§ 6. Brigadier-General Sir HENRY CROFT
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now had an opportunity of looking into the facts with regard to the attempt in 1932 to serve writs upon members of the State Council in Ceylon in connection with debts, or whether he is satisfied that. 349 there are no members against whom there was an attempt to serve a summons?
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. Malcolm MacDonald)
I have been asked to reply. I have seen in the Ceylon Press accounts of the incident to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers, which arose from the attempt by a process server to serve summonses on two members of Council. As I said in my speech in the Debate on the 21st of February, if any member of the State Council were to become bankrupt, he would under the terms of the Constitution be ineligible to continue as a member.
§ Sir H. CROFT
I understand the hon. Gentleman to say that there was an attempt to serve a summons. Am I right in saying that this was only prevented by the accused pouring red ink over the process server when he attempted to hand the summons to the members of the Council?
§ 8. Sir H. CROFT
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has now received information with regard to the attempts by the State Council to reduce the various allowances to the Governor of Ceylon; whether the Governor's travelling allowance reduced in committee has been restored, and, if so, by what majority; whether the allowance for upkeep of furniture and equipment was cut; and, if so, by what amount?
§ Mr. M. MacDONALD
My hon. and gallant Friend presumably alludes to certain, reductions made in Committee in the Governor's allowances during the passage of the Appropriation Bill for the financial year 1932–33. No reduction was made in the Governor's travelling allowance in Committee, the provision being carried my a majority of one. The allowance for the upkeep of furniture and equipment was reduced by Rs. 10,000 from Rs. 25,000 to Rs. 15,000. No reductions were made in Committee during the passage of the Appropriation Bill, 1933–34. I may point out to my hon. and gallant Friend that the critical examination of the estimates 350 by the State Council in the year 1932–33, when economies were urgently necessary, was extended to all the heads of expenditure.
§ Sir H. CROFT
Would it be unfair to suggest that these petty vexations may be described as in the nature of "baiting" the Governor?