INDIA—THE BANDA AND KIRWEE PRIZE MONEY.—QUESTION. (Hansard, 3 July 1873)

§ THE EARL OF DERBY
said, the subjects referred to in the Question he had placed on the Paper were familiarly known to the noble Duke (the Secretary of State for India), and indeed to all persons who of late years had taken any part in connection with Indian affairs. The claims had remained unsettled for 14 or 15 years, and in the course of that time they had given rise to a great deal of correspondence and discussion. He had been asked by parties who were interested in the settlement of these claims to put to the noble Duke the Question which stood in his name on the Paper, and under the circumstances, considering the lateness of the hour, he would do so without any further remarks. He would ask the noble Duke, Whether the complete accounts of the Banda and Kirwee Booty can be presented to Parliament in this Session; and, whether Her Majesty will be advised under the Act 3rd & 4th Vict. chap. 65. sect. 22. to refer for judicial decision the claim of the troops, which in 1871 was confirmed by the Secretary of State for India, to interest on a million and a half of old rupees taken at Kirwee, or other claims for valuable booty which are supported by the legal opinions of Her Majesty's Attorney General and other very eminent counsel?

THE DUKE OF ARGYLL
said, the final accounts of the Banda and Kirwee booty had not yet been received from India. They were extremely complicated, but as soon as they arrived from India they should be presented to Parliament. With regard to the second Question, he did not know whether his noble Friend was aware that the same Question was put to him last year by the noble Lord opposite, on which occasion he made an elaborate statement to the House of the whole circumstances of the case. He then stated that the claims were finally settled, and declined to refer the matter to a judicial tribunal. The only remaining question, even among the officers themselves, was whether interest ought to be allowed on a large quantity of bullion, old rupees, and jewels which were held by the Government for a certain period unrealized. He explained to the House the important principles which were involved in this question. The claim was made on the supposition that the Government were in the position of a prize agent, and were bound to make the best possible use of all the property which came into their possession. The whole of the money and the proceeds from the jewels had been given to the Army, with interest from the moment when the Government became the profitable owners of them, but for a part of the time during which they were in the hands of the Government they could not be turned to profitable use, and the Government could not admit the claim that they were bound to allow interest upon them during the period which they were not profitable. As to the jewels, they had been valued by native jewellers at a price which exceeded the sum realized by the sale, and some of the officers put forward a preposterous claim for the amount at which the jewels were valued. The Government had certainly not acted in a niggardly manner, for they had calculated the interest on the bullion from the time it was captured, and the interest on the jewels, &c., from the time they were actually sold. He repeated that the Government could not consent to bring the claims before a legal tribunal, as they deemed the question to be finally settled.

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
regretted that no more satisfactory explanation could be given, and stated that much 1704 dissatisfaction prevailed in consequence of the manner in which the whole transaction had been dealt with.

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
said, the question referred to the decision of Dr. Lushington was as follows:—The Crown having granted particular booty to be distributed among the troops, what troops were entitled to take the benefit of that grant? The legal foundation for the judgment was the actual grant by the Crown of certain things to certain troops, and the decisions given in former cases enabled the Judge to solve that rather difficult question. It was quite a mistake, however, to suppose that there was any legal principle on which the Judge could be asked to try the question whether the Crown ought to pay interest on the booty, or whether the Crown should let the troops have property not taken in the actual operations of the field. These were matters for the Crown and the Government to exercise their discretion upon, and, in his opinion, they ought not to be referred to the decision of a judicial tribunal. To do so would be to call in a judicial tribunal to arbitrate on the question, whether the Crown ought to give something which it had not given in fact, and which it was under no obligation to give.