§ MR. BRADLAUGHI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether any application has been received on behalf of Mr. Arthur Crawford, to be refunded the legal expenses incurred by, him in connection with the Poona Special Commission; and, if so, what decision, if any, has been come to in the matter?
SIR J. GORSTThe payment of Mr. Crawford's legal expenses was, in the first instance, refused by the Secretary of State, although, in consideration of his services, other concessions to his family-were made. A further application has been since made on the subject, which is still under consideration.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHHas any further decision been come to in this case? I have had a notice upon the subject upon the Paper for some time, but I have not had an opportunity of obtaining an expression of opinion upon it.
*SIR J. GORSTYes, Sir. I believe that whenever the Secretary of State and the Government of India have made up their minds they will act without waiting for the discussion which is proposed to be initiated by the hon. Member.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHMay I point out that there are strong expressions contained in the Papers now before the House with reference to this matter?
§ MR. BRYCE) (Aberdeen, S.I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether we are to understand that he intends, in the surprising course which he is taking, to lay down that there is no necessity for producing Papers in justification of the action of the Indian Government?
*SIR J. GORSTThe hon. Member for South Aberdeen (Mr. Bryce) and the hon. Member for Northampton. (Mr. Bradlaugh) somewhat exaggerate the importance of the matter. The only question now at issue is the cost which has been incurred by Mr. Crawford in the litigation which has taken place. Strong representations have been made to the Secretary of State upon that matter, and they are receiving proper consideration.
§ *MR. BRADLAUGHMay I ask whether what the hon. Gentleman terms "litigation" was not a series of charges against Mr. Crawford, a very high official, for accepting bribes from a number of Magistrates, and whether several of the Magistrates alleged to have been bribed have since been dismissed from the service of the State?
§ *MR. MACLEAN (Oldham)Is it not the fact that the Government of Bombay empowered a special tribunal to try Mr. Crawford on 33 different charges; is it not also the fact that he was acquitted upon 32 of those charges, and only partially convicted upon one—the 33rd—and did not the Secretary of State dismiss him from the Service, not on the ground of corruption, of which he had been acquitted, but on the ground, which he had himself confessed, that he was indebted to some of the native capitalists in his district for borrowed money?
*SIR J. GORSTYes, Sir; all the questions which have been addressed to me are perfectly correct, and the particulars will be found in the Papers which have been presented to the House.