Lords Sitting of 13 February 1880

AFGHAN WAR—ALLEGED SEVERITIES AT CABUL—EXPLANATION OF GENERAL ROBERTS.
VISCOUNT CRANBROOK: My Lords, your Lordships are aware that certain charges have been made against General Sir Frederick Roberts of cruelties at Cabul. We have received at the India
580
Office to-day a letter which, with the permission of your Lordships, I will read. It is in these terms—
"I am extremely grateful to you for so kindly writing to me with regard to attacks being made on me in certain quarters respecting ill-treatment of prisoners and wounded at the battle of Char-Asiab, and also for forwarding to me a copy of the article in The Fortnightly Review for December, headed 'Martial Law in Cabul.' I think that a short explanation of what has really occurred since we entered Afghanistan last September will enable you to satisfy all those who may refer to the subject in Parliament that wounded Afghans have not been ill-treated, and that there is no foundation for the remarks made by Mr. Harrison in The Fortnightly Review.With regard to the burning of Afghan bodies at the battle of Char-Asiab, I would beg to say that I first heard of the circumstances from the newspapers, and that I at once directed a Court of Inquiry to investigate the matter, the proceedings of which have some time since been forwarded for the information of the Commander-in-Chief and Government of India. It would appear that the act was committed in the rear of the troops engaged by two or three Goorkhas who were by themselves, and by the evidence given life must have been as good as extinct at the time the clothes were set on fire. I need not assure you that no blame for the act in question can be attached to any officer of the force under my command, and that with this exception every consideration has been shown to the wounded and the dead, inasmuch as they have been treated as if they were our own soldiers, and after Char-Asiab some of the wounded Afghans were taken into hospital and placed alongside of our own wounded men. This fact, I think, speaks for itself as regards the general treatment of the Afghans who fought against us. With reference to martial law having been proclaimed within a radius of 10 miles round Cabul, I can safely affirm that for many reasons it was absolutely necessary to do so, the chief one being to prevent the inhabitants carrying firearms and other weapons which might render it possible for them to make sudden attacks on soldiers and other individuals belonging to this force. Had this precaution not been taken, I venture to say that, living as we are among a nation of fanatics, murders would have been of frequent occurrence. I am not at all in favour of martial law, and shall be glad to see it discontinued, as soon as some other form of government can be decided upon. As to the Proclamation published relative to the treatment of soldiers and others concerned in the attack on the Embassy and of those who had apparently shown themselves to be rebels against the Ameer by fighting against us, I would mention that at the time the Proclamation was issued Yakoob Khan was outwardly our friend, and repeatedly spoke to me of the people who fought against us at Char-Asiab as rebels to his rule; and on that account they were referred to in the terms of the Proclamation. As to men being hanged for the simple fact of their having fought against us, such was not the case. Rewards were certainly offered for their capture; but this was done with a view of arresting those who, directly or indirectly, had taken part in

581
the massacre of the several members of the British Embassy. All convicted of such a crime would, I believe, have been sentenced to death in any country, whether civil or martial law had been in force. The Kotwal (chief magistrate of the city) was found guilty of having incited the troops to the massacre, of having taken an active part in dishonouring the dead bodies, and of having subsequently instigated the troops and people of Cabul to resist our advance. On these accounts he was hanged. As to prisoners taken in fight being shot, such is totally devoid of truth, further than in one or two instances summary punishment has been inflicted on individuals who have been found mutilating our wounded soldiers; indeed, all the wounded that have fallen into the enemy's hands at different times have been treated in the most cruel manner and horribly mutilated. With regard to the men who were not implicated in the attack on the Embassy, some short time after Yakoob Khan had been made a prisoner an amnesty was proclaimed, and the people of every district visited by our troops have invariably been informed that those soldiers have nothing to fear from us; but, on the other hand, if they came in and gave up their rifles or guns they would receive the amount authorized for the same. This was fully understood, and a considerable number of arms have from time to time been brought in. Recently, quite irrespective of any action taken by us, the Mollahs have been preaching a 'jehad,' or religious war, and have by these means got together by coercion, practical as well as religious, a gigantic collection of people. On reaching Cabul this mass was joined by all the riff-raff of the city and neighbouring villages; but the Kazilbashis, merchants, and respectable inhabitants, so far from throwing in their lot with our opponents, held aloof, and from time to time gave us valuable information. The greater portion also of the Sirdars of Cabul remained during the disturbances in our camp. As soon as I was aware that the enemy had been completely dispersed I published a general amnesty, feeling that the people generally were not to blame for what had occurred, and the quickest way of restoring order was to invite the people to Cabul and to let them see that they could trust implicitly to our forbearance and generosity. At the same time the Civil Dispensary was re-established, and notice was sent through the city and to all the neighbouring villages inviting the wounded to hospital and assuring them that they had nothing to fear. Many wounded have been brought in and are being taken every care of. Afghans are naturally very suspicious and require time to be re-assured; but so many Maliks and other headmen had responded to the Amnesty Proclamation that yesterday I was enabled to hold a Durbar at which nearly 200 of the principal men who had fought against us were present. Others will doubtless follow their example, and I hope in time the country will quiet down. Referring to the administration of affairs in the city and surroundings of Cabul, I can conscientiously say that our rule from the first has been extraordinarily mild and lenient. No harsh measure of any kind have been adopted. On the contrary, I have since had reason to regret that, from a desire not to do anything that could possibly set the people
582
against us, I abstained, on our first occupation of Sherpur, from levelling the forts and enclosures by which it is surrounded on all sides, and which during the late siege, by affording shelter to the enemy, were the causes of much annoyance and some loss to us. Two proofs which to my mind are fairly conclusive as to the feelings of security and trust which the people of Cabul city and adjoining villages reposed in us are the rapid manner in which the city filled immediately the enemy dispersed, and the fact that since our arrival there had not been a single complaint against a European soldier, and only a few of a trivial nature against one or two men belonging to the Native regiments. The strictest discipline has been maintained, and there has not been an instance of violence against the people, notwithstanding that our soldiers have witnessed the cruel treatment of their comrades on every occasion of their falling into the enemy's hands. There is one point mentioned by Mr. Harrison in The Fortnightly Review—namely, that civilian special correspondents have been prevented from accompanying the force under my command—in answer to which I would like to say a few words. I certainly never received any orders prohibiting civilian correspondents accompanying the force, and from the first one has been in my camp. He had considerable difficulty in reaching Ali-khel before the force marched, as our movements were very rapid after the order for an advance on Cabul was received. This may have prevented other correspondents joining me at the time. Had any come they would have received every assistance. Some correspondents have arrived since we reached this. No restrictions whatever are placed on them, and they are allowed to send any telegrams they please, even when the information contained in them is incorrect, always excepting such information as by nature of its inaccuracy is calculated to produce an evil effect."

PERSIA AND HERAT.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I regret having arrived in the House yesterday a few minutes too late to hear a statement made by the First Lord of the Treasury. The object of that statement appeared to be to correct a misapprehension which had arisen concerning an explanation he had given a day or two before in answer to a Question which I put to him. I should like now to ask him to be good enough to state what was the character of the misunderstanding which he desired to obviate. The two statements seem to have been the same, with the unimportant exception of the transposition of the two sentences. One was that there had been communications with Persia respecting the North-Eastern Frontier, about which it was premature to give information to

  583
  the House; the other that no concession had been made to Persia with regard to the clause of the Treaty respecting her possession of Herat. I wish now to ask the noble Earl, Did the sentence mean merely that the concession had not yet been granted, or that such a concession would be contrary to the policy of Her Majesty's Government?
  THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My Lords, the misapprehension to which I referred was an impression, which I found somewhat general, that in the statement I originally made in this House in answer to the noble Earl, I stated that no communications had been made by Persia to Her Majesty's Government with respect to Herat. That, as your Lordships know, is not the case. I stated that we had not released Persia from her engagement not to occupy Herat; but, at the same time, I informed the House that there had been communications from Persia—and not infrequent communications—hough they had led to no conclusion. As to the other inquiry of the noble Earl, he, who is himself so well acquainted with the conduct of public affairs, will, I feel sure, agree with me that these fragmentary allusions to negotiations still pending will only lead to further misunderstanding if I went beyond the absolute statement I have already made, that we have not released the Persian Government from their engagement not to occupy Herat.

COALMINES—THE LEYCETT COLLIERY EXPLOSION.

  MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS.
  EARL DE LA WARR,in moving for the Report of the Inquiry into the Leycett Colliery Explosion, said, his object in doing so was that it might be placed in their Lordships' hands as soon as possible, the accident being of an unusually fatal character, resulting, he believed, in the loss of 61 lives, and attended by circumstances which seemed to render a strict inquiry specially necessary. He might also add that it was a case bearing very much upon the question now before their Lordships' House with regard to the liability of employers for injuries to their servants. It had been stated that another fatal explosion occurred in this mine so recently as September last, and that its dangers were
  584
  so well known that safety-lamps of a peculiar construction were used; but, notwithstanding that fact, in the evidence given before the magistrates it appeared that the manager of the mine, though required by the Mines Regulation Act to exercise daily supervision, was absent for 10 days previous to the accident. Mr. Wynne, Government Inspector of Mines, said, at the examination before the magistrates—
  "He was present at the inquest and heard the defendant (the manager) state that he had not been into the Fair Lady pit (i.e.,where the accident happened) for 10 days prior to the explosion. It was very wrong for a manager to absent himself from the mine for so long a period as 10 days. In a pit like this, knowing they were driving into virgin ground, the defendant ought never to have missed more than one day, especially when he might have examined the place in an hour.… He was not justified in trusting to the contractor. A contractor ought not to act as underlooker. He was astonished when he saw the lower level that such a thing should have been done. If Mr. Stevenson had gone down the pit and seen what was being done, he (witness) did not believe he would have allowed it to go on. In fact, Mr. Stevenson said himself he did not know what was being done. Driving the level in the way they were doing, with the means of ventilation employed, rendered it almost impossible for the thing to go on without an explosion."
  Such was the evidence given by the Government Inspector of Mines at the recent inquiry before the magistrates, which resulted in the conviction of the manager for not having exercised the control and supervision which the Act required. A full report of this terrible accident would doubtless appear in the usual Mining Reports; but as probably some time would elapse before they were presented, it was, he thought, very desirable that their Lordships should have, as early as possible, such information as could without inconvenience be given.
  Moved,That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty for Report of the inquiry into the Leycett Colliery explosion.—(The Earl De La Warr.)
  EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, that the noble Earl seemed to have confused one or two matters which should have been kept separate. He was sorry to say that, unfortunately, two accidents had occurred at this colliery—one on September 8, and the other on January 22 last. The noble Earl, in the reports which he had quoted, had referred to the accident that occurred on September 8. After that

  585
  explosion an inquiry was held by the Government Inspector, and a Queen's Counsel, Mr. Wheelhouse, was employed to watch the proceedings on the part of the Government. The Inspector duly presented his Report to the Home Secretary, and subsequently proceedings were taken against the manager and two other persons concerned with the mine. One of the cases was dismissed, and in the other two fines were inflicted. In this explosion eight men lost their lives; but in the last explosion last month between 60 and 70 men were killed. In the last explosion the loss of life had been so serious that the inquest which had been held had been adjourned until the 18th instant; and up to the present time no Report of these proceedings had been received from the Inspector of Mines as to that accident. Under those circumstances, he was unable to comply with the request of the noble Earl, and, for the best of all reasons, that the Report had not yet been presented. He was not sure when the Report would be received; but Mr. Wheelhouse had been again instructed to watch the proceedings on the part of the Government until a verdict had been arrived at. It was impossible to say what steps would be taken. He could not produce the Report as to the first accident.
  LORD ABERDAREasked whether it was not a fact that the manager who was now on his trial was one of the persons who was convicted of an offence arising out of the explosion of September?
  EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, he had no information on the subject.
  On Question?Resolved in the Negative.

OFFICE OF REGISTRAR GENERAL— DR. FARR.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  THE MARQUESS OF LOTHIAN,in rising to ask a Question of which he had given Notice on this subject, said, his object was to ascertain if the Prime Minister would give an authoritative statement as to why Dr. Farr had been passed over in filling the appointment of Registrar General. Dr. Farr had been for many years employed in the office, and he believed that during the whole of that time he had fulfilled his
  586
  duties with ability and devotion. He (the Marquess of Lothian) did not mean to imply that it was necessary that a person who had been long in an office should, when a vacancy occurred, be promoted to it; but there was a general tendency to believe that when a person had been so long in a Department, and was not promoted, there must be something against him. His (the Marquess of Lothian's) reason for asking this Question was that it had come to his knowledge that, certainly in Scotland, and to some extent in England also, an impression had arisen among the Medical Profession—an impression which he was sure was mistaken—that Dr. Farr had not been promoted only because he was a medical man. He was certain that, in appointing Sir Brydges Henniker to the vacant office, there had been no intention to throw any reflection on the Medical Profession, many individual members of which must be known to their Lordships as honourable men of great business capacity. He trusted the noble Earl at the head of the Government would not think him unreasonable in asking this Question, but would agree with him that it would be a great misfortune that any misapprehension which had arisen should be allowed to continue if it were possible to remove it. In conclusion, the noble Marquess asked the First Lord of the Treasury, with reference to the recent appointment to the office of Registrar General, Whether the long services of Dr. Farr had been taken into consideration; and whether he would state why Dr. Farr had not been selected as the successor of George Graham, Esquire, in that office?
  THE EARL OF BEACONSFIELD: My Lords, I know nothing in the duties of a Minister more difficult than the distribution of patronage. It has fallen to my lot several times since I acceded to Office to exercise that function, and I can truly say that I never make an appointment of any kind without due regard to the interests of the Public Service. Now, with respect to this question, my noble Friend intimates that I have even incurred the ill-feeling of a learned and illustrious Profession, on whose skill most of your Lordships and I myself much depend. Generally speaking, however actuated one may be by a high sense of duty in,

  587
  the distribution of patronage, Questions are generally asked in Parliament in regard to it. Sometimes Votes of Censure are passed, and sometimes Votes of Censure are rescinded. In the present case of Dr. Farr, the original wish of the Government was to appoint him to the vacant office. I know Dr. Farr by reputation; his claims are obvious, his labours in his office have always been admitted; but I may add that they have been amply recognized by the State. But when I had to make those inquiries which were necessary before the appointment was made, such a representation was made to me as to the state of health of Dr. Farr that I shrank from the responsibility of appointing him to discharge such very arduous duties as the office to which my noble Friend has referred entails. I have here—I am unwilling to read it, and I shall not read it, though it is at the service of my noble Friend—an official document asking for a superannuation for Dr. Farr; and the statement as to his health which is made in that document, combined with the fact that he is now 72 years of age, is of that description that I feel confident none of your Lordships, on whichever side of the House you sit, would, after reading that document, authorize the appointment of Dr. Farr to the post in question. This is the ground, and the only ground, on which the Government acted as regards Dr. Farr; and as to supposing there was a prejudice on the part of the Government against the appointment of a medical man to the head of an office, the duties of which are intimately connected with the qualifications and acquisitions of the Medical Profession, I am sure your Lordships will, without a moment's hesitation, acquit me, or anyone occupying my position, of being influenced by such a feeling. After I found it to be out of my power to appoint Dr. Farr, the office was open for a considerable period. A great many names were mentioned; and the gentleman who now fills the office received the appointment because I believed, on the whole, that he was the most competent to perform its duties. I had no personal acquaintance with him; but he was the one who, to my mind, gave the best promise of the ability to fulfil duties which are of the greatest importance, and which certainly require health and vigour for their performance, par-
  588
  ticularly at this moment, when preparations are making for taking a new Census of the country.
  House adjourned at a quarter before Six o' clock, to Monday next, Eleven o'clock.