§ MR. JAMES STUART (Shoreditch, Hoxton)asked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether any of the following official Reports for the year 1885 are in the India Office:—namely, (1) Annual Report of the Punjaub Lock Hospitals; (2) Review of Chief Commissioner of Reports on Lock Hospitals in Central Provinces; (3) Annual Report of working of Secunderabad Lock Hospitals; (4) Report on Lock Hospitals, British Burmah; (5) Annual Report on Bengal Lock Hospitals; (6) Annual Report of the working of Lock Hospitals in the North-West Provinces and Oudb.; whether, in these Reports, giving the Returns of venereal diseases among the British troops in India for 34 cantonments, in which the Contagious Diseases Act system has been uninterruptedly in force, an increase of disease, in general very marked, is shown in 22 cantonments in 1885 as compared with 1884, while the decrease in the other cantonments is very small; whether the India Office are in possession of information as to whether the following statement has been made by the medical officer of the Cantonment of Ranikhet:—
In addition to the medical officer's weekly examination of the women, daily examinations were made by the dhais. Every soldier admitted into the station hospital for venereal complaint was sent with a non-commissioned officer to identify, if possible, the woman with whom he had contracted disease. Any woman thus pointed out was immediately examined by the medical officer. In the great majority of instances the women so examined were found to be healthy;whether he can state the number of medical officers who have made similar statements; and, whether, if these Reports are not in the India Office, he will take immediate steps to obtain them?
§ THE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE (Sir JOHN GORST) (Chatham)As Questions on this subject are becoming frequent, I trust the House will allow me to make such a statement as will, I hope, obviate the necessity for more. A letter from Umballa, which contains statements shocking to the moral and religious sentiments of many persons in this country, has been extensively circulated, and it is upon this letter that the Questions seemed, in the first instance, to be founded. I stated, 584 at the outset, that the official information in the possession of the Secretary of State was at variance with this letter. Similar charges were made in 1873, and were officially denied by the Government of India. But I promised that the letter should be sent out to the Government of India, and that they should be requested to submit a detailed Report on the various allegations therein contained, and that, if anything like the practices alleged in the letter prevailed in India, measures would be taken to secure that any such practices should be stopped forthwith. As to the Acts for the repression of disease which are in force in various parts of India, the attention of the Government of India has been called to the strong representations made in this country against the maintenance of such Acts, and a full Report upon the entire subject has been asked for, and is expected shortly to arrive. But the Secretary of State has no power to withdraw this matter from the cognizance of the Legislative Council of the Governor General and the Legislatures of Madras and Bombay, to which the duty of making laws for India has been delegated by Parliament. Nor can he sanction any statement being made by me in the House of Commons which would prejudge that full consideration of the whole subject by the Secretary of State in Council, which will take place as soon as the Report referred to arrives Of the Reports mentioned in the Question all are in the India Office except No. 1, and, as I informed the hon. Member on Tuesday, No. 6. For the reasons already stated the Secretary of State declines to express any opinion at present upon the conclusions drawn by the hon. Member in trio second paragraph of the Question. The Cantonment referred to in the third paragraph is in the North-West Provinces; and I have already twice stated that the Reports from this district have not been received. The Secretary of State does not consider it necessary to ask for further district Reports till the full Report now expected has been received.