Lord Rosslyn and the £25.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXI, Issue 5697, 28 June 1902, Page 1

Lord Rosslyn and the £25.

Scathing Exposure m the Lords: la the House of Lords, on May 2nd, the Earl of Rosslyn asked Hiß Majesty's Government, 1, for what purpose was £25 to each officer and. .£5 to each man, being prisoners of war m Pretoria, supplied on or about 25th May 1900 ; 2, was such money a gift, an allowance, or a grant, or was it m lieu of pay ; 3, if m lieu of pay, m what form was if; entrusted to the late Mr Adalbert Hay, and with what instructions; 4, will such instructions be laid upon the table of tho House; 5, was such allowance, grant, or gift intended for every prisoner of war, combatant or non-combatant, civilian or soldier ? Lord Baglan, m reply, said that at the beginning of 1900, when the noble Earl was a prisoner of war m Pretoria, it-was decided that the offer of the American Consul, Mr Adalbert Hay, to distribute any money that might be sent for the prisoners of war should be accepted. A certain sum of money was sent out through the Standard Bank, and each officer received £25 and each non-commissioned officer and man £5. Among the prisoners of war were certain civilians, of whom the noble Earl was one, and they participated m the advance made to the prisoners of war. It was distinctly understood that the money vjras an advance, and not a gift or an allowance m lieu of pay. At the time it was j not known that there were any civilian prisoners of war, nor was it primarily intended that these non-combatants should receive this advance. Anyhow, the money was given out, and among the non-eomba-taats who receired the £25 the noble Earl was one. He did not think it was possible for anyone except the noble Lord to hare. imagined that this money was a free gift or a grant from the Government. Of the £8170,10s so advanced £797tf, 10s had been recovered; the balance of £194, including the noble Earl's £25, had been written off as irrecoverable.—Laughter. The Earl of Rossiynsaid that neither th» officers nor the men for whom he spoke understood that the money was an advance. The Marquis of Lansdowrt—There could be no doubt from the documents that grants of money were intended as advances to the prisoners of war, and the money handed to the noble Earl and another noble Lord was paid on the express understanding that it was to be refunded to the Imperial Government if necessary. When the War Office came to settle accounts with the recipients of the advances, a letter was written to the noble Earl, suggesting that as the other recipients of the grants were refunding the money, and that as it was an advance, he would cause a remittance to be made to the Chief Paymaster. The noble Earl replied-"! asked for no money. I was handed the sum of £25, which I understood was a present from His Majesty's Government. Unless compelled by law, [ ■shall not refund the money." The War Office thinking that the iibbieEarl was not quite aware of the arrangement which was made iv 19()0, wrote another letter to him explaining fully the circumstance* under which the advances had been made, At the close of > the letter they stated that a civilian could not be exempted from ,the obligation to repay, which was recognised by and .incumbent upon every officer aud man who received payment. Not quite knowing'their man, they expressed a pious hope that the money would be refunded. Tho noble Earl replied that the letter of the War Office savoured of an appeal to his goner-. oisity, that it was not explained to him at the time that the money was an advance, and he proceeded to tell them that their conduct m requiring a settlement of this account by the imprisoned officers was scandalous. The noble Earl ended by announcing that he would adhere to his intention not to refund the payment made to him, for which he was most grateful. (Laughter.) The War Office consulted the Treasury solicitor, who advised them that upon the whole it would scarcely be worth their while to institute proceedings with lhe object of compelling the noble Lord to disgorge the money which had unintentionally passed into his possession, and they accordingly left him alone. (Laughter.) He (Lord Lansdowne) did not know whether the noble Earl was altogether to be congratulated on the result, but he confessed it surprised him that hp should come down to their Lordships' House and proclaim the fact that he had succeeded m retaining • possession of a sum of money which he was never intended to receive, to which, he had no moral right whatever, and which other recipients of similar allowances infinitely more entitled to the generosity of the pubile, had refunded without any complaint whatever. Hear, hear. The Earl of Rosslyn said he had put the question after consultation with the very gentleman who distributed the money, and who was entirely of opinion that he (Lord Rosslyn) was m the right. When he asked the geatleman whether the money was for civilians as well, he replied that it was for' every prisoner of war, and their was no mention of an advance. Of course, if the War Office would have the £25, he should be pleased to send it to them. !—U—l—— ■'.'' "■■— „