§ MR. ANDERSONasked the Secretary of State for War, If the Correspondence as to the Accounts of the Commander in Chief of the Forces in Ireland is yet complete; if the "portions" of them that "objections have been raised to" by the Accountant General had been objected to by that officer previous to the 10th June, when the Question was first put on the paper; and, if he will state the nature of the "objections" that have been raised, and if they involve any censure to any one, or any repayment of money by the Commander in Chief in Ireland; and, if so, how much?
§ MR. CARDWELLSir, the Correspondence has resulted in the objections raised by the Accountant General being sustained by me. The nature of them was that the periods during which the General was absent from Ireland in excess of the period for which pay during leave is allowed by the Royal Warrant had not been entered in the pay-lists as absent on leave or otherwise, the principal ground assigned being that such absence, which was in a considerable degree absence while attending Parliament, was understood by the General as not being required to be so entered, and as being permitted to carry Staff pay and allowances. The inquiry made in pursuance of the hon. Member's Question brought these circumstances to the knowledge of the Accountant General, and led to the objections which I have sustained. The amount retrenched is £753 11s. The Accountant General, however, informs me that if the hon. Member's Question had not been put objections would have appeared on the face of the accounts now under examination, which would have led to the inquiry. The Correspondence and the pay-list will be laid on the Table without delay if my hon. Friend will move for them. I am glad of the opportunity of saying that the General observes upon the form of the pay-list as being deficient, of which those who see it will judge.
MR. OTWAYasked, if he was to understand that the General commanding-in-chief had certified that he was in Ireland when in reality he was absent?
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, he had already stated the particulars.
§ MR. ANDERSONasked, if the sum of £753 11s. had been re-paid?
§ COLONEL NORTHsaid, surely attendance in Parliament was a performance of duty, and did not involve stoppage of pay.
§ MR. CARDWELLsaid, the regimental pay was not stopped, but Staff pay and Staff allowances were stopped. He was willing to lay the pay sheets and the Correspondence on the Table.