§ Sir JOHN JARDINEasked the tinder-Secretary of State for India whether the directions given on the 30th April, 1872, by the Governor-General of India in Council after the Kuka rebellion, and promulgated by him as the statutable head of all the civil and military services in India, still hold good and are to be taken by them as lawful commands, namely, that for the apprehension and safe custody of offenders the law authorises and indeed requires the use of any degree a military force which may be necessary for the purpose, and that rebels with arms in their hands, gangs of dacoits banded together for the purpose of robbery and murder, persons in the act of waging war against the Queen, and all who aid and abet them may and ought to be attacked by force of arms precisely as armed invaders may be 1642W attacked, and that, as regards refusing quarter and all other severity in the usage of war, these bands of criminals, whether rebels or not, be treated like enemies' troops for the purpose of defeating and breaking them up, or whether, as regards officers of the Civil Service or of the Army, any other orders modifying or superseding the above have been made and promulgated in the Official Gazette of India?
§ Mr. CHARLES ROBERTSThe Secretary of State has seen the passage to which my hon. Friend refers. It occurs in a letter addressed by the Government of
India to the Punjab Government after the Kuka outbreak, and is a descriptive statement rather than a direction or command to executive officers. It sets out the extraordinary powers which Government has in reserve for the suppression, if need be, of violent crime. But so far from countenancing their indiscriminate exercise by civil and military officers, it insists on the principle that it is for the Government and not for individuals to decide whether the ordinary processes of law are strong enough to protect society.