HC Deb 29 June 1888 vol 327 cc1716-7
SIR ROPER LETHBRIDGE (Kensington, N.)

asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether, for the convenience of hon. Members, the Government will lay upon the Table a reprint of the Minutes of Sir Barnes Peacock and Sir Henry Ricketts, with reference to a recommendation of Sir Frederick Halliday, Lieutenant Governor of Bengal, that Mr. Tayler, Ex-Commissioner of Patna, should not be granted the Public Commission of Inquiry for which he had asked, but that the records of a certain case, formerly tried by Mr. Tayler during the Mutiny, should be submitted to the Judges of the Sudder Court of Bengal for their opinion and Report without the presence or further examination of Mr. Taylor; whether the Government would now be willing to submit Mr. Tayler's case to Sir Barnes Peacock for his decision; and, whether, as a fact, Mr. Tayler was ever informed that he was at liberty to demand a Commission, as recommended by Sir Henry Ricketts?

THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (Sir JOHN GORST) (Chatham)

The Minutes referred to, which are inaccurately described in the Question, have already been laid before Parliament in No. 308 of 1879. The Secretary of State sees no necessity for reprinting them. The action of the Secretary of State in refusing to re-open the case of Mr. William Tayler has been approved by a large Parliamentary majority, and the Government cannot now reverse that policy. Mr. William Tayler was never entitled to ask for a Commission. In 1859 he was offered, as I before stated, an inquiry by the Sudder Court into his judicial conduct at Patna, which he declined.

SIR ROPER LETHBRIDGE,

arising out of the answer of the Under Secretary, asked, whether it was not the fact that Sir Henry Ricketts did recommend that Mr. Tayler should be allowed a Commission, and said that the Commission, if asked for, would be granted?

SIR JOHN GORST

I must refer the hon. Member to the Minutes, which will speak for themselves.