CO882-10 — Page 424

409

8

whose opposition to the special seat I did not fully appreciate when you submitted proposal for this seat which on general grounds I only accepted with reluctance. Similar considerations to those mentioned in concluding seutence of your telegram might be held to justify claims from Mohammedans and possibly other communities with special interests in Western Province. Adequate representation of special interests might well be secured by communal nominated member. I shall retain liberty in default of compromise to reconsider whole question at any time if it is found that new Council is strongly opposed to continuance. I am reluctant to adopt course which clearly involves perpetuation of agitation, when agreement can apparently be obtained without practical sacrifice.-DEVONSHIRE,

37955

7

No. 14.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Paraphrase.)

(Received 9.20 a.m., 28th July, 1923.)

TELEGRAM.

28TH JULY. I have referred proposal for alternative for Western Province scat to Tamil leaders for consideration, and will report decision in due course.-- MANNING.

38205

37587

No. 12.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE. (Received 3.41 p.m., 25th July, 1923.)

(Paraphrase.)

•

TELEGRAM.

[Answered by No. 19.]

1

25TH JULY. As I know the settled opinion of the Tamil leadere regarding the special seat, I have not placed before them alternatives mentioned in your telegram of the 24th July. I am assured that they would very strongly resent any attempt to modify concession granted to them. Except by grant of preponderance of seats to them, Sinhalese opposition cannot be conciliated. The Mahommedans and other communities are hardly in a position to put forward any claim for further special seats as they signed the communities report giving seats to Tamils, and to themselves. It would not be possible to convince Tamils that a practical sacrifice to them was not involved in any modification of the concession either by the grant of communal nominated member or otherwise. I would also call attention to the concluding part of paragraph eleven, your despatch 11th January, 1923.† In short, the Tamil support of the Government is based on special seat, and even if a lessening of Sinhalese agitation were secured, it would be dearly bought by awakening of a Tamil agitation which would be intensified by what I am satisfied Tamils would regard as breach of faith.-MANNING.

38146

No. 13.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE to THE GOVERNOR. (Sent 3.55 p.m., 25th July, 1923.) TELEGRAM.

(Paraphrase.)

I HAVE no objection to submission of proposed scheme for Executive Committee as suggested in your telegrams of 19th and 24th July. I consider that practical scheme might be found subject to relations between Executive Council, Executive Committee, Legislative Council and Finance Committee being fully examined, but I do not desire to express definite opinion until your proposals have been laid before Legislative Council, and the views of Elected Members have been elicited. I consider that all correspondence including my despatch of 18th June,§ should, when you have expressed your views, be published for general information.-DEVONSHIRE.

* No. 11.

† No. 8 in Omd. 1809.

Nos. 7 and 10.

i No. 1.

No. 15.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(No. 466.) MY LORD DUKE,

(Received 31st July, 1923.)

[Answered by No. 22.]

Ceylon, 10th July, 1923.

I HAVE the honour to refer to Your Grace's despatch No. 697 of the 24th November, 1922,* relative to the memorial, dated 20th September, 1922,† from the Executive Committee of the Ceylon National Congress, in which it is alleged that the Joint Memorandum of the Minority Communities, dated 21st February, has not been widely supported by the members of those Communities.

2. I regret the delay in replying to your despatch. On my return from leave in February last I adopted your suggestion that the signatories of the Joint Memo- randum should be given an opportunity of replying to the statements contained in the memorial, and I now transmit a copy of a letter from Sir P. Ramanathan, dated 5th July, 1923, in which, after explaining the reasons for the delay in answering the communication addressed to him in February last, he replies to the statements made by the Executive Committee of the National Congress. I consider that he correctly states the facts in paragraph 10 of his letter, in that the Joint Memo- randum is most strongly supported in the Colony by the thoughtful individuals in every tommunity, and likewise, in my opinion, by the moderate Sinhalese themselves.

I have, &c.,

W. H. MANNING,

Governor, &c.

SIR,

Enclosure in No. 15.

Colombo, 5th July, 1923.

REFERRING to your letter of the 21st instant, I have the honour to state that I was unable to deal with your letter of the 28th February last owing to extreme pressure of work and to my departure from Ceylon, Returning to Ceylon early in May, I found myself so overwhelmed with work that I had no time to write an adequate reply to the tissue of half truths and gross perversions which characterize the Memorial of the Executive Committee of the Ceylon National Congress, and I hoped that, as the members of the Ceylon Tamil League and of the Ceylon Tamil Mahajana Sabai and the Jaffna Association had addressed His Excellency the Governor on this subject in May last, it was need less for me to reply to your letters at so late a period.

2. You ask me to forward to you a joint reply of the signatories of the Joint Memorandum to the statements contained in the Memorial of the Ceylon National Congress dated 25th September, 1922. I beg to state that a joint reply of the signatories of the Joint Memorandum is not possible now, for, of the eight Members of Council who signed the Joint Memorandum, Mr. Arthur Alwis (a Burgher Council Member) has died. The other Burgher Member, Mr. Allan Drieberg, has

*No. 46 in Eastern No. 138.

Enclosure in No. 45 in Eastern No. 188. In No. 8 in Eastern No. 188.

: Enclosure

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

חי

Reference :-

C.O. 882/10

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

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON