Sir Winston Churchill and his cabinet colleagues, concerned at the number of "coloured people" they thought were moving to Britain to take advantage of the welfare state, considered introducing immigration controls more than 50 years ago, according to records released yesterday from the National Archives.In hand-written notebooks, the cabinet secretary, Sir Norman Brook, noted that the then home secretary thought there was a good case for excluding "riff-raff".
Brook stated that controls were discussed at a cabinet meeting on February 3 1954, six years after the ship the Empire Windrush docked at Tilbury with 492 immigrants from Jamaica.
Churchill commented: "Wd lke also to study possibility of 'quota' - [number] not to be exceeded."
The prime minister began the discussion, saying: "Problems wh. will arise if many coloured people settle here. Are we to saddle ourselves with colour problems in UK? Attracted by Welfare State. Public opinion in UK won't tolerate it once it gets beyond certain limits."
Florence Horsbrugh, the minister of education, added that the problem was becoming "serious" in Manchester. David Maxwell-Fyfe, the home secretary, reported that the total of "coloured people" in Britain had risen from 7,000 before the second world war to 40,000 at the time of writing, with 3,666 of those unemployed, and 1,870 on national assistance, or benefits.
He referred to those "living on immoral earnings". Of 62 people convicted the previous year in the Metropolitan police area, 24 were "coloured". He added: "All adminve. measures to discourage have bn. taken. Only further step wd. be immigrn. control over admn. of [British subjects] to UK. Wd. have to admit in Parlt. tht. purpose of legn. was to control [admission] of coloured. There is a case on merits for excludg. riff-raff. But politically it wd. be represented & discussed on basis of a colour limitation. That wd. offend the floating vote viz., the old Liberals. We shd. be reversing age-long tradn. tht. B. [subjects] have right of entry to mother-country of Empire. We shd. offend Liberals, also sentimentalists."
But fearing public feeling, he said the risk of introducing controls should not be taken "today". He warned: "The col. popns. are resented in Lpl., Paddington & other areas. By those who come into contact with them. But those who don't are apt to take Liberal view."
Another cabinet member referred to an "increasing evil" and said that principles "laid down 200 yrs. ago are not applicable to-day. See dangers of colour discriminn. But other [Dominions] control entry of B. subjects. Cd. we present action as coming into line...& securing uniformity?"
Churchill said the question was whether it might be wise "to allow public feeling to develop a little more - before takg. action...May be wise to wait...But it wd. be fatal to let it develop too far."
Why abandon sound traditional wisdom in favor of failed policy ? What has this world come to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/aug/06/past.politics/
For the rest of the opinions of the allied leaders click here:
http://saveaustria.blogspot.com/2010/08/allied-leaders-were-against-mass.html
No comments:
Post a Comment