WANTED, MINE-OWNERS WHO CAN "THINK IMPERIALLY."
[To THE EDITOR OP THE "SPECTATOR."] seems a pity that Mr. Lyttelton should treat the question of Chinese labour in such a superficial manner. In his speech in the House on Wednesday, February 17th, he hardly reached the root of the matter. It is pleasant, of course, to know that the Chinese Government approves of the Ordinance ; the approval of the Chinese Government is the hall-mark of a scheme's excellence ; and doubtless it will not greatly miss some few thousands of its superfluous and less reputable subjects. It is also pleasant to know that the labourers would be permitted to bring their wives and families with them. This concession—a sop flung in scorn to " senti- mentalists "—is really beside the mark. And it is no less interesting to hear that if Chinese labour is not permitted, the Boer generals suggest forcing the Baffin to work in the mines. With all due deference to the Boers, the opponents of the Ordinance are not likely to forget that the natives are also our fellow-subjects, and that we are still in their debt for their helpful loyalty to us in the late war. Therefore the Colonial Secretary need scarcely fear that in default of Chinese labour the enslavement of blacks would be recommended. Mr. Lyttelton rather gives his case away when he says (1) that the most strenuous efforts of the mine representatives to obtain native labour have been in vain ; and that (2) all unskilled labour in the Colony is performed by Kaffirs, who overwhelmingly preponderate. The inference to be drawn is obvious. This is no more a party question than it is a question of dislike to the Chinese, or jealousy of the Rand mine-owners ; it holds for men's minds far greater issues. Again and again we are told that the prosperity of the Transvaal is dependent on its mines. If this be so, then what a magnificent opportunity now presents itself to the mine-owners of showing they can "think Imperially " ! They stand at the parting of the ways with a great responsibility laid on them, and men's eyes are watching to see if the great death-roll is being justified, or whether those to come will find ruins. If the only aim of the mine-owners be to amass imme- diate riches for themselves, or even for "this new and expen- sive Government" (ride Mr. Lyttelton), then let them bring in forced labour, with all that it means, all that it leads to. But because of what their possession has cost in the past, because of the promise it holds for the future, they will surely not do this. What is asked of them ? Some courage, some strength, self-denial, and foresight. Courage to acknowledge the error of judgment which brings them to this pass. Strength totally to revolutionise the conditions—economic, industrial, and moral—that now prevail in their mines ; and to establish their works on such a base of clean-dealing, justice, and equity that men, skilled and unskilled, white and black, will seek work in them gladly and freely, without thought of "degra- dation" (unskilled labour of itself is not degrading; the con- tinuous use of this term by those seeking to benefit the mine- owners is sufficient condemnation of the circumstances at present attending work in their mines). And self-denial enough to rest content with setting up the foundations, slow and sure, of a great Imperial building, to which their sons and their sons' sons will proudly add the final stones. Finally, to look at the question from a material point of view, should the measure be passed, it will not help Britain in the work that lies before her. The tu quo que retort may not be logic or argument ; it has, nevertheless, a paralysing effect on the nation to which it is addressed; and in view of what is passing in Macedonia and the Congo, it would scarcely become us very well if our remonstrances to the Sultan and King Leopold were negatived by our own conduct in a British Colony.—I
Previous page
