Letters and Papers Concerning the Trans-Persian Railway and Other Railways in Persia [‎161r] (321/442)

2003 Supply {Committee).
Foreign Office. 2004
10 July 1912
SI. Petersburg is the political capital of
Russia, and it is known that the construc
tion of this railway is regarded there with
the greatest apprehension, and that they
regard it as what it is, purely a strategic
line. I wish to refer to one other matter
dealt with by the Foreign Secretary, be
cause I do not think he was altogether ap
preciative of the point made by my hon.
Friend the Member for Warrington. He
rather casts, I will not say ridicule, but
pleasantry at any rate, over the idea that
my hon. Friend wanted to keep up the
Fleet in all parts of the world and in the
Mediterranean to top strength. I do not
think my hon. Friend said that; but he re
gretted that at a time 'when Germany is
going in we should be coming out of the
Mediterranean. I did regret to hear the
right hon. Gentleman say that he thought
it sufficient for his part that Great Britain
should be one of the Powers in theMediter-
lanean. I certainly hope that no Govern
ment in this country will be satisfied that
Britain should be anything else but the
chief naval Power in the Mediterranean,
and I believe any other policy will lead to
the fulfilment of the prophecy of Admiral
Mahan, who said that with the disappear
ance of Britain from the Mediterranean
she would cease to be a first-class Power.
The hon. Member who has just sat down
referred to the labour conditions in the
island of San Thome and Principe. I wish
to refer to that matter with an exactly op
posite object. I wish to ask whether the
Foreign Secretary has seen a letter from
the First Secretary of the Colonial Office
in Lisbon, who I take it might fairly be
regarded as the representative of a friendly
Power and who might be regarded to some
■ extent as responsible in these matters. He
deals with the assumption that slavery is
rife in these Portuguese islands. He gives
figures with which I need not trouble the
Committee, but he gives many facts and
his object is to show that the Portuguese
Government are not indifferent to the suf
ferings, if there are sufferings, of inden
tured labour in these islands. He shows
there is proper protection for them, and
he shows that the planters are kindly, just,
and generous employers of labour. From
a lifelong association w r ith them, I heartily
subscribe to that, and I am not prepared
to believe that in these islands the natives
are worse off than in other islands. It is a
matter which should be investigated, I sub
mit, by the Foreign Office, so that if these
Portuguese officials make false statements
let them be responsible. Let them be in
vestigated and let the Government Front
Bench not accept questions which proceed
upon the basis that our allies are inhuman
and indifferent to the sufferings of others;
but let the matter be put to the test by
making inquiry. The only answer I have
seen is a letter from some anti-slavery pro
tection society flatly contradicting every
thing stated by this responsible official, and
ending in what I regard as a very offensive
manner to a friendly Power. I do not
know what acquaintance the gentleman
who writes this letter has with the Portu
guese Government and officials, but I say, as
one who is in continual contact with them,
that I believe them to be capable, cour
teous, and humane as their Government is
fViendly to ours. I think it would be be
coming of this House and of hon. Members
not to assume that other Powers are in any
way inferior to ourselves until they have
proper proofs, which I do not think myself
they will ever get. I submit that the condi
tions in these islands is a subject which
might very well engage the attention of
the Foreign Office. Behind the hon. Mem
ber for Norfolk opposite sits an hon. Mem
ber who urges the Foreign Office to bran
dish the sword in the face of Italy and
Turkey, and who asks us to see to the pro
tection of other countries regardless of
whether we have any such power or not.
There is another hon. Gentleman opposite
who engages in an agitation that the
officials of another friendly Power are
inhuman and tyrannical and unjust.
Mr. MORRELL: If the hon. Gentleman
refers to me, he is absolutely misrepre
senting what I said.
Mr. KING: And if the hon. Gentleman
refers to me, I do not recognise his de
scription.
Sir J. D. REES: I daresay the hon.
Gentleman does not see himself as others
see him.
The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I do not
see in the Estimates any reference to the
salaries of these hon. Gentlemen.
Sir J. D. REES: I wish to point out in
regard to this case that it is the habitual
practice to refer to wffiat other hon. Gen
tlemen have said, and I wash that the
Foreign Secretary, who is always capable
as I know him to be, and strongly as I
approve of the -work of his Department, I
think it wmuld still be more satisfactory
to this House if he would not have ques
tions and subjects placed before him upon