CO882-10 — Page 361

33

347

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

NIITT

CO. 882/10

32

people of this country, should have a predominant voice in reflecting the views of the country. I do not know to what extent this predominance is intended to go, but from what I can gather it would be one which, if it included the territorially elected Singhalese and Tamils would dominate the Government and all other communities, taking as a guide to the proposed numbers of the Legislative Council the figures mentioned during the debate on Constitutional Reform in the Council-i.e., about 45 members.

3. As regards paragraph 3 of the Memorial I cannot agree that the "Nomin- ated Members should be regarded as the supporters of the Official rather than the Unofficial side." The experience of past Councils as well as of the present Council by no means bears out this contention.

drawn in connexion with my I cannot agree that the "natural inference' promise to the effect that after a year's working of Legislative Council I would, after discussion in Legislative Council, make recommendations on the amendment of the Order in Council, was that the demands made for a four-fifths majority would be conceded; since I was entirely unaware of any such expectation, and such was not mentioned at any time during the debate in Legislative Council upon Constitutional Reforms.

4. As regards paragraph 4 of the Memorial the point at issue here is whether it is desirable that there should be a predominance of two territorially elected com- munities, which, should they combine, would dominate the Government and all other communities. The speech of the Attorney-General in this connexion reflected Gov- ernment's views as to whether such a predominance would work satisfactorily, at least for some time to come, and this doubt is apparently shared by others who do not subscribe to Ceylon National Congress principles.

5. As regards paragraph 5 of the Memorial I hardly think this correctly repre- sents that attitude of the minorities, judging from a Memorandum* lately addressed to you by them.

6. As regards paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Memorial I cannot do better than refer you to the Attorney-General's speech in Legislative Council on these points, which is set out on pages 815 et seq. of Hansard of 10th December, 1921,† and also to the arguments already submitted to you in the Memorandum of the Minorities.*

7. As regards paragraphs 8 to 17 of the Memorial I do not propose to criticize these proposals, since I have already in my despatch of 1st March, recommended that the suggestion for a Committee of the Legislative Council for the allocation and dis- tribution of seats should be given your favourable consideration.

8. As regards paragraph 18 of the Memorial this formed also one of the sug- gestions put forward during the debate in Legislative Council on the Constitutional Reforms, and I recommend that it should receive your favourable consideration.

9. As regards paragraph 19 of the Memorial I cannot do better than refer you to the Attorney-General's speech in Legislative Council on this point, which is set out on page 826 of Hansardt of 10th December. 1921.

The mover of this suggestion, Mr. James Peiris, was understood to say that he did not want to elaborate the scheme, and that it would be well to place a more detailed scheme before Government. So far I have not received any such scheme. and, as I stated in Legislative Council, I was unable to understand exactly what was proposed then, and the position is not any clearer now.

10. I forward the Memorial to you for your consideration in connexion with the proposals for the reform of the Constitution, and no doubt you will give it due consideration together with the Memorandum submitted to you on behalf of the communities which are not party to the National Congress views on Constitutional Reforms, and when in due course the suggested Committee of the Legislative Council upon the allocation and distribution of seats, should such be approved by you, has made its report.

I have, &c.,

W. H. MANNING,

Governor.

* Enclosure in No. 8.

↑ Not printed here.

↑ No. 8.

To

SIR,

Enclosure in No. 9.

The Right Honourable

Winston Spencer Churchill, P.C, M.P.,

His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies,

Downing Street, London.

THE Executive Committee of the Ceylon National Congress beg to address you on the reform of the Constitution of Ceylon in view of a promise on the part of His Excellency the Governor to make his recommendations to you on the demands of the people in this respect.

2. The Legislative Council of Ceylon was inaugurated in 1833. In 1911 the elective principle was introduced into it. But from a date anterior thereto the people had advocated the creation of a legislature composed of members elected upon a territorial basis. We beg to refer to certain extracts from the Memorials of the National Association and the Jaffna Association addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies on the 19th April, 1909, and the 10th April, 1909, respectively. (Vide Appendix A.) There had been long continued and persistent agitation for the creation of such a legislature, when in September, 1920, an Order in Council was proclaimed creating a Legislative Council, the composition of which may be conveni- ently expressed by the following table:-

Legislative Council [87 exclusive of the Governor]

Officials (14 exclusive of the Governor)

Nominated (7)

Elected (16)

According to Governor's discretion (3)

To represent certain Communities (4)

Commúna) (3)

Territorial (11)

Special interests (2)

3. It was claimed by the authorities both in Parliament and in Ceylon that a large measure of popular control was conceded by the grant of a large unofficial majority. But the people had always maintained that the nominated members should be regarded as supporters of the official rather than of the unofficial side. They were sorely disappointed by the Order in Council. assembled Congress not to send their representatives into a Council in which they They decided in duly would be powerless to carry out the popular will, but whose decisions the local Government might claim to be the expression of the popular will. They realized that the proposed reform would leave the electorate and the elected as powerless and irresponsible as before, and they felt that the Council as a means of political educa- tion and as a stage towards responsible Government would be as worthless as ite predecessor. An informal Conference, however, between His Excellency the Governor and a few leading members of the Congress resulted in an understanding by which the people were to elect their representatives and the Governor was to make his recommendations on their demands at the end of one year after he had seen the working of the new Council for some time. He promised to give due weight to the views of the elected members. annexed hereto. (Vide Appendix B.)

A copy of the proceedings of that Conference is His Excellency knew what the popular demands were, and the natural inference drawn from his promise was that if the new Council proved to be a success, those demands would in the main be conceded. One of those demands was that the territorially elected majority should be four-fifths of the membership.

4.

His Excellency the Governor has publicly acknowledged the capacity and fitness of the elected members and the success of the new Council. (Vide Appendix C.) And though this should be a strong reason for extending the popular control,

D

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE. LONDON

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-