11. Sir H. DALZIELasked the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the speeches delivered by the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark in America during the last few months; can he say whether the hon. Member has paid two visits to that country during the past year; has ho any official information of the object of his visits as set forth on his application for passports; and can he give a definite assurance that the hon. Member is in no way connected with any Department acting under the Foreign Office?
§ Lord R. CECILI have no information with regard to the first part of the hon. Member's question beyond what has appeared in the Press. With regard to the second and third parts of the question, no passport has been granted to the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark since March last, and no communication has been received from him. At that date no special inquiries were made as to the purpose of a journey to countries outside Europe, unless there 171 appeared to be any ground to doubt the bona fides of the applicant. Since that time evidence as to the purpose of journeys has been required in all cases, irrespective of destination. With regard to the last part of the question, the hon. Member for Mid-Lanark has no connection with the Foreign Office, direct or indirect.
§ Mr. ASHLEYCan the Noble Lord say who paid this gentleman, and whether the Government have not received urgent representations from our Minister at Washington urging that Members of Parliament should not be sent on a similar mission?
§ Lord R. CECILI do not in the least know who paid for the journey. As far as I know, the Government had nothing whatever to do with it.
§ Sir E. CARSONIf a Member of this House makes in a foreign country speeches calculated to interfere with the due prosecution of the War, is there no way in which the Government can propose a Resolution to this House as regards that Member?
§ Lord R. CECILThat is obviously a very-different question, and one which I think deserves serious consideration. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will allow me to communicate with the Prime Minister on the subject.
§ Sir CHARLES HENRYDid the hon. Member at any time go to America under the auspices of any Department of the Government?
§ Lord R. CECILI do not know what "at any time" means.
§ Sir C. HENRYDuring the War?
§ Lord R. CECILNot as far as I know. But I should like notice of that.
§ Mr. PRINGLEIs it not the fact that the only official- post which the hon. Member has held is that of Parliamentary Private Secretary to the present Secretary of State for War?
§ Lord R. CECILThat is a matter which concerns other members of the Government besides myself.
§ Sir J. D. REESIs it not particularly necessary to repudiate this hon. Member's action, as he was actually Parliamentary Private Secretary to at least one, and probably two, Cabinet Ministers?
§ Lord R. CECILI have done my best in the answer I have already given to repudiate the action of the hon. Member. If my repudiation is not clear, I desire to repeat it in the most emphatic way. The hon. Member represents in no sense whatever the British Government or, as far as I know, anybody else.
§ Mr. BOOTHIs the Noble Lord aware that this particular Member has claimed in the United States that Cabinet Ministers do not correctly voice the views of this nation, and that he, because he is secretary to a handful of Members here, does represent them?
§ Lord R. CECILAll sorts of things which are not true are said about Cabinet Ministers.