Foreign News: Questions & Answers

• Share

(2 of 2)

Instead, Sandys, backed by his father-in-law, carried his case to the floor of the House. The Act, frequently used in the prosecution of spies, has of late been used against newshawks who disclosed petty official secrets, but never has it been extended to a Member of Parliament. Opposition members and Chamberlain Conservatives alike set up a howl that such application of the Act would deprive M. P.s of their centuries-old privileges. Members quoted from thumb-marked copies of the Bill of Rights and the Grand Remonstrance, which the House addressed to Charles I in 1641. "Parliament is supreme!" shouted Liberal Sir Percy Harris.

"The Official Secrets Act was devised to protect the national defense, and ought not to be used to shield Ministers who may have neglected that defense. It ought not to be used to shield Ministers who have a strong personal interest in concealing the truth about that from the country," cried Father-in-law Churchill, who is not out to spare the Government any embarrassment.

The Prime Minister quickly intervened, shrewdly proposed a compromise. The all-party Committee on Privileges would meet to determine whether the Sandys summons constituted a breach of privilege. Meanwhile, the army hearing was to be postponed. The committee, which includes the Prime Minister, Mr. Churchill, Labor Leader Major Clement R. Attlee and Sir Archibald Sinclair, Liberal leader, in short order decided unanimously that there had been a breach of privilege.

That was not enough for Mr. Churchill. The information Mr. Sandys had originally sought from Mr. Hore-Belisha was not revealed, but the War Secretary was forced to take the floor following the committee meeting and admit that he could not deny it because Mr. Sandys's facts were true. The facts are that the War Office is burdened with obsolete 3-inch antiaircraft guns and is inadequately supplied with the new 3.7-inch weapons, which have proved more effective against air raiders. Mr. Churchill gleefully got all this in the record.

The Prime Minister again hurried to block the attack. This time he announced that a 14-man select committee of the House would take up the case, determine whether the Act can be applied to a Member. During the time the committee is deciding, however, no debate on the subject will be allowed and Mr. Sandys's question will remain officially unanswered. The committee, the Prime Minister hopes, will take three weeks in its investigations. By this time Parliament will be ready for summer adjournment.