§ 26. Mr. GINNELLasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what action, if any, has been taken on the evidence of Mr. E. A. P. Wijeyeratne, a Colombo solicitor, who satisfied the authorities at the time of the riots in Ceylon in 1915 that the police excited the people to arm and defend their churches against the Moors; and, if no action has been taken, will he explain why?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Sir A. Steel-Maitland)The conduct of the police during the riots has been the subject of a full local inquiry, and I have no reason whatever to suppose that there is any foundation for the suggestion contained in this question.
§ Mr. GINNELLMay I ask whether citizens of standing in Colombo, professional and business men, were invited to give evidence at that inquiry?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDPerhaps the hon. Member will give me notice of that question.
§ Mr. GINNELLIt is on the Paper.
§ 27. Mr. GINNELLasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what is the official answer, and why it was not given in the Legislative Council of Ceylon, to the charge made by Mr. Ramanathan there that martial law was kept in force for three months after the cessation of the riots in 1915—first, to dispense with the safeguards of the civil law in arresting men denounced by the Moors; secondly, to sentence such unfortunate men more heavily that the civil Courts would tolerate; and, thirdly, to assess and exact compensation to the Moors by methods which the civil law would' not permit; and whether all the cases of punishment and of compensation under martial law prolonged for those purposes have since been reviewed by a civil Court before which the sufferers were allowed to appear?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI am unaware to what proceedings in the Legislative Council the hon. Member is referring, but he will find the reasons for keeping martial law in force until the 30th August, 1915, explained in the correspondence presented to Parliament. As martial law was not prolonged for the purposes alleged, the last part of the question does not arise.
§ Mr. GINNELLThe last part of the question does arise. Will the hon. Baronet answer the last clause of the question as to whether all the cases dealt with by court-martial have been reviewed by a civil tribunal?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDI am within your ruling, Mr. Speaker, that the last part of the question contains the words "prolonged for those purposes," and as martial law was not prolonged for those purposes, then, strictly speaking, that does not arise. But if the hon. Member wishes to ask me whether there has been a review of cases of punishment—
§ Mr. GINNELLAll cases?
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDOf all cases of punishment. Perhaps he will give me a question with regard to every one. The present Governor has been careful in seeing that all the cases, so far as I know without further inquiry, should be gone into and reviewed.
§ Mr. GINNELLWhat sort of tribunal did review them?