NATAL CENSURED.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 21, 4 June 1908, Page 7

NATAL CENSURED.

DINIZUW'S POSITION. CTOPPAGE OF HIS SALARY. ' ' DID HIS ARREST' AUTOMATICALLY TERMINATE IT?: - , or telegraph—rniiss association—corYnioHt. London, Juno 2.. In the House of Lords, "tt'o Secretary of State for the Colonies (tlio Earl of Crowe) censurcd Natal for stopping Dinizulu's salary without Imperial assent. Ho declared that the stoppage was a breach of the conditions on which Dinizulu had been permitted to return t-o Zululand, and it had inflicted a hardship on the prisoner, who was also involved in nuich expense owing -to prolongation of the trial; but, inasmuch asi legal points were involved, and tho-matter had been referred to the Supreme Court, its docision must bo awaited. , ~ i . . In tho House of Commons, Lieut.-Colonel Seely (Under-Secretary for the Colonies), in reply to Sir H. Cotton (Liberal member for Nottingham East), said Natal contended that the arrest of Dinizulu as a Government induna, with a view to criminal proceedings,, implied suspension from the Government service, and the suspending of his salary. , Tho Natal Government has authorised Reuter to explain that Imperial sanction to Dinizulu's removal from Zululand was interpreted as covering the suspension of his salary. The suspension was'in accordance with the civil service as regards either blacks or whites. - • • INTERFERENCE RESENTED. .

In 1888 Dinizulu was convicted by a Natal Court of treasonable actions, and was banished to St. Helena. He-was allowed to return to Zululand in 1898-as a Government-appointed chief, with a yearly income of .£SOO. 'i'he test of ttio speech of the Premier of Natal, in which he referred to the "damnablo interference" in the affairs of the Colony of a group of politicians in the House of Commons, is now available.*' "I would," Mr. Moor said, "ask these men what good they are doing as between the Motherland and Natal when they impertinently by questions and other insidious means cast discredit and dishonour on the judiciary and the public institutions- of this Colony., ~l\atal _is within her. chartered, rights. It'is'' ; the.'duty'-oli any j and evory country to maintain''law"and order in its midst. We throw it back in the teeth of thoso men. -They have no right to iiiy terfere. They interfered without ever'-hear- I ing Natal. ■ ! .. "'These men would be better employed, if they are concerned for the.welfare of the Empire at large, if they., looked moro closely to the sedition mongers'm India, to the crimes that are being perpetrated in Ireland; and' to i the millions in the British Isles who .aro -going about without food or clothcs. ; They be doing better service ;if they turned itheir attention to measures of reform and reliefin the directions I haye'.indicated.' • I would, ask them .to remember, .that:'' the people, of Natal are-partners inj'tho Ihiperial concern, 'j are no longer' dependent, aid while we are doing our share in carrying the whito man's burden, those at home are making that burden no Jighter by their damnable interference. I hopo that better counsels; may prevail,' and that tliey'will at least -, givo Natal time to show the justice of ; and the integrity of its: institutions.." , ..: