356
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference :--
C.O. 882/10
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON |
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- GOPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
50
in reference to the number of members of which the reformed Council is to be com- posed; the number of official members; the number to be elected by territorial electorates; the number to be elected by committees or interests, if any; and the number of unofficial members to be nominated, if any;
(2) Whether he is aware that, owing to the opposition in Ceylon to the reforms promulgated in 1920, the Governor promised the Singhalese to forward to the Secretary of State within a year from the first sitting of the new Council, Le.. June, 1921. his recommendations on such amendments to the Constitution as might be brought forward by Motion in Council, giving due weight in his recommenda tions to the views and votes of the elected members; whether this has been done, and, if not, whether he can state the reason.
4
The Secretary of State for the Colonies (Mr. Churchill): Resolutions regard- ing the further reform of the Constitution were brought forward in the Legislative Council in December last, and fully debated. The Governor forwarded to me the report of the Debate, with an analysis of the voting on each Resolution, and his remarks thereon. One of the Resolutions, which was carried without a Division. ran as follows:---
16
That a scheme for the allocation and distribution of seats in territorial electorates should be made on the recommendations of a Committee of this Council appointed for the purpose."
I approved of the appointment of this Committee, which has, I understand, now completed its report, which I am awaiting. It would clearly be premature to come to any decision as to the numbers of the several classes of members in- dicated by the honourable Member before the report of the Committee is in my hands.
37881
No. 26.
THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Confidential.)
(Received 1st August, 1922.)
[Answered by No. 32.]
SIB
I HAVE the honour to forward to you the enclosed letter at the request of the seven elected members of the Legislative Council, who, at the meeting of Council, held on 22nd June, 1922, when asked by me to serve on a Committee for the alloca- tion and distribution of seats in the territorial electorates, refused to serve on that Committee; such a Committee having been unanimously agreed to without any stipulations whatever at a meeting of the Legislative Council on 10th December, 1921, during a debate on the reform of the Constitution of Ceylon.
The Queen's House, Colombo, 11th July, 1922.
2. They also request me to forward a copy of the Ceylon Daily News* purporting to contain a report of the debate on that occasion. I do so with the reservation that I do not accept the report of that debate as being à correct and verbatim report as regards my remarks made on that occasion, since I find it for the most part grossly inaccurate.
3. I adhere to my position that the adequate representation of the territorial electorates has no bearing on the composition of the rest of the Legislative Council.
I defined "adequate representation" in the following words :-
"Our object must be to endeavour to guarantee that the people of all parts of the Island shall have fair and reasonable representation; neither over-representation nor under-representation, but such representation as will give those who send their representatives to the Council a voice in its pro- ceedings commensurate with their interests.”
4. I considered then, as I do now, that the action of these members was undignified. They had asked for such a Committee, which had been unanimously agreed to by the Legislative Council, and then without adequate reason they refused to sit on it. The reference to an unwarranted interference with their rights and privileges I do not comprehend.
* Dated 17th June; not reprinted.
51
5. Paragraph 6. With this pronouncement I entirely disagree. No such statements were at any time put forward.
6. Paragraph 7. I have already dealt with this statement. Adequate representation of territorial electorates has, in my opinion, no bearing on the composition of the rest of the Council, except that it has been con- ceded that there shall be an unofficial majority.
7. Paragraphs 8 and 9. The statement that there was ample evidence "furnished in the debate of the opinions of unofficial members, for the Government, if it wished to do so, to formulate a scheme for the allocation of seats, as a reference to the discussion will show" is hardly borne out by facts. The member for the town of Colombo, Mr. James Peiris, did put forward a scheme for the allocation and distribution of seats in the territorial electorates in his motion on 1st December, 1921, but subsequently withdrew it. Various references to this scheme were made in Legislative Council, but as I stated then and do now, the debate was
very inconclusive." I could certainly not, on that debate, have formulated any scheme for the reform of the Constitution.
8. Paragraphs 10, 11, 12. I have already in a previous despatch referred to the point in regard to the question raised here that I could not accept the suggestion" that so fundamental a change in the constitution of the Legislative Council of Ceylon should be decided by a majority of one; though as pointed out here the majority of the elected members was as 10 to 6 in favour of the "suggestion." I am not in a position to verify the statement that the adverse vote of the remaining two members was due or not to the withdrawal of the scheme for the distribution of seats as originally set out in the speech of the member for the Town of Colombo.
9. Paragraph 13. The claim bere put forward that the "suggestion" for a majority of territorially elected members should be acquiesoed in, seems to be based on my statement that in forwarding my despatch to you I would give "due weight" to the views of such members. I conceive the expression "due weight" to mean the full consideration of those views in conjunction with the views of the other unofficial members, and by no means that they should necessarily be acceded to because there was a majority of one when the official votes were deducted from the majority of the whole Council against the "suggestion." and because 9 out of 11 territorially elected members voted for it.
10. Paragraphs 14, 15. There can be no question but that the clause con- taining the suggestion for a two-thirds territorially elected majority in a Council to he composed of 45 members was lost on division by 12 votes to 25, and conse- quently the addition of the words allocation and" to the words "distribution of seats in territorial electorates" was necessary; and it is misleading to say "advan- was taken of this amendment to refer to a Committee the determination of tage the number of territorial seats without
any guidance whatever." The guidance necessary in such a case was, and is, the "adequate" representation of territorial electorates.
"
11. Paragraphs 17, 18. These remarks betray a complete misapprehension of the role of the Governor, who has an undoubted right to speak and vote in the Legislative Council. I have a right of reply and intend in all circumstances to make the fullest use of that right, which it is most necessary I should enjoy. Whatever "embarrassment" may be caused by my right of speech is due to the perverted sense of the signatories of this document, whose assertions I have found it desirable to disprove, and shall continue to do whenever necessary.
The so-called “rule" stated to be laid down by me is one which makes for the proper conduct of debate, and when I have to intervene, as I often do, I reserve for myself the full right to wind up a debate; and the statement that such a practice on my part tends to "stifle discussion" is absolutely incorrect, and it is evidently made in the hope that my remarks may be "stified," which on occasions are possibly not too palatable to the signatories of this document.
12. This document is the production of those members of Legislative Council who are members of the so-called National Congress, and who refused to sit upon the Committee lately formed for making recommendations for the allocation and distribution of seats in the territorial electorates, and who are the extremists of that body, which I am informed does not now express the views of the Island in regard to Political Reform.
13. I hope I may be permitted to advise that this document should not be replied to fully, and that beyond acknowledging its receipt, you will uphold my
E 2