§ 2. Sir A. KNOXasked the Secretary of State for India if he will consider the desirability of establishing special courts so as to accelerate the proceedings in the trial at Meerut on the same lines as has been done in the case of the trial at Lahore?
§ 4. Colonel HOWARD-BURYasked the Secretary of State for India whether, in view of the length of the proceedings in the Meerut trial, similar steps to speed it up will be taken as have been taken in the Lahore case?
§ Mr. BENNThe answer to these questions is that it is not proposed to adopt the suggestion offered.
§ Sir A. KNOXDoes it not seem likely that this trial will go on indefinitely—it has already lasted several months—unless some special procedure is adopted?
§ Colonel HOWARD-BURYCannot the right hon. Gentleman do something, seeing that this trial has lasted for 14 months, to have some changes made, because it is a scandal that a trial which has lasted for 14 months should go on indefinitely?
Earl WINTERTONCould the right hon. Gentleman state, in reply to this or some future question, what the difference is between these two trials which has induced the Government of India in the one case to take special action and in the other not, in view of the fact that this trial has now been going on for something like 14 months?
§ Mr. BENNI am well aware of the grave disadvantages of the protraction of these trials, but the difference is that in the case of the Lahore trial the magisterial inquiry was superseded, while in the case of the Meerut trial the magisterial inquiry is complete.