§ Sir HENRY CRAIKasked the Undersecretary of State for India what principle guides the India Office in regard to telegraphic communication with India; and whether the Office declines to obtain information on an important matter desired by an honourable Member of this House which could be obtained by a telegram of a few words at a cost of a few shillings?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu)The urgency of any particular request for information is a matter which the Secretary of State must decide in every case as it arises.
§ Sir H. CRAIKDoes not the Secretary of State consider that complaints made by members of the Civil Service are matters of urgency when they have reference to grievances of long standing?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThat question is quite unwarranted by the circumstances.
§ Sir H. CRAIKIs it not the case that the grievances have been the subject of correspondence for more than two years?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe hon. Gentleman has other questions on the Paper on the same subject, and I think the answers to them will meet the question he now asks.
§ Sir H. CRAIKasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the India Office looks with indifference upon grievances felt by a large body of Civil servants in India, and is not prepared to take prompt steps to ascertain who is responsible for the failure to represent these grievances to the proper authority?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe answer to the first part of the question is emphatically in the 1560 negative; to the second part, definite and adequate rules for the submission of representations have been laid down and there is no reason to believe that these are not observed.
§ Sir H. CRAIKasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether the India Office is aware that a widespread belief exists that the grievances of members of the Civil Service in the Punjab Commission have not been submitted by the Punjab Government for the judgment of the Government of India; and, failing such submission, what course is open in order to have such grievances considered by the Government of India and by the Secretary of State?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative; as regards the rest of the question, local governments are bound to submit to the, Government of India memorials addressed to that Government by persons within their jurisdiction, subject to certain exceptions, and must report each quarter as to any memorials which they have withheld as falling within those exceptions. If a memorial raises an important question of policy, the local government transmit it with a reasoned statement of their own views, and this often necessitates some delay.
§ Sir H. CRAIKWhen will the grievances be considered by the Local Government?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI do not know. They will be considered by the Local Government in the first instance, and then they will be transmitted here in due course.
§ Sir H. CRAIKCan that not be ascertained by cablegram?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe India Office spends £3,000 a year on telegrams to India, and a corresponding sum is spent by the Government of India in answering. My hon. Friend asks that assistance should be given in keeping down the cost of cablegrams.
§ Sir H. CRAIKIs a small addition to the £3,000 a matter for consideration when grievances are being investigated?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI think I have already answered the hon. Gentleman. There is another consideration in addition to that of cost. It is that certain functions have been expressly delegated to the Government of India, and it would be a dangerous thing to send a telegram which would be taken 1561 as a precedent, as meaning that we desire to express an opinion before the Government of India have expressed their own.