BUDGET LEAKAGE

Evening Star, Issue 22363, 12 June 1936, Page 9

BUDGET LEAKAGE

COMMUNIST MEMBER'S RESOLUTION MR THOMAS ANNOUNCES RESIGNATION Press Association —By Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, June 11. (Received June 12, at 10 a.m.) Mr W. Gallacher, Communist, tabled a resolution in the House of Commons expressing belief in the justice of the findings of the tribunal and affirming that Mr Thomas and Sir Alfred Butt should no longer continue to bo members of the House, and further expressing the opinion that in the view of the character of the evidence presented at the tribunal, criminal proceedings should be instituted against Mr Thomas. Mr Thomas announced that lie is resigning immediately and will not fight the by-election. Sir Alfred Butt also indicated his resignation. MOTION AMENDED OPPOSITION’S PERSISTENCE. LONDON, June 11. The Government’s motion on which to-day’s debate will occur has been altered to read —“ That the tribunal’s report be now' considered and approved.” The ‘ Daily Herald’s ’ political correspondent says this is obviously tantamount to a vote of censure on Mr Thonias, bub adds that the alteration is due to the Opposition’s persistence. MR THOMAS ADDRESSES MEMBERS 11 NEVER CONSCIOUSLY GAVE A SECRET AWAY " LONDON, June 11. (Received June 12, at 11.30 a.m.) Crowds witnessed Mr J. H. Thomas’s arrival at the House of Commons. Mr Baldwin, answering Mr Thurtle, attached no credence to the allegation of a rise in Newfoundland stocks preceding the issue of the report of the commission examining the island’s finances, which indicated a leakage of official information. Mr Thomas rose amid tense silence and said that no member had over addressed the House under such painful circumstances.’ He hoped that never again would a member be similarly placed. Referring to his resignation from tho Ministry, he said he felt sure the House would agree that he took the only course open. “ I wished to make it clear to my personal friends that I intended to accept the findings of the'tribunal without challenge, whatever they might be,” he said, “ not because a judicial body is infallible, but because I believe there is a no more impartial tribunal than a British judicial tribunal, and I felt that of this tribunal, however keenly I felt its report. I am entitled to say, regardless of the report, that 1 never consciously gave a Budget secret away. I repeat that, regardless of the tribunal’s findings. To attempt to deal with some of my private affairs would be us painful to me as unfair to the House. My vices, if they are vices, have always been open and never disguised, even from my own family. Mr Thomas’s face became more and more flushed and his voice less steady as he proceeded. “ I intend to resign from the House immediately,” he continued. “ I thank all parties for kindness and often generosity over a period of 27 years, and.can only hope that during that long period I made some contribution to what to-day is almost the only bulwark of democratic. Government in the world. I would only say that no word of this debate can wound me more than I feel -wounded. Nothing, nothing can ever be said that can humiliate me more than I have been humiliated, but I can at least go to one who has shared all my trials and troubles, and who still believes in me .in this darkest hour of my life.” Mr Thomas said he had no strength left to fight a by-election. He spoke for six minutes, and ended almost in tears. He sat down amid a few sympathetic cheers, and then rose and walked dejectedly from the House in dead silence. OPENING DF DEBATE TRIBUNAL'S WORK APPRECIATED (British Official Wireless.) f RUGBY, June 11. (Received June 12, at noon.) The resignations of Mr Thomas and Sir Alfred Butt will' necessitate byelections in Derby, the division for which Mr Thomas has sat continuously since 1910, having been returned at the last two General Elections as a National Labour member, and in Balham and Tooting Division, which has returned Sir Alfred Butt as a Conservative member since 19221 The House of Commons debate on the Budget tribunal report was opened by tho Prime Minister, who emphasised the difference between a judicial tribunal, which Parliament constituted for the purpose of inquiry into Budget disclosures, and an ordinary court of law, since, lie said, a grave injustice would be done to the two members affected by tho report if the distinction were overlooked and they were regarded as having been found guilty of a criminal act. It was his responsible, though distasteful tusk as leader of the House, to move that the report of the tribunal bo accepted. He said that Mr Thomas, whose long pub-

lie career was well-known and whoso loyal co-operation in the Government of which, he was now head ho gratefully acknowledged, had recognised that the House was hound to accept the findings of the tribunal, regarding which Mr Baldwin declared that they all acknowledged the .sense of duty under which it undertook its task and the promptness and thoroughness with which it discharged it. In resigning from Parliament while maintaining as he had the perfect right to do that, he was conscious of no offence, Mr Thomas had consulted his own dignity and the dignity of the House and had taken a course which deserved and would receive the full sympathy of the House.

Sir, Archibald Sinclair (Liberal leader) said his party associated itself with the Prime Minister’s expression of thanks to Mr Justice Porter and his colleagues on the judicial tribunal. Maflor Atleo (Labour leader) said two' members of the House had been found by the tribunal to have acted in a manner inconsistent with the positions they held in public life, and it was their clear duty to vindicate the honour of the House. They were proud of the probity of the public servants and rightly exacted from them a very high standard. They could not accept a lower standard from the members of the House or those who held high positions in the Government, but they all deeply regretted that Mr Thomas’s long and distinguished career should have had such an ending. Sir Archibald Sinclair agreed that the incidents disclosed in the tribunal’s report were deplorable, but happily they wei’o of a kind rare in British public life. That that was so was not due. to fortuitous circumstances, but the ’jealousy with which they guarded the probity of their public life and the quickness with which they acted whenever it was impugned. That attitude must be maintained, for it was the greatest and only safeguard against chronic scandals and the festering corruption from which other countries had found it difficult to purify their public life. POINTS IN THE DEBATE I LONDON, June 11. (Received June 12, at 1. p.m.) In the course of his speech Mr Baldwin said that Sir Alfred Butt had l also taken the proper course. Expiation in full had been made by both members. They had left the House for the last time, and it was closed to them. The careless and unthinking cruelty of modern publicity had been theirs, and for weeks they had been paying the penalty in full. “ There is no appeal from the findings, and whatever stigma there is from the report remains for all time. Let us hope with nil our hearts that wc shall never participate in so painful a scene again.” In conclusion, Mr Baldwin said he would change the motion to read that the House accepted the report. Major Attlee indicated that he would not now move his amendment, which read: “That, in view of the definite findings of the tribunal and the disclosures of gambling practices in the City of London, this House calls on the Government to take appropriate action.” Major Attlee attacked the “corrupt influences emanating from gamblers in .the city.” He said it was high time there was a clean-up of the city superstructure. Mere gambling had been built up upon legitimate institutions. The Opposition urged an inquiry into it. Mr Maxton (Labour) said he had known Mr Thomas for almost 30 years. He had been associated with him for many years in the work of the Labour Tarty. “At no time during that period did I or those associated with me approve of his methods and general political conduct.” Nevertheless, they regretted that his political career should end in this way.

Mr Gallacher (Communist) said Mr Thomas talked about his vices—if they were vices—but the Government had encouraged him in them. They knew tlie more he got into society the more he was their man. (Laughter.) Mr Thomas did not suddenly develop corruption. He was brought into contact with captains of industry and politicians representing them. They patted him on the back. If Mr Thomas was the Artful Dodger in the Labour movement, Mr Ramsay MacDonald was the Fagin. Proceeding to criticise Sir Donald Somervell’s ruling, Mr Gallacher said it created suspicion that there were reasons why there were no prosecutions. Were they afraid that other things would come out? Men had been hanged on less circumstantial evidence than was available in this ease. “ I understand you are not prosecuting because you would expose and end the rule of the National Government, which is founded on corruption and a betrayal of the people.”

A Conservative (Colonel Mason) here shouted: “You dirty swine.” Labour members demanded withdrawal.

Colonel Mason rose and said: “ I apologise for using such an unparliamentary word.” Labour members not being satisfied, Colonel Mason rose again and formally withdrew the expression. Sir Donald Somervell (Attor-ney-General) said he was satisfied there was no evidence to justify proceedings for perjury against any witnesses at the tribunal. As regards the Official Secrets Act, ho was satisfied that evil intent was a necessary ingredient of an offence. Mr Neville Chamberlain said gambling could not be stopped by legislation. He had suggested to Lloyd’s a sort of close season from the end of the financial year, Match 31, until the Budget was announced in the House of Commons, during which time no Budget risk be accepted. Lloyd’s assented. Thus what happened would not happen again. Meantime Lloyd’s had appealed to the underwriting agents not to accept insurance contingency risks without assuring themselves that the insured bad legitimate interests to bo covered. The House then divided on the amendment which was moved by Mr Johnston after Major Attlee’s state-