§ LORD SYDENHAM had given Notice to ask the Under-Secretary of State for India—
- 1.What is the total sum involved in the alleged frauds on the Munitions Board?
- 2.What are the business concerns with which the accused persons were connected when the prosecution was ordered?
- 3.Whether the prosecution of the European subordinates is proceeding.
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, I put the first Question last week to the noble Earl and I gave him private notice at the time, but he did not then reply, being naturally encumbered by a great many other things that he wished to say. I have put the Question down again because I think that he would wish to have an opportunity of giving me an answer. I understand that under Indian law only three instances of fraud can be dealt with in one prosecution. I am told that the total sum involved is considerably larger than that which has been stated. That is the explanation of my first Question. As regards the second Question, it has been stated in the Indian Press that Mr. Kernani, at the time of the prosecution, was associated only with a land bank, with a paid-up capital of 128 six lakhs of rupees, and that Mr. Bannerjee was a contractor on a very large scale and also associated with some coal mines, which certainly would never have shut down had he chanced to be convicted. I hope the noble Earl will clear up that very important point, and I beg to put my Questions.
THE UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE EARL OF LYTTON)My Lords, in the first place I should like to apologise to my noble friend for not having given him this information on Tuesday. He will remember that a great many speeches were made and several questions were put. I am afraid that when I came to reply I overlooked the specific point of which my noble friend had given me notice. With regard to the first Question my noble friend has put down, we do not know the total sum involved in all these frauds. In the one case against Kernani and others, in which the prosecution was withdrawn against Kernani, Bannerjee and Stringer, the value of the property involved was about one lakh of rupees.
Secondly, my noble friend asks what are the business concerns with which the accused persons were connected. In the case referred to there were four persons accused. One, named C. S. Waite, had been Deputy Controller of Munitions. Another, H. Stringer, was a subordinate official. Mr. Kernani is the managing director of the Kernani Industrial Bank, an institution which is understood to finance a number of minor industrial undertakings. Mr. Bannerjee is also connected with various industries in Bengal. Sir Thomas Holland was informed, as a ground for requesting him to withdraw the case, that the bank financed 120 concerns, and, from Press messages, it appears that the maximum available capital of the bank was £300,000.
With regard to the third Question, as already stated, the European subordinate, Mr. Stringer, was discharged, but against Mr. C. S. Waite, the former Deputy Controller, who is still on bail in England owing to illness, the prosecution still stands, and there is another case also pending in which four other Europeans are jointly accused with him. That is all the information which I have bearing on the subject which I am able to give my noble friend.