|
The Hilton Young Commission was a Commission of Inquiry appointed in 1927 to look into the possible closer union of the British territories in East and Central Africa. These territories were individually economically underdeveloped, and it was suggested that some form of association would result both in cost savings and their more rapid development. The Commission recommended an administrative union of the East African mainland territories, possibly to be joined later by the Central African ones. It also proposed that the legislatures of each territory should continue and saw any form of self-government as being a long-term aspiration. It did however reject the possibility of the European minorities in Kenya or Northern Rhodesia establishing political control in those territories, and rejected the claim of Kenyan Asians for the same voting rights as Europeans. Although the Commission's recommendations on an administrative union were not followed immediately, closer ties in East Africa were established in the 1940s. However, in Central Africa, its report had the effect of encouraging European setters to seek closer association with Southern Rhodesia, in what became in 1953 the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland. ==Background to the Commission== In 1914, a number of territories on East and Central Africa were under British sovereignty, but they were neither united nor administered in the same way. The East Africa Protectorate, or Kenya, had originally been the subject of a grant to a Chartered company, the Imperial British East Africa Company in 1888, but when the company began to fail it was taken over as a British protectorate in July 1895. Uganda, which had become a British protectorate in 1894, was incorporated into the East Africa Protectorate in 1902, but became separate again in 1914. Zanzibar became a British protectorate in 1890, but retained a Sultan as ruler.〔Institute of Curriculum Development, (1988). East Africa from 1850 to the Present, pp. 25–7.〕 Nyasaland had been a British protectorate since 1891, but Northern Rhodesia and Southern Rhodesia were administered by another Chartered company, the British South Africa Company, under a Royal Charter dating from 1889.〔H. I Wetherell, (1979) Settler Expansionism in Central Africa: The Imperial Response of 1931 and Subsequent Implications, pp. 210–11.〕 Germany possessed German East Africa from 1885 to 1918, but after the First World War, Britain received a League of Nations mandate in 1922 over what was renamed Tanganyika Territory.〔Institute of Curriculum Development, (1988). East Africa from 1850 to the Present, p. 34.〕 Also in 1922, a referendum was held in Southern Rhodesia in which the white minority electorate chose responsible government as an internally self-governing colony, rather than entry into the Union of South Africa. British South Africa Company rule in Northern Rhodesia ended in 1924, when it became a British protectorate.〔E A Walter, (1963). The Cambridge History of the British Empire: South Africa, Rhodesia and the High Commission Territories, Cambridge University Press pp. 690–1.〕 These changes resulted in a continuous block of British-controlled territories from the Zambezi northwards in which, following the principles first set out in 1923 by the Duke of Devonshire, who was then Colonial Secretary, the interests of Africans would be treated as paramount. However, the next Conservative Colonial Secretary, Leo Amery later attempted to qualify this principle, and gave tacit encouragement to the aspirations of non-native immigrant communities hoping to obtain a degree of self-government following the model of Southern Rhodesia. In Northern Rhodesia, the tiny white community aimed for a similar constitutional position to that in Southern Rhodesia.〔H. I Wetherell, (1979) Settler Expansionism in Central Africa: The Imperial Response of 1931 and Subsequent Implications, pp. 210–11, 217.〕 In Kenya Colony, which was formed in 1920 from the former East Africa Protectorate, there was a significant immigrant community from British India, and a smaller Arab one, as well as a European community. From 1905, one Indian was nominated to the Kenya Legislative Council to represent Asian interests. In 1919, when Europeans became able to elect members to the Kenya Legislative Council, Asians were excluded from the franchise. The offer of a second nominated Indian seat on that council was refused in 1920 as unrepresentative of the size and economic strength of the India community. In 1927, India representation was increased to five members, of whom four were nominated, compared with eleven members elected by Europeans. There was also one nominated Arab member’ and African interests on the Legislative Council were represented by a single nominated Europeans. Up to twenty official Legislative Council members, all but one European, could outvote the 18 communal representatives. There were then no Africans in the council, and the representatives of both the European and Indian immigrant communities opposed both their admission and any increase in African representation there.〔R G Gregory, (1971). India and East Africa: a history of race relations within the British Empire, 1890–1939, pp. 90, 179, 271, 310.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Hilton Young Commission」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|