A—6

72

Possession of British Citizenship does not imply Right to Franchise. Sir Tej said that I was subtle, that my memorandum* was a subtle one. lam not subtle, and my memorandum, I thought, was a truism. All that I said was this : There is one British citizenship over the whole Empire, and there should bo ; that is something solid and enduring. But we must not place a wrong interpretation upon that; we must not derive from the one British citizenship rights of franshise, because that would be a profound mistake. The attitude, has been that franchise does not depend upon British citizenship. It is only in India that this position is not understood. Indians go the length of deriving from their British citizenship the further notion of equal franchise rights too, and they claim that they may go from India to any other part and enjoy the same franchise, rights as the other portions of the Empire. I think that is a wrong conception. It is wrong not only as regards India, but as regards every part of the Empire. Ido not think that an Australian, for instance, should come to South Africa and claim the franchise there as a matter of course. He is a British subject, and on that footing we are equal in the eye of the law, but, when it comes to tho exercise of political franchise: rights, I think that there is a great difference and. distinction, and we should recognize that; and where a distinction is carried into actual practice, as it is in South Africa, it should not be looked upon as an indignity, as a reflection on the citizens of any Dominion, including India, who come to us and who do not get these rights. That is really all I wish to say about this matter. India cannot make Question one of Foreign Policy. I noticed in Sir Tej's statement a remark which almost looked like a threat: that, if India fails in forcing on us the view which she holds so strongly, then she may be compelled to make of it a question of foreign policy. Well, I would say this : you cannot have it both ways. As long as it is a matter of what are tho rights of a British subject, it is not a matter of foreign policy ; it is a matter entirely domestic to the British Empire. If it becomes a question of foreign policy, then Indians cannot claim. on the ground of their British citizenship any more the recognition of any particular rights. Once they appeal to a tribunal, whether it be the League of Nations or whatever it bo, outside the British Empire, they can no longer use as an argument the common British citizenship. I want to keep it there. I want it to be recognized that you must not drive it too far, and you must not derive from that citizenship claims which you cannot uphold. Comment on Speech of Maharajah of Alwar. Let me just say this in regard to what fell from the Maharajah. He said that, if we do not invite him, that he will invite himself. The Maharajah of Alwar : I did not quite say that. General Smuts: Let me say this, Maharajah: Nobody would be more welcome in South Africa than you would be, and I would welcome nothing more than that you should come as a great representative of India to look into conditions in South Africa yourself, convince, yourself of the situation there, and convince yourself also that, apart from the far-reaching political difficulties we have, our fundamental attitude towards our Indian fellow-citizens is one of justice and fair play. Ido not think that our Indian fellow-subjects in South Africa can complain of injustice. It is just the, opposite. They have prospered exceedingly in South Africa. People who have come there as coolies, people who have come there as members of the depressed classes in India, have prospered. Their children have been to school; they have been educated, and their children and grandchildren to-day are many of them men of great wealth. I noticed the other day that the Reverend Mr. Andrews, who is a great friend of the Indian cause in South Africa, publicly advised Indians in South Africa not to go back to India. The Government of South Africa actually pray for their tickets, give them pocket-money and other inducements in order voluntarily to return to India, and thousands avail themselves of that policy and return to India. That gentleman, who is a great protagonist of the Indian cause, has publicly advised Indians not to fall in with that policy. He says, " You will be worse off in India." I quote this to show that there, is no unfairness, no injustice to our fellow-citizens in India ; but when they come forward and make, claims which, politically, we cannot possibly recognize, out attitude of friendliness will worsen and the position as regards them will become very difficult and complicated. The Maharajah of Alwar : I should just like to get my mind a little more clear on one point, and that is with regard to settlers in Natal who have built their houses, invested their money, and spent their money there : what would you propose about them ? General Smuts : They have all the rights, barring the rights of voting for Parliament and Provincial Councils, that any white citizens in South Africa have. Our laws draw no distinction whatever. It is only political rights that are in question. There, as I have explained to you, we are up against a stone, wall and we cannot get over it. STATEMENT BY THE MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS, IRISH FREE STATE. Sympathy of Irish Free State with Indian Claims. Mr. Fitzgerald: Prime Minister, in our country Ido not need to say we have no racial distinctions at all. Indians in Ireland have the same position as Englishmen or South Africans. It seems to me that this matter falls more or less into two classes : There are the Indians in the Dominions and the Indians in the colonies and mandated territories, &c. Now, we recognize tho Dominions as independent, sovereign countries, having a perfect right to look after their own affairs, and we really have no right to interfere there, ; and in the mandated territories and protectorates they are, controlled by the British Government and we have no responsibility. So all that I can do really is to give an opinion. We have no responsibility in the matter ; but, if we had responsibility, we should have to protest very strongly against any racial distinctions being made. We who are not suffered a good deal in the past from being treated as an inferior race. Now, the Indian representatives here

* See Annex B.