§ SIR W. WEDDERBURN (Banffshire)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for India whether the consent of both Houses of Parliament, under Section 55 of 21 & 22 Vic., c. 106 (an Act for the Better Government of India), was obtained for the expenditure on Military operations beyond the west and northwest frontiers of India of the following sums (shown in a Parliamentary Return, entitled "East India (Military Expenditure beyond the Frontier)," and dated India Office, February 1895, viz.: Rx. 159,116, in 1884–5; Rx.2,121,086, in 1885–6; Rx.116,055, in 1888–9; Rx.4,825, in 1889–90; Rx.143,730, in 1890–91; and, upon, what date, with reference to each of the sums mentioned in the previous question, was the consent of the House of Commons and the House of Lords respectively obtained for such expenditure?
§ SIR EDWARD GREYThe figures given in the Return under the heads "Expeditions and Explorations," "Expenditure in the Military Department," do not relate to what are called in Clause 55 of the Act for the Better Government of India "Military Operations carried on beyond the External Frontiers" of Her Majesty's Indian Possessions for which, as the hon. Baronet points out, the consent of Parliament is 326 necessary; and, as a matter of fact, there were during the period covered by the Return no "Military operations beyond the External Frontiers" on the north-west, which were held to fall within the scope of Section 55 of the Act; a reference to the Return, which comprises such items as "Railways," "Fortifications," and "Cantonments," shows that it does not refer to expenditure beyond the frontiers of India in the strict sense of the words.