ADDRESS MOVED. (Hansard, 14 July 1863)

§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE
said, he rose to move that an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that She will be graciously pleased to give such directions in the matter of the Banda and Kirwee Booty or Prize Money as Her Majesty may be advised by the Law Officers of the Crown or by some competent judicial authority. He begged leave to assure the noble Lord at the head of the Government that he had no intention of saying or doing anything discourteous towards him. He referred to the subject on the previous Motion merely to illustrate the necessity of having such questions decided by a competent judicial tribunal and on definite principles. The facts of the case were very simple. There were two bodies of troops who were engaged in the suppression of the Indian mutiny, one under Sir G. Whitlock, and the other under Sir H. Rose. The troops under Sir G. Whitlock captured Banda and Kirwee. When it was announced that the prize money at Banda and Kirwee was to be distributed, a claim was advanced on behalf both of the column under Sir G. Whitlock and of that under Sir H. Rose. It was suggested that these two columns were parts of one force, and on that question a difference of opinion prevailed. He did not ask the House to pronounce in favour of one claimant or of the other. All he sought was 818 that they should urge the Government to have these matters decided, not by the artrary discretion of the Treasury, exercised in the dark and without any opportunity of cross-examining witnesses and hearing evidence on both sides, but by some competent authority on sound judicial principles. Sir G. Whitlock and his friends desired only that the dispute should be settled before a legal tribunal. As he had been erroneously supposed to have said something offensive to the Government on the merits of the case, he would refrain altogether from going into it. If the army was to be encouraged by grants of prize, and if the men were to be kept in good order and discipline by the hope of such a reward, they ought to know on what principle it would be distributed. The same measure of justice should be meted out to the army as to the navy. That was a proposition which commended itself to common sense, and which had already been sanctioned in more than one instance. The High Court of Admiralty had, after hearing opinions of counsel, repeatedly decided cases of army prize; and, in fact, the Act passed twenty years ago for providing a better tribunal for these matters, authorized that arrangement. When Lord Cottenham brought in that Bill, he said it was desirable that there should be a court for deciding questions of army as well as of navy prizes. These were formerly disposed of by the old Court of Chivalry; but when that was given up, they were transferred to the Treasury, and then to the High Court of Admiralty. He hoped that Act would not be allowed to remain a dead letter, and that the Government would deal with these cases in a spirit similar to that which governed them in regard to navy prizes.

SIR MINTO FARQUHAR
said, he would second the Motion. He wanted to know on what principle booty was to be given in one case to actual captors alone and in another to constructive captors. They heard that the opinions of Sir R. Phillimore, of Sir R. Palmer, and of Sir H. Cairns had been given in favour of the actual captors in that case, and he could not understand on what grounds the moderate proposal of his hon. Friend could be resisted. There was not a man in the whole army of India who did not thoroughly do his duty in the fearfully trying circumstances of the mutiny, and therefore this Motion was a simple act of justice.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
My right hon. Friend the Secretary for India complained, justly, as I think, in the early part of the evening that the hon. Baronet, having declared that he would not go into the particulars of this case, did go into these particulars, and stated ex parte one view, which no one could answer afterwards, and when that statement did not apply necessarily to the object of the Motion of the hon. and gallant Officer. But I have another complaint to make. The hon. Baronet implied that I had been influenced by some private and personal motives. I beg to say I repudiate those motives with the utmost contempt. [Sir STAFFORD NORTHCOTE: I never intended to impute such motives.] There are two modes of imputing motives. One is directly imputing so and so, and the other is by saying, "I will not say that he was influenced by such motives," but implying that it really was so. In the first place, the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) moved some days ago for papers connected with this subject; and as that Motion was granted, the papers will soon be in the hands of hon. Members. It appears to me that it is more fitting that the House should wait until they have got those papers, to know what the case is, before they agree to a Motion which is founded in the dark, and without a knowledge of all the circumstances of the case. There is no law at all ruling cases of this sort. That is admitted by all. It is the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, it is admitted by the prize agents themselves in one of their last communications, and it is an unquestionable fact, that there is no law regulating the distribution of prize money. It rests entirely with the discretion of the Crown according to the circumstances of the case. As far as private solicitation is concerned, I have had a good deal of it, as I have no doubt have had also those hon. Gentlemen who are so loud in their expressions of concurrence with the hon. Baronet. No doubt they have also received solicitations from the prize agents, who have been extremely active in canvassing hon. Gentlemen for their support on behalf of their view of the case. ["No!"] Well, I can only speak for myself, and I have 820 had a great deal of private solicitation from them. But I have had no private solicitations of this kind from those who represent the other force. The representations of the agents of Sir G. Whitlock's claims were that Sir G. Whitlock was acting in an independent command upon a separate base, and not co-operating with any other force, and that therefore his position was entirely separate and independent. They say that consequently any prize of his column could only be shared by his column. But these assertions were, in my opinion, entirely refuted by a memorandum of Lord Clyde, under whose orders that force was acting, and which shows that these two columns were part of a combined force acting under his directions, and not at all independent of each other, but acting from a common base arranged by him for a common purpose; that the action of one was materially assisting the action of the other, and that to all intents and purposes they were co-operating columns; and that, although not united, union was not necessary to success, as the success of one depended mainly upon the success of the other operating against the common enemy. The mere fact of one column being in one place and the other column in another place did not affect their co-operation. It appeared to me that the fairness and justice of the matter required that the captures made by each of those columns should be thrown into a common fund, and be divided among the two columns. That opinion I came to, not in the least in consequence of private solicitation—there has been none, indeed, on the part of Sir Hugh Rose's force—but upon a view of the facts of the case, and very much in consequence of seeing that the statements made by the prize agents of Sir G. Whitlock's force were not founded on fact, and were rebutted by the orders of the Commander-in-Chief. I have no interest in the matter. I have no personal pride or vanity in the matter. It is a matter of perfect indifference to me how the matter is decided, provided it be according to justice and right. But there is no rule whatever upon the subject. Each case is decided upon its own merits. We are told that many precedents can be quoted in which the prize has been given to the particular corps by which it was taken. It seems to me that to make a precedent applicable to a given case you must show that the circumstances of the precedent were similar in ail respects to the circumstances of the case to which you 821 apply the precedent as a ruling guide. That does not appear to be the case here, but I would suggest, as the noble Lord has moved for papers, which will be presented in a few days, that the hon. Baronet should wait and see those papers before calling upon the House to take any further steps in the matter. I shall have no objection, when the papers are produced, if the House should think that the case should be referred to any authority competent to decide, for it is indifferent to me what course is taken. But it must not be forgotten that these proceedings are not unattended with expense to the parties, besides involving delay, and therefore I would suggest to the hon. Baronet whether he had not better wait for the papers, to enable him to judge whether he ought to take any further steps.

LORD STANLEY
Are we to understand that no steps will be taken to deal with this fund until the House has had an opportunity of considering those papers?

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
signified assent.

§ SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTE
said, if that were the understanding, he had no wish to press his Motion. He had only brought it on that evening because of the advanced period of the Session. The papers had only just been ordered, and there was a natural fear that they would be presented only at the very close of the Session, when no opportunity would be afforded to the House of expressing an opinion upon them. If it were understood that the prize fund should not be dealt with until the House had had an opportunity of expressing an opinion, he would not press his Motion, and the matter must stand over until next Session. He only wished further to state distinctly that neither directly or indirectly had he intended to impute to the noble Lord any personal interest in this matter. What he said, or meant to say, was that it was most important for the discipline and good feeling of the army that there should not be even a suspicion of any personal influence being at work to insinuate statements which the other parties had no opportunity of criticising in open court. For his own part, he had no acquaintance with any of the persons interested in the prize money, and had taken the matter up simply for the purpose of doing what he believed to be a good service to the army in getting such cases decided upon some principle of law.

§ MR. AYRTON
hoped that all the papers relating to the case would be produced.

§ LORD HOTHAM
said, he thought that the Motion should not be withdrawn until the noble Lord at the head of the Government had given a distinct assurance that no action would be taken until the House had had an opportunity of expressing its opinion on the subject. His object was that justice should be done, and that the influence of a Commander-in-Chief should not be unnecessarily strained in order to give him a share in prize money to which he was not fairly entiled.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
said, he had already assented in as plain terms as were usual in that House to the proposal of the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn that no step should be taken until the papers were considered by the House.

COLONEL DICKSON
said, he trusted that no long time would be allowed to elapse before the prize money was distributed, for it was monstrous that the soldiers should for years be kept out of a reward which they had earnt by their blood and valour. If, as the noble Lord had stated, there was no law for the distribution of prize money, the sooner one was made the better. At the time of action nothing was too good for the soldier; but when it was over, he was forgotten.

§ SIR JOHN HAY
said, he wished to ask whether, if the papers were not laid on the table till the close of the Session, no decision would be come to until next year; or whether the question would be referred to a judicial tribunal in the interval.

§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTON
said, that unnecessary delay in the distribution was to be avoided, but no action would be taken until the House had had full time to consider the papers, and express any opinion upon them which it might think fit.