RESOLUTION. (Hansard, 16 March 1885)

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY,

in rising to move— That Her Majesty having directed a military expedition of Her native forces charged upon the revenues of India to be despatched for service in the Soudan and Nubia, this House consents that the ordinary pay of such troops as well as the ordinary charges of any vessels belonging to the Government of India that may be employed in the expedition, which would have been charged upon the revenues of India if such troops or vessels had remained in 1223 that country or seas adjacent, shall continue to be so chargeable; Provided that, if it shall become necessary to replace the troops or vessels so withdrawn by other vessels or native forces, the expense of raising, maintaining, and providing such vessels or forces shall be repaid out of any moneys which may be provided by Parliament for the purposes of the said expedition, said: Your Lordships are, no doubt, aware that the small Contingent of Indian troops which has proceeded to Suakin consists practically of three regiments of Infantry and a regiment of Cavalry. That measure was taken at the request of Lord Wolseley, and the reason why we have now to move this Resolution is to be found in the 5th section of the Act "for the Better Government of India," 1858, which requires the consent of both Houses of Parliament before Indian troops can be employed for any other purpose than to prevent or repel actual invasion. The other House has passed a Resolution similar to that which I am about to propose. It has been necessary for us to consider which precedent on this subject we are to follow. The first occasion was that of the war in China in 1839–40. In that case all the ordinary charges were borne by the Government of India, and the extraordinary charges by this country. Then came the war with Persia in 1856, in which the ordinary expenses were borne by the Indian Exchequer, and the extraordinary divided equally between the Indian and the English Exchequers. In the next case—that of the Abyssinian War, which precedent we have followed on this occasion—the whole ordinary charges were borne by India, and the extraordinary by England. In the Expedition to Malta in 1878 the whole of the expenses, ordinary and extraordinary, were borne by the British Exchequer. In the last case—the Expedition to Egypt—the whole of the ordinary expenses were borne by India, and the extraordinary charges were divided between India and this country in the proportion of six to four, India contributing the larger share. The exact effect of following the Abyssinian precedent is that India will stand exactly in the same position as if the troops had never left her shores. England undertakes all the extraordinary expenditure, direct and indirect, so that if it were necessary to replace any of these 1224 Forces the expense would fall upon this country. In the case of the war in Abyssinia, I confess I am not able to see what special interest India had; but there is no question that Egypt is a country in which India has a special interest, and the war in the Soudan has arisen directly from the necessity of protecting Egypt. I will merely mention that we have every confidence that, in this as in every other service which they may be called upon to undertake, the Indian troops will well and faithfully and nobly discharge their duty. The regiments which are being sent are all well known. They are the 17th Bengal Infantry, the gallant Sikh Regiment, the 28th Regiment of the Bombay Army, of which General Hardinge speaks in the highest terms, and also the regiment of Bengal Cavalry, the 9th, called Hodson's Horse. Neither is the Madras Army without representation, for it has sent 150 Sappers, who have a high reputation. Although the force is small, there is every reason to suppose that it will be able to render most important and valuable service to the Suakin Expedition.