§ LORD EARINGDON had given Notice that he would ask His Majesty's Government for the reason for impounding the 882 passport of Mr. M. R. Masani, an official of the All-India Congress Socialist Party, on his arrival in England; and move for Papers. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am not going to apologise to your Lordships for asking again a Question which has been asked in another place, because I trust that I shall receive 'a rather more satisfactory answer than was given there. Mr. Masani, who left India a short while ago, on arriving in England had his passport impounded. The answer as to why this should have been done, given in another place, was that the Government of India had requested that it should be impounded on the ground that he was a Communist. Quite frankly I admit, myself, that I consider that to be no reason for impounding his passport or for denying him a passport. In fact it seems that the Indian Government have a form of "jitters," with which the Imperial Government might well reproach them, since it has caused a certain amount of embarrassment.
§ Mr. Masani, in point of fact, is no Communist, and I will give your Lordships his career, because I think that the Government have not been properly informed. He is a barrister, a councillor of the Bombay Municipal Corporation, a member of the Executive Council of the Bombay Provincial Congress Committee, joint secretary of the All-India Congress Socialist Party, and also a member of the British Labour Party from 1925 to 1928. None of these particular affiliations in point of fact would permit of his being a Communist. For membership of the All-India Congress Socialist Party it is essential that members should be members of the Indian National Congress, and every member of the Congress must subscribe to the attainment of the ends of Congress by all legitimate and peaceful means. The Party is functioning legally and openly throughout India. The Communist Party is illegal in India. The Congress Socialist Party is constantly denounced by the Communists both in India and in England as a "sham Socialist" and a "National Reformist" Party. If it is the Government's objection that Mr. Masani is a Communist it cannot possibly be upheld, and I should like very much to know on what possible pound his passport has been taken away from him. I beg to move.
883THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS (EARL STAN-HOPE)My Lords, I must apologise to the noble Lord opposite, but this Motion came on much sooner than was expected. We have sent for my noble friend, the Secretary of State for India, and I think lie is on his way down to the House. I can give to the noble Lord an extract from a paper put in my hands, but I am afraid it is not a complete answer. I understand that my noble friend has reconsidered the matter. The views expressed from India were definite that this passport should not be extended, but my noble friend is not entirely satisfied, I think, with the reason given, and therefore in view of the representations made to him on the subject, and having reexamined the case, he is prepared to grant a passport for a year, at the end of which the matter can be further considered. I am afraid that that is the only information I can give at the moment, and I hope the noble Lord will be satisfied with this concession and overlook the fact that the answer is somewhat brief.
§ LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDEMy Lords, I am not sure that my noble friend behind me will think that it is a sufficient reply, but I really would call attention to the proceedings to-day with regard to the Government Bench. We had a very long pause before the first Question was answered, and unless the noble Earl had come into the breach we should have had no reply to this Question. When the House sits at three o'clock I think members of the Government at any rate might realise that that is the time for the House to meet, and they should be ready to reply to Questions. I do not know whether my noble friend will think it worth while to put his Question down again for to-morrow, or whether he will accept what the noble Earl has been good enough to tell him.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYMy Lords, I certainly accept what the noble Lord has said. I apologise for not having been in my place, but I had a very urgent call at that moment and was under the mistaken belief that the business before the House would give me a quarter of an hour. I am not putting that forward as an excuse, but merely explaining the situation which arose, 884 The Question which the noble Lord opposite has asked ought to have been answered by the Secretary of State for India, but I understand that he is engaged at the present moment. The noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition was quite right when he called attention to this matter of procedure, and I can only on my own behalf apologise to the noble Lord.
§ LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDEMy Lords, in order to allow the Secretary of State for India, who is now here, a breathing space, my noble friend behind might perhaps repeat his Question.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF ZETLAND)My Lords, I must apologise to your Lordships for not having been here when this Question was asked. I was, un-, happily, detained on other business, and I was under the impression that this Question was not likely to come before your Lordships quite so soon. I am under the disadvantage, therefore, of not knowing precisely what has been said by my noble friend opposite. But I have looked into this case, and the impression which has been left on my mind by a study of the previous history of Mr. Masani, whose passport is in question, is that he certainly has given great grounds for suspicion that, if he is not actually a member of the Communist Party in India, he has been very closely associated with members of that Party, and his action has been such as to suggest that he realised himself that his activities had laid him open to considerable suspicion. The noble Lord will remember, as I think I recall myself, that on one occasion at a meeting, I think it was of the Congress Party in India, Mr. Masani moved an amendment to the proposal of Mr. Gandhi, who was in favour of non-violence, in favour of violence in the event of Mr. Gandhi's non-violent proposals proving to have been unsatisfactory from his point of view. The noble Lord will, I think, agree that a man who, at a public meeting of the Congress, moves an amendment of that kind at once lays himself open to the suspicion that he is entertaining in his mind the intention of endeavouring to subvert the Government by violent movements.
885 Now, I admit it has been suggested to me since then that too much attention should not be paid to a thing of that kind, and that at meetings in this country, and particularly meetings of debating societies of undergraduates and so on, motions of that sort are sometimes moved without very much being really intended. In all the circumstances, if the noble Lord is prepared to assure me—and I would like to discuss the matter with him—that Mr. Masani is not indeed a member of the Communist Party, then I certainly would be prepared, in my turn, to recommend that, he should now be given a renewal of his passport for a specified period. I do not know whether the noble Lord is himself acquainted with Mr. Masani, but if he is not, perhaps some of his friends, who I know are acquainted with him, would be prepared to come and discuss the matter with me.
LORD FARINGDONMy Lords, I thank the noble Marquess very much indeed for his offer, which I am delighted to be able to accept. If the noble Marquess had been in his place a little earlier he would have heard that exactly what. he says is the case—that Mr. Masani, whom I do know personally and knew in India—and, incidentally, I have asked to 'have his passport extended because I have asked him to come and stay with me—has no connection whatever with any Communist Party and, in fact, belongs to Parties which are definitely abused by the Communist Party. It is a matter of considerable personal interest to him should he contrive to get badly tarred with the Communist brush. But I may say that there is no reason why Communists should not be given passports. Indeed, I should have thought the Government of India would have been glad to get rid of them, because who knows if they are not preparing a Communist coup d'Etat?
But he is not a Communist. He belongs to Parties which are detested by the Communists and are attacked by them. He himself has been attacked both by the Indian and the English Communist, Press, and I think there can be hardly any doubt that he is, like my noble friends who sit on these Benches, a mere Socialist—I hope the more dangerous for that. I am delighted that the Government have reconsidered their opinion, or perhaps have insisted on further and 886 better information, because this question is, I fancy, very largely a question of pique on the part of the Police of Bombay. The noble Earl who answered for the Secretary of State said that the passport would be extended for a year. I do not know why it should not be extended in the way that passports are ordinarily extended, and simply renewed. But we must all be thankful for the small mercies which the Government of India allow the Government of England to give.
§ LORD RHAYADERMy Lords, this short debate has been very interesting for many reasons, but it leaves me in considerable confusion of mind. I need not assure the House that I have no sympathy whatever with Communists or people who wish to upset our Government by violent action. But it is news to me that the holding of Communist views, or being a member of a Communist society, is sufficient reason for excluding from our shores a man who holds those views.
§ THE MARQUESS OF ZETLANDThe noble Lord is quite wrong. He is not excluded from our shores; he is here now.
§ LORD RHAYADERI understood that on information received from India this gentleman—of whom I never heard before this Question was put down—had not been allowed to have his passport extended to come to this country, as had been arranged, because he was a member of the Communist Party. But that is not so?
§ THE MARQUESS OF ZETLANDNo, that is not so.
§ LORD MARLEYMy Lords, before the Motion is withdrawn, may I say this? Lord Rhayader seems to think, and the belief is apparently shared by other members of your Lordships' House, that members of the Communist Party believe in change by violence. Now, I am not a, member of the Communist Party, and I do not know a very great deal about it, but as I understand the position, the ordinary member of the Communist Party says that he believes in change of Government by peaceful means, but the change he desires is so far-reaching that those who are going to be changed will resist by violence, and therefore he may be 887 compelled to fight to put through his beliefs. That may or may not appear odd, but nevertheless I understand that is the belief held by members of the Communist Party. I hope therefore that the noble Lord, Lord Rhayader, will not say that because a man is stated to be a member of the Communist Party therefore he believes in violence.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, since the noble Lord makes that statement, may I say that I do know a little about the views of the Communist Party, because it was my privilege to prosecute them ten years ago. It was then proved to the satisfaction of a jury that the Communists held quite different views from those which the noble Lord now imputes to them, that they did intend to overthrow by violent and unconstitutional means the form of government lawfully established here.
§ LORD MARLEYThe noble and learned Viscount has the advantage of me in years, but, whatever may have been the case ten years ago, that is not the case to-day.
§ LORD RHAYADERI do not wish to prolong the discussion, but my point is that I do not think the views a man holds should be made use of to exclude him.
§ LORD RHAYADERUntil now it has been quite open to a man to advocate any views in this country, provided he 888 was not advocating disorder. Therefore I am glad it is not for that reason that this gentleman has been excluded from this country or not allowed to come in.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, with-drawn.