§ 11. Major H. TERRELLasked the Secretary of State for India whether officers in the Indian Army whose term of service has expired and who are over fifty-five years of age are, though unemployed, not allowed to leave India; whether such officers whilst unemployed receive any, and, if so, what pay beyond the pensions they have earned; will he say by what authority such officers are forbidden to return to England; and will he explain why such officers should be compelled to remain in India at their own expense and without pay?
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Herbert Fisher)No information has been received to this effect, but inquiry will be made.
§ 12. Major TERRELLasked whether officers in the Indian Army who have, during the War, been engaged on Staff work in France have been recalled to India and there employed in various subordinate positions where their experience of Staff work on active service is of no use; and whether the Government will take steps to prevent such waste of Staff experience and see that experienced Staff officers are employed on Staff work?
§ Mr. FISHERThe Secretary of State for India must leave it to the judgment of the Commander-in-Chief in India to employ officers recalled from France to duty in India to the best advantage having regard to their individual qualifications and capacities, as to which he is fully informed, and to the special needs for the time being of the Indian Army. At present experienced officers with knowledge of the Indian vernaculars are urgently needed in India for the training of new units, and possibly some officers who have been on Staff duty in France are being utilised for this purpose.
§ 13. Major TERRELLasked the Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that Captain Barlow, of the 8th Goorkhas, was, whilst serving in France, severely wounded in the arm and had, after a long detention in hospital, a steel appliance fitted to keep the arm in its place and that, when he was still unable to move his arm, he was ordered to attend at the India Office to be medically examined; whether he is aware that the surgeon who had attended him declared that he was still wholly unfit for service, but that the board by whom he was examined at the India Office passed him fit for service in India; whether he is aware that Captain Barlow was then ordered to proceed for service to India, and that since his arrival in India he has been examined by several medical boards and declared unfit for service; and whether he has in consequence been ordered to return to England?
§ Mr. FISHERMajor Barlow received in France a gunshot wound in the right arm on 30th October, 1914. After nearly a year's treatment, he was passed by the India Office Medical Board not for service but for " light duty " in India, with the 1613 concurrence in writing of the surgeon immediate attendance on him and of the very eminent consulting surgeon in charge of the case, it being understood that he would be able to return to this country for operation when circumstances permitted. He accordingly proceeded to India in November, 1915, was examined and recommended for sick leave at the end of May, 1916, returned to this country and underwent the operation in September, 1916. He was examined by the India Office Medical Board in June, 1917, was passed fit for "light duty," and returned to India in July last. No further information has been received regarding this officer.
§ 14. Major TERRELLasked whether there have recently been several cases of officers of the Indian Army who have been passed as fit for service in India by the medical board at the India Office and have consequently been ordered to proceed for service to India, and who have shortly after their arrival in India been certified as unfit for service and ordered to return to England; and, if so, whether steps will be taken to prevent the recurrence of such unfair treatment of officers and such waste of public money?
§ Mr. FISHERIn view of the Government of India's urgent needs officers are in present circumstances sent back to India who in ordinary times would be kept in this country for more complete convalescence. Of these a few have not stood the strain and have been invalided from India. The Secretary of State, to reassure himself, asked the Government of India in March last for their opinion as to the suitability of the standard adopted by the medical board. They reported that the number of returned officers was not sufficient to warrant any change in the standard. The Secretary of State saw no sufficient reason to differ from this conclusion. The Government of India have again been asked whether they are still of the same opinion.