HC Deb 01 July 1937 vol 325 cc2131-2
21. Mr. Gallacher

asked the Home Secretary on what grounds police-sergeant H 6 stopped a Communist meeting which was being held at West India Docks, at 12.30 noon on Thursday, 24th June, when a rival meeting started up five minutes later; whether he is aware that a promise was given that, in the matter of rival meetings, the police should follow the principle of first come first served; and whether, seeing that a large number of witnesses at this meeting testified that the Communist meeting had been in progress for some time when the Economic League speaker started the second meeting, he will give instructions to the police that the aforesaid ruling is to be enforced?

Sir S. Hoare

I have received a police report on this incident which does not accord with the statement of facts in the first part of the question. I am informed that the police sergeant, in the course of his patrol, came upon two meetings which were proceeding simultaneously within a few yards of each other; that he formed the opinion that a breach of the peace was likely, and accordingly requested the chairmen of both meetings to close their meetings; and that this request was immediately complied with. As regards the remainder of the question, the principle referred to is the subject of standing instructions by the Commissioner of Police, and I have no reason to think that it is not observed. The action of the police officer concerned in this case was entirely correct.

Mr. Gallacher

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I got this information from the Civil Liberties Committeee, and that they are very scrupulous in their investigations, and will he receive a deputation from that committee on this matter?

Sir S. Hoare

I have received my information from equally responsible quarters, and I can assure the hon. Member that his information, whatever may be the source of it, is not correct.

Mr. Gallacher

Is it not the case that the Minister has received his information from one of the parties that is being accused? Would it not be better to take his information from an independent source, such as the Civil Liberties Committee?