LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY, in asking the Secretary of State for India, What steps have been taken with 742 regard to Mr. Sullivan's infraction of the regulation against land speculations by members of the covenanted Civil Service, now that Mr. Crole's accusations of Mr. Sullivan have apparently been substantiated, inasmuch as Mr. Crole had been replaced in the Service after having been suspended by the Madras Government for making them? said, that the case was one of the Madras scandals, but not the first. The first of this nature had been the speculations in gold mines in Mysore, in which several officials in Madras had taken part in 1880. That had given rise to a Question in the other House; and the late Secretary of State for India (the Earl of Kimberley) had written, on the 28th of December, 1882, to the Governor of Madras (Mr. Grant Duff) for explanations. This despatch and the reply of the Madras Government, with enclosures, had been laid before the other House of Parliament on the Motion of Mr. O'Donnell. This Parliamentary Paper was, however, incomplete, since it did not contain the despatch of the Secretary of State in reply to that of the Madras Government. A list of lands held by Civil officers of Madras contained the name of Mr. H. E. Sullivan as owner of 75 acres for building purposes. This, however, was not the estate which had given rise to the accusations of Mr. Crole. Mr. Sullivan had tried to pass this other estate as belonging to his son, though he had a mortgage on it to its full value. An attempt was made to sell this estate, which led to Mr. Crole being consulted by the intending purchaser, and to his receding from his intentions, and to Mr. Crole making charges against Mr. Sullivan of infraction of the regulations against land speculations by civil or military officials, supported by nine documents containing affidavits in support of his allegations. There was no inquiry into Mr. Sullivan's conduct; but Mr. Crole was suspended. He then appealed to the late Secretary of State, who directed that he should be replaced in an office of equal emolument, and also allowed the time during which he had been suspended to count for his pension. Mr. Crole, however, lost his salary during the time of his suspension, as the post he occupied had been filled by another official; and some of the Indian newspapers stated that, when reinstated, he was placed in a post 743 inferior to that which he had before occupied. It would appear, from this decision of the late Secretary of State for India, that Mr. Sullivan was in fault, and that Mr. Crole was justified in the charges he had made. It had also been stated that Mr. Crole wrote an intemperate letter; but it was only natural that he should be betrayed into some heat when he found himself suspended by Mr. Sullivan, amongst other members of the Madras Government. It had not yet transpired what notice the India Office had taken of Mr. Sullivan's conduct in the matter; and, as far as the public were aware, Mr. Crole was the only sufferer. As it appeared that the Government regulations against land speculations by civil officers would not be upheld as they should be, he would put the Question which stood on the Notice Paper.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (Viscount CROSS)My Lords, the question whether Mr. Sullivan had infringed the rules relating to the holding of land by Government servants—and, if so, to what extent—was taken into consideration last year by the Secretary of State in Council. Before any final decision had been come to on the case, Mr. Sullivan placed his seat in the Council of the Governor of Madras at the disposal of the Secretary of State; who, after a careful examination of all the circumstances, arrived at the conclusion that it was his duty to advise Her Majesty that his resignation should be accepted. Mr. Sullivan ceased to be a member of the Council on the 7th of December last.