Coll 1/49 'Aden. Administration and control: changes consequent on Indian constitutional reforms; transfer to HMG' [‎442v] (893/968)

sisdi^ co:
20 : Novembris, 1933.] Memorandum by Sir Phiroze [Continued, ^
C. Sethna, O.B.E., ON THE Future Constitution or Aden.
ifbich si:
His Exee
bad bea
sav,
ijiiaTery i
„! of India bare
outsk
Muhammad Shafi, at the end of the debate surveyed the whole situation
and stated that Government were going to observe perfect neutrality i n
the matter. Sir Muhammad Shah’s words will bear repetition, and there
fore, with your permission, propose to quote them. He said: —
sentmg ditterent interests, iney win note tne tact that Indian senti
ment according to the various speakers is entirely opposed to this
transfer. They will also take note of the fact, which has been
positively stated by the Honourable Mr. Sethna and is endorsed bv
the Bombay Government that local opinion in Aden as well as in
Bombay is also opposed to the transfer. They will further take note H** t0
of the fact stated by the Honourable Rai Bahadur Lala Ram Saran : w®® ^ 18
Das, that in view of the position which Indians at present occupy in ^
different parts of Africa—parts that are under the control of the Colonial .^rhCbief’s i
Office—Indians would prefer that Aden—their brethren, their country- I'-y jn both t
men, residing in Aden—should remain under the control of the Govern- wgovernment i:
retain*
idea Till r<
ment of India rather than that Aden should be transferred to the
expressed in the various speeches delivered by Honourable Members if the fact thi
to-day will, the House may rest assured, be carefully borne in mind by i^tof
the Government of India. The Government of India have not yet l TTe s of the"
ted with an op]
re occasions, an
itely necessary
r new should bi
talk.
September,
lie Honourable i
which she
fflied on the qu<
nnsfer of Aden
meat of Bomba’
pronounced in favour of this transfer and until they do, no Honourable
Member has any right to assume that they are in favour of that pro
position. Their position is, as announced by the Honourable the Foreign
Secretary, one of benevolent neutrality towards the Resolution moved
by the Honourable Mr. Sethna. They prefer to leave this Resolution to
the vote of the House. The official Members will take no part in the
voting and Government will undoubtedly pay due regard to the final
verdict of this House upon the Resolution moved by my Honourable
friend.’
“ Mr. President, if this was the view that the Council held in September,
1921, I think I am perfectly justified in stating that the Council holds not
only the same view to-day but holds it in a greatly intensified form. (Hear- smattitude
hear.) Sir, even after 1921, there were occasional reports that Aden was an® one 0 f w
going to be transferred, and in order to make sure on the point, questions a to the provision
were asked both in this House and in another place to which very definite ^
replies were given by Government which I will quote. On 16th January, s;very little notic
1922, the then Law Member, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, in the Legislative
Assembly said:— ^ ^ which the tr
Government have no intention of arriving at any decision without :::lt o pini^ ^
giving the Assembly an opportunity of discussion.’ against the p
“ Two years later, on 9th June, 1924, in answer to a question in this by the tradii
House Sir John Thompson, the Foreign Secretary, observed as follows:— r the prese
The matter of the transfer was under the consideration of His ' s ^ u * quo.
Majesty’s Government and it was not possible to say when a ieBombay Goi
decision would be arrived at but that before a final decision was arrived - <iit followed j n
at, the Indian Legislature would be given an opportunity to express tide by His
its opinion.’ K^Mfloemen
“ Such an opportunity, however, was not given to us, and this is where
Government committed a breach of faith with the Legislature. On 3rd , nes l Hots
March, 1927, the then Commander-in-Chief, speaking on the Budget debate, '’ 1(e Bill in