THE EARL OF DUNRAVENMy Lords, I rise to ask the Question which stands in my name, and to move for copies of certain documents, because I think it is a fitting time for your Lordships' House and the country to have some information concerning a subject which has exercised men's minds to a considerable extent for some time, and has excited a good deal of feeling throughout the country. It is exactly a month since my noble Friend on my right (Lord Truro) asked a Question in this House concerning the position of the late Prince Imperial, and made, at the same time, certain remarks about the conduct of affairs in South Africa. My noble Friend opposite the Under Secretary of State for War, in his reply, commented rather severely upon the tenour of the noble Lord's speech. He said he thought it was a pity that the noble Lord should take advantage of his privilege of free speech to throw broadcast, without proof, without waiting for reliable information, his censures as he had done, loud and long, and couched in almost violent language; and this, he said, the noble Lord had done on nothing better than the irresponsible statements of journalists. I hope I shall not be betrayed to use any language that might be described as almost violent; but if I am to wait to exercise my privilege of free speech until we have some information from Her Majesty's Government I might as well abandon my right of free speech altogether. We have had since then the newspapers full of these "irresponsible statements of journalists;" but not one word of responsible and reliable information from Her Majesty's Government. The position which the Prince Imperial occupied with our Forces has been, and is, involved in a good deal of obscurity. The noble Lord, on the occasion to which I have alluded, asked whether the Prince Imperial was in command on the 1st of June. In 1827 his reply to the noble Lord, the Under Secretary of State for War said that the Prince Imperial could not have been in command, because he could not bear any commission from Her Majesty; and he added, in the same speech, that he could not have been in command, because he was in the presence of an officer a great deal senior to him. Either one of these statements taken alone might be considered good, though not conclusive evidence, that the Prince Imperial was not in command. It would not be conclusive, because it is quite possible that an officer might be, under certain circumstances, put over the head of an officer senior to him, and it is conceivable that an individual not bearing the commission of Her Majesty might be in command of a party. Taken together, the two statements afford no proof whatever. If the Prince Imperial held no commission or appointment, he could not have been in the presence of an officer senior to him. He might not be the junior of that officer; but he might have held some appointment or commission. The noble and illustrious Duke (the Duke of Cambridge) read two letters in your Lordships' House—one from Lord Chelmsford, the other from Sir Bartle Frere. The letter from Lord Chelmsford is the only one that concerns me at present. It was to the effect that the Prince Imperial was anxious to serve with our troops in South Africa; that Her Majesty's Government would not sanction that; but that he had the sanction of the noble and illustrious Duke's writing to Lord Chelmsford to recommend the Prince Imperial to him. He was recommended to enable the Prince Imperial to see as much service as he could with our troops in the field. At the same time, he was told to take care of the Prince Imperial. It is obvious that the object of Her Majesty's Government, in not allowing the Prince to serve with our troops, was to guard against his running a certain risk; but, with all respect for the accumulated wisdom of Her Majesty's Government, certainly the means they took were not calculated to carry out the aim they had in view. They allow the Prince Imperial to go out as an irresponsible individual. It would have been wiser, I think, if they had attached him to Lord Chelmsford in some definite capacity. If they had allowed that, it would have been pos- 1828 sible for the Commander-in-Chief in South Africa to have prevented him running any false risks which it is very natural and unavoidable that a young and brave man would run in his desire to see some active service, especially in such a campaign as was waged in South Africa. Lord Chelmsford was given a task which it was impossible for him to fulfil. As a matter of fact, we know Lord Chelmsford did attach the Prince Imperial to his personal Staff. The Secretary of State for War read extracts from two private letters, and from one official letter, from Lord Chelmsford stating that he had made the Prince Imperial an extra aide-de-camp, and the Secretary of State for War in "another place," and the Under Secretary of State for War in this House, stated that that was probably done to enable the Prince Imperial to draw forage and food. We do not know what that was probably done for. We want to know what it was done for. I think it would be interesting to your Lordships to see a copy of the orders by which the Prince Imperial was attached to the Staff of the General commanding in South Africa. I am quite aware that it is customary, when a non-combatant and civilian is allowed to accompany the Forces into the field, to give him certain facilities and a certain position. He is allowed to pass freely within the lines, and is usually offered the rank of lieutenant, or captain, or some rank suitable to him, to enable him. to draw forage and rations; to be billeted if there are any quarters to be billeted for; to have facilities for transportation, and so on. But there the matter ceases. The individual so treated cannot be called upon to perform any kind of military duty. The authorities cannot demand his services in any way. The authorities are not responsible for his well-being or his life in the smallest degree. If that was the position occupied by the late Prince Imperial, it is well that your Lordships and the country should know it for certain, and at once; for, in that case, nobody is responsible for the Prince Imperial, and the country would learn with a sense of relief that no British soldier or officer was responsible for him; and that, consequently, there has been no neglect of duty. Unfortunately, it does not appear certain that the Prince was a mere spectator. 1829 It is quite possible for a civilian to be employed in a definite capacity. Your Lordships will excuse my being personal; but I would say that I know that from my own experience. I had the honour of accompanying an English expedition in the field. I had left the Service and was a civilian; but I was attached to the Quartermaster General in a definite capacity. My services were at the disposal of the Quartermaster General, and he was entitled to command them; and he was responsible for my life in the same way that any officer is responsible for the lives of those subordinate to him. It appears to me that that was the position occupied by the late Prince Imperial; and, if so, I want to know who was responsible for him? It has been rumoured that the late Prince Imperial was given some command in some Native or Colonial Force. I have no idea whether there is any truth in that report. If not, it would be well that it should be authoritatively denied by Her Majesty's Government. Well, then, we know that the Prince Imperial was transferred from the Staff of the General commanding in South Africa to the Quartermaster General's department. We have a telegram from Lord Chelmsford saying that the Prince was, on the 1st of June, acting under the orders of the Assistant Quartermaster General. It would be interesting to see a copy of the orders by which the Prince Imperial was transferred from Lord Chelmsford's Staff to the department of the Quartermaster General. It appears to me that the statement which has been made in both Houses, that the late Prince Imperial was a mere spectator, is quite incompatible with the fact that he was appointed an aide-de-camp of Lord Chelmsford's Staff, and that he was employed by the Assistant Quartermaster General to do a specific duty—namely, to fix a locality for a camp. Is it possible for a man to be an aide-de-camp without being liable to perform military duty? I would wish to consider principally the position occupied by the Prince on the 1st of June. We have had various statements, some made by Lieutenant Carey, by the troopers who formed part of the escort, and by Colonel Harrison. It has been said that the Prince gave the word of command which was obeyed by the troopers; that he disregarded the advice 1830 of Lieutenant Carey when he was urged to wait for the Basutos who were to have formed part of the escort, when he was recommended to alight and off-saddle on the ridge instead of in the exposed position where he did off-saddle, and when he was advised to leave; and we know that the Prince carried written instructions which were lost with him. In order to clear up the matter surrounding the Prince's position on the 1st of June, I moved for copies of the orders or instructions on which the Prince Imperial was acting on that day. The position of Lieutenant Carey was also very doubtful; and it is scandalous that there should be any uncertainty about a matter of such importance. It has been stated that he was in command of a reconnoitring party; that he was in command of an escort; and that he was present merely as a volunteer, because he knew the ground well, having been over it before. There is one very simple method of solving all these difficulties; that is for the Government themselves to lay upon the Table a copy of the orders which were given to Lieutenant Carey on the 1st of June. If Lieutenant Carey was not detailed for duty on orders, either the statement that he was present as a volunteer is correct, or the campaign in South Africa has been conducted in a manner very different from that in which warlike operations are invariably conducted by civilized nations. Further, I move for copies of the charges upon which Lieutenant Carey was arraigned. I presume that the proceedings of the court martial have been now for some time before the Judge Advocate General, and that there can be no difficulty in giving your Lordships information as to the charges. It is obvious that there are two charges upon which he may have been tried—neglect of taking proper precaution, and misbehaviour in face of the enemy. The whole thing depends, of course, upon the position which Lieutenant Carey held. If he was in command of a reconnoitring party, then he was to blame for not taking the ordinary precaution -which, a man would take if he was at all acquainted with savages and their mode of carrying on war. If he was in command of the escort merely, he cannot be held accountable, because he would be entirely under the orders of the Prince Imperial, and would no more have dic- 1831 tated to the Prince than an officer of one of the Household Cavalry Regiments, commanding an escort accompanying Her Majesty to a levée at St. James's Palace, could dictate to Her Majesty as to when she was to go, or when she was to leave. If Lieutenant Carey was a mere volunteer, still less, in that case, could blame attach to him. From all that can be gathered, it is quite certain, that no danger whatever was apprehended. Smaller bodies of men had traversed the country in security. Basutos were scouting on the other side; General Marshall's Cavalry were close at hand; Colonel Wood's camp was only one mile distant; General Newdigate was at a distance of only four miles. The small-ness of the escort shows that no danger was apprehended. The party had un saddled and tethered their horses; their carbines were not even loaded; and it appears that the expedition was looked upon more in the light of a military pic-nic than anything else. If, therefore, Lieutenant Carey is to blame for not having taken proper precautions, it appears to me that at least an equal amount of blame attaches to the officer, whoever he was, who allowed the Prince to go out under such mistaken notions, and with such an inadequate idea of the danger that he incurred. If Lieutenant Carey has been tried for misbehaviour, that is quite another matter. We know enough about the circumstances to be able to form some idea of the nature of the surprise. The horses, as I have said, were unsaddled and tethered; the men were cooking, and were scattered about the place, resting themselves. The alarm was given, and the command to mount was ordered with such precipitation that, according to the statements of the troopers, scarcely any one of them had time to get into his saddle properly. It appears as though each man threw himself on his horse, and made his escape as speedily as possible. Is it conceivable that any officer, under such circumstances, could have rallied his men in a few minutes, and could have been aware of what was going on about him, even if it had been his duty to rally and halt them. If Lieutenant Carey were in command of a reconnoitring party, it clearly was not his duty to offer any resistance. The duty of a party employed in feeling for the 1832 enemy is to carry information of their presence the moment that you feel them. It might be impossible to judge of the number of the Zulus. They might have been in force; and if they had been in force, and the little party had lost their lives, the result might have been a surprise, and, possibly, the destruction of the troops in the neighbourhood. I would ask your Lordships to pay special attention to the fact that it is not the duty of a reconnoitring party to stop and fight, but to get out of the affair as soon as possible, and convey the intelligence to the first body of troops. Besides, my Lords, we have been told that the Prince Imperial was merely a spectator. If that be the case, it would surely have been most culpable for Lieutenant Carey to have imperilled his life, and the lives of his men, and consequently to have endangered the safety of the camps and the troops in the vicinity, for the sake of endeavouring to save the life of a mere spectator, however exalted the rank of the spectator might be, and however peculiar the circumstances surrounding him. That is the real difficulty of this question. It is almost impossible to look at it with perfectly impartial eyes. The position of the individual who there lost his life is so peculiar that men's minds are indefinitely influenced by it. It is not easy to find a single life regarded with the utmost affection of which the human heart is capable, calling forth the deepest friendship of friends and comrades, around which, at the same time, cluster and cling all the hopes and aspirations of a great Party of a great nation; and it is not unreasonable to suppose that Lieutenant Carey's case has been somewhat prejudiced on that account. As a matter of fact, it appears to me to have been prejudiced in various ways. He was removed from his Staff employment. Previous to the Court of Inquiry and the court martial, statements, prejudicial to him, have appeared in the newspapers. The Times published a letter, some little time ago, signed, One present," and written from the Army and Navy Club, comparing Lieutenant Carey's conduct with that of another officer, under what might be considered to be similar circumstances. The circumstances were not at all similar. The ignorance of the writer on military matters was only equalled by his want of decency 1833 in attempting to prejudice the public mind against a man awaiting his trial. The circumstances were not at all similar, and no comparison could be made. But, unfortunately, the general public are so ignorant of military affairs that they cannot fail to be prejudiced by such a letter. Moreover, the Prime Minister, speaking in this House, made use of an expression which I fear may have tended to prejudice Lieutenant Carey's case. The noble Earl at the head of Her Majesty's Government said that the life of the Prince Imperial had, in his opinion, been so "needlessly and cruelly sacrificed." I understood the noble Earl to mean by that word "needlessly," that so valuable a life, one which had such great possibilities before it, had been sacrificed for no great object, and with no adequate results; but it is obvious that another meaning could be attached to the word, and I fear that many of those who naturally weigh and ponder the words of a Prime Minister might think that the noble Earl considered that his life might and ought to have been saved by those who were present. Moreover, the newspapers, in speaking of the matter and writing of the Court of Inquiry and court martial, made constant allusion to the late Prince Imperial, to the inquiry into all the circumstances attending his death; but made scarcely any mention whatever of the two troopers who lost their lives on the same occasion. This cannot fail to make people think that if it had been merely a question of the lives of those two troopers, possibly the affair would have attracted no attention whatever, and Lieutenant Carey would not have been blamed to the extent that he has been. There is some danger that the public mind may be prejudiced against Lieutenant Carey. There is danger also that strong re-action may set in which might cause some miscarriage of justice. For, as your Lordships are well aware, the English people will not stand for a moment the notion that any responsibility should be cast upon the shoulders of a man who ought not properly to be made to bear it. They will not for a moment suffer Lieutenant Carey in any way to be made a scapegoat of in this matter, or to be treated differently on account of the illustrious rank of the individual who perished when with him, than he would have been treated had it been merely a ques- 1834 tion of the lives of the two troopers who also perished. This matter is one of such importance that I make no apology for bringing it before your Lordships, and I beg to ask, Whether the late Prince Imperial held any appointment in South Africa under Her Majesty's Government, either Home or Colonial? I beg also to move for Copies of the Orders or Instructions under which the late Prince Imperial was acting on the 1st of June; and for Copies of the Orders which detailed Lieutenant Carey for duty on the same day; and for Copies of the Charge or Charges upon which Lieutenant Carey was arraigned.
§ VISCOUNT BURYI am afraid I must answer the speech of the noble Earl in a very few words. I must decline to follow him into any of the details which he has brought before the House—in my opinion, the time has not yet arrived when we can discuss this matter. The proceedings of the court martial which sat on Lieutenant Carey have reached this country; but they have not yet been confirmed, neither are they yet officially before the War Office. I have not myself seen them. Under these circumstances, it is impossible for me to follow my noble Friend into those details on which he has framed some ingenious hypotheses. I will, therefore, confine myself to answering the Questions in the fewest possible words, guarding myself, at the same time, against the supposition that there is any indisposition on my part to afford the information for which my noble Friend asks. My noble Friend asks whether the late Prince Imperial held any appointment in South Africa under Her Majesty's Government either Home or Colonial? My noble Friend suggested that the Prince was attached to some Colonial Forces, and had a commission in them. That is not the case; neither is it a fact that he held any commission or had any direct employment under Her Majesty. He was employed in the Quartermaster General's Department on the occasion in question, in the same way that any civilian may be employed without acting in any military capacity. The answer, therefore, I have to make to my noble Friend's first Question is that the Prince Imperial, though he was employed, had no appointment under Her Majesty. My noble Friend moves for Copies of the Orders or Instructions 1835 under which, the late Prince Imperial was acting on the 1st of June. We have at the War Office no knowledge of any such Instructions. They have not come to us, and we do not know of their existence. My noble Friend asks for Copies of the Orders which detailed Lieutenant Carey for duty on the same day. I must give to that Question the same answer—that they are not in the possession of the War Office, and I am not aware of their existence. My noble Friend also asks for Copies of the Charge or Charges upon which Lieutenant Carey was arraigned. My Lords, as I have said, the Report of the finding of the court martial, and the proceedings of the court martial, are in this country; but until they have been confirmed it will not be possible to produce them. When, however, they can be produced without injury to the Public Service or to the interests of justice, those Charges will be laid upon the Table of your Lordships' House.
§ LORD TRUROsaid, the reply of the noble Viscount the Under Secretary of State for War was characterized by reticence and ambiguity; indeed, most of the noble Viscount's replies were capable of a double signification. ["Oh! oh!"] What could be the meaning of the Prince Imperial being employed and yet holding no appointment under Her Majesty? There was a double significance in the noble Viscount's answer. The answer was not intelligible. The evident intention of the Government was that this matter should not be discussed in Parliament during the present Session. He complained that they were keeping the public uninformed' on a subject which excited so much interest throughout the country until Parliament should be prorogued.
THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDONThe speech of the noble Lord who has just sat down, I think, will lead all your Lordships thoroughly to understand the very great ignorance which he displays upon matters connected with the Military Service of this country; because it is scarcely credible that the noble Lord should have got up and found fault with my noble Friend the Under Secretary of State for War for the answer which he gave him, if he had any knowledge whatever of anything connected with the Army. The noble Lord laments the death of the Prince 1836 Imperial, and complains that the subject is not likely to be discussed during the present Session of Parliament. But the subject-matter connected with the lamented death of Prince Louis Napoleon, and the subsequent transactions which took place in South Africa affecting the character of an officer of Her Majesty's Army, are questions not to be discussed in Parliament until Parliament has before it the whole of the circumstances of the case. It would be most unjust to Lieutenant Carey, and most unseemly and incorrect on our part, if we were to give any opinion upon this matter until the whole of the proceedings of the court martial can with propriety be made public, and they cannot be made public before they have been approved by the General Com-manding-in-Chief. The noble Lord seems to think that the proceedings of a court martial can be treated like some trivial proceeding before a police magistrate. The noble Lord seems to imagine that those proceedings should be made the subject of discussion at once; but that was more surprising than the noble Lord's being surprised at what was said by the noble Viscount the Under Secretary of State for War. My noble Friend stated that the Prince Imperial did not hold any appointment in the British Army—and it was impossible that the Prince, situated as he was, could do so—but on this occasion he was employed; and that answer was substantially correct and true; and if the noble Lord brought forward the question over and over again he could not receive any other answer—namely, that the Prince was employed on the 1st of June, but held no appointment.
§ LORD WAVENEYthought that the subject had been very ingenuously brought before their Lordships by the noble Earl who raised the discussion, who, as he understood, had some apprehension and had stated that there were some fears in the country that this subject would not be discussed in that House this Session. The subject was one of the highest importance, and it should not be left to be considered simply upon any Report that might be presented which few people would read. He did not understand his noble Friend (Lord Truro) as wishing to discuss the proceedings of the court martial. He asked for information; and, no doubt, it was 1837 important that their Lordships should learn whether the discipline of the British Army was what it ought to be. The very fact that the Prince received employment showed that his life was under the protection of the British flag; and his life should, therefore, have been as strictly guarded as that of anyone engaged in the Queen's Service. As for the Instructions which had been moved for, he understood that the correspondence was so much in arrear that copies had not come home. The Adjutant General's Department in that case must be very ill-served. Of Lieutenant Carey he knew nothing; but he trusted an opportunity of discussing his case would be given before the end of the Session, notwithstanding the misgivings of his noble Friend. All these questions must be settled authoritatively, with as little delay as possible. He supported most cordially the Motion of his noble Friend for the Papers, with the exception of those relating to the court martial.
§ LORD HAMPTONagreed with his noble Friend (Lord Waveney) that no exception could be taken to the speech of the noble Earl who introduced this subject. The inquiries were very natural under the circumstances, and no complaint could be made of the tone in which, he had spoken. But he could not speak in the same sense of the speech of the noble Lord who followed the Under Secretary (Lord Truro). He had listened to the remarks of his noble Friend the Under Secretary, and he had not heard a word which would justify the charge that his speech was distinguished by ambiguity and reticence. Equally without foundation was the statement that it was the evident intention of Her Majesty's Government that the subject should not be discussed this Session, and that the Papers were withheld on that account. He had never heard in that House a statement more destitute of foundation. His noble Friend had said all that he prudently could say under the circumstances. With respect to Lieutenant Carey, until the proceedings of the court martial had been confirmed they could not be made public, and, in the meanwhile, there would be necessarily great curiosity to know in what manner that officer would be treated. It was essential that justice should be done to Lieutenant Carey, and justice could 1838 not be done if the unusual course were taken of discussing his conduct before the House was in possession of the whole of the circumstances of the case.
§ LORD TRUROwished to say a word in explanation. The noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond and Gordon) had taken him to task with great severity, and had imputed to him the idea that the proceedings of the court martial ought at once to be laid before that House. He was perfectly ready to acknowledge his own little acquaintance with military affairs; but he did not for a moment suppose that the proceedings of the court martial would be laid before that House before they had been confirmed by the Commander-in-chief.
§ EARL GRANVILLEsaid, it was quite clear it was not desirable that the House should discuss the case of Lieutenant Carey without full information; but the noble Earl who brought forward this Motion (the Earl of Dunraven) did not ask their Lordships to discuss the subject without information. The great object of his noble Friend was to get whatever information Her Majesty's Government could give on the question. The observations which his noble Friend had made contributed very useful information as to the case, and he was quite sure that information on the matter was required by the public, whose feelings were stirred in the most extraordinary degree. For his own part, he could give no opinion on such questions as these—whether Her Majesty's Government were right in permitting the Prince Imperial to go to South Africa at all—the question as to the position in which the Commander-in-chief placed him—the question as to Lieutenant Carey's position with respect to the Prince—and, above all, the question of the unfortunate situation in which Lieutenant Carey was now placed, whether he was guilty of very grievous misconduct or not. Upon these questions he expressed no opinion whatever. But he thought it was obviously reasonable that Her Majesty's Government should decline to produce the Report of a court martial which the Under Secretary said had not yet reached the War Office, and had not been confirmed by the Commander-in-chief. No doubt all the Instructions asked for by his noble Friend would be found in the Papers of the court martial; if not, important information would be 1839 wanting without which it would be impossible for Her Majesty's Government to act. What he wanted was that when complete information could be given on the subject it would not be withheld from Parliament.
THE EARL OF DUNRAVENsaid, that as the noble Viscount the Under Secretary of State for War had stated that he had received no copies of the documents he would not press for them. In what he had said with regard to himself he meant that he was under orders and served in a special capacity. He held that appointment throughout the campaign, he received a medal for the campaign, and he was a civilian. He thought his position in that case was analogous to that of the Prince Imperial.
§ VISCOUNT BURYsaid, the Prince Imperial was attached to the Staff, but was not an aide-de-camp.
§ Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.