THE KENYA PROBLEM.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18461, 26 July 1923, Page 7

THE KENYA PROBLEM.

BRITAIN'S SOLUTION. 1 AFRICAN INTERESTS FIRST. FRANCHISE FOR INDIANS. COMMUNAL BASIS. : By Telegraph—Press Association.— Copyright. (Received 8.5 p.m.) A. and N.Z. ' LONDON. July. 24. A White Paper regarding the Government of Kenya Colony states that the British Government is of opinion that, the interests of African 1 natives is - the most paramount, while the interests of other communities/ European, , Indian, and Arab, must also be safeguarded. To grant ■' responsible government to Kenya is 'out; of the question at.the present With regard to the claims of Indians domiciled in Kenya, the Government has decided that the interests of all will be best served by the adoption of a communal system of representation on the Legislative Council. Under this system Indians will be granted a wide franchise. The existing practice of reserving agricultural land in the highlands by Europeans must bo maintained, but an sirea in the lowlands will be reserved in case there is a demand for agricultural lands among Indians. , .

EUROPEAN VIEW PREVAILS. , EMPIRE-WIDE ISSUE. I The cable summary of the British Government's decisions regarding the Government of Kenya• Colony - .(British East Africa), indicates that the European view has prevailed at Downing Street. , Conversations have been proceeding in London for some time past between the Duke of Devonshire, as Secretary of State for the Colonies, and two delegations from Kenya, one representing the' European settlers, comprising Lord Delamere, head of the white community,, and the oldest settler in th& colony, Mr. C. K. Archer, one of the leading settlers, Mr. T. A. Wood, representing white 1 commercial interests, and Rev. Dr. J. W. Arthur, who represents " the whole of the ' missions of all. Christian faiths in Kenya, and the other representing Indian opinion, consisting of Mr. V. S. - Srinivasa Sastri, Mr. M. A. . Desai, Mr. . Varma, and another. There was also an unofficial Indian representation, which included the Rev. C. F. Andrews, and the Aga Khan. Indians in Kenya demanded • first ' the establishment of a common electoral roll, representation on the Legislative and Executive Councils ■ in proportion to their numbers, which would mean an Indian majority and Indian control of affairs, the right to acquire land in the more healthy highlands ,of the, colony which have. been expressly reserved — a reservation reaffirmed by succeeding Colonial Secretaries — for white settlers ; the abolition of segregation, and the right of unrestricted immigration. The ; counter demands adopted by the European settlers may bo summarised as follows:— _ . > 1. Strictly controlled immigration >■ of Indians at present, with a view to ultimate prohibition, consistently with tha principle ■ enunciated in 1917, and confirmed in 1921, by the Imperial Conference of the inherent right of every community within the Empire to determine the composition of its . own population. 2. - Tvvo nominated and not elected Indian members of the Legislative Council. (There are four at present as a temporary concession. 3. Segregation in residential areas, and, where practicable, in commercial areas also. ■■ • ■ > . ,

4. No alienation to Asiatics of . land in the highland areas. • ■ : . ' 5. Full recognition ,of existing Asiatic property rights. . The /Indians biased their claim mainly on the declaration of the Imperial Conference of 1921, which accepted the principle of equal rights for all British . subjects everywhere within the Empire. South Africa refused to agree to the declaration, and Kenya was not, represented; at. the Conference. The important Dominions which did accept ;it were, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. ; . It is ■ pointed out by Europeans .in Kenya that the three Dominions which accepted the resolution. have no Indian question,. and' they already possess stringent laws regulating the admission of Asiatics, and these will neither be repealed nor relaxed. The total number of Indians in the three Dominions mentioned is less than 4500, scattered among a population of fully 15,000,000. Very different are the proportions in Kenya. There the ■Indians outnumber the white populatipn by more than; two to one; 22,000 as compared -with 9500, though the native population of 2,500,000 to 3,000,000 must be taken into account. In some other British colonies the disproportion is almost as great. In Mauritius, for instance, there are 257,000 Indians out of a total population of 370,000; in British Guiana, 129 000 out of a total of 307,000: and in Fiji, 60,000, out of a total ; of : 150,000. There is also a large Indian popula+inn in Jamaica. South - Africa has 165,000 Indians, of whom 120,000 are _in _ Natal. Success of - tHe Indian agitation in Kenya would doubtless _ have been lowed by similar, agitation- in the other Crown colonies. .Thus, the issues raised in Kenya are not confined to East Africa, but are of Empire-wide importance.