In the Lords on Thursday the question of the Sandhurst
- punishments was brought before the House by Lord Carring-
ton. Lord Raglan, the Under-Secretary of State for War, in his reply made, we regret to see, the mistake of suggesting or hinting that the Commander-in-Chief's splendid career and known leniency placed his action above criticism. That is a kind of appeal always dangerous to make to Englishmen when a case of justice is involved. We ourselves yield to none in our admiration of and trust in Lord Roberts, but we cannot admit that in a matter in which justice to individuals is con- cerned, his authority can outweigh all other considerations, or that we ought to assume that he cannot possibly blunder. Lord Roberts's own speech was manly and straightforward and without heat, as his speeches always are. And though he defended his own position firmly, he made no attempt to prejudice the case by any form of personal appeal. His mistake seems to have been that he accepted too readily the assurances of the Sandhurst authorities that it was useless to employ detectives, and that they had done all that they possibly could. When Sir Edwin Markham stated that, as Lord Roberts tells us he did, we venture to say that Lord Roberts should have told him that he could not accept the view that the resources of ordinary investigation had been exhausted, and that he (Sir Edwin Markham) must return and carry out his duties with greater vigilance. Lord Roberts's error lay in yielding far too soon to the notion that the authorities bad got to the end of their normal powers and must have exceptional help from outside.
Lord Roberts ended his speech by giving the assurance that he would himself go carefully into each individual case. "I will endeavour to see that no boy shall lose time in the Service by what has happened."
Previous page
