HC Deb 09 November 1932 vol 270 cc339-40
32. Mr. KNIGHT

asked the Attorney-General if he will make a statement as to the reasons for withholding the evidence of certain witnesses in the recent inquiry held by Mr. Justice Maugham into claims of the North Charterland Exploration Company?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip)

No evidence was withheld at the inquiry before Mr. Justice Maugham. It is true that on one issue in the case, namely the circumstances in which a certain Agreement in 1923 came to be made between the Crown and the British South Africa Company, two former officials of the Colonial Office might have been called, if they had been available, to supplement evidence given on this issue by my right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works; but one of them was suffering from a serious breakdown which, as is not disputed, made it out of the question to call him. As to the other I satisfied myself that physically his state of health was such that to have subjected him to the strain of giving evidence in court would have involved too great a risk to justify me in incurring the responsibility of calling him. I am satisfied from what I have since heard that my decision was a proper one and moreover that the absence of this gentleman did not in any way prejudice the company's case. Statements have been made in the Press and elsewhere to the effect that either acting on instructions or on my own responsibility I deliberately suppressed the evidence that might have been given. I hope I may assure my hon. Friend and the House that such a charge is without foundation.