§ MR. SNAPE (Lancashire, S.E., Heywood)I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India if he has observed the telegraphic despatch published in The Times of Saturday last which declares that the 23rd Pioneers are marching into Chilas in accordance with the pre-arranged programme; can he inform the House if there is a pre-arranged programme and what are its objects, also why British-Indian troops are marching into Chilas, which is far beyond the boundaries of Her Majesty's dominions; and whether a considerable escort has been sent on the Khagan route to Gilgit; and, if so, what the escort is to convoy, and what 1573 is the object of this military operation in these remote regions?
MR. G. RUSSELLThe 23rd Pioneers are engaged in making a new road from Abbotabad viâ Khagan and the Babosar Pass to Chilas. This road will afford a shorter and easier communication with Gilgit than the present one. The first 140 miles are in British territory. The last 20 between the Babosar Pass and Chilas are in territory which is tributary to the protected State of Kashmir. The Secretary of State has no information of any "escort" being sent on the Khagan route such as is referred to by the hon. Member.
§ MR. SNAPEI beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India if he is aware that it has been publicly stated that we have overstepped the Indus by hundreds of miles; that we have a railway station within 60 miles of Kandahar, and military posts in the Zhob and Gomal Valleys; that we have pledged to the Ameer the integrity of Herat, Maimena, and Andkui; that we are contemplating a railway up the valley of the Kabul river, and have established garrisons at Gilgit and Chittal; whether he will present Papers to Parliament showing under what authority the Indian Government has overstepped the Indus by hundreds of miles, accompanied by a map describing the extent of territory so included; when and under whose orders military posts wore established in the Zhob and Gomal Valleys; and also what garrisons were established at Gilgit and Chittal; and whether the official documents can be laid upon the Table of the House by which we have pledged to the Ameer the integrity of Herat, Maimena, and Andkui?
MR. G. RUSSELLThe Secretary is aware that various statements have from time to time appeared on these subjects, for which he is in no way responsible. The portion of our frontier to which the hon. Member presumably refers as overstepping the Indus by hundreds of miles is Quetta and the territory in its vicinity. The Papers in regard to the occupation of Quetta will be found in Parliamentary Paper (Baluchistan) (No. 2), 1877, and a map showing the extent of territory brought under the control of the Indian Government in that district was placed in the Library of the House at Mr. Slagg's request in 1888. The military 1574 posts in the Zhob and Gomal Valleys consist of local tribal Militia, and were established under the orders of the Government of India, approved by the Secretary of State in 1889 and 1890. In regard to Gilgit, which is part of Kashmir, a garrison consisting of three Kashmir regiments, one company of Kashmir sappers, and a mountain battery (Kashmir) is stationed in that territory. The Political Agent who is posted there has an escort of 200 Sikh Infantry. There is no British garrison at Chittal. A Mission was recently deputed there at the request of the new Ruler, Mehtar Nizam-ul-Mulk, and the Gilgit Agent's escort of 200 men accompanied the Mission. On the Mission being withdrawn, an officer was left there temporarily; also, at the Mehtar's request, he retains one-half of that escort. The official Document, in which our pledge regarding the integrity of the Ameer's territory is recorded, will be found at page 40 of Parliamentary Paper (Afghanistan) (No. 1), 1881. The Secretary of State will consider whether Papers can be presented with regard to the Zhob and Gomal Valleys; but it would not, in his opinion, be for the interests of the Public Service at the present time that Papers should be presented on the other subjects referred to by the hon. Member.
§ MR. SNAPEDoes the Secretary of State for India deny the allegations contained in the question, and is he aware that they were made public by his predecessors in Office?
MR. CUEZON (Lancashire, Southport)Inasmuch as the statement in the question on the Paper emanated from myself, I beg to ask the Under Secretary whether it is not the case that the frontier policy there alluded to was explained at length to this House in the Indian Budget Debate of 1885, and was received without criticism or opposition by the Liberal Party, and was further discussed at length on March 13, 1888, when Mr. Childers, speaking on behalf of the Party opposite, accepted that policy, and declined to vote against it, and when, upon a Division, it was approved by a majority of 50?
MR. G. RUSSELLI believe the facts are as stated by the hon. Gentleman opposite. With regard to the supplementary question of the hon. Member for Lancashire, I have only to in- 1575 form him that the words of the answer have been carefully studied, and I am not disposed to subtract from or add to them without consultation with the Secretary of State.
§ MR. A. C. MORTONMay I ask whether the speech of Mr. Childers, delivered in 1888, pledges the Liberal Party of to-day?
§ [No reply was given.]