§ Sir D. MACLEAN (by Private Notice)asked the Secretary of State for India whether he can inform the House when the Inquiry into the occurrence at Amritsa will be completed, whether a Report will be immediately available for Members of this House; when did he become acquainted with the details of the occurrence, and what reason was there for not informing the House thereon; and, further, has any action been taken by the authorities to express to the General in Command their opinion of his conduct?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Montagu)I do not know when the result of the Inquiry, which is an open one, will be obtained. The Committee is at present taking evidence. I hope the evidence will be completed at the end of this month, and as soon as I get the result of the Inquiry it will be given to this House. As regards the remainder of the question, I can quite appreciate the profound disturbance which must have been caused in public opinion by the evidence 241 published, but I trust my right hon. Friend and the House will agree with me that we are right in waiting until an impartial, authoritative pronouncement on all the facts is made by Lord Hunter's Committee. I have not received any de tailed account, nor do I expect to do so, because the Viceroy and the Government and I agreed the formation of a Committee of Inquiry, which will present a Report on all the circumstances.
§ Sir D. MACLEANMy right hon. Friend has not answered one point, and that was, when did he become aware of the occurrence, and what reason, if he had heard of it, had he for not informing the House of it?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI thought I said that I knew of no details of the circumstances until I saw the report in the newspapers. It is not an official communication yet. I cannot expect that the evidence can be reported to me, because the machinery that we had devised was to have a Committee of Inquiry. It will be the Committee of Inquiry that will report to me on the facts and the circumstances and the evidence.
§ Sir D. MACLEANIs it the practice in the India Office that the Secretary of State for India would not hear of an occurrence of this nature which happened eight months ago?
§ Mr. MONTAGUWhen the riots were occurring I published a series of communiqués giving the information as it was telegraphed to me. The result of the detailed investigation which has been going on has been prepared by the authorities in India to lay before Lord Hunter's Committee.
§ Sir H. CRAIKDoes not the right hon. Gentleman consider that at this moment it is most undesirable that any opinion should be expressed in this House on this subject, which is now under consideration by Lord Hunter's Committee, based upon what he states to be unauthorised reports?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI am quite sure that the House does not want to prejudge the matter. At the same time I cannot help saying that the evidence as published in the newspapers is profoundly disturbing, and I cannot help saying, also, that that is why I hope that, without any unnecessary delay, Lord Hunter's findings will be available. The Committee are sitting continuously. They have completed evidence 242 at Lahore, they have three or four other places to finish, and I hope that the evidence will be completed by the end of the month.
§ Sir D. MACLEANIn view of the very deeply agitated state of the public mind on this occurrence, will my right hon. Friend see that a special Report on this occurrence is sent to him, and will he publish it immediately he receives it?
§ Sir H. CRAIKWill the right hon. Gentleman refuse to publish part of the evidence until the whole of the Inquiry is completed?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThe Committee which was appointed I believe to be an authoritative and impartial one. It is presided over by a distinguished judge. I would deprecate interfering with their decisions, but I hope as soon as the investigation is completed to publish everything quite fully.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHCan the right hon. Gentleman explain how it happens that an incident which occurred eight months ago, in which 500 Indians were killed and 1,500 wounded, was not made known in this country for a period of eight months?
§ Mr. MONTAGUThere were statements published relating to this occurrence as they were received. As the months have gone by more and more evidence has been collected, which is now available for Lord Hunter's Committee. The casualties involve one of the most difficult points. It is very difficult to say the exact number of men who unfortunately lost their lives in these occurrences. Various estimates have been furnished, and I look to Lord Hunter's Committee to give the Empire and this House the authoritative figures.
§ Lord R. CECILCan the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government of India. exercise any censorship to prevent the telegraphing of the evidence before Lord Hunter's Committee, because apparently this has only come by mail?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI believe that there has been no censorship in India. There may have been a censorship during the riots in the Punjab, but none since. The wires are very much congested, and it may have been for that reason that none of this evidence was telegraphed.
§ Colonel YATEIs it not a fact that the English papers have selected the evidence 243 of one particular witness, and that all the evidence of the magistrate's and other people who gave evidence prior to that witness has not been published in England, and that in fact we have had no evidence published?
§ Mr. MONTAGUI would invite Members to read the evidence as published in the Indian newspapers. The selection of this particular piece of evidence was, I believe, due to the enterprise of one particular London Journal, which always seems to me to be the best informed of them on Indian affairs. They selected this particular one from what was sent by their correspondent in Allahabad, which was copied into other newspapers, but the" Times of India" and other newspapers are available, and I shall place them where hon. Members Can see the whole evidence as published in Indian newspapers.