§ Mr. ARTHUR HENDERSON(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it is a fact that upon his authority a police raid has been made upon the premises of Arcos Limited or the Russian Trade Delegation, or both, and, if so, can he state the reason for this action, and can he give the House full information on the matter?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Sir William Joynson-Hicks)Information was placed before me on Wednesday evening by the heads of the police, upon which I authorised them to apply to a magistrate for a warrant to search the premises of Arcos. That warrant was applied for and granted. Entry was made yesterday afternoon. Search is now in progress, and I am not, and shall not be able for a day or two to give any further information to the House.
§ Mr. HENDERSONWill the right hon. Gentleman be in a position to give the House any information if a question is put to him on Monday? He must recognise, as the House as a whole will recognise, the very serious matter that is involved in the action he has taken, and it is of great public importance that it should not stand over too long before the House obtains full information.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe police are at present in possession of Arcos, and the search is continuing. Of course, the right hon. Gentleman can repeat his question on Monday, and he may be perfectly certain that if there is any information that I can properly give, I will give it at the earliest possible moment.
§ Mr. HENDERSONI beg to give notice that I will repeat the question on Monday.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThe right hon. Gentleman did not answer the part of the question which dealt with the Trade Delegation. He was asked whether Arcos and the Trade Delegation, or the Trade Delegation, had been raided. Is the right hon. Gentleman able of his own knowledge to say that, and particularly whether the office of the head of the Trade Delegation, Mr. Khinchuk, was raided, and is he aware that this gentleman has written documentary diplomatic immunity from the Foreign Office? If I am not asking too many questions, I should also like to know whether this permission or application was made after Cabinet consultation, or consultation with the Foreign Office?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAs far as the first part of the question is concerned, I saw Sir Wyndham Childs late last night. He is again at Arcos this morning, and I cannot answer a question as to the exact portion of the building where the Trade Delegation is. I shall have further information in regard to that on Monday. In regard to the second part of the question, this is a matter in which the responsibility rests with the Secretary of State.
§ Mr. R. HUDSONIs there any truth in the report that the Soviet Charge d'Affaires came straight to the Labour Whip's Office in this House instead of going to the Foreign Office?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThat question should be addressed opposite.
§ Mr. HENDERSONIt is true that the Charge d'Affaires did come down to this House to have a consultation with myself. We do not work through subterranean passages. I ought to say that he had done everything he possibly could, before he came here, to get into touch with the right hon. Gentleman the Foreign Secretary.
§ Miss LAWRENCECould the Home Secretary say whether the police raid is taking place in Moorgate Street only, or at another building in a different part of the town as well?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThere has been no raid in any other part of London, other than Moorgate Street. I am not sure that there are not two intercommunicating buildings there. I rather fancy there are two buildings there, one in Moorgate Street and another, probably that which the hon. Lady has in mind, which is inter-communicating.
§ Miss LAWRENCE indicated dissent.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSWell, there was no other raid in any other district of London.
§ Mr. TAYLORIs it true that some hundreds of employé s of Messrs. Arcos of British nationality were searched? If so, can the right hon. Gentleman give the House the terms of the warrant?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe hon. Member seems to think that this is an exceptional case. Amos is an English company, and, as he quite rightly says, with a lot of English officers and employé s. When a magistrate issues a search warrant in regard to any particular premises, the question of nationality does not enter into it at all.
§ Mr. TAYLORWhat I asked was, whether it was true that these persons have been subjected to a search— whether their personal documents have been inspected by the police?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSIt is impossible for me to answer that at the moment. If the hon. Member will put a question down, or give me notice of any question he desires to be answered, I will endeavour to get him the information.
§ Mr. TAYLORIs the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the terms of the warrant gave the police the power to search British subjects in this way?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSNo, I am expressing no opinion at all. The warrant was not granted by me, but by a magistrate.
§ Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOXWill the right hon. Gentleman state whether the visit of the Soviet Charge 798 d'Affaires to the Houses of Parliament to consult with the executive of the Socialist party does not form a gross breach of diplomatic etiquette?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI think that question must be put to my colleague, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
§ Mr. THURTLEMay I ask the Home Secretary whether the authority he gave for application to be made for a search warrant included authority to apply for a search warrant to search not only Arcos but to search the Russian Trade Delegation?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI said just now that I am not at present able to say where one building begins and the other ends, and until I have seen Sir Wyndham Childs, who is charge of the matter, and had a full consultation with him, it is impossible for me to answer that question.
§ Mr. A. V. ALEXANDERMay we understand from the Home Secretary, when he gave authority to the police to apply for a warrant, that although he had knowledge of the Russian Trade Delegation, he took no precautions to ask them to exclude from the search the office of another body which had diplomatic immunity?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSNo, the hon. Member must not understand that. He must only understand by my statement what I have actually said in this House.
§ Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGEIs it not clear from the Supplementary Questions put from the opposite benches, that the Labour party are concerned with any country but their own?
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYThe Labour party does not want war. Is it possible that the Home Secretary was not aware that, under the terms of the Trade Agreement, the Trade Delegation has immunity, and is it possible that this warrant was applied for without knowledge of where the Trade Delegation begins and Arcos ends?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSAs regards the first part of the question, it is not possible that the Home Secretary was not aware of certain facts. As far as the second part of the question is concerned, I have already said I do not know 799 exactly the rooms in a particular building where the one begins and the other ends.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYAnd you do not care.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe hon. and gallant Member is not entitled to say that.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI do not want to be offensive.
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI know that I directed that application should be made to the magistrate for a warrant to search the premises of Arcos Limited, and that warrant was granted.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI did not want to be offensive, but I thought the right hon. Gentleman's attitude indicated what I said.
§ Mr. ALBERYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware, as has been stated, that, as an indirect result of this raid, a number of employé s have not received their week's money, and can he take steps to see that Arcos are given facilities to pay these people their week's money?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI was not aware of that, but I will send down to see if any arrangement can be made for the convenience of the employeé s, and, if it can, it shall be made.
§ Sir WILLIAM DAVISONIs it not a fact that the British Embassy at St. Petersburg was actually raided in 1918, and that up to the present no compensation has been paid?
§ Mr. THURTLEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is not merely a case of two separate buildings, but of two separate and distinct organisations, one of which is diplomatic. Will the
| — | Men. | Boys. | Women. | Girls. | Total. | |||
| 4th April | … | … | … | 1,294 | 83 | 89 | 84 | 1,550 |
| 11th April | … | … | … | 1,316 | 84 | 85 | 84 | 1,569 |
| 18th April | … | … | … | 1,280 | 82 | 64 | 85 | 1,511 |
| 25th April | … | … | … | 1,306 | 98 | 86 | 97 | 1,587 |
§ right hon. Gentleman say whether he authorised the search of both these organisations, or only one of them?
§ Sir W. DAVISONIs it not a fact that nobody knows where the authority of the Third International ends and that of the Soviet Government begins?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI do not think that I can add anything more to what I have already said until Monday.