§ 33. Mr. Sydney Silvermanasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he has considered the leaflet sent from Jerusalem to the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne and a number of other hon. Members, a copy of which has been sent to him, in which the British League of Servicemen and Ex-Servicemen, Palestine Branch, claim to have been responsible for the explosion in Jerusalem on 22nd February, 1948, and to have killed 100 persons and injured 200 others; whether he can now state the authorship of the leaflet repudiated as false by the Arab Higher Committee in which the guilt is claimed for the Arab commander; and whether he will now order a public inquiry into all the circumstances, with a view to establishing the real perpetrators of this outrage.
§ 67. Mr. Jannerasked the Secretary of State for the Colonies what inquiries he has made with regard to the letter, a copy of which has been sent to him, recently published and circulated from Jerusalem in the name of a body calling itself the British League of Servicemen and Exservicemen; and if he will make a statement on this and other claims made to the commission of the Ben Yehudi Street outrage there.
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsI have considered the leaflet in the light of comments received from the High Commissioner for Palestine, and understand that the organisation purporting to issue this leaflet has no branch in Palestine. Nor does the leaflet contain any convincing evidence that it was of British authorship. It is perhaps significant that it did not appear until 10 days after the incident to which it relates. With regard to the second part of the Question, nothing has yet been established regarding the authenticity of the pamphlet purporting to have been issued by Abdul Khader Hussein. He himself has not disclaimed responsibility for either the pamphlet or the outrage. With regard to the third part of the Question, inquiries continue but have been seriously impeded by the refusal of the Jewish community to submit evidence in their possession or facilitate inquiry by the police. I understand that a separate Jewish inquiry is being held with the apparent object of implicating British personnel. When the official police investigation is completed, a statement of 1223 conclusions reached will be made public. I see no reason to institute any separate public inquiry.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanDo I understand that my hon. Friend is satisfied to leave this matter where it is without any inquiry at all?
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsThere is an inquiry now proceeding. I am fully satisfied that the people conducting the inquiry will conduct it in a proper manner, and that we shall have a report in due course.
§ Mr. JannerIn view of the fact that Hussein has not denied issuing the pamphlet to which reference has been made, has my hon. Friend taken any steps in regard to him, and will he make inquiries as to whether he was guilty of this terrible offence?
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsWe have not got possession of Hussein. He is not under our control in any shape or form, or in custody. We are making inquiries, and inquiries are now being held into the responsibility for this outrage, and all these other matters will be taken into consideration.
§ Mr. PickthornCan the Under-Secretary tell us whether he has any evidence of the provenance of the paper signed by the so-called "British League"; whether he knows where it was printed, and whether he has any evidence as to who was responsible for issuing it? When he speaks of the date of its issue being "perhaps significant," can he tell us what is "perhaps significant"?
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsIt is significant that the claim was not made until 10 days after the incident took place. Furthermore, we have put the whole matter to the law officers in Palestine, and this is one of the matters they are now considering. If there is any evidence to be obtained, it will naturally be obtained in Palestine and not in this country. We shall hear in due course from the Government whether they have obtained any information.
§ Mr. PickthornCan I have a direct answer to the first part of my question: Has the hon. Member's office yet any evidence where this paper came from?
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsWe have evidence that it was posted from Palestine; apart 1224 from that, we have no further evidence. The postmark was from Palestine—at least on the letter I received.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanDo I understand my hon. Friend to say that the Palestine administration is holding an inquiry into a matter on which it made up its mind before the inquiry started?
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsCertainly not. The Palestine Government is holding an inquiry into all the circumstances connected with this outrage to determine the cause of the outrage, who was responsible, and whether the necessary measures were taken as a result of the outrage to ensure that injured people were taken to the proper hospital, and the like.
§ Mr. EdenAs a result of all these leaflets, and despite these leaflets from whatever organisations they came, I think the House would like to be assured that up to date the Government have no evidence whatever to change the view which they have frequently expressed to the House, that British troops had no responsibility whatever for this outrage.
§ Mr. Rees-WilliamsI give the right hon. Gentleman that assurance, namely, that there is no reason whatever to think so. In fact, everything that has come to light since goes to show that our original estimate that British troops had nothing whatever to do with it is perfectly correct.