MILITARY SCANDAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume X, Issue 1036, 31 October 1903, Page 3

MILITARY SCANDAL.

BLACKMAILING OF A COLONEL.

AN OUTRAGEOUS CASE. London, Sopt. 26,

Another very gross scandal has come to light revealing the shameful blackmailing practised even upon officers in command of a regiment, in forcing them to contribute toward the profligate extravagance of tho officers, says the London correspondent of the Now Zealand Herald. Lieutenant-Colonel P. F. Robertson, of the 92nd (Gordon) Highlanders, after being absent from his regiment for five years on a staff appointment, and rejoining tho old 92nd as a major and second in command, was greeted by the subjoined missive : n Victoria Barracks, Belfast, Thursday. Hear Major,—l ,bave been requested to draw your attention to rul9 No. 3, passod by the promoters of the regimental drag fund. It appears from this rule that you are liable to back subscriptions, which amount to £4l. Please inform me as to what steps you desire me to take in this matter—Yours truly, J. Gordon Pirib, Lieutenant, Hon. Secretary Regimental Drag Fund,” “ Most unfortunately for me,” says the colonel, who tells his story in tho Times, “ l had tho necessary moral courage to tell tho young subaltern that, being a married officer, with a largo family, and that, like most Highlanders, not being a rich man, I did not feel justified in paying a sum of over £4O for such a purpose, more particularly as this large sum had been suddenly sprung upon me without any previous notice of any kind at any time. However, I offered to pay my subscription for tho current year, and any monthly expenses in keeping up the drag.” This offer was declined, and when the next annual regimental report wont in it was declared in it that Colonel Robertson ‘‘did not possess the esteem and confidence of his juniors.” It should be added that this was the first unfavorable report of any kind that bad been made of Colonel Robertson during bis whole military career of nearly 30 years. In due courso be was promoted, and took command of the regiment, and a little later received a peremptory order Iron) Sir Redvers Buffer, then adjutaot .■enoral, to relinquish his command forth* with and take leave. Of this extraordinary conduct ho has never received the smallest explanation, and has been unable to obtain any redress. lb is naturally asked bow this fits in with the following passugo in Lord Roberts’ Army Order of tho 7th inst : u General officers aro directed to ensure . . . that officers’ mosses aro so conducted that it is possible for those of moderato means to live in the servic9. Should any commanding officer fail to carry out in their true spirit and intention tho regulations of tho service ... the Commander-in-Chief. will seriously consider the propriety of retaining him in his command.” It is also asked what Lord Roberls means to do in this scandalous case.