HC Deb 24 July 1934 vol 292 cc1646-7
39. Mr. DORAN

asked the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been drawn to a case in the Calcutta High Court, E. A. King v. the King Emperor, and to the allegation of counsel in that case as to the terrorising and bullying of witnesses; and will he make representations to have a full inquiry made into the case in question?

Mr. BUTLER

I have no information regarding the case referred to, but will inquire.

40. Colonel WEDGWOOD

asked the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been directed to a charge, proved to be false, made by the Calcutta chief presidency magistrate against the hon. Member for Hanley (Mr. Hales), a charge for which, on appeal being made to the Calcutta High Court, the magistrate was severely censured by the high court judges; and whether an inquiry will be made into the magistrate's conduct?

38. Mr. HALL-CAINE

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that many serious complaints have been made against the unfair decisions of the hon. S. K. Sinha, the chief presidency magistrate of Calcutta, such as the bullying of witnesses, and the unfair treatment of counsel, resulting in many applications for the transference of cases to another court; and will he make arrangements for a searching inquiry to be made with the least possible delay in the interests of British subjects residing within the jurisdiction of the chief presidency magistrate?

Mr. BUTLER

I have seen a report in the Press that the findings of the chief presidency magistrate, Calcutta, in the case mentioned by the right hon. and gallant Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Colonel Wedgwood) were criticised by the Calcutta High Court. I have no information regarding the complaints referred to in the other question. The question whether there is a case for inquiry is a matter for the consideration of the Government of Bengal.

Colonel WEDGWOOD

May I ask whether magistrates are entitled to make serious charges against Members of this House with impunity, more particularly when those charges are proved to be entirely unfounded?

Mr. BUTLER

I have only hitherto seen a Press report of this matter. If the right hon. and gallant Member so desires, I am ready to ask for a report from India on the facts. Naturally, I congratulate the hon. Member for Hanley (Mr. Hales) on the result of his appeal.

Colonel WEDGWOOD

Will the hon. Gentleman remember that it is the business of the Government, if I may say so, to defend the honour of this House?

Mr. MICHAEL BEAUMONT

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at the time when the strictures were made they caused considerable comment in India, and did a great deal of harm to this House in India, and will he give this matter his most careful consideration with a view to seeing whether anything can be done to defend the honour of this House?

Mr. BUTLER

I have already informed the right hon. and gallant Gentleman who put the question that I am willing to ask for a report on the facts. The question of whether a further inquiry arises on the facts is a question for the Government of Bengal. In reply to the hon. Member for Aylesbury (Mr. M. Beaumont), I have already said that I am glad the hon. Member for Hanley won his appeal.