demands a gradual influx of immi- grants who could maintain themselves upon a moderate acreage of land and who could start also some simple and minor industries. The latter condition is essential, but it involves capital expenditure, and at present there is little encouragement for a flow of capital to East Africa. European settlers are not going to East Africa, with this notable exception—Germans, of Nazi sympa- thies, are finding their way there with assistance from their own Government. In fact, the only considerable immigration into British East Africa is that of Nazis.
If it is possible for Nazi Germany to promote settle- ment in Africa, then it is surely possible for our Govern- ment to promote settlement by Jewish and other refugees. But they cannot be sent to our African dependencies on a considerable scale until the possibili- ties have been carefully surveyed and money made available. The Government have already made in- quiries in regard to certain Colonial areas. The report for British Guiana has shown that a small, but only a small, colonisation is possible there, and the question has also been examined by the Governor of Tangan- yika and the Commissions for Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland. But it is not enough to survey the problem in a perfunctory way. The question is not whether, in existing circumstances, there is the land and prospect of occupation to warrant the sending of batches of refugees from Europe. It is rather, what could be done if the Government would make it a matter of policy to foster the establishment of small industries to operate in conjunction with agriculture, and open up to new enterprise the immense under-developed territories which are in our charge.
The question with which the Colonial Office has to deal concerns the whole Empire and the world. The economic, moral and political future of the black races is now in the making. Are they to be exploited and ulti- mately antagonised, or are they to be assisted in their development? Are they to be used as catspaws in the quarrels of Europe, or are they to be scrupulously pro- tected from our ideological conflicts and preparations for war? Are they to be imaginatively assisted to take their part in the economic re-organisation of the world, or do we leave them stranded mid-way between the old primitive savagery and the civilisation only a veneer of which has so far affected them? These are questions which demand the close and constant interest of Parliament. Lord Halley has suggested the appoint- ment of a Parliamentary Committee which should receive reports from the different territories, interview officials, and make its own reports to the House of Commons. Mr. Noel Baker and Sir R. Glyn urged the Government to set up some such committee which would be in permanent session and keep Parliament in touch with Colonial Office policy. If it is objected, as it was objected by Mr. Petherick, that the setting up of such a committee would make it impossible to refuse similar requests for other departments, the answer surely is that the Colonial Office is in a unique position—it is the only Department of State which is in charge of the government of scores of millions of people who have no representative institutions and little or no say in what is done on their behalf. Since that is so, the least that we as a democracy can do is to insist that our own representative body shall be provided with the machinery of effective criticism.
Previous page
