NATAL AND THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 274, 12 August 1908, Page 6

NATAL AND THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT.

The resolution recently moved by Sir James Hulett in the Natal Parliament, viz., " that the Imperial Government's decision to pay Dinizulu's salary is fraught with serious danger to Natal, and South .Africa,'and. may. tend to defeat the ends of justice through the natives drawing an inference that Great Britain is backing Dinizulu against Natal," is worth the attention of the solf-governing colonies, becauso the principle of tho freedom of those colonies to manage their own internal affairs seems to bo in a measure involved. Summarised, the position is this. Dinizulu, the son of the late Cetewavo, in 1888 was found guilty of high treason, and was banished to St. Helena. In 1898, Mr. Chamberlain committed one o£, tho few mistakes of his great Colonial Secretaryship. He permitted Dinizulu to return to Zuliiland. He was given the rank of a local chief, one of fourteen, and such he still is in theory. In actual fact, the moment ho returned, he became tho uncrowned Zulu King, and the other chiefs became his chief indunas. At the time of his return, it was arranged between Mr. Chamberlain, the Natal Government, and Dinizulu that he should rcccive a salary of £500 per annum from the Natal Govornmont, and'Mn. Chamberlain gave him an assurance that this salary should never bo withdrawn, so long only as his behaviour was satisfactory. It would bp unfair at the moment to form an opinion as tp whether he has performed this condition, because ho is now on trial on charges which, if proved, will effectually settlo tho point. Although for years past the Natal Government has, rightly or wrongly, bepn dissatisfied with his conduct, tho salary has been regularly paid. Recently, however, while the preliminary inquiry into fresh charges of high treason was being held, payment of the salary was suddenly suspended. The Natal Government justifies this stop on the ground that Dinizulu, in the circumstances above set out, is a Civil Servant, or at least a Civil Service pensioner. The former would seem to be the- more correct view, because the salary is payable for present'and not for past services. If ho is not a Civil Servant at all, then his position would seem to bo morn nearly, analogous to that of a subsidised Indian

prince than anything else. But whether he roceives the £500 as salary or as subsidy, it is difficult to see any ground for his being entitled to exemption from the liabilities of a Civil Servant or a subsidised prince. In either case, suspension from duty and suspension of salary or subsidy follow by established and com-mon-sense custom upon the preferring of serious charges against the individual.

Whether the Natal Government- has been well advised in taking the step thq,t it has taken is perhaps open to doubt. Probably it is a right step taken at the wrong time. It should either have been taken as soon as Dinizulu was arrested, which was a sufficiently obvious suspension from duty, or not until a prima facie case was made out, and he was committed for trial The Home Government now comes on the scene. First it censures the Natal Government for suspending the salary Now, if the latter had cancelled or " withdrawn " the salary, the Imperial Government would have been within its rights in intervening, because it was a party to the original agreement. But, admittedly, the salary has neither been cancelled nor " withdrawn." It has merely been suspended, which is a very different thing, and is a purely lccal administrative act. ' Failing to force the Natal Government to cancel the suspension, it takes yet a further step in the infringement of the rights of a selfgoverning colony. It announces its intention of making good Dinizulu's salary out of Imperial funds. This step has a moro serious aspect even than tbo breach of the rights of the self-governing colonies, and it is this aspect that is touched on with studied moderation in the resolution we have quoted. It is well known to all who have had much to do with coloured races in Africa that the first requisite for their successful government is for them to fully and constantly realise that the authorities on the spot are the " baas." Tliere can be no more fatal blunder in dealing with them than to touch thorn that the Government they l|avo been accustomed to pbey and respect is npt the real " baas," but has to oboy the orders of some bigger " baas " elsewhere. Such a step strikes a deadly blow at the prestige of 'the loca) authorities, and prestige is the foundation stone of thp successful government, of inferior races. Two years ago this same Imperial Cabinet committed a similar blunder. They countermanded the orders of the Natal Government for the execution of certain native rebels. This interference at once raised a fierce storm of protest from the other colonies, as well as from Natal, the obnoxious' command was ignominiously withdrawn, and, thanks to the prompt action of the Natal Government, the threatened revival of the insurrection, with its inevitable murders of 'peaceful settlers, was prushod in the bud. The native question in Natal is not one to be trifled with. We do not suppose that the Natal laws in regard to natives and native lands cannot be iinprpved, but interferences of the nature' described are not likely to have a beneficial effect.