Immigration Bill.

Part of Class Ii. – in the House of Commons at on 25 July 1923.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Henry Snell Mr Henry Snell , Woolwich East

I confess I have a good deal of hesitation in intervening in this Debate lest I should do some injury to the cause for which I speak, because I understand from some speakers on the other side of the House that if anybody from another country consulted us on these benches, or asked our advice, it would prove that they were enemies of this country. When they speak of the settlers of Kenya that, presumably, is all right; it is the natural thing to do. But if we should speak for groups of Indians, who require reforms in their constitution, or for any other group in the outlying parts of our Empire, that would seem to label them as being enemies of this country. That, I venture to say, is a very deplorable suggestion, of which hon. Members on the other side ought to be entirely ashamed. There is, however, just this point, that although the Members of the Labour party may have different ideas of Government, and even as to the ultimate end of our Empire from hon. Gentlemen on the other side, it is conceivable, in the long run, that our theory may hold the Empire together, and the other theory may disband it. It is worth while in that connection to point out that the theory advanced by the hon. and learned Member for Swindon (Mr. Banks) has already lost us from our Empire Ireland and Egypt, and if such racial impertinence as he indulged in to-night is repeated very often in this House, it might result in our losing India.

That 1s all I desire, or trust myself to say upon the matter, but I do ask the attention of the House for one or two minutes to another matter that was mentioned by the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies, namely, the relation of this country to the Colony of Ceylon. It is not so exciting a subject as Kenya, but it does affect 4½ millions of our fellow-citizens in the Empire, and it is worth while, therefore, that the House should give it some slight attention. The people of Ceylon are engaged in bringing their constitution more closely in accord with the growing capacitiee and progressive culture of their people, and as the constitution is being revised, it is not surprising that the views of certain sections in the community do not entirely agree with the views put forward by His Majesty's Government. One would assume that the purpose of revising the constitution of any part of the Empire would be to make it as good as it possibly could be made, and that any criticisms of plans suggested, so long as they were courteous and helpful, would be welcomed by His Majesty's Government. I shall assume in what I have to say that the principle which should guide us in revising a constitution is that the constitution should be so constructed that it would function efficiently, that it would safeguard the liberties of the people of Ceylon, for instance, and at the same time promote the well-being and protect the interests of the Imperial Government. It should, further, evoke the assent of the great majority of the people who will have to live under the Constitution.

Now the aim of the Imperial Government, in revising the constitution of Ceylon, should, I suggest, be to build a constitution which is expressive of the national idealism of the great majority of the people of the country, to develop a spirit which is bigger than the spirit of any section within that community, and aim at transforming those who are divided into races, tribes and religious sects and interests, into a people; in other words, to create a national spirit so healthy and so strong that it would dominate over the sectional interests and ambitions as they exhibit themselves in different races. What does this constitution which His Majesty's Government are proposing for Ceylon actually do? Is it likely to promote the end that I have described? As a matter of fact, it would seem by its proposals to disregard the fact that the discontent which exists there is a natural thing. After all, racial ideals and racial ambitions are very slow to die, and they accommodate themselves very slowly to national ideals. But this constitution does not gain the assent of the majority of those who will have to live under it, and in that respect is bad. It does not create a people. On the contrary, it would seem to intensify every difference, to separate still further one race from another, and to perpetuate difficulties which it should aim at solving.

In spite of what has been said on the other side, this all centres in what I regard as the very unwise and dangerous expedient of communal representation. It is seeking to run a community on racial lines for an indefinite period, and there seems to be no justification for this narrow and limited conception of tribal interest. When the electoral principle was established in 1912, the various populations were then formed into an electorate for the purpose of political and administrative representation. That experiment has resulted in no such disadvantage as would justify it being broken up, and the communal system of representation being reestablished. There has been ample evidence of the willingness and the capacity of the people of Ceylon to transcend the racial limitations, and they have shown that by appointing men of different races and different creeds in popular elections to undertake their government. The people of Ceylon very naturally fear at the present time that if this communal representation is imposed upon their colony, with all the racial and tribal jealousies, which it should be the aim and business of the Imperial Government to try to abandon, and if this constitution passes, then we may never expect to have the national spirit developed, but the racial needs, and so on, will be intensified. Each group will watch and fight for its own interest, and all kinds of artificial antipathies will be stimulated. What advantage is to be gained by this principle being proposed in this way? It settles no problem, but it does create new problems. It seems as though the intention of His Majesty's Government was to play off one section of the community against the other on the principle of "divide and govern." One knows that that is not the intention of His Majesty's Government, but people looking at it from the island to which it refers may think it is so.

I would remind the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies that, when he spoke of Ceylon, he said nothing about the position of the Executive Council in the new Constitution that is proposed. There is one deduction to be drawn from the Constitution proposed, to which I desire to draw the attention of the Committee. It appears to me, in certain of its features, to bear a very ominous resemblance to certain features of the Soviet Constitution of Russia, with its nominated members, with its specialised representation and all the other antidemocratic expedients associated with that system. I am a polite person, and all I would venture to say is that my enthusiasm for the Soviet system is under very strict control. It surprises me, but I am sure it must interest the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Newbold) to see certain features of that system imposed upon a Colony against its will by the Imperial Government of the Empire. I, for my part, am content to leave Russia to a monopoly of its own methods and try to conduct our business in the Empire on lines which have been tried and proved by many years of experience. May I try to draw a parallel of what would happen if the same system ruled in our own country. We should be a people not striving for a common purpose but divided into separate groups, each group looking after its own interests. Supposing we had Members elected to this House as Jews and Scots and Irish and Welsh, whether they lived in Scotland or Ireland or Wales or anywhere, just on the point of nationality; or supposing we were the elected as Roman Catholics, or Protestants, or Dissenters, or Sceptics, or whatever we happened to be, the nation would lose a good deal. We should be further away from that unity of purpose and outlook we are striving to obtain, and whatever difficulties we have would be intensified If it is our aim in this country to develop that larger fellowship of the nation as a whole, then we have to transcend the boundaries of sects and creeds and races and think of something bigger than that.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Under-Secretary for the Colonies, in his speech, said that nothing could be of greater peril than the clash of races, and he told us that the great fellowship of the Empire could not be subordinated to norrow ideals of racial consciousness. These were admirable statements of high principle, and I ask him, in relation to this Constitution of Ceylon, to apply, where he has the power, the advice and the principles he so ably enunciated to this House. I understand the matter is not finally settled, and that in a few weeks the Government will issue a report. Presumably, therefore, the matter is still open, and the final decision is not made. I therefore appeal to the Government to make an earnest attempt to accommodate its views, so far as that is possible, to the views of the representatives of the Ceylon Congress. It may be a bad thing that a majority of a nation should rule, but it is a worse thing that a minority should rule over a majority. This Constitution makes the minority rule the majority. I can understand why His Majesty's Government has introduced that, because it itself rules on a minority vote in this country. [Laughter.] But this matter is too important to be a matter of banter in that sense. I only suggest that an opportunity is now presented for revising a decision come to and for trying to bring into accord both the views of the people of Ceylon, as expressed by the Ceylon Congress, and His Majesty's Government. If that is done, it will make for peace and security abroad; it will supply one example at least of that desire for fair government which hon. Members on the opposite side have said is the prominent feature of our Empire policy.