MR. J. COWENasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is true that Private George Mills, of Her Majesty's 94th Regiment, was, on the 29th day of January last, put under arrest, he having made a grave charge against an Officer of his Regiment; that he so continued under arrest until the 10th day of February following; that in the meanwhile the Officer against whom such charge was made, having been placed under arrest, broke his arrest and absconded, and subsequently sent in his resignation, whereupon Mills was released; whether the imprisonment of George Mills in the above circumstances and his subsequent discharge without a trial were in accordance with Military Law; and, whether he is entitled to receive any compensation for his imprisonment?
MR. GATHORNE HARDYSir, the statement contained in the Question of the hon. Gentleman is generally correct, but not altogether so. The private in question, George Mills, made a charge against an officer of his regiment for an offence committed in the August previous. He was put under detention. He was not imprisoned, but confined in the guard-room, and as his pay was continued to him, he suffered no loss whatever. On the officer absconding an order was sent from the Horse Guards for his release on the 8th February, and on the 10th he was released. Under such circumstances, his detention was strictly in accordance with law, and was both legal and justifiable.