§ MR. B. KELLY (Donegal, S.)asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether Vijiaraghava Chariar was in 1882, on the prosecution of the Madras Government, sentenced to a term of transportation; whether, on appeal, the High Court honourably acquitted him, and ordered his immediate release; whether he charged the Crown wit- 1104 nesses, on whose evidence he had been convicted, with perjury; whether the Madras Government replied that he had entirely failed to substantiate this charge; whether, in spite of the most determined opposition in Court of the Madras Government, he obtained the sanction of the High Court to prosecute these Crown witnesses for perjury; whether he procured the conviction and punishment of the whole of these Crown witnesses; whether the Madras Government turned him out of his honorary office as Municipal Commissioner of Salem, disparaging his character; whether he then in the High Court convicted the Government of illegality in so doing, getting damages and costs; whether both Judges hearing the case commented on the behaviour of the Madras Government, one of them publicly remarking from the Bench—
When I ordered particulars to be given, instead of furnishing a succinct statement of facts, found and believed, the advisers of the Government put in a statement which appears to be a disjointed collection of disparaging statements;and, whether Government will compensate Vijiaraghava Chariar for the expense he has been put to in defending over several years his character in these several actions?
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (SIR JOHN GORST) (Chatham)The events referred to in the Question happened substantially as intimated between three and four years ago. They have already, on several occasions, been the subject of Questions in Parliament. Vijiaraghava Chariar recovered 100 rupees damages for wrongful dismissal against the Madras Government; but no further claim for compensation has, so far as the Secretary of State is aware, ever been made by him.