§ 4. Mr. WELLOCKasked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he is aware that the late Punjab leader, Lala Lajpat Rai, stated at the time of the incident that, on the occasion of a public demonstration against the Simon Commission in Lahore on 30th October, he received two blows from a police officer who refused to give his name, and that the family and friends of the deceased are of opinion that his death is the result of the said blows; and if it is intended to hold an inquiry into the matter?
§ 5. Colonel WEDGWOODasked the Under-Secretary of State for India if he will inquire into the circumstances of the death of Lajpat Rai.
§ Earl WINTERTONI am aware that a statement was made to the Press by the late Lala Lajpat Rai to the effect indicated in the first question, and, while I have no information as to the views of his family and friends, I am aware that the charge has been freely made in the Indian Press and at public meetings that his death was due to this incident. As at
§ Friend's permission, I will circulate the figures asked for in the last two parts of his question (which are arranged in tabular form) in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
§ Mr. HARRISIs this factory running at a profit, or is it on a non-commercial basis?
§ Earl WINTERTONI should have to have notice of that question.
§ Following are the figures:
§ present advised, my Noble Friend sees no need to hold any further inquiry. Two inquiries have already been held into the conduct of the police in controlling the crowds on the 30th October—the first held departmentally immediately after the occurrence, and the second, a public inquiry held in the Town Hall, Lahore, by the Commissioner of the Rawalpindi Division. I should prefer, with the consent of the House, to make at this juncture no detailed statement as to the facts elicited by these inquiries, since the whole matter is to be debated within the next 10 days in the Punjab Legislative Council, but I may say that no evidence has been produced to show that the death of Lala Lajpat Rai was due to blows received on that occasion, and that the general effect of both of them was to establish the fact that, while pressure from the large crowd behind did necessitate the use of some force by the police who were endeavouring to prevent the crowd breaking through at a certain point, and consequently to some slight injury to the persons in the front ranks of the crowd (a position occupied by the 7 late Lala), there was no deliberate or unprovoked attack by the police, and no individual was singled out for assault.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODHave the Punjab Government expressed any sort of regret to Lala Lajpat Rai's family for this unfortunate accident?
§ Earl WINTERTONI do not quite know what the right hon. and gallant Member means. Does he mean by "this unfortunate accident" the death of Lala Lajpat Rai, because, if so, my reply clearly shows that no evidence has been produced to show that his death was due to blows received on that occasion.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODNo. I mean regret that force should have been used upon him.
§ Earl WINTERTONI must point out that no Government, when it has been found necessary to use force to restrain crowds, is justified in making apologies to any particular individual or to the relatives of any particular individual.
§ Colonel WEDGWOODWould it not be possible to express the Government's regret at his demise?
§ Earl WINTERTONI think the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is trying to suggest—I will not say insinuate—that the Lala's death was in some way due to the action of the police, but no evidence whatever is forthcoming to show that, and I hope the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is not making himself responsible for such a statement.
§ Mr. WELLOCKHas there been an inquest?
§ Earl WINTERTONNo. Under Indian law there is no necessity to hold an inquest, but there have already been two inquiries into the whole incident. I may take this opportunity of saying that this incident arose out of an illegal procession, forbidden by the police, and my Noble Friend is satisfied that the police used no more force than was necessary in the circumstances to restrain the crowd from breaking through the barricades and possibly assaulting members of the Simon Commission.
§ Mr. WELLOCKWas not the police injunction countermanded afterwards or partially modified?
§ Earl WINTERTONNo. That is not so. The crowd endeavoured to break through the barricades, a European police sergeant was knocked down, and stones were thrown at the police. The police used the force necessary, and only the force necessary, to restrain the crowd from doing further mischief.
§ Mr. WELLOCK rose—
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe cannot have another inquiry into this question here.