Summary of selected documents
24th April, 1956,
From Kay Beachamp,
London District Committee of the Communist Party,
75 Farringdon Road, EC1.
“Comrade Manchander (sic)
“Dear Comrade,
“The District Committee has arranged a very important conference on how we can strengthen for fight for colonial freedom. This will be held at Marx House on Sunday, June 3rd from 10.30 pm to 5 pm. Cde John Mahon will deal with this question in the light of the decisions at the 24th Congress. The Congress showed the tremendous possibilities for developing united action against the Tory Government and the fight against Tory colonial policy was one of the main means of developing this movement.”
[She continues by asking Manu to write a report covering a series of questions. For example, ‘What activity does your organisation carry out among your compatriots in this country?’ ‘What other organisations carry out activity amongst your compatriots?’
This follows a pattern of Manu, Claudia and others being asked to submit reports which were then used by ‘non-colonial’ ‘comrades’ in their presentations on ‘the colonial question.’ It fits with Claudia and Manu both being told ‘We don’t want colonial comrades playing a leading role.’]
19th August, 1956
Report of A. Manchanda,
General Secretary,
Indian Workers Association, London,
On the occasion of the Ninth Independence Day,
Holborn Hall.
15-16th February, 1958
October 1955-January 1958
Report of the London District Committee of the Communist Party,
Finsbury Town Hall
1958: documents relating to the Frank Bailey fit-up.
The Communist Party pursues a complaint made by Frank Bailey, an ex-party member, against Manu.
18th November, 1958
Letter from John Mahon,
Secretary, London District Committee,
75 Farringdon Road, EC1.
According to Manu’s papers, this was the first he knew of the complaint. Mahon wrote:
“The matter came before the District Committee at its last meeting. The Committee noted that you had not replied to my letter of October 24th and that you had not given any explanation of the incident.
“Under these circumstances the committee decided to censure you for irresponsible conduct and to remove you from membership of the District Colonial Committee. The latter decision takes effect immediately.
“Yours fraternally,
“John Mahon,
“Secretary.”
November 27, 1958
Letter from A. Manchanda
To John Gollan, General Secretary
The Communist Party of Great Britain.
6, Meadow Road,
London SW8
Dear Comrade Gollan,
I am writing to you, as the General Secretary of the Communist Party of a metropolitan country. A party, which because of historical reasons, has among its ranks members of various races and countries, colonies and ex-colonies.
A party which stands, programmatically, for a fraternal alliance of peoples based on equality and mutual respect, without discrimination among its ranks, as an example for others.
I am writing to you as an individual member who has the same duties as any other member, and who has been wronged (slandered) by members of the London District Committee; but also to bring to your kind notice an instance of party behaviour which negates party unity and confidence and naturally demands your attention. It is a sign of the seriousness of a political party how it deals with its weaknesses, and how in practice it realises its ideals and professions.
But for the importance I attach, according to my own understanding, I would not have encroached upon your precious time. I sincerely do hope that this instance would impress upon (you) the urgency of re-examining the weaknesses of the Party functioning on the colonial and national question, at least in London.
Wishing you all the best of health,
I remain,
Yours fraternally,
A. Manchanda)
Enclosed herewith are the copies of the communications between myself, Comrades K. Beachamp and Johnny Mahon: as well as a letter from Comrade Beauchamp to Comrade Claudia Jones and one letter from Comrade Betty Reid to Comrade Jones, along with my submission on the same – for your kind perusal and necessary action.
[A sheaf of supporting papers includes the following comments by Manu:
“Claudia raised the question with Com. (Betty) Reid who told the latter that the Centre had not asked for any statements from me or Claudia, as the matter was for the District to deal with then. This Comrade Reid confirmed in her letter of Septeber 23 ’58.
“Comrade Beachamp, in another letter, insisted that statements from myself and Claudia should be sent to Comrade Reid. In her letter of Sept. 25 ’58, Comrade Beachamp conveyed Com. John Mahon’s message that he wanted a statement ‘concerning my attitude to the ‘points’ raised by F. Bailey. Comrade Beachamp further stated that the District had already received a letter from Claudia, but not heard from me. In fact, Claudia had not written any letter to the District on the question, or to the District at all…in part 2 of her letter Cde. Beachamp makes a qualitative change: ‘the points raised’ becomes ‘the charges against…’
“I am still waiting for the London District to convey the charge against me.”
According to Manu’s statement, Idris Cox opened up a separate inquiry into the matter, at the ‘centre.’
He continues: “The logic of the decision to ‘censure’ me for ‘irresponsible conduct’ is beyond my comprehension’, and refers to himself as ‘a thorn in the side’ of John Mahon because of his criticisms of party policy on ‘the colonial question.’
He points out that party officials had originally included Claudia in the charges but didn’t refer to this again, even though Claudia had ignored their letters. Manu asked why she is not included in the charges?
Supporting papers include letters from Kay Beachamp, Betty Reid, Idrix Cox and Manu himself.
In a letter to J. Mahon, he writes:
“Thanks for your kind note of Oct. 6, 1958, stating that Frank Bailey has made “a formal charge” against me; and you have enclosed ‘a copy of the relevant portion of his letter”. You have addressed him as ‘comrade’; has he been readmitted to the Party?
“Since you have asked me to make a statement on this so-called charge, I am re-typing it here and dealing with it accordingly:
“At the next EC meeting he gave notice that he would raise a question on other business. Claudia was in hospital at the time and therefore any Manchanda was present at the EC. Nine people were present, a quorum being seven. Before the item came up Manchanda apologised to the chairman for having to leave the meeting. In a few minutes the wife of the chairman of the meeting in whose house the meeting took place was summoned to the telephone. She came back to say that it was Manchanda who had telephoned to suggest that she and her husband should leave the meeting thus reducing it below the quorum necessary and preventing him from raising the question.”
(a) Who gave notice to “raise a question on other business” and what was his question?
(b) I have never attended any meeting at the house of the chairman, in fact I have never been to his place.
(c) Regarding the ‘telephone call’ to the wife of the chairman, I have never met the wife of the chairman in my life. I am given to understand that she left Britain for Trinidad before West Indian Workers and Students came into being, and she still lives there. It would be quite a miracle if I could speak to her spirit in London on the telephone, while physically she was in Trinidad.
Comrade, I am quite at sea; what is the charge against me?
With fraternal greetings, Yours in comradeship,
A. Manchanda.
Apparently this was the end of the matter as there is no further reference to it amongst Manu’s remaining papers. However, letters on the subject are listed among those at the Schomburg Library in New York.
November 8, 1962
From Idris Cox,
International Department
Communist Party of Great Britain.
Dear Manu,
I was extremely interested in the quotations you read out last night of Nehru’s statement in Lok Sahha last August on the absence of a defined border.
I have not got the text of these quotations and would be extremely grateful if you would write out two or three of the relevant paragraphs so that we can make use of them in our explanatory material.
Yours fraternally
Idris.
MEMO FROM CLAUDIA JONES TO THE CPGB - from their archive in the Northern Library of Working Class History
"Another aspect I want to raise is the party's evaluation towards me as an individual regarding getting settled down in this country, both politically and financially...I want clarification as to what basis and what estimate they have of my assets to the party. There have been times when I have resisted concluding that either I'm to be retired from political life or so invalidated that I must lead a sedentary life - or if the opposite is true, then not only clarification but some implementation would appear to be required." [date unknown]
24th April, 1956,
From Kay Beachamp,
London District Committee of the Communist Party,
75 Farringdon Road, EC1.
“Comrade Manchander (sic)
“Dear Comrade,
“The District Committee has arranged a very important conference on how we can strengthen for fight for colonial freedom. This will be held at Marx House on Sunday, June 3rd from 10.30 pm to 5 pm. Cde John Mahon will deal with this question in the light of the decisions at the 24th Congress. The Congress showed the tremendous possibilities for developing united action against the Tory Government and the fight against Tory colonial policy was one of the main means of developing this movement.”
[She continues by asking Manu to write a report covering a series of questions. For example, ‘What activity does your organisation carry out among your compatriots in this country?’ ‘What other organisations carry out activity amongst your compatriots?’
This follows a pattern of Manu, Claudia and others being asked to submit reports which were then used by ‘non-colonial’ ‘comrades’ in their presentations on ‘the colonial question.’ It fits with Claudia and Manu both being told ‘We don’t want colonial comrades playing a leading role.’]
19th August, 1956
Report of A. Manchanda,
General Secretary,
Indian Workers Association, London,
On the occasion of the Ninth Independence Day,
Holborn Hall.
15-16th February, 1958
October 1955-January 1958
Report of the London District Committee of the Communist Party,
Finsbury Town Hall
1958: documents relating to the Frank Bailey fit-up.
The Communist Party pursues a complaint made by Frank Bailey, an ex-party member, against Manu.
18th November, 1958
Letter from John Mahon,
Secretary, London District Committee,
75 Farringdon Road, EC1.
According to Manu’s papers, this was the first he knew of the complaint. Mahon wrote:
“The matter came before the District Committee at its last meeting. The Committee noted that you had not replied to my letter of October 24th and that you had not given any explanation of the incident.
“Under these circumstances the committee decided to censure you for irresponsible conduct and to remove you from membership of the District Colonial Committee. The latter decision takes effect immediately.
“Yours fraternally,
“John Mahon,
“Secretary.”
November 27, 1958
Letter from A. Manchanda
To John Gollan, General Secretary
The Communist Party of Great Britain.
6, Meadow Road,
London SW8
Dear Comrade Gollan,
I am writing to you, as the General Secretary of the Communist Party of a metropolitan country. A party, which because of historical reasons, has among its ranks members of various races and countries, colonies and ex-colonies.
A party which stands, programmatically, for a fraternal alliance of peoples based on equality and mutual respect, without discrimination among its ranks, as an example for others.
I am writing to you as an individual member who has the same duties as any other member, and who has been wronged (slandered) by members of the London District Committee; but also to bring to your kind notice an instance of party behaviour which negates party unity and confidence and naturally demands your attention. It is a sign of the seriousness of a political party how it deals with its weaknesses, and how in practice it realises its ideals and professions.
But for the importance I attach, according to my own understanding, I would not have encroached upon your precious time. I sincerely do hope that this instance would impress upon (you) the urgency of re-examining the weaknesses of the Party functioning on the colonial and national question, at least in London.
Wishing you all the best of health,
I remain,
Yours fraternally,
A. Manchanda)
Enclosed herewith are the copies of the communications between myself, Comrades K. Beachamp and Johnny Mahon: as well as a letter from Comrade Beauchamp to Comrade Claudia Jones and one letter from Comrade Betty Reid to Comrade Jones, along with my submission on the same – for your kind perusal and necessary action.
[A sheaf of supporting papers includes the following comments by Manu:
“Claudia raised the question with Com. (Betty) Reid who told the latter that the Centre had not asked for any statements from me or Claudia, as the matter was for the District to deal with then. This Comrade Reid confirmed in her letter of Septeber 23 ’58.
“Comrade Beachamp, in another letter, insisted that statements from myself and Claudia should be sent to Comrade Reid. In her letter of Sept. 25 ’58, Comrade Beachamp conveyed Com. John Mahon’s message that he wanted a statement ‘concerning my attitude to the ‘points’ raised by F. Bailey. Comrade Beachamp further stated that the District had already received a letter from Claudia, but not heard from me. In fact, Claudia had not written any letter to the District on the question, or to the District at all…in part 2 of her letter Cde. Beachamp makes a qualitative change: ‘the points raised’ becomes ‘the charges against…’
“I am still waiting for the London District to convey the charge against me.”
According to Manu’s statement, Idris Cox opened up a separate inquiry into the matter, at the ‘centre.’
He continues: “The logic of the decision to ‘censure’ me for ‘irresponsible conduct’ is beyond my comprehension’, and refers to himself as ‘a thorn in the side’ of John Mahon because of his criticisms of party policy on ‘the colonial question.’
He points out that party officials had originally included Claudia in the charges but didn’t refer to this again, even though Claudia had ignored their letters. Manu asked why she is not included in the charges?
Supporting papers include letters from Kay Beachamp, Betty Reid, Idrix Cox and Manu himself.
In a letter to J. Mahon, he writes:
“Thanks for your kind note of Oct. 6, 1958, stating that Frank Bailey has made “a formal charge” against me; and you have enclosed ‘a copy of the relevant portion of his letter”. You have addressed him as ‘comrade’; has he been readmitted to the Party?
“Since you have asked me to make a statement on this so-called charge, I am re-typing it here and dealing with it accordingly:
“At the next EC meeting he gave notice that he would raise a question on other business. Claudia was in hospital at the time and therefore any Manchanda was present at the EC. Nine people were present, a quorum being seven. Before the item came up Manchanda apologised to the chairman for having to leave the meeting. In a few minutes the wife of the chairman of the meeting in whose house the meeting took place was summoned to the telephone. She came back to say that it was Manchanda who had telephoned to suggest that she and her husband should leave the meeting thus reducing it below the quorum necessary and preventing him from raising the question.”
(a) Who gave notice to “raise a question on other business” and what was his question?
(b) I have never attended any meeting at the house of the chairman, in fact I have never been to his place.
(c) Regarding the ‘telephone call’ to the wife of the chairman, I have never met the wife of the chairman in my life. I am given to understand that she left Britain for Trinidad before West Indian Workers and Students came into being, and she still lives there. It would be quite a miracle if I could speak to her spirit in London on the telephone, while physically she was in Trinidad.
Comrade, I am quite at sea; what is the charge against me?
With fraternal greetings, Yours in comradeship,
A. Manchanda.
Apparently this was the end of the matter as there is no further reference to it amongst Manu’s remaining papers. However, letters on the subject are listed among those at the Schomburg Library in New York.
November 8, 1962
From Idris Cox,
International Department
Communist Party of Great Britain.
Dear Manu,
I was extremely interested in the quotations you read out last night of Nehru’s statement in Lok Sahha last August on the absence of a defined border.
I have not got the text of these quotations and would be extremely grateful if you would write out two or three of the relevant paragraphs so that we can make use of them in our explanatory material.
Yours fraternally
Idris.
MEMO FROM CLAUDIA JONES TO THE CPGB - from their archive in the Northern Library of Working Class History
"Another aspect I want to raise is the party's evaluation towards me as an individual regarding getting settled down in this country, both politically and financially...I want clarification as to what basis and what estimate they have of my assets to the party. There have been times when I have resisted concluding that either I'm to be retired from political life or so invalidated that I must lead a sedentary life - or if the opposite is true, then not only clarification but some implementation would appear to be required." [date unknown]
