HC Deb 23 February 1921 vol 138 cc899-902
10. Sir W. DAVISON

asked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Mr. Har Kishan Lal, who was convicted on a charge of conspiracy to wage war and of abetting the waging of war against the King, was sentenced to transportation for life and forfeiture of property, and was subsequently pardoned as an act of clemency, has now been selected by the governor of the Punjab as one of his two Indian ministers who will be charged with the administration of public works, education, excise, commerce and industry, local government, etc.; whether in the discharge of this office he will have control over large numbers of British and Indian officials, and will exercise great patronage with wide financial powers; whether the Secretary of State is aware of the bitter feeling which this appointment has caused among His Majesty's loyal subjects, both British and Indian; whether he has personally approved of the appointment of a recently convicted rebel to such a prominent position of trust under the Crown; and what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

14. Captain Viscount CURZON

asked the Secretary of State for India whether Har Kishan Lal, who was committed as a rebel in the rebellion of 1919, has been appointed as a minister in the Punjab; whether since his release he has continued to take part in rebel agitation; whether in his new appointment he will have a very large number of loyal subjects of the Crown, both British and Indian, under his jurisdiction; and whether, as such an appointment is an insult to all loyalists throughout the Empire, it can be reconsidered?

Mr. MONTAGU

Under the Government of India Act, Ministers are appointed by the Governors of Governors'. Provinces, hold office at the pleasure of the Governor, and are responsible to the Legislative Councils who vote their salaries. The Joint Select Committee advised that the Ministers selected by the Governors should be elected members of the Legislative Council, enjoying its confidence and capable of leading it. In these circumstances I would submit to the House that the proper place to consider the title of Ministers to the confidence of the Legislatures is the Provincial Councils.

Sir W. DAVISON

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware, and is it not a fact, that the action of the Governor is subject to the superintendence, direction, and control of the Secretary of State?

Mr. MONTAGU

No; that is not quite true. It is subject to the superintendence, direction, and control of the Secretary of State, except—I am quoting from memory—as provided in this Act, and under this Act the question of the appointment of Ministers is laid by Statute on the Governor.

Sir W. DAVISON

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this action of showing favour to rebels is driving many loyal subjects into the hands of the extremists?

Viscount CURZON

Is it a fact, as stated in Question 14, that this man is a convicted rebel, and that he holds jurisdiction over a large number of Europeans?

Mr. SPEAKER

That does not seem to be a matter for this Parliament. It is a matter for the Legislative Council.

Viscount CURZON

Will the right hon. Gentleman exercise his influence with the Leader of the House to secure the release of the hon. Member for East Leyton (Mr. Malone)?

Sir W. DAVISON

Is it not a matter for this House to know whether a man responsible for the Government of India, who has been appointed to high office under the Crown, is a convicted rebel? I submit that we are entitled to that information.

Mr. SPEAKER

The House having given practically Home Rule, or something in the nature of Home Rule, to these Councils the less it interferes with the Councils the better.

Sir H. CRAIK

Was this nomination made by the Governor of the Punjab without any suggestion from home or from the Government of India?

Mr. MONTAGU

Of course it was. The Governor is specially charged by Statute to make his own nominations. I never knew of the appointment until some time after it was made.

Dr. MURRAY

Was not General Smuts a rebel at one time?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS

As your ruling, Sir, is important, may I ask if the question of law and order and India was handed over to the Councils, or were not only certain specified subjects handed over to them by this House? Is it not the case that this House retains control of every other subject other than those directly handed over?

Mr. MONTAGU

May I point out that this gentleman who has given rise to this discussion is a Minister who has charge of those very transferred subjects, and that if the Legislature does not think him a man worthy of its confidence it has its remedy, and if the Punjab does not think the Legislature worthy of its confidence it has its remedy.

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS

I was not discussing this case. I was asking as to the things that were reserved.

Mr. SPEAKER

This is the only case that I am discussing. This is not the time to deal with hypothetical cases. What I said arose entirely out of the answer given by the Secretary of State for India.

Sir H. CRAIK

Can the system which the Government have instituted in India be described as one of Home Rule? On the contrary, is it not a system which is described by the newfangled word "diarchy," or divided rule, with common responsibility of this House and the Legislative Council?

Mr. SPEAKER

The words "Home Rule" were used, not in a technical sense, but in a general sense. Certain subjects have been transferred wholly to these Legislative Councils, and it is with regard to those only that I used the expression.

Sir W. DAVISON

As this matter is one of great importance, may I ask whether the Members of this House cannot get information from the Secretary of State for India as to certain action which may have been taken by the Governor or some of his Ministers? Are we not entitled to ask that question?

Mr. SPEAKER

It depends on the information which is asked for. When the question appears on the Paper, I will consider it.