§ MR. BRADLAUGHI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India under what statutory authority the Secretary of State claims to have allowed the Indian Indemnity Bill of the 14th October last so that disallowance is now impossible; whether the sole statutory provisions as to the power of the Crown to disallow laws and regulations made by the Governor General of India, in Council, are those contained in the 24 and 25 Vic. c. 67, ss. 21 and 23; whether the power of the Crown to disallow under Section 21 can be exercised without limit of time, and under Section 23 within six months from the promulgation of the ordinance; and whether the Government will give the House an early opportunity of discussing the Indian Indemnity Bill with a view to its disallowance?
SIR J. GORSTSection 21 of 24 and 25 Vic, c. 67, is the only section which empowers the Crown to disallow an Act which has been passed with the approval of the Governor General of India. No limitation of time is specified, but if an Act is disallowed, the disallowance is required to be signified by Her Majesty through the Secretary of State in Council. In the present case the Crown, having, through the Secretary of State, in the usual manner signified that the Act will be left to its operation, the Secretary of State is advised that the matter is at an end. The hon. Member for Northampton will therefore see that the last part of his question requires no answer.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHAm I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman corrects the answer which he gave the other day that the Secretary of State had power to disallow an Act, although it might have been previously allowed?
SIR J. GORSTIf I said so I must have been guilty of some inaccuracy of language. When the Crown has signified its assent the Act must remain in operation.