AFFGHAN WAR—THE ARMY—PAPERS. (Hansard, 17 February 1843)

§ The Duke of Wellington
said, he had drawn up the resolutions which he intended to submit to their Lordships on Monday next, and would now lay them on the Table.^*

§ The Duke of Wellington
then said that he would now communicate to the House the information which he had obtained as to the papers respecting which the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Lansdowne) had last night addressed some questions to him. The noble Lord had asked about certain letters, which he said were not contained in the papers which had been presented to the House, relative to the military operations in Affghanistan. With respect to a letter written by General Pollock, and dated the 13th of May, no such letter was to be found either in the office of the secret committee or at the Board of Control. The noble Marquess also alluded to a letter written by Mr. Clarke, the political agent, and referred to in the Governor-general's letter, to Sir Jasper Nicholls, dated the 14th of May, 1842; he (the Duke of Wellington) had a copy of that letter, and would now lay it on the Table. The noble Marquess had also asked whether there was any letter from General Nott, giving reasons for disobeying orders which he received to evacuate Candahar. No such letter was to be found; nor was it likely that it should, because General Nott, obeyed the Governor-general's orders, dated the 19th of April, as far as related to the evacuation of Khelat-i-Ghilzie. Another noble Marquess (the Marquess of Normanby) had expressed a wish for the production of some proclamations issued by the Governor-general, which, he said, had been laid before the House of Commons. If the noble Marquess wished these documents to be laid before the House, he would recommend him to give notice of a motion for that purpose. The proclamation related entirely to political matters, and he thought it was not desirable to mix up such considerations with the motion for a vote of thanks on account of military operations. He certainly would not enter at all into the political part of the question on Monday next. It was for the noble Marquess to say whether he would call for the papers; but, if he should, he saw no objection to their production. ^* They will be found in the debate of the 20th.

Lord Brougham
said, that he might observe, with reference to the letter which General Nott wrote, and to which his noble Friend (the Marquess of Landsdowne) had referred, that it was quite possible that there never was a letter from General Nott giving reasons for disobeying the order to retire from Candahar. Perhaps General Nott had anticipated the order, or had given, before he received it, his reasons for retaining the occupation.

§ Lord Wharncliffe
General Nott did not disobey the order.

§ The Marquess of Lansdowne
was obliged to the noble Duke for giving notice of the terms of the motion he intended to make on Monday. As to the letters which he had asked for, he was of course, aware that the Government could not lay upon the Table any documents which they had not in their possession. At the same time the noble Duke must be aware that General Pollock's letter of the 13th of May must necessarily be of great importance, considering the period at which it was written, and it was unfortunate that it was not in the power of Government to put the House in possession of it, because it would have enabled their Lordships to form a more accurate judgment respecting that portion of the operations to which it referred.

§ The Duke of Wellington
I have said that no such letter can be found.

§ The Marquess of Lansdowne
There could be no doubt that the letter was written, or that General Pollock would never have said so; but he implicitly believed the statement of the noble Duke that no such letter was in the possession of the Government, or, as he understood the noble Duke to say, in the possession of the East India Company. That such a letter existed, that it was written at a most critical moment of these operations, and that if it could be produced it would throw light on the operations, no one could doubt who had read the papers before the House. The letter from Mr. Clarke, which the noble Duke had produced, might possibly throw light on this part of the transactions but. with respect to General Nott, he was surprised to hear the noble Baron opposite say that he had not disobeyed the orders he received from the Governor-general. Undoubtedly, General Nott obeyed the orders with respect to the evacuation of Khelat-i-Ghilzie; but did he evacuate Candahar?

§ Lord Wharncliffe
said, that General 765 Nott never disobeyed any orders which he received, and he gave his reasons why he had not done so.

§ The Marquess of Lansdowne
Does General Nott give reasons for disobeying the orders he received to evacuate Candahar?

§ Lord Wharncliffe
It is useless to de bate this matter now; but I am prepared to show that General Nott did not disobey the orders which he received, and that he himself gives his reasons for not having disobeyed them?

§ The Marquess of Lansdowne
said, he had not been prepared to hear from any one that General Nott, having received orders to evacuate Candahar immediately, and not having evacuated it, could be considered as not having disobeyed his orders. His noble Friend, however, had undertaken to show that such was the case, and undoubtedly it would be more convenient to discuss the matter on another occasion. It certainly had occurred to him that, as General Nott evidently had not concurred with the Governor general respecting the propriety of an immediate evacuation of Candahar, the general must have expressed his reasons for not concurring with the Governor general. It certainly appeared most extraordinary that not an atom or a fragment of any letter from General Nott upon that subject was to be found. In saying this, he wished it to be understood that he had not the least doubt Government were not in possession of any such letter.