§ 13. Mr. WALLHEADasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state in extenso the charges contained in the communication from the Russian Government regarding the deportation from Russia of Seaman David Scott?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINI would refer the hon. Member to my answer to several questions on this subject on 23rd February, which reproduced in full the charges as stated by the Soviet Government with one exception, which does not, appear to have been relevant to his deportation. The additional charge was that Scott and his mistress had kept a brothel at Novorossisk, but it was not on this charge that he was deported.
§ Mr. STEPHENIn view of the noise on the Tory benches, might we have the reply read again?
§ Mr. WALLHEADI caught the Minister's reply very imperfectly, but may I ask him whether it is not the fact that this man was reported to be liable for deportation, and was deported as an undesirable alien?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINI answered fully as to the grounds of his deportation in the replies to which I have referred the hon. Member. I have stated one additional charge made against him to-day, but it was not alleged as a reason for his deportation.
§ Mr. D. GRENFELLCan the right, hon. Gentleman tell us whether it is the case that this man was charged with offences which would have led to his deportation if the same charges had been brought against him here?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINThe charge on which he was deported was agitation against the Soviet Government. That was the charge, and he was deported from Russia as an undesirable alien.
§ Mr. GRENFELLWas that the only charge brought against him? Is it not the fact that he was charged with offences against common morality?
§ Mr. J. HUDSONWas he not charged with keeping a brothel?
§ Sir A. CHAMBERLAINIf the hon. Member had been good enough to listen, or had been able to hear, he would have appreciated my answer.
§ Mr. KIRKWOODDo not be so offensive.
§ Mr. WALLHEADWe know now, Kensington, what he was deported for.