HC Deb 31 July 1882 vol 273 cc210-1
MR. ONSLOW

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether it is a fact that, whilst Foreign Powers are not permitted to place consuls at the capitals of Native States of India, the Government of India has refused to facilitate any public inquiry into an alleged grievous injustice suffered by an Austrian subject named Silbiger, at the hands of the Jeypore Durbar, although the Maharajah of Jeypore has himself asked for a public inquiry; whether the Government of India, by its Political Agent at Jeypore, took the case into its own hands, thereby precluding Mr. Silbiger from obtaining redress directly from the Maharajah, and subsequently refused to sanction any hearing of the case; whether, in reply to the representations of the Austrian Government on the subject, the British Government has in effect stated that an arbitration, or what practically amounted to one, had taken place; whether Mr. Silbiger has submitted an affidavit to the effect that this reply of the British Government was incorrect; and, whether any steps have been taken publicly, either to disprove Mr. Silbiger's sworn statement, or to admit the justice of his claim to have his case heard?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON

Sir, it would be impossible to give a really intelligible answer to these Questions without making a statement of the principal facts of a long and rather complicated controversy. This I shall be ready to do on any fitting opportunity; but I will not now, or unless I find it absolutely necessary, inflict such a statement on the House. I can, therefore, only answer very succinctly and imperfectly the Questions of the hon. Member. It is true that Consuls of Foreign Powers are not admitted at the capitals of Native States; and for this reason the British Government would, I think, hold itself bound to see that no substantial injustice was inflicted on a foreign subject in respect of transactions which he had entered into with a Native Government with the knowledge and approval of the Government. I am not aware that Mr. Silbiger ever asked the Government of India to institute a public inquiry into his case, although he has recently memorialized the Secretary of State in Council on the subject. The late Maharajah expressed his willingness some years ago to assent to a public inquiry; but the Government of India decided that it was unnecessary. So far as we have information, the Government of India has not, through its political agent, taken the case into its own hands. All that it has done has been to express its opinion, after full inquiry into the case, that there was no ground for interference. In reply to official and non-official representations of the Austrian Government, the case has been inquired into both by Lord Cranbrook and myself, and we have both stated in. effect that an arbitration, or what practically amounted to one, had taken place. Mr. Silbiger has recently memorialized the Secretary of State in Council, and an affidavit is included among the Papers. I do not understand that he denies that an arbitration has taken place; but he denies that he assented to the Maharajah acting as arbitrator. The Secretary of State in Council has considered this Memorial, but he has seen no reason for re-opening the case. The Papers will, however, go to India in due course, and it will rest with the Viceroy to deal with them as he thinks proper, although I can hold out no hope that he will take any action in regard to them.