HC Deb 07 May 1869 vol 196 c389

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, Why Officers of the Army on the Retired Half-pay List are not paid monthly, in the same manner as all Officers on the Staff of the Army, who have been paid on that system since the 1st of October 1867, instead of quarterly, and a week in arrear, by which arrangement the former are deprived of the full benefit of the incomes upon which they are dependent? He would also beg to ask, If a Correspondence be authentic which appeared in the Army and Navy Gazette of March 28th, 1868, between General Forster, Military Secretary, and Captain Rintoul, half pay, in which; General Forster threatened Captain Rintoul with restoration to full pay, as a preliminary to his trial by Court Martial, for writing certain letters assumed to have been written by him while on half pay; if the course thus threatened is illegal; and. if not, whether any steps have been since taken to investigate the matters forming the subject of the Correspondence?

MR. CARDWELL, in reply., said, he believed the first Question of the hon. Member related to a matter which was rather for the consideration of the Treasury than the War Department; but the reason why the concession had not been made was the additional labour and the number of clerks that would be required at the Pay Office. The correspondence as to Captain Rintoul was authentic. The opinion of the late Judge Advocate had been obtained on the 23rd of July, 1867, to the effect that he could not recommend the course suggested, and, so far as he knew, the case had never since been brought forward officially.