§ 3. Major-General Sir Alfred Knoxasked the Under-Secretary of State for India whether, as the paramount power in India is bound by treaty to protect Indian States from external aggression and internal disorders menacing their security and integrity, he will therefore represent to the Government of India that Congress should be warned to cease aggressive agitation in the Indian States?
§ Lieut.-Colonel MuirheadMy Noble Friend is satisfied that the position of the paramount power in regard to agitation in Indian States, as stated in the reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Sir J. Wardlaw-Milne) on 16th December, is known to all quarters in India.
§ Sir A. KnoxIs it not the case that, in permitting this agitation in British India, the Government of India are really, in effect, breaking the treaties with the Native States?
§ Lieut.-Colonel MuirheadNo, Sir. I would not say that. I think that the situation is clearly understood as a result of the statement of His Majesty's Government, and I do not think that any action by the Government of India can be interpreted in the sense that my hon. and gallant Friend indicates.
§ Sir A. KnoxDoes my hon. and gallant Friend realise that the Government of India have a duty to protect these States from disorder?
§ Lieut.-Colonel MuirheadThe treaty obligations of the Government of India in that respect are well understood.