CO885-11 — Page 549

543

C. 73230/30 (No. 36].

148

No. 98.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Received 5.25 a.m., 16th April, 1930.)

TELEGRAM.

15TH APRIL No. 10. Confidential. Your despatch of 27th March, Con- fidential.* Indian Franchise. Have you received my telegram of 10th March? I ask, as no reference is made to that telegram either in your despatch or in your despatch of 26th March to India Office, although the latter contains reference to my telegram of 12th March.§

2. I cannot of course estimate to what extent danger of prohibition of emigration of unskilled labourers from India to Ceylon exists. Local effect of threat of such stoppage would I fear be reverse of that desired by the Government of India. While stoppage would in time have serious effect on European financial interests, it would directly affect Ceylonese interests to small extent only. More long-sighted politicians would no doubt appreciate that eventually general prosperity of the Island would be considerable, but it seems unlikely that even this appreciation would outweigh their reluctance to advocate surrender to what would be popularly considered as unwarrant- able attempt by the Government of India to dictate to Ceylon. Threat would be strongly resented and would stiffen rather than relax existing opposition to any change in franchise offered by you and accepted by the Legislative Council. Resentment would not have been lessened by action of Indian members of Legislative Council in appealing directly to the Government of India without even having explained their ground of objection to the Legislative Council of which they are members.

3. Telegram from the Government of India entirely ignores admission of Indians to franchise by qualifications of domicile. As explained my telegram of 31st January, Confidential, number of domiciled Indians is probably very large.

4. Menace to local predominant Ceylonese involved in any increase of Indian votes may, as the Government of India suggests, be largely illusory. Important fact is that nothing will persuade Sinhalese that it is negligible.

5. I am grateful to you for calling attention to the manner in which Government of India have misinterpreted my reference to Africans. Any repetition of Indian grievances in Africa was of course the very thing I wished to avoid, and suggestion that my proposal envisaged or would lead to a reproduction of African conditions here is so absurd that I am surprised to find it in a telegram from the Government of India. 6. Reference to equality of political status in the 5th part of telegram from the Government of India is, to me, unintelligible, as equality in status is exactly what I have proposed and is exactly that against which the Government of India are con- tending in their endeavour to secure that all Indians admitted to voters' roll must retain special status and privileges not enjoyed by the rest of the electorate.

7 Such of the correspondence as I have seen does not indicate that Govern- ment of India have made any attempt whatever to dispel the misunderstanding which has been fostered by agitators. They seem to have accepted all the protests at their face value without any effort to form an accurate appreciation of the real effect of my proposal; none of the points made in my telegram of 31st January appear to have been considered by them.

S. I share the desire of the Government of India that final settlement should be reached with the least possible delay, as if registration of voters cannot begin before the end of May introduction of new Constitution before the end of next February will be impossible. I am not wedded to my proposals on any personal grounds, nor were they the outcome of any bargaining of which I have cognizance. They embodied what I believed and still believe to have been minimum concession to Sinhalese objection which, unless met, would have been fatal to any chance of acceptance of Donoughmore Constitution by a majority of present unofficial members. Any substantial modification of what was crucial point determining acceptance of your offer could hardly I think be made now without exposure to imputation of that breach of faith unless offer so modified were resubmitted to Legislative Council. I apprehend that result would be rejection of offer by large unofficial majority and there would be some risk of subsequent fairly extensive non-co-operation in working new Constitution if such rejection were ignored.

C. 73230/30 [No. 40].

(No. 273.) MY LORD,

149

No. 99.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

(Received 28th April, 1930.)

Queen's House, Colombo, 7th April, 1930. I HAVE the honour to transmit a letter (with enclosures) addressed to your Lordship by the President of the All-Ceylon Village Committees' Conference, on the subject of the Indian vote under the new Constitution.

MY LORD,

I have, &c..

H. J. STANLEY,

Governor.

Enclosure in No. 99.

ALL-CEYLON VILLAGE COMMITTEES' CONFERENCE.

42, Silversmith Street,

Colombo, 1st April, 1930. I HAVE the honour to forward herewith for your Lordship's information a copy of a resolution unanimously passed at a Special Session of the Village Committees' Conference held at the Tower Hall, Colombo, on 22nd March, 1930. A copy of the Times of Ceylon* containing a full report of the proceedings is also forwarded.

Your obedient servant,

The Right Honourable Lord Passfield,

The Secretary of State for the Colonies,

Downing Street,

London.

S. W. R. D. BANDARANAYAKE,

The Resolution.

President.

In view of the fact that originally the chief objection to the Donoughmore Scheme was due to the unsatisfactory proposals regarding the franchise for non- Ceylonese and that the Governor realising this difficulty suggested that the franchise for non-Ceylonese be limited to those possessing the qualifications set out in the Order in Council, 1923, or alternatively to those producing a Certificate of Domicile, which suggestion was adopted by Lord Passfield who said "I cannot fail to recognize that unless some material modification of the proposals relating to the franchise can be announced, the prospect of general acceptance of the Scheme and of active co-opera- and also "I propose to adopt your tion in its working if it is put in force is remote suggestion the Register

that domicile should be the standard test for inclusion on I propose that provision should be made for this qualification

in the Order in Council."

And in view of the fact that a majority of the country accepted the proposed Scheme of Government on that assurance, this Conference protests strongly against any attempt now to alter or modify Lord Passfield's proposals regarding the franchise. Any such action will be considered a grave breach of faith on the part of the British Government. If any modification is being contemplated this Conference demands that the whole Scheme of Government be re-submitted to the Legislative Council for acceptance or rejection în views of the modifications now to be suggested regarding the franchise.

* No. 97.

† No. 92.

↑ No. 96.

§ No. 93.

| No. 84.

Not reproduced here.

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE

Reference :-

TELEC.O.882/11

PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON |

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