HC Deb 14 May 1928 vol 217 cc673-4
67. Captain GARRO-JONES

asked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that a British subject named John Zarlia, domiciled for over 10 years in this country, with a wife and family in Liverpool, was, upon arrival home from his last voyage, permitted to remain only 10 days with his family, and upon the expiry of this period deported on the s.s. "Abinsi" without being charged with any offence; and can he state the reason for this action?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS

The man is a coloured seaman who, under the name John Momo, has been employed by Messrs. Elder Dempster and Company. There appears to be no evidence that he is a British subject. I understand that on the termination of his last voyage on 12th March the company decided to dispense with his services; and he was accordingly refused leave to land and the company were called upon to repatriate him at their own expense to West Africa.

Captain GARRO-JONES

What difference does it make whether he is a coloured seaman or not, and is it presumed against a seaman serving on a British ship that he is not a British subject unless otherwise proved?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS

In reply to the first part of the question, there is, of course, a very obvious difference between a coloured seaman and another seaman. One is coloured and the other is not. In reply to the second part of the question, arrangements have long been in force to enable all coloured seamen' to have certificates of identity, if they are British subjects, in order that they should be treated accordingly. This man has no certificate, and there is no evidence at all that he is a British subject.

Captain GARRO-JONES

Is the right hon. Gentleman enabled under the Statute to deport a seaman serving on a British ship unless he brings evidence that he is a British subject?

Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKS

This man was not deported. He was on the ship. His employers stated that they did not want him any longer. In order that he should not possibly become a charge here, he was refused leave to land, and the employers were compelled to repatriate him to his own home country at their own expense.