§ MR. ABEL SMITHsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for India. Whether, according to the scheme for compensating Officers of the Indian Navy for the loss of their professional prospects on the abolition of that service, had Captain B. Hamilton been in an inferior grade as a Senior Commander, would he have received a pension or compensation of £450 per annum; but he having been promoted to the higher rank of Captain before the abolition, and having been guaranteed by the Act 21 and 22 Vic., c. 106, Clause 56, £120 per annum more unemployed pay and £70 per annum more pension, why is the pension or compensation allotted him reduced to £400 per annum; whether, to enable Captain B. Hamilton to obtain the same amount of compensation or pension as he would have received with the other Senior Commanders had he remained in that inferior grade, is he compelled to sell to the Secretary of State for India his reversion of the £800 per annum pension which he would have received in rotation as he stood on the seniority list; whether a Letter was written to Captain B. Hamilton informing him that unless he signed a Paper sent him from the India Office accepting the above amount of compensation or pension, no pension or payment whatever would be made him by the Secretary of State for India, 996 notwithstanding Captain Hamilton having served his full time for his pension guaranteed him by Act of Parliament 21 and 22 Vic.; whether there is anything against Captain Hamilton's character as an officer or a gentleman to justify such a course as that of placing him on only the same amount of compensation or pension, viz., £400 per annum, as that allotted the Junior Commander, Captain Hamilton being guaranteed £240 per annum more pay and £170 per annum more pension, and having served in India eight years longer than that officer; and, whether, if there is no complaint against Captain Hamilton, if he will give the reasons why Captain Hamilton is not compensated for the loss of his professional prospects according to his rank and length of service, on the same principle and in the same manner as not only the 236 Officers of the late Indian Navy junior to him are, but as all Civil, Military, and Naval Officers in every service are compensated or pensioned?
MR. GRANT DUFFsaid, in answer to the first Question in his hon. Friend's catechism—for it was a catechism, and hardly a Shorter Catechism—he had to say that, under the special scale of pensions granted to officers on the abolition of the Indian Navy, captains of Captain Hamilton's standing were allowed the option of retiring on a pension of £400 per annum, with succession in turn to a pension of £800 per annum, or of retiring on a pension of £450 per annum without any such right of succession. The most favoured class of commanders—that was, those whose appointment to the service bore date prior to the year 1831—were allowed to retire on a pension of £450 without any option like that allowed to captains. In answer to his hon. Friend's second Question, he had to say that Captain Hamilton was compelled to accept nothing. He was merely placed midway between two extremely good things and asked to take his choice—a proverbially difficult position, no doubt. In answer to his hon. Friend's third Question, he had to say that on the 9th of December, 1862, a letter was sent to Captain Hamilton, as to other officers, enclosing a paper of queries, and requesting him to state which pension he elected to receive. Not having returned the paper of queries with his answer, he was, on the 6th 997 of March, 1863, applied to for it. A long correspondence, with which he would not trouble the House, then ensued, in the course of which Captain Hamilton urged his views with no small pertinacity, but on the 7th of June, 1863, he wrote a letter giving up the whole matter in dispute, front which the following was an extract:—
I have the honour to request you will forward to the Secretary of State for India my earnest request to withdraw my letter of the 10th of May, 1863, and all my letters regarding back pay and pension. I am afraid I have been misinformed as to what I considered my right, which I feel I have urged in stronger language than becomes me. I have also misunderstood the nature of the pension offered to me in the Circular of the 28th of November, 1862. I beg to forward with this the amended answers to the queries which I request may be substituted for that sent with my previous letter—Query.—Which scale of pension do you elect to receive? Answer.—£450 without succession to the senior list.In answer to his hon. Friend's fourth Question, he had to say that until he heard the suggestion therein contained he never heard it hinted that there was anything against Captain Hamilton's character. He must remind his hon. Friend, however, that the amount of a man's pension depended upon fixed rules, and had nothing whatever to do with the vices or the virtues of the pensioner. As to Captain Hamilton's having been guaranteed the amounts stated, that was a mere delusion. If he had been guaranteed one farthing which he had not got, were not the courts open? In answer to his hon. Friend's fifth and last Question, he had to say that precisely the same measure had been meted out to Captain Hamilton as had been meted out to all the other officers of the late Indian Navy, senior and junior, distinguished and undistinguished.