§ COLONEL SYKESsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India, Whether officers of the local Armies of India are liable to be removed against their consent from the regiments to which they belong, and to be sent to any station for the performance of general duty; whether compensation will be granted to officers so taken from their regiments and sent to general duty for the loss of regimental, troop, or company command allowances whether compensation will be given; to officers who have subscribed to Regimental Retiring Funds, in the full confidence of their subscriptions being returned; to them on their own retirement; and; whether the East India Company's late; European Artillery and Engineers have be 990 come integral portions of the Royal regiments of Artillery and Engineers respectively, with the advantages of seniority, succession, augmentation, &c.? With respect to the first question, it would appear that the conversion of regular regiments of the Indian local armies into irregulars, annihilated the regimental rights of an officer. Recent instances of officers who had returned to India from furlough had come to his knowledge, being told by the Adjutant General when application was made to be ordered to join their regiments, that they had no regiments; that they existed on paper only, and that they must go to general duty. On remonstrating that they had served from their youth with their own regiments, that they had friendships with the officers and sympathies with the men, the reply was that their regiments were converted into irregulars, with a limited number of officers, and that they were not required, and they must go to general duty. He (Colonel Sykes) could not believe that such injustice was contemplated by his right hon. Friend in his changes in the Indian armies. The second part of his question was whether any compensation would be granted to officers so taken from their duty. The right hon. Gentleman had stated that the House did not guarantee allowances, hut only the gradations of rank. The clause in the Act, however, which referred to pensions and allowances, provided that the allowances should be maintained; and the officers prevented from joining their own regiments lost their troop and company allowances contrary to the guarantees of the House. With regard to the Regimental Retiring Funds, a practice had prevailed for many years of junior officers making a purse in order to upset their seniors, and that practice had been permitted by the Court of Directors. The officers who had not retired when the amalgamation of the Royal and Indian armies took place lost the large sum which they would have received on their own retirement under the old system, and he wanted to know whether the Government would give them some compensation? His fourth question needed no explanation.
§ SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that the interpretation which his hon. and gallant Friend had put upon the guarantee given by the House would prevent any reduction whatever in the Indian army. Orders had been given to reduce several of the native regiments, and therefore the officers who 991 had no longer command of companies were not entitled to the allowances due to officers in command to cover certain expenses, His hon. and gallant Friend was one of those who most pressed upon the Government and the House the necessity of reducing the expenses of India, The great source of expense was the military expenditure; and if regiments were to be kept up merely in order that captains might hate allowances For being in command of companies, reduction would be impossible. The effect of the interpretation which the hon. and gallant Gentleman put upon the words of the Act would be this—that until the youngest cadet had gone through all the grades and received the allowances due to each grade, as they stood before reduction was contemplated, no reduction of the Indian army could take place. Perhaps to the proposition, put in plain terms like those, his hon. and gallant Friend himself would object. Some Indian regiments had been reduced. What was to become of the officers? said his hon. and gallant Friend. Well, what became of the officers of the English army when a reduction took place? They were put upon half-pay. But to Indian officers whose regiments were reduced, the same pay and promotion was given as if their regiments were in existence. In answer to the first question of his hon. and gallant Friend, he had to say that in the Indian army, as in the case of the English army and the English navy, every officer was bound to serve under his superior authorities wherever they thought it best for the public service he should be employed. In answer to the second question, he must say that he was not prepared to give compensation to officers who had ceased to have the command of companies. But the pay and promotion of these officers remained utterly unchanged. They would be promoted as rapidly and would receive the same pay as they received when in command. The next question was somewhat difficult to answer. The House had always been told that one of the great merits of the Indian army was that there was no purchase in it; but it now turned out that in every portion of the Indian army there was a system of purchase different from that in the English army, but just as illegal and irregular. In fact the substantial injury to the Indian army of which its officers complained, would arise from their being deprived of the benefit of that system of 992 purchase which they disdained. No doubt, a certain loss would be entailed upon Some Indian officers by the extinction of an irregular and illegal system of purchase; but the Government had endeavoured to mitigate the evil by liberal offers of retirement. With regard to the last question, the Bengal, Madras, and Bombay Artillery had become as it were a part of the Royal Artillery, and no change was made in the pay, promotion^ and pensions.
COLONEL GILPINsaid, that as to purchase in the Indian army being illegal, it was sanctioned by a minute of the Indian Council. It was perfectly right not to give allowances for expenses out of pocket to captains of companies who had ceased to hold commands. But the Government might consider the propriety of increasing the amount of bonus on retirement to certain officers who had passed the best part of their lives in the service.
§ SIR CHARLES WOODexplained, that purchase in the Indian army had been declared illegal by a court of law, but he was aware it was as common as payments in excess of the regulation price of commissions in this country.
§ COLONEL SYKESinsisted that purchase was legalized by the order of 29th of November, 1837.
§ Motion agreed to.