Motion made, and Question made:
That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £10, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1921, for sundry Colonial Services, including certain Grants in Aid.
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Lieut.-Colonel Amery)
It may perhaps be for the convenience of the Committee that I should explain briefly why we are asking for this Supplementary Vote, even though it is only a token Vote. As the Committee will see, there is an estimated additional expenditure in connection with Somali-land of £60,000. The greater part of this, that is, say, about £34,000, is due to the extra cost of the recent Somaliland campaign, mainly in connection with the purchase of certain additional stores and equipment required by the Air Force for that campaign.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I remember the Debate and the lucid statement which the hon. and gallant Member made last Session on this question. Have we not already voted the cost of the expedition against the Mullah?
§ Lieut.-Colonel AMERY
I was just explaining that point. The Committee may remember that the operations of the Air Force, which contributed so largely to the astonishing success of that brief and short expedition, were estimated for in this form, namely, that a small detachment of the Air Force was borrowed from Egypt, and the Air Ministry calculated for an expenditure of £50,000 over and above the normal cost of keeping that detachment in Egypt. This amount was for the expenses in Somaliland. Certain extra stores had, however, to be brought from this country, and the amount comes to something over £34,000. Those were essential purchases in connection with what was by far the most economical campaign we ever had, because the total cost amounted only to £100,000, and for that sum we disposed of an enemy who has cost this 1867 country many millions, as well as a very considerable number of gallant lives. I believe and I trust that we have disposed of our enemy finally, and I think this expenditure will enable the whole of that country to be put under British administration. I hope in a few years time we shall have a revenue from that country which will meet the cost of administration.
The remainder of the £60,000 is almost entirely made up of expenses in connection with the Exchange. As hon. Members are no doubt aware, Somaliland is on the rupee basis, and both the expenditure and the deficit is reckoned in Indian rupees. If the Indian Exchange goes up the same grant-in-aid does not go so far. Unfortunately, just after the original Estimate, the India Office came to a certain decision in connection with the rupee which sent it up from 2s. 2d. to something like 2s. lid. for a considerable period, and all the heaviest expenditure in connection with the Somaliland campaign, and the general expenditure of administration, including the purchase of camels and other expenses, had to be made during the early months of the year, when the rupee was standing anywhere between 2s. 4d. and 2s. 11d. If the rupee had stood in January, February, March, and April at the figure at which it stands at present, I do not suppose I should have had to ask for any Supplementary Estimate at all. For reasons which certainly could not be foreseen by the Somaliland Administration or the Colonial Office, the rupee rose very sharply in the early months of the year, and that is practically responsible for the whole of the rest of this £60,000. We have come to the House for a token Vote of £10 only because it has been found possible to make a saving on the next sub-head grant in aid of Uganda of approximately the amount we require.
§ 10.0 P.M.
§ Sir D. MACLEAN
Those hon. Members who were present just now when we discussed the Bill dealing with the export of gold and silver will now see how very important that measure is, because we immediately come to an Estimate which shows what a very remarkable reflex there is on the Treasury in connection with the movements of silver. I think hon. Members will do well to bear in 1868 mind that these small Bills, such as the one we have just passed, although they are very dry and technical, have a very practical bearing upon other problems which come before the House. With regard to the campaign in Somaliland, we congratulate the Colonial Office upon the brevity, the economy, and the success of that campaign. I only wish to say that I regret the same result has not distinguished the operations in Mesopotamia, because if they had adopted something like the same methods of dealing with that difficulty by the Air Force, I think we should have saved scores of pounds and possibly hundreds of lives. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman in charge of this Vote will explain more in detail than he has done the saving in connection with Uganda amounting to £59,990. I understand that the reason for bringing this token Vote before the Committee is to get the authority of the House for this additional expenditure, although on the total sum issued from the Treasury nothing more is really required. I understand that no extra sum is required, but that a fresh authorisation is required to devote this saving to another purpose. Really, this £34,000 is what we are dealing with, and £26,000 has practically gone in the difference in the exchange. The real sum we are dealing with is £34,000 which is left over from the original Estimate.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
I wish to ask a question about the difference in the exchange value of the rupee. I understand it has gone against us in Somaliland, but it has apparently gone in our favour in Mesopotamia. We understand that the War Office has been enabled to postpone for some time the Supplementary Estimate for Mesopotamia, because the rupee has fallen or risen in value, and that is in our favour. How is it that fluctuations in the exchange value of, I presume, the same Indian rupee benefit the War Office in regard to Mesopotamia and, I suppose, the Secretary of State for India, but, apparently, hit the Colonial Office in Somaliland. It is rather puzzling, and if the right hon. Gentleman could explain that I think we would all be very much the wiser. With regard to the saving of £60,000 in Uganda, the words used by the Under-Secretary were that they were a postponement of certain expenditure, and 1869 I was rather disappointed, because I thought there had been a saving, and I was prepared to congratulate the hon. Gentleman on the one Government Department that apparently had been able to make a saving. I hope the saving has not been made in some necessary service, because life out there is particularly hard for our officials, and I hope the saving has not been made by cheese-scraping in any of the amenities that these officials enjoy. I would rather like to know what these postponements are and whether they could not have been postponed indefinitely, because we are in such a state that even £60,000 is something.
Before we vote this money I should like to ask, have we really settled what part of Somaliland we are going to hold? It is being run at a loss to-day. The revenue and the expenditure do not balance, and I do not think it will ever be run at a profit. It is a desert country, and I doubt whether it will ever be worth the expenditure of a European administration, especially as regards the interior. It may be necessary to hold the coast line for stategic purposes—I am not discussing that—but is there anything in the rumours that there is going to be a readjustment of frontiers between Italian Somaliland and British Somaliland? The Committee ought to know that, because it will affect future expenditure. Our Italian friends have been pressing for readjustments in their favour, on the ground that the mandatory areas made over to Italy have not been so favourable as those made over to this country and France. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman may be able to tell the House whether anything is settled, and, above all, what is our policy? Are we going to push on any further? We are accused by our enemies on the Continent of trying to push right in there, and to absorb Abyssinia, although I think my right hon. Friend denied it on the Estimates last year. Although we are only asked to vote altogether a sum of £210,000 for Somaliland—and I hope we have got rid of finally the mad Mullah, who was the principal cause of the expenditure then— I do not think we will ever do any good in the interior of the country. The number of packets of troops that we have scattered about in different parts of the world is a danger to the Empire. We have only a certain limit of recruitment in this country, and we ought to cut our 1870 commitments wherever we can, and the interior of Somaliland is one of the places where we can cut our commitments without loss of prestige and without any loss of valuable markets.
Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAY
Having only just entered the Committee, I have not heard the speech of the hon. and gallant Member below me (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy), but I gather that he has advocated that the hinterland of Somaliland could be evacuated. If that be so, I venture to support the hon. and gallant Gentleman in the appeal he has addressed to the Government. I carry my mind back to 1911, when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ilkeston (Major-General Seely) was Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, and, if my memory serves me correctly, he recommended that Somaliland should be evacuated. A great deal of water has flown under the bridges since those days, and, if anything, the reasons why the hinterland of Somaliland should be evacuated are stronger and more insistent than at that time. It may be true to say that there are naval advantages in retaining a portion of the coast line, but what is the strategic advantage or any other advantage to this country in remaining in possession of Somaliland to the extent that we do at the present day 1, for one, fail to understand. In 1911 a sum of £210,000 was not a sum that occasioned much comment or aroused much opposition, but in these days it is a very considerable sum, and very good arguments ought to be brought forward by the Government if they are to substantiate the expenditure of such a sum in the retention of the hinterland of Somaliland. I venture to suggest to the Government that they should withdraw all troops from Somaliland, retaining only Berbera, and, if necessary, the coast line. If they were to carry out some such policy as this it would very largely reduce this Estimate of £210,000 which is now necessary as a grant-in-aid of local revenues. Can the hon. Gentleman inform the House if there is any reason from the point of view of commerce or trade why we should remain in Somali land, or from the strategic point of view? If he can do so, that will alter the situation. If he cannot do so, then I beg to move the reduction of this Vote by £10, in order to elicit from him whether or not 1871 there is any good reason why we should retain the hinterland of Somaliland at the present time.
Can the hon. Gentleman finally assure the House that the Mullah is disposed of? The Mullah seems to have not a human life but the nine lives of a cat. I have read of his death every year for I do not know how many years past, and I should like to be absolutely assured that he is finally disposed of in some way or another. I do not mind how, whether he has been blown up or killed in some other way, or captured, or put into prison. I should also like to have an assurance that in this part of the world the policy of forced labour is not to be adopted. It seems to be a pity that in some parts of the world where we have influence or exercise a mandate it is apparently a growing practice to have forced labour or slavery in some other form. I want an assurance that in Somaliland, at any rate, these practices will not obtain.
I would like a very full explanation of these anticipated savings which are spoken of in connection with Uganda. We ought to be told how they have been brought about. Is it due to a reduction in the number of officials, or is it because your taxation has proved more remunerative than was expected? We should have this information so that we may act upon it in other Departments. Then I would like to be told if these anticipated savings are in any way due to a change in silver currency. We have been told it is postponed expenditure. I do not see how that can be an anticipated saving. If it is postponed expenditure, why was it ever entertained? If it can now be put on one side it surely need not have been proposed in the first instance, and why the hon. Gentleman in charge of this Vote—working his Department as efficiently as we know he does—should have proposed it I cannot understand. Why should we expend the money at all? Perhaps the hon. and gallant Gentleman will explain that in due course. As regards Somaliland, I am far from wishing to hold a vast tract of more or less barren land, which has been known to the public 1872 chiefly through the exploits of the Mad Mullah, but, before we make up our minds either to hold or to abandon it, we should be told clearly and definitely, first of all, what its value may be from the point of view of trade purposes, and whether there is any possibility—I do not think there is—of opening up through the country access for trading purposes to any other part of Africa; and, secondly, whether it is necessary to hold any part of it, either temporarily or otherwise, for the purposes of protecting prospective trade routes in the future. I doubt that, but the Committee should be given the position clearly, and the hon. and gallant Gentleman has much fuller information on the subject than we have. Can he also tell us the exact number of troops, the details of the garrisons, and the probable expenditure upon them in the future? We are told, for example, that certain works have to be done in other parts of the world; is there any proposal, either on the coast or inland, involving capital expenditure here? We have a right to know in full detail what is going to be the Government policy as regards Somaliland in the immediate future.
§ Major-General SEELY
As I have had a good deal to do with Somaliland, I may be permitted to address a few words to the Committee on this matter. We now have a Supplementary Estimate for Somaliland, but we have a saving elsewhere. I put it to the Committee that, if it had not been for the wise disposition of His Majesty's Forces in Somaliland, we should, instead of this small sum, have had several hundred thousand pounds to deal with. I agree with the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardine (Lieut.-Colonel A. Murray) that it is undesirable to attempt to hold Somaliland with small garrisons here and there, and that that will only involve us in continuous and increasing expenditure without any corresponding advantage to this country. In Somaliland, however, we had the first proof of the power of the Air Service, when it is used, as it should be, as an independent arm. My right hon. Friend beside me (Sir D. Maclean) whispers "Mesopotamia," and on another occasion I shall hope to develop that theme; but here we have a most striking example. After much argument—and my hon. and gallant Friend opposite deserves credit for this—it was given to the Air Service, but, in the press of other matters, in- 1873 sufficient notice was taken of it. It is not untrue to say, however, that this country was saved at least £1,000,000 in Somaliland alone by the use of the Air Service, directed by the Air Service. Had we adopted this method elsewhere, we might have saved, not £1,000,000, but many millions. Here, at last, we have done it. We are grateful to my hon. Friend (Lieut. -Colonel Amery) for having secured the adoption of what I call the modern policy in Somaliland of holding on to the coast, where our Navy can always secure us from being involved in wild adventures which we find it difficult to carry through. From that secure base we can work with the Air Service on a far more humane method, in the long run, by saying to those with whom we are dealing, "If you will agree to our reasonable proposition, if you will maintain the pax Britannica, all will be well. If not, we can continue, not only to embarrass you, but even to terrify you, and to shoot you down from the air." If we adopt that wise policy elsewhere we shall save ourselves millions of pounds and thousands of lives. Somaliland was evacuated on my advice, as I was representing the Government at the time, and I was denounced in the House of Lords by Lord Curzon for having followed that policy. "We all know now that the policy of His Majesty's Government at that date was sound, and that it was a ridiculous thing to attempt to hold on to Shech and other villages beyond. I trust that my hon. Friend (Lieut.-Colonel Amery) will not be led by old-fashioned militarists— and there is always that danger unless he protests—into again following on the Mesopotamian plan of advancing little packets of infantry into that country in the hope that by so doing you may establish a claim here and a claim there, and gradually extend your influence. That is not the way to do things nowadays. We congratulate the hon. Gentleman on the great success- of an entirely new, more humane, and wiser policy, using modern methods, which are more economical and more effective, and we hope that he will tell his colleagues that this Committee applauds his action and hopes that others will follow suit.
§ Sir F. BANBURY
I am glad to hear that the Government have done something well and have saved some money. It is the first occasion for a considerable 1874 time that I have ever heard those two things attributed to this Government. Am I right in thinking that the policy of the right hon. Gentleman (Major-General Seely) has been carried out by himself, or that my hon. Friend (Lieut.-Colonel Amery) has himself carried out this policy which has been so successful?
§ Sir F. BANBURY
I am glad to hear that it was carried out by my hon. Friend, I presume, on the advice of the right hon. Gentleman. The hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) did not know whether the rupee had gone up or down. It has done both. Silver rose from somewhere about 24d. to the ounce to nearly 80d., and it has now gone down to somewhere about 60d. per ounce.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY
What I wanted to know, and perhaps the right hon. Baronet can inform me, is this: Why is it that on the fluctuation of the rupee the Colonial Office loses money and the War Office gains money?
§ Sir F. BANBURY
I suppose it was because the exchange operations took place at two different times. That is the only solution which I can think of. I rose to put two questions to my hon. Friend, and I am surprised that they have not been asked before. In the footnote there is this statement:The expenditure out of this Grant-in-Aid will not be accounted for in detail to the Comptroller and Auditor-General,Why not?but he will be furnished by the Colonial Office with the audited accounts and with any report of the Director of Colonial Audit thereon.Why should not the Grant-in-Aid be accounted for in detail by the Comptroller and Auditor-General? He is an officer appointed by this House. The only people to whom he is responsible is the Committee of Public Accounts. The result of these sums being accounted for by him has always been satisfactory. He has to appear before the Committee. They issue a report which I hope is read by all Members, and they show where the official has mismanaged, if he has done so, the money granted by Parliament. Personally, I attach, and I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman for Paisley (Mr. 1875 Asquith) would agree with me in this, very great importance to the preservation of this check on the public expenditure We have not very many checks, but the check by the Comptroller and Auditor-General is the best one which we have got.
The foot note goes on to say:no surrender will be made at the close of the year of such sum as may be issued out of the Grant-in-Aid.That is directly contrary to all precedents in connection with the financial control of this House. It has always been held that money not spent at the end of the financial year must be returned to the Treasury. Personally, I think that that is a very sound doctrine. In times past I think everybody, from Mr. Gladstone down, held that though there might be arguments against the policy of surrender yet on the whole the greater weight of argument was in favour of it. Even though the Colonial Office has saved some money, that is no reason why it should be exempt from the law which applies to all Government offices. I may be told that there have been occasions of this sort in the case of the Colonial Office in days gone by. I am not sure whether that is right, but, if so, I would say in reply that we are in a very difficult position at present. We are passing through a financial crisis and, although in times gone by we may have granted these facilities to the Colonial Office, we ought not to do so any longer. All the safeguards imposed by our predecessors on the spending of money should be jealously maintained. I see that it is proposed to meet this £60,000 by a saving of £59,900 which is anticipated under sub-head E, "Uganda." I expect that I am right in saying that it is admissible to transfer from one sub-head of the Vote to another sub-head with the consent of the Treasury, but not from Vote to Vote. I presume that the consent of the Treasury has been given.
§ Sir F. BANBURY
It does not say so, and it would have been more in order if it did. The words are "a saving is anticipated." That means that hon. and gallant Gentleman lives in hopes of this saving taking place. What ground is there for the anticipation?
§ Lieut.-Colonel AMERY
I can hardly complain of the reception which this Supplementary Estimate has had. I am certainly very grateful to my right hon. Friend (Major-General Seely) for what he has said about the policy of dealing with the long-standing military difficulty in Somaliland on the line of independent air operations. They certainly were extremely successful. At the same time, personally, I should hesitate a little before drawing too far-reaching conclusions from that fact. The conditions under which the Air Force could strike in such a manner as to see the enemy and be able to disperse him effectively, were extremely favourable, and I should not like the Committee to think that in other circumstances, such as in Mesopotamia, the conditions were such that what was done in Somaliland could be as well done here. However, that is not my province. The operations were undoubtedly a very complete success. In answer to the hon. Member opposite (Dr. Murray), I would say that the Mullah escaped, and only just escaped with three followers, while the rest of his family and followers were taken prisoners. At this moment the Mullah is well in the interior of Abyssinia without any following, and is not in any position to hurt us. The whole of Somaliland is now in a peaceful and undisturbed condition.
I am not proposing to traverse in any way the wisdom of the decision of my right hon. and gallant Friend (Major-General Seely) and the Government of the day with regard to the withdrawal to the coast in Somaliland. They were dealing with an active and troublesome enemy, and an attempt to hold a large and disturbed country would have required the splitting up of a very considerable force, with no real security anywhere, and with very considerable expense. The condition of affairs now is very different. The whole force employed in the so-called operations was in any case a very small one. We increased the local mounted constabulary from 450 to something like 600 men, and we borrowed a battalion of the King's African Rifles from East Africa. That battalion has gone back. The constabulary have been reduced, I believe, to the original figure; at any rate, there will be a reduction on the pre-operations military expenditure of something like £27,000 a year. I hope it may be possible to carry that further.
1877 On the other hand, the revenue, even of the portion of Somaliland that we held, and held back to the Abyssinian frontier, before these operations, was growing very satisfactorily, and Sir Geoffrey Archer, to whom credit is mainly due for all that has been done in Somaliland, is confident, now that peace is restored, that without any attempt to introduce an elaborate administration, or to set up a number of officials all over the interior of the country, there will be a steady increase of revenue and the resumption of, trade. It is not altogether fair to Somaliland or to ourselves to treat that country as a desert and uninhabited. There is a great deal of very good stock country. Some of the coast region is suited even to cotton-growing. I do not see any reason why we should despair of the future economic value of Somaliland and of its capacity to pay for its own administration, any more than in the case of many another part of the Empire which at the present moment is very successful and more than paying its way, and which not so long ago was described as utterly valueless. I remember when the late Mr. Henry Labouchere described the whole of the interior of West Africa as a hopeless and unprofit able wilderness which would never cover the expenses of the carrying on of the administration. We have never yet had anything in the nature of even the most cursory geological survey of Somaliland, but there have been extremely favourable indications of oil, and investigation is now being carried on. There may be other minerals, and it is worth while spending a little to find out what assets you have really got in order to develop a reasonable administration there without cost to this House. Personally, I have every confidence, now that peace is restored, that in a reasonable number of years even Somaliland, which has long been a burden to the British taxpayer, will pay the cost of its own administration. The hon. Member for the Western Isles asked a question about forced labour. I demur strongly to the suggestion that we are introducing anything in the nature of slavery anywhere, and I can assure the hon. Member that there is no question of forced labour in any form or in any shape in Somaliland. The hon and gallant Mem- 1878 ber for Hull (Lieut-Commander Ken-worthy) put a conundrum as to why the rupee has been the occasion for extra expenditure to the Colonial Office and a source of economy and saving to the War Office. I can only hazard the conjecture that it is due to the variation of the rupee, and that in the case of the War Office that the rupee stood high when the particular estimate was made, and there was a saving from the subsequent fall. As the hon. and gallant Member knows, during the last four or five months the rupee, which had previously soared to 2s. lid., has steadily fallen, and at this moment stands in the neighbourhood, I think, of Is. 5½d. As to the question about the footnotes raised by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the City (Sir F. Banbury), I confess frankly this was not an innovation introduced at my instance or at the instance of the Colonial Office in my time. I always understood that these grants-in-aid were given in that form. As to the footnote about a saving being anticipated, it is possible that the language is not as clear as might be wished. The anticipation refers to the amount; there is no doubt about there being a saving. We put down the sum of £59,990, and we preserved the right of the House over any change from this sub-head to any other. As regards the actual nature of the saving, the position is this: There are certain public and other works, which the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull rightly described as amenities, in connection with educational institutions and other things, for which Uganda is getting a loan from the Treasury, though that loan is actually appearing in the form of a grant-in-aid, but in connection with a change in the annual accounts of the Uganda Protectorate this expenditure has been postponed from the beginning of the year till after 31st March, and the postponement of this borrowing will involve on this year's Estimates a saving sufficient, and I think a little more than sufficient, to cover the £60,000 in question.
§ Lieut.-Colonel AMERY
It is a saving on this year's Estimates, but something corresponding will appear in next year's Estimates.
§ Sir D. MACLEAN
I think it would have been very much better to have 1879 allowed the Uganda postponed payment to fall back into the General Fund and to have taken the thing on a proper business basis as an extra payment out of the Treasury. The method followed in this case is mixing up two things, and I do not take nearly so favourable a view of the transaction, from a business point of view, as I did before. I think it is wrong to mix up the accounts of Somali-land and Uganda in this way.
§ Lieut.-Colonel AMERY
I quite see my right hon. Friend's point, but if he will look at the smaller print on the Paper he will see that the figure that matters to the Committee is the £2,815,248, and that represents the position quite exactly. I venture to think that, whichever way it is put, the position finally has been made perfectly clear to the Committee.
§ Major-General SEELY
The hon. and gallant Gentleman has not answered my question. I expressed the hope, which I think is shared by the Committee generally, that the hon. and gallant Gentleman, who has scored so great a success in these operations, will not fall into the error of now going back to the old-fashioned way of dotting Somaliland with small infantry garrisons. Will he tell us if we are going to hold this place in what I believe to be the common-sense way, by concentrating whatever forces we have near the coast—you will have your political officers in the interior—and by not attempting to garrison with small bodies of infantry six or eight different districts?
Lieut.-Colonel A. MURRAY
The hon. and gallant Gentleman did not really answer the main point put to him. He rode off by suggesting that it was necessary to spend £210,000 a year on Somaliland in order to carry out a geological survey.
That certainly was the impression left on the Committee. The question I put to him was: Could the British Government withdraw from Berbera and the hinterland? If not, will he indicate whether there is any reason, from the point of view of trade, commerce or strategy, why we should continue in the hinterland of Somaliland and spend this vast amount of money? We are constantly 1880 asked by the Government to indicate ways in which money can be saved. When we come down here and show how money can be saved, the hon. and gallant Gentleman gives no answer at all.
Lieut.-Commander KENWO RTHY
We get very few opportunities of asking what the Government policy is. One day we are told we cannot debate matters because they are under discussion and the next day we are told we cannot discuss them because they have been settled. I would respectfully ask for an answer on this question of Somaliland. What is being done there? The Italian papers were full of it a little time ago, and, after all, it is a part of the world which is at present under British protection.
§ Lieut.-Colonel AMERY
I apologise for not having answered the point, but there is no question of an alteration of the boundaries of Somaliland. As regards the main question put by the hon. and gallant Gentleman. I must also apologise for not making myself sufficiently clear, though I confess that I thought I had done so. I tried to say that I thought it would be an unwise policy in dealing with a disturbed country full of hostile forces, such as Somaliland was at the period referred to, to scatter infantry posts about. There is no question of scattering infantry forces about anywhere in the interior, except the smallest detachment at Berbera itself. There is a small force of mounted Constabulary which is now able to preserve peace all over Somaliland and to enable the trade of the country, which was already very satisfactorily developing before the recent operations, to develop further. My belief is that that trade will very soon develop to a point at which the normal expenditure and income of Somaliland will begin to approximate, and that eventually the income will cover the expenditure. There is no question of our spending £210,000 a year. That sum covers the actual cost of the whole of these most successful operations. In a normal year the deficit will be not only a much smaller one, but I hope a very rapidly decreasing one. I am confident that much of the resources of Somaliland which have been decried in the past will, with the general peace and the development of trade, including fisheries, minerals, and possibly even cotton plantations in certain of the better watered regions, be so developed that 1881 that part of the Empire will lapse into the position of so many other parts and will be very rarely heard of in this House, and that the ordinary Budget will be sufficient to carry on such administration as may be adequate for maintaining law and order and ensuring the gradual progress and well-being of that country.
§ Question put, and agreed to.